Ed. Courier:- Becau3e I could not see iow an increase 1n the use of lumber i lii-i country would not cause an increased lestruction of our forests, agalnst which leseoratlon the Argus lift up its voiee n ears and wailin??, that sheet begs me to jonder this problem : "Why not allow the Cnnadlan woikTien, who are imported by Aljter, Palner, and our other lumber miHionaires, referring probiibly to Fisher, Buit, Ne.er, all jood democnits.but not mentioned y the Argus for Tariius reitsons, ) to detroy the forests of this state, ctit down ,he Canadlan foresto, nd let our farmers nd medíanles have the benpfit of the ;wo dollitrs per tbousand feet ot lumber iow paid as duty. Will the extra nuniter of houses now built destroy the American or Canadian forests? These Danadian worklng men in this country iid no one here but the lumber barons. Why not allow Ihem to stay at home, ;ut timber there and save our foresta.?" The only "problem" I can flnd in the nbove, is the one as to how the Argus will it,-t out of the mire into which it lias iinwittingly plunged itsclf. The position of this paper as t plalnly -laten, is this : lst. lt desires the turllier de8truction of Michigan pine forests to cease. This mcans of course tbc throwing out of employment of thousands ot' workmep, the sluit tlnr down of all our great saw milis, the ruin of all tirms of llmited capital engaged in the business, and the closlng out and winding up of one of the greatest industries In the United States. 2d. It desires that Canadian lumbermen shall return home, go to work in Canadian forests, cut as much and as fast as possible, increase the revenues of the Canadin governnient by ncreaslng the "timber dues," paid by holdersof timber limita, ship the lumber luto Michigan free of duty, and fherehy build up Canadian interest at the expense of Michigan capital, industry and prosperity! With thi state of things, with Canada the sole producer of the lumber used here, and the sole dictiitor of the price thereof, wlll the Argus, in lts astuteness, please teil us how much chiaper lutnber would be then than now? And how much better off would our farmers and mechanics be ? Wliat would become of the workmen (and their families) now employed in our pine woods? But, bosh! The position of the Argus in ita desire to ruin our "lumber barons," and crush out our great industry, s so wild and so untenable, as to mnke au ordinary anarchist blush with -lianir. Anil yet the tnwblngl of the Argus in this "problem" are iu accord with the principies of its party. Auy way to break down American manufactures and reduce wages. The Argus advocates Canadian luraber in preference to Michigan lumber; thfi employment of Canadian lumbermen at home; the idlenegs o! mm workmen lieic; the adinission ant use of free foreign wool, in pntirence to the product of American sneep, the removal of the duty on salt, whlcb costs hut 52 cents per barrel, and the retention of dutj' on eugar (wliich ricti anc poer ülike must use) which costs $14 per barrel, and so on to the end. 'Twas ever thus. Inconsistency and democracy have been synonomoua tenns ever sinee the toundation of lliat party, and trom present indications will ever continue to be.