A short time ago we announced our intention to publish authoritative accounts of the experiments in co-operative government which have been made at several colleges. In the same issue we published a statement of the operation and success of the methods in vogue at Amherst; to-day an article on the "Jury System at Bowdoin" will be found on our front page.

It will be remembered that the members of the Senate are elected by the classes, the same method which is proposed for our Conference Committee. The representation on the jury is essentially different from this; every class has one representative, but the majority of jurors are elected by the various chapters of the inter-collegiate fraternities, of which there are a large number at Bowdoin. Society feeling is so strong there that this was thought to be the only way by which the students could be represented. The President of the college officiates as judge at the trials, and passes sentence on the culprit after the jury have rendered a verdict as to his guilt, and as to the grade-of which four are named in the articles of agreement-to which in their opinion the offense belongs. A certain penalty is attached to each grade; and the President must pass sentence as determined by the grade in which the jury have placed the offense. unless there be such mitigating circumstances as to induce him to lower it, but in no case can he impose a heavier penalty than that of the grade fixed by the jury. It is thus seen that the power of the Jury is greater than that of the Senate, whose doeress can be vetoed by the President, and also than that of our proposed Conference Committee whose resolutions are to be adopted or rejected by a vote of the Faculty. The remarkable success of this attempt at government of students by students clearly demonstrates the wisdom of giving to such student bodies executive power, and we hope that it will not be long before our Conference Committee will be given such power.