Yesterday morning the instructor whom the Crimson criticized so severely in its last number, took the trouble to reply to the criticism. He gave his reasons for adopting his method, and they seemed sensible and forcible enough. Furthermore, he said that if the author of the Crimson editorial, or any one else who felt aggrieved, would come to him and show a good reason why he should not be questioned, he would gladly excuse him from further annoyance on the subject. The same offer was made at the beginning of the term and also repeated once at least, so we fear there was no excuse for the Crimson article. This questioning method may be disagreeable to many, and some of the questions asked may seem trivial, but we think that very few of the men who wish to get a thorough understanding of the course will object to the system now in practice. The principal points of the course are kept constantly before the minds of the men, so that besides understanding the subject more thoroughly they will not be compelled to grind so hard just before the examinations. Furthermore, what is a great convenience and benefit to many, hour-examinations are dispensed with. The whole system amounts to a substitution of a series of informal, detailed questions and explanations in the place of two or three hurriedly prepared written examinations. We think that the instructor has had only the benefit of the men in view in adopting his method, and also that he deserves and undoubtedly has the support of a large majority of the men who comprise his section.