Confidential communications;

              98 HASKINS & SELLS November
THE high ideals of a physician impose
upon him the obligation of holding
in confidence any information concerning
his patients which may come to him in the
course of professional relations. Law­yers,
ministers and accountants are guided
by the same principle of obligation.
The statutes confer upon doctors and
lawyers the right of refusing to divulge
information which they acquire in the
course of service to patients and clients.
Ministers are likewise protected. But
the accountant, who is frequently in the
confidence of his client to a degree equal
to that of other professional men, is
omitted from the statutes.
Such omission may not be attributed
to a difference of opinion regarding the
propriety of placing the accountant under
the statutes, but rather, in all probability,
to the fact that accountancy as a profes­sion
had not yet received recognition when
the statutes in question were framed.
Mr. John B. Geijsbeek, L . L . B . , M.C.S.,
C.P.A., in the August, 1911, number of
the Journal of Accountancy, referring
to the subject of confidential communi­cations,
writes as follows:
"The latter doctrine pertains only to
the question whether a person can be
permitted or compelled by law to divulge
the communications between persons who
stand in a confidential or fiduciary re­lation
to each other, or who on account
of their relative situation are under a
special duty of secrecy and confidence.
In other words, the question involved
here is whether secrets between parties
can be forced from them for the sake of
justice, public policy, or the good order of
society. Such a confidential relation in
law exists between parties in which one
is bound to act for the benefit of the
other, or who, on account of their relative
situation, are under a special duty of
secrecy and fidelity. Such a relation may
also exist when a continuous trust is re­posed
by one person in the skill and
integrity of another, or the peculiar re­lations
which exist between parties such as
client and attorney, principal and agent,
principal and surety, landlord and tenant,
parent and child, guardian and ward,
ancestor and heir, husband and wife, and
others. Such a relation certainly exists
between the accountant and his client,
although not specifically named."
Notwithstanding the lack of specific
provision in the statutes, accountants
generally have taken unto themselves the
obligation of confidence and have refused
to disclose to third parties, except with the
permission of the client, information which
has come to them in the course of pro­fessional
engagements.
A certain well-known trust company
sent a representative to a firm of certified
public accountants seeking information
as to the financial standing of a client
who was a prospective borrower. For
some reason the bank chose this course
rather than that of seeking the information
from the client. The request was denied.
The trust company was offended. The
accountants lost one, if not more, en­gagements
as a result. Yet the bank
would require the approval of a depositor
before giving out the amount of his bank
Confidential Communications