The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1872-08-03
0IndenendeAce.N

We notice that some of our State contem-
poraries are bestowing on themselves more
self-gratulation than comports well with the
most sensitive modesty, because, as they say,
they are independent" and are in this
respect on a higher plane than other papers.
This has suggested to us some reflections on
the nature and value of independence i'll
journalism. We find that there are several
kinds of independence possessed or ahecteo
BY different newspapers. The New York
Herald, for instance, has been one OF the
most independent newspapers ever published,
if independence means, as it very often ap-
pears to mean in the mouths OF those who
boast themselves to spossess that virtue, q
mere inability or Discrimination to adhere to
any given principles or ideas for twenty-four
hours in succession. This kind of independ-
ence seems to arise from a dizziness of the
moral perceptions. To minds afflicted with
it right and wrong are undistinguishable, and
are accordingly interchangeable as policy or
caprice may dictate. In these cases the
morals are not sufficiently developed to give
steadiness to the intellect. Thus the Herald
was one day for slavery and the next tor the
abolition of the ame,-now rebel, now loyal
now for Lincoln and tomorrow for Nc
Clellan. At one time people called it the
Satanic Herald, but it outgrew the name be
cause, it would seem, its readers ceased to
to attach to its vaccilating conduct the idea
of responsibility. So well established is its
present character for independence that
the young journalist who should seriously sit
down to point out the fact that the Herald
had been guilty of gross inconsistency in
the propoundings of two successive issues,
would only get laughed at for his pains, how
ever successfully he might establish his point.
This kind of independence" 10 very COM
mon, but it is a terrible abuse of the word.
Independence is not practicable of whirigig,
and moral instability is no more an admirable
quality than corresponding physical infirm-
ity. But all our Harold Skimpoie plume
themselves on it, nevertheless.
There is another kind of independence"
in journalism that il still more common and
still more disreputable. 1t is much like that
which we have just described, except that
the mental fluctuations are guided by dis
tinct, settled purpose of a selfish character.
1t may be described as lying in wait to see
which way the cat is going to jump. If
Themistocles, Alcibiades, Talleyrand and
Macauley's great Lord Halifax had edited
newspapers, they would have made them
'independent''-that is, unembarrassed, as
means of promoting their own interests, by
any bonds of principle, friendship or consis-
tency. Thetrimmers have always driven a
thriving business for themselves in this world,
but have done nothing for progress, nothing
for humanity, nothing for God. Let us hear
no more Boosting then, of the possession of
this diplomatic kind of independence"
which forever hesitates toltake definite posi-
ton, until the rewards are certain and the
victory sure.
The true independence of a paper that has
to deal with politics, We conceive to be perfect,
unsrerring loyalty to the principles Of the
party whose causeit has espoused, and perfect
independence of men. To be the organ of a
progressive party, is glory to any paper, but
to be the organ of any man or clique of men
is disgraceful. Before the New York Trib-
une became Mr.. Greeley's personal organ
and the most abjectly servile and unprinci-
pied organ ever published, it has now be-
comet was a fine example of what
an indepedent party paper ought to be. 1t
was in the main faithful to the principles of
the Republican party, but was unrelentiug in
its criticisms of men and suffered no sugges-
ton OF party expediency to open or close its
lips. This is the kind of independence which
the PRESS has always striven to maintain,
and, as it hopes with good degree of sue
noso