St. Johns review. (Saint Johns, Or.) 1904-current, 1912-02-16

We are in receipt of a communi.
cation from Ed /. Stockton de-
manding an apology for an editori.
al comment on an article published
last week under the caption of" Pa
rents Complain. Mr.. Stockton
claims TO be the author of the arti
Gle, which was originally published
in the Telegram. If there was any
thing to apologize for, we would be
inclined to do so. We published
the article in question solely that
our readers could get all intelligent
idea of what we were commenting
upon. II reflected seriously upor
the integrity, capability and moral.
ity of the National Conservatory o
Music, which institution has started
a branch in ST. Johns. We deemed
the attack unnecessary ,uncalled for
The institution was attempting C
provide musical instruction in St
Johns at a very nominal cost. But
il seems that misunderstanding
arose. Several parents were al
legged TO have visited the conserva.
tory here in order to have an ad-
justment of the differences with the
manager, Mr.. Osborn. Unfortu.
nately he was not present. His
Office is in Portland Why these
differences or grievances should
next be aired in a newspaper with
no further attempt TO get into COM
munication with Mr.. Osborn does
not appear. In commenting upon
the article we stated that It APP
peared to be grossly overdrawn,
and some of the remarks ascribed
as coming from the parents we
could scarcely credit. That was
all. We heard the other side
Of the proposition, portion Of
which appears in another column.
From this we had a right to think
the article was far.ictched aud over
drawn. Mr.. Stockton states we
were making him out prevarica-
tor. This is wide of the mark.
Because he made statement or
several OF them that was difficult
for us to believe he had gotten
Alright, doesn't make him out pre-.
varicator Why the morality, in
tegrity and capability OF what had
become a local institution should bc
attacked in a daily newspaper just
because the complainants tailed TO
see the manager on a particular
day is difficult TO understand, and
II is also difficult To understand why
the author OF the attack should de-
mand an apology when his attacks
are questioned. He may not have
intended 4, as an attack. but any.
thing spoken or written that has a
tendency to injure is an attack, as
we understand IL. An apology to the
conservatory might be due by rea-
son of republishing the derogatory
item, but since we have stated It's
purpose do not expect to apologize.
As to the parents, we have nothing
To say. As they saw Il, Il is likely
they must have had a kick coming,
for all are good people against whom
not a word can be said. Many
times representatives OF an institu-
ton make promises and do acts
that are not sanctioned OF authoriz-
cd by the institution. This is an
occurrence by no means rare. Such
may have been the case IN this in
stance; that we do not know. We
still contend that the differences
could have been adjusted outside OF
print, without bringing an insitu-
ton into bad repu,e, the same as
any other differences that sometimes
arise between local business houses
and patrons are adjusted. How
ever, II Mr. Stockton still desires
our apology we take pleasure IN
apologizing for anything we have
said that is contrary TO the truth, II
any there be, OF any undue reilec'
tions that might have been cast, or
in fact, anything we may have said
that should not have been said.