The action of the plaintiff in the case of Strout versus the seven Bowdoin students, now on trial before the Supreme Court of Maine, seems perfectly justifiable and commendable. On the 25th of October last young Strout stood at the window of his room on the second floor of Appleton Hall. A piece of coal weighing one pound was thrown through the glass, striking him in the eye, causing a serious wound. A few minutes after the defendants entered the room on a hazing expedition, for the purpose of seizing some cider supposed to be in the possession of the freshman. The complainant does not know who threw the coal, but claims that a combination was formed, and that circumstances are so strong and convincing that the conclusion cannot be resisted that this party of students are responsible for the injury, no matter which threw the coal. He contends that the whole party are liable. It is becoming altogether too common a practice to be longer countenanced by college men for careless brutality, and the infliction of personal indignities, to be resorted to by unruly students with perfect freedom from impunity under the specious pretext of "hazing." This condition of affairs must be reformed by some means or other. If college students themselves do not see and appreciate this fact, and if there is no other way to convince them of it, measures as stern and decisive as the summary arrest and punishment of all offenders would seem to be justified. It is to be hoped that this trial will have the effect of bringing the attention of students to the matter, and effecting the desired reform.