WE have not forgotten the proverb, "Let well enough alone," and detest that cavilling spirit that like a dishonest dentist always finds one more defect to be remedied. But, on the other hand, suggestions of improvement are proverbially a paper's vantage-ground, and it seems but fair we should here express in concert what finds daily expression in the jokes or grumblings of individuals. Why, then, does the anachronism still-exist of a rule in the Schedule of the Memorial Hall Association forbidding the use of alcoholic drinks among the diners at the Hall? In the old days, when the unbending sternness of one part of the community had led to disgraceful indulgence among those who refused to yield to such asceticism, it was well for the Faculty to prohibit all liquor at Commons; but times have changed, and a more rational temperance, not altogether due to the (so-called) "Temperance Party," has been adopted by almost all. It seems, then, like a repetition of the old mistake to hold up teetotalism as the highest virtue, and, in regard to our own College, Why, we ask again, should the almost English system of our Commons be defaced by so superannuated an Americanism as the enforcement (to the extent of the Faculty's power) of total abstinence? Our climate may not make ale or cider necessary for all, but illness certainly makes it helpful to some, and a friend of ours was advised by a physician on the Corporation to take, as the very best tonic, a pint of porter daily at dinner. At the Hall this is forbidden. We would trouble no man's conscience, and while there are among us those brought up in the "most straitest sect of the Puritans," we shall not lack warnings of the danger of opinions such as we have expressed; but we would ask these Rechabites, Is there not as much danger in encouraging a system which makes a glass of beer after dinner something to be frowned at or smiled at as immoral?