The Corvallis gazette. [volume] (Corvallis, Or.) 1862-1899, 1894-11-23
so HORRIBLY VULGAR.

II was WITH feelings OF horror that the
editor of the GAZETTE read letter from
"Citizen," in the Times of November
18th, accusing this paper of publishing a
vulgar and filthy article anent the hal
loween pranks. The article complained
of was hunted up and read and re-read.
Instead of relieving the editors anxiety
the perusal only increased it ten-fold-
not because he discovered any indecency
in the language or ideas, but because he
could not. 1t Is really awful to think
that ones mind is so far below the stand
ard of such people as Citizen" that he is
unable to make distinctions between
decency and indecency. The GAZETTE,
however, fears that "Citizen," in his
pursuit and practice of decency, has sac
rifcedhis reputation for veracity-if he
ever had any-because he says tthe al1u-
sion deserves and is receiving the con.
demnation of every c1ean-minded person
in the city," while in fact the editor has
failed to find, among its five hundred
Corvallis readers, single individual who
considered the article any worse than
trivial with a vein of 1evity. Either
"Citizen" has large-sized impediment
in his veracity Or the proportion of clean
minded citizens in Corvallis is remarka-
bly, small. 1t must be confessed that the
article was not instructive: but it was
not intended for that purpose. The Ga
ZErTE has all kinds Of readers and
attempts to cater to the tastes of all
The item was of minor importance and
intended principally for small-minded
people. Some would laugh heartily over
it; some talk about it to their neighbors,
some take the matter to the debating
society, and one even rushed off to a
newspaper with a letter concerning it.
Men of sense merely glanced at the item,
smiled, perhaps recalled for a moment
their own youthful pranks and read on,
without having their finer sensibi1ities
torn and lacerated. Such a reformer as
"Citizen" should not hide his light under
a bushel; he should have signed his
name that the people might see his good
works and follow his example. Perhaps,
however, his ideas of nicely are simply
for expression and not for practice, and
would fade in the light of the authors
brilliant personality. The expression he
condemns is can ignoble specimen of
| architecture. The Times, in referring
to the same structure, called it 'out-
house" Yet Citizen condemns the
| GAZETTE, (ignoble specimen of architec-
ture''), in letter to the Times, (out-
house"). 1t seems to the GAZETTE as
though "Citizen" jumped from the fry
ing-pan into the fire. Our expression
was certainly the more delicate, refined,
euphoneous and poetical. ''Citizen"
certainly had not read the Times care
fully. Doubtless he considers any refer
ence to the building in question as indie
cent, and would probably be willing to
organize a crusade against its very
existence. Such an extraordinarily
clean minded 1nau-or, rather, nilk-sop
has no use for this class of architecture.
The GAZETTE apologies to its readers
for taking so much valuable space to
answer such silly criticism. The COM
position and matter of "Citizen's" letter
certainly do not deserve such attention
| and show that the author is mentally
incapacitated for filling the position he
is attempting to occupy.