Communicated

Editor Demgcrat : I am a subscriber íor your paper and for Beveral other county papers, and have been for man y yeare. I have paid for all of them promptly, and I think the owners of them will bear witness that I have not been a whining or a fault-finding subBcriber. And yet I have some fault to find with jour paper; and not only yours but all the rest of the city papers which I read. I refer to the tables you publish noticing the real estáte transfers in this county. These tables are interesting to me and to many others; but tliey would be much more interesting if they were made substantially correct. I have Bometimes thought the editora themselves did not fully appreciate the importance of having these tables pnblished correctly. Mistakes in them cause anxiety of mind, trouble and expense. I know a man who traveled twenty miles to Bee if the land he had just purchaBed was described in his deed, which he had left for record at the Kegister's office, as it was described in his county paper, which he knew to be wrong. He found his paper wrong and bis deed correct; but he had his trouble and expense all the same. I onceaold a piece of land, and accordingtothe description in one of the county papers I found I had sold one of my neighbors out. I read id a recent paper that John V. King had sold forty acres of land to John Hagan, on section 19, Ypsilanti, for $2,000. John King was born in Salem and never owned any land anywhere else. Even the Argus, with its fabled hunebed oyes, stated, two weeks sinoe, that some land had been sold in Salem, section 43. I had supposed I was quite familiar with the several sections of land in Salem, but I don't know where section43is. Perhaps the present supervisor, who is said to be an "edueated cuas, may De able to lócate ít; but even if hn can, I would advise hira not to do it uutil after the equalizatiou of the county by the board of supervisors, next fall. I remember that a great many yeare ago I presented to the board of supervisors a plan for the reduction of the aggregate valuation of the township of Salem, on the ground that the township was deficiënt in land about one seotion. My plea was successful, and the valuation of Salem, for taxation purposes, was reduced. But now comes the statement, in one of the leading county papers, that Salem has seven sections of land more than her sister townships. I have often thought that friend Wheeler, the present supervisor, was not materially deficiënt in what is commonly called "cheek," but I think he will have to assume more than his usual amount if, under the circnmstance recited above, he asks for a reduction of taxes in the township of Salem on the plea that his township is too small. Yours trulv,