The Union and journal. [volume] (Biddeford, Me.) 1858-1882, 1870-07-22
Freedom Of the Press What is it2

Freedom Of the Press-What Is it2
It Is question for gentlemen Of the
Press" practically to determine whether
the freedom of the Press Is to cover the
publication Of every kind Of private con.
versation. But In the courts of honor
and good taste the question Is, however,
already determined. II reporter waits
upon Senator. or any other person Of
high official standing, and says. "Sir. I
am the correspondent Of daily news.
paper In every large city in this country,
and ! should be glad to know your views
upon the Alabama question, and upon the
Cuban question, that may write them
out and submit them to you for publica-
tion in my various journals" the Sena-
tor or other distinguished parsonage
would govern himself accordingly, and
talk with his interlocutor rs II he were
addressing Congress, with regiment Of
reporters lying in wait for every word he
uttered.
Or II one of the same gentlemen. who,
with his methods of communicating with
the public. and his opportunities Of CIV
ing all that he relates that indefnable air
Of weight, Justice, absurdity, or sophistry
which skillful writer can employ, real
ly Is one Of the most powerful persons
among US, should go to Mr.. Bryant and
say. "Mr. Bryant sharing the universal
respect which Is felt for you by your coun-
trymen. and proud of your fame. and Of
your life and character, I should be very
much gratifed II you would favor me
with your private opinion Of the poetical
performances of Mr.. Longfellow, and
your viows of the comparative poetic
merits of Mr.. Whittier and Mr.. Emer-
son. and your individual preference be-
tween Mr.. Stedman and Mr.. Stoddard,
that may impart freshness Of interest
to the letter that am about to write to
the "Echo Of the Rocky Mountains"-and
If Mr.. Bryant should reply. my dear
sir, ! am happy to say that / think very
small beer Of Mr.. Longfellow and of the
other gentlemen whom you have been
pleased TO MENTION" he would have no
right to DO surprised at the appearance Of
his opinion in print; and II the cores
pondent stated all the facts Of the inter-
Wow the public could not accuse him of
impropriety, whatever Judgment It might
form Of the discretion Of Mr.. Bryant.
But now when we read In the news
papers lettcr from correspondent de-
scribing his interview with any noted
person, there Is feeling Of shame, As If
we were overhearing private CONVERSE
ton. 1t Is q very small soul that peeps
through keyhole. and we cannot escape
an unpleasant conviction upon reading
such letters that we have been inv,.lunta.
rily thrust into that position. The Easy
Chair has heard upon excellent authority,
that during the happy administration Of
the late enlightened and docile Chief
Mag istrate conversations occurred In that
abode of peace called "the Executive
Mansion" which were Reproduced with
astounding accuracy of detail In Balti-
more newspaper. The fact was especi-
ally observed by distinguished guest
who was ofen engaged In conversation
upon public affairs by his docile Excel
lency-and one day observing door
standing partially open in the room In
which he was talking, the guest rose quiz
etly while the President Of the United
States was making some interesting re-
mark, and suddenly throwing the door
wide open. discovered shorthand re-
porter industriously at work. Whether
the President of the United States knew
of his presence was question the dis
tinguished guest did not ask, but ono he
undoubtedly answered satisfactorily to
himself.
And even II the excellent correspon-
dent whose business It Is to collect news,
and whose pride and often profit II Is to
serve 1t up with certain spirit and flavor
for the reader. tells us that he introduced
himselfto the noted person as n reporter,
how do we know-nOt that fact, for Is It
not that fact, nt least, printed in the most
legible typo ?-out how do we know that
he has reproduced the exact significance
or the significance at all. of the words Of
the conversation? Certainly there Is room
for the question, for words publicly spok-
on are often very curiously and ludicrous-
" misrepresented SO rs to produce an Of
feet wholly different from the fact. Many
of the newspapers color very much Of the
news they sell to their readers. They
color It favorably or unfavorably accord
ing to the tenets Of the newspaper, or to
Its theory of the expectations of the public.
Now how can We be sure when we read
of an interview which was announced TO
the object of 1t as preparatory to publi-
cation of his words, that those words have
been fairly reported; that tho real mean
ing of the Senator, for instance, has been
understood; or that It has not been ingen-
iously perverted by q sly touch Of the mr.
tist who describes itp One of the most
delightfully."- comic Of the Punch sketches
of Leech was that of a family group at the
daguereotyper's. The artist poses them
all-father. mother. daughters, sons-in
the most striking and picturesque attitude.
Nothing can be better than the gracious
smirk Of the pa:erfamiliss, except the
complacent sniff of the mater. The arms
of the daughters are lovingly entwined !;
the toes of tho sons are politely turned
out. The group Is model Of family hap
piness and the domestic virtues. "Now
steady. II you please; the operation be-
gins look at my nose. please. while I
count ten-steady-sto.a-d-y." And out
1t comes, tie most abominable and deli
cious caricaturo. sDcar, dear" the ar
tist may be heard saying. 20 most unfor-
tunate little Jog has ruined u.s." Il y 10
with the reports of the conversations.
There Is n sense of the little Jog In than.
Thus they slt-and 1t comes out %! So
he spoke-and It Is reported hnI
But there are many conversations re-
peated In print which evidently were not
meant for the public ear. which In their
nature were plainly private, and yet
which reputable newspapers print. Is II
not incumbent upon the editorial RESPONSE
bility to prevent such publications7 Some
time ago newspaper Published long
string Of remarks which General Grant
was said to have made upon certain con-
spicuous citizens. 1t was impossible not
to SEQ ut once either that General Grant
had never said what was attributed to
him. or that he did not mean It should be
made public. The publication could have
no result except to pain ccrtI.in persons,
crafty taste for personalities" and
stigmatize the General rs u foolish loqus.
cious man. The article WAS undoubtedly