|
ED. CHRONICLE.
One of the items in your Brooklin news is the cause, or part of the cause,
of an anonymous writer’s ungenerous attack upon your correspondent in
the Times. In order to set Mr. “Spice” in the right
road and give him an opportunity to censure the proper person I beg
leave to inform everybody in any way interested that I am the author
of the item referring to the social given by the Rev. Mr. Philp.
Your correspondent had nothing to do with writing it.
Perhaps, sir, it is a mystery to you and the larger number of
your intelligent readers to understand exactly what there was in the
report of the social that produced the literary effort of friend
“Spice.” My use of the expression “Parson Philp.” This
is spoken of as being in very bad taste. Really, how intensely
amusing ! and yet how fortunate we are in having a gentleman who
can give us pointers in matters of taste. The only thing that our
friend can do now, is to give us his name so that on all future
occasions your correspondent and I can consult the infallible
judge and by following his example save offending the too-too
sensitive “Spice” and others of his ilk.
Please, “Spice,”
what is your name? I hope my request will be granted; not because
it is a matter of importance to know his name, only it will be
convenient to know know it when I want to ask his advice. It
would save so much trouble and annoyance to me. Now, just think,
if I had know this person when writing that item I could have
called on him and got his criticism and made the necessary
correction. Now there is nothing to do but apologize for the
expression. Please “Spice” and “self-same thinkers,”
accept my apology and allow me to withdraw the ill-favored title
“Parson” and substitute the proper “Rev. Mr.”
In conclusion, Mr. Editor, for the benefit of “Spice”
and two “others”–for I am happy to inform you that
only three persons (so far as I have learned) have objected to
the term “Parson”–I want to give the meaning of
the word. It is according to Webster, “a clergyman; one
who is in orders or who is licensed to preach.” Only
ignorant and vulgar persons would think for a moment, it was
intended for a reproach. Anticipating being under obligations
to “Spice” on matters of taste I wish now to advise
him, in all charity, not to be so ready to impute “envy and
want of feeling in head and heart,” to your correspondent.
Yours respectfully,
June 6th, 1888. |
Jno. Spence. |
|
|
