AUSPICIOUS INAUGURAL

Succeeding the tightening of the admission requirements with a revision of the course of study in the Law School, he faculty committee has accomplished a work of brilliant reform. The telescoping of the basic principles and cases of law into the first two years and the allowing of more flexibility in choice of subjects to third-year students are two new policies that will show the individual at an early date the various fields of specialization open to him and give the opportunity for original work in one particular field. Each man will be encouraged to select a course containing a small number, in which he can do original scholarly investigation. Thus, the teaching efficiency of the School will be promoted, since the student, can determine an entire year earlier the branch of law he wishes to pursue.

The teaching innovation is certainly no modernization or spring cleaning of the Law school. The school has always maintained up-to-date methods and material. Neither is this step in imitation of the Yale Law School, which seems to emphasize Business Organization and to permit specialization in the second year. In short, these changes mark no desertion of the venerable Harvard law tradition, which for many years has made the school the leading institution of its kind in the country.

In essence the reforms Dean-elect Landis proposes to innovate himself next fall do not differ from the changes already established by the faculty of the Law school. Mr. Landis hopes, in addition, to stimulate interest in the Graduate Law School, which this year had an enrollment of about thirty students, by bridging the gap between the theory of law, demanded by teachers, and its practice, demanded by lawyers concerned with practical problems and clients.

With so many brain children, all of sparkling intelligence, hatched by the minds of those who best understand the Law School and its needs, it would appear undisputedly accurate to forecast a fine beginning for the Landis regime in September. Yet it is to be hoped that Mr. Landis will not mar such a promising start by further intemperate public statements on current questions. If he curbs his vigorous tongue, the zealous reforming attitude displayed by him, combined with the innovations in the curriculum, presage a long period of prosperity for the Harvard Law School.