We are in receipt of a comniunication signed "Citizen," which has been in the postoffice some weeks because we have not hitherto paid the extra postage on it. The communication will not be found in these columns, f or the writer of it, who f ailed to put sufficient postage upon it, also f ailed to sign his or her name to it. An anonymous communication is not a courageous way to make attacks. II is a cowardly way of shirking one's in dividual responsibility. If "Citizen' has any information concerning the violation of the laws, it is his or her duty to bring such information to the knowledge of the proper authorities No reputable newspaper publishes anonymous attacks or will be used f or what may be a screen for private venom. There may be nothing of the kind in this particular letter on whicl we have been compelled to pay pos tage, but how are we to know tha fact when "Citizen" says that he o she "is personally a ware of the f acts stated," and yet gives no clue to his or her identity. Such Communications are thoroughly worthless. ïhey consei-ve no good end. They do not allow the paper to give the proper authorities any informatiou, for the attacks are couched in vague and general language which must strike some innocent parties. The Argus must know the name of every correspondent, not for publication, but as a guarantee of good faith. It is taken for granted that an unsigned communication is not written in good faith.