New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1879-12-04

tJey are apD.icu iaiDtit HicS"''''J '" ~
matur ly) to the uses for which they are
primarily intended. Neither does newspaper
which prints them in advance convert them
to it's own use. Indirectly il hopes to pion'
by the priority of publication, but the use 10
which the documents are put is the pupiic
use. If any right is violated in the transac-
ton. it is not the right of property.
A pubic officer il will be said, is entitled
to give out his Report at his own time ana III
his own way. Within certain limitations TINS
is true Meanwhile, the Report, OF the matter
contained in it, is his secret lie may keep
his secret if he can; he may not require the
press and everybody else to keep II Tor him'
Violation of confidence is dishOnorable ana no
respectable journal will BE- guilty OF 1t; Dut
TO PRINT a surreptitiOus Report. rs the treas
uly Report was recently printed, ~ no
violation Of confidence, because no obligation
of confidence has been entered into by the
press 4; no pledges have been either given or
implied. There may have been violation OF
confidence or of duty on the part of the per-
son who first obtained the early copy of the
document, and from whose hands it passed
To the newspaper; the censors OF the
premature publication assume that there
This Is not necessarily the case. There
are many ways in which II Report may come
under the eyes of one who has no trust or re-
sponsibiiity in relation to it; we could mention
signal instances in which Government news,
supposed TO have been strictly guarded, has
been divuged by pure accident; and as mat
ter of fact in nine cases out of ten when adj
vance copies of public documents reach
newspaper Office the editor does not know how
they were obtained, and cannot easily ascer-
tain. The presumption that they were pro-
cured dishonOrably-is not so strong that there
is any moral obligation to refuse them, for
fear of encouraging improper practices.
Moreover, there is a broad distinction be-
tween receiving stolen goods and making
use of violated secret. Stolen goods are
tainted. Every man who takes them is guilty
of converting another's property to his own
use and so repeats the original offence. But
n secret is not property, and there is no wrong
in making it public unless the person to whom
it has been impaired has pledged himself
formally or by implication, to keep it. Then
the wrong is not in making use OF the secret,
but in breaking the pledge. Manifestly The
faint does not attach to the secret, and the
wrong goes no flrtncr tnin the OIlGlHdi idnS-
crossor who violates his obligation of honor.
Those TO whom he imparts the news are
under no promise or bond of trust. and If
they believe that the matter is proper to be
published they are at liberty TO treat 1t as
they would any other intelligence.
If the censors TO whom We refer mean to
say that newspaper editors have no right to
tempt people to bctray their trust, then we
heartily agree with them. SO tar as we know,
respectable papers never do put forth such
temptations. But when news Is in the market
they are not bound to take it for granted that
the possessor has obtained it by dishOnora6le
means Especially since experience has salts
fed us that in very many cases he has noD,
and to refuse to deal with him lest they en-
courage him in evil courses.
1t is the business of a newspaper to PRINT
the news as early as it can. 1t is the bust
ness of the Government to keep its own Sc
crets. When it does not, 1t must not fall back
heplcssly upon the newspaper to keep them
for it,