Passage Summary: Jack promised his aunt to release her will, but he found out the money would go to a friend who would waste it. If he hides the will, his mother gets the money and uses it for good, so Jack decides to keep it hidden.

Conclusion: Jack was justified in his decision to suppress his aunt's will.

Reasoning: Revealing the will would result in the money being wasted by the intended heir, whereas keeping it secret ensures the money benefits his mother and others without causing harm.

Analysis: This is a Principle Justify question, so we are looking for a moral rule that forces Jack to choose the 'greater good' over his personal promise. Jack is caught between a deontological duty (keeping a promise) and a consequentialist outcome (ensuring the money does good). Since the argument concludes he was right to hide the will, the correct principle must prioritize the beneficial outcome or the prevention of waste over the obligation of a promise. It’s a classic case of 'the ends justify the means,' provided the ends involve helping Mom and the means involve a little light probate fraud.