The communication regarding the method of work in History 13, which appears this morning seems to give a fair statement of the case. The writer with justice shows that the accusation of laziness, which a correspondent made in Tuesdays paper against those who desire a systematic course of reading in the course, is certainly uncalled for. Every one who has taken the same knows that there is a vast amount of reading to be done, and that the reference books are few and far between, compared with the large number of men who take the course. If it is often impossible to get the necessary books, what more reasonable request can be made than that some other method of study should be recommended by the instructor? It is an undoubted fact, too, that many hours of valuable time are wasted every day by members of the course in the vain hunt for books, which other members of the course are reading in some secluded nook in the library. We do not mean to underrate the admirable system of references which Dr. Hart has compiled with such care. They are invaluable to the students of American history, and nowhere can such orderly and comprehensive treatment of the great questions of our history be found. It does not mean that work on the special references would be abandoned, if a course of general reading is pointed out by the instructor. The course of general reading would be designed particularly for those who who were unavoidably prevented from using the reference books, and such a course would, at all events, be an extremely useful supplement to the special reading. We think our correspondent is right in maintaining that a large number of hard-working students in History 13 would be benefited by this addition of a general course of reading.