Gold Hill daily news. [volume] (Gold Hill, N.T. [Nev.]) 1863-1882, 1871-02-11
"|-"---
PERSONAL REPUTATION.

PERSONAL REPUTATION.
Ofall the duties we owe TO society,
perhaps none Is so lightly held, or so
imperfectly performed, as the care Of
the reputation Of others. We hold life
to be a sacred possession, and shrink
from the criminal who, from malice or
cupidity, destroys 1t. Property is pro-
tected by public sentiment no lessthan
by law, and we severely censure all
attempts to defraud another Of his
rightful gains. So also any effort to
abridge the liberty which is now ac-
knowledged as a universal right meets
condemnation. But when we approach
that most precious Of all possessions,
that most sacred of all rights, a, mans
or woman's reputation, 1t is strange to
see how lightly 1t Is held, and how sell
dom society visits any deep displeasure
upon the persons who wantonly injure
their neighbors in this respect. 1t Is
true that where this species Of injustice
is attended with gross falsehood and
extreme malice, it may not meet with
so much indulgence, and may even be
amenable to law; but such are not the
cases that most damage reputation.
By their very excess they over-reach
their mark, and only rebound to their
own discontinue. The greatest real
injury is accomplished In more in
sidious ways. The discussion Of others
faults, the exposure of their weak
nesses, the imputation Of. unworthy
motives, the laugh raised at their ex-
pense, the gesture Of contempt, even
tile silence with which their praises
are received-all these are the means
by which they are robbed of the dear
est of earthly possessions-a good
name. 1t may be done with inten-
tional malice, or with thoughtless
want of consideration. The former Of
course incurs the greater guilt, but
equally injurious consequences follow
from the latter. 1t is to be hoped that
comparatively few -desisnediy injure
others in their reputation, but large
numbers actually accomplish the same
result through love Of gossip; the
vanity of suggesting a new idea, and
the mistaken though prevalent notion
that the presentation Of Others faults
and foibles shows up their own vir-
tues in n contrasting light, and raises
them in public esteem. Sometimes the
injury that is inflicted may not even
occur to the mind at the time, and the
plea is often made that no harm Is
meant. DIR. Wayland asks peril
nently, "What then is meant?" All
should be ready to answer this ques-
ton. Surely no worthy or benevolent
motives are ut work, and even a'cur-
sorry view Of the consequences entailed
would sufficiently convince US how
greatly we are swerving from the path
Of kindness and good fellowship. 1t
Is sometimes urged in defense of this
practice, that no untrue word is ut
tered, that the detractor confines HIM
self to the real faults or weaknesses
that he is bringing into view. and by
no means invents or exaggerates. No
one, however, has any right 70 make
public even what is strictly true Of his
neighbor to his injury. We all know
some things Of ourselves which, If
others knew, would lessen us In their
esteem. How carefully we conceal
such knowledge, never letting it I'M
Willingly drop into the minds Of Others.
The law of kindness demands an equal
reticence with regard to Others faults.
Though our knowledge may be accu-
rate, though we may guard against
exaggeration, yet we have no right to
disclose it if it Is calculated to abate
the esteem or honor In which the one
Of whom We speak is held. We can
never fully realize the mischief, and in
some cases even the ruin, that we may
thus thoughtlessly inflict by giving
publicity to the faults Of Others. Often
it is the turning point Of those who
may be wavering between good and
evil. On discovering that their de-
reflections are matters Of common talk,
and that they have lost the respect OF
others, the next step is a loss Of self
respect, and the downward road Is
easily trodden. There are exceptional
cases where the concealment Of what
Is derogatory to tho character Of an-
other ceases to be a virtue. Where the
public good demands the disclosure OF
such knowledge, we are bound by q
higher claim to make such disclosure.
where..a crime against the law Of the
land has been committed, and We
alopeSknow the author, justice re-
quirss.usto reveal it; or where any
onsfis plotting an injury, we must, II
possibie, prevent it all hazards. But
these cases are comparatively rare,
and do not in the least affect the large
majority, where no such higher law in
terferes. A man may enjoy a better
reputation than he deserves, but rs
long rs no injustice to Others is in
volvcd we have no right to diminish 1t.
The law of reputation Is not wholly
negative. If it forbids, it also enjoins.
| While it claims our reticence In regard
to tho faults and follies of Others, it
also claims our free utterance Of what
we know to be worthy and admirable
in them. If this point DO gained, 1t