The public require a daily account of all facts connected with politics and the institutions of the country; it also demands analyses, discussions, and opinions on the bearings of all such facts upon its interests. As opinions amongst the public are often much opposed to, or widely different from each other, it is clear that this demand cannot be satisfied without many newspapers. Now, looking solely to the commercial profit arising from its sale, it is tolerably certain that some one paper supported by greater capital, and conducted with greater skill, will endeavour to represent the opinions of the largest class of those who purchase these sheets of diurnal information. The first place being thus occupied, other journals will arise to represent the opinions of smaller, yet, perhaps, of powerful classes. Thus the opinions of all parties, and, in some measure, their relative strength, become known to each other. This is an end much to be desired. If the opinions of the public change, those of the leading journal must of course follow, even though they are directly opposed to those advocated by it a few days before. Such a change undoubtedly shocks the feelings of many who remain constant to their own views, and cases often occur in which these latter give up their usual paper. It must, however, be admitted that there are few political or economical questions on which one side is morally right, the other morally wrong. That a given man has or has not got possession of another man’s estate, that a man has or has not committed a murder or other crime, must, in most cases, be well known to his counsel; if in either case the wrong-doer escapes punishment, an injury is done to society. But whether a given line of policy or a given law, is more or less beneficial or even injurious to the State, is generally dependent on so many causes that very few are able to foresee their consequences with tolerable certainty. The most general and unsophisticated opinion is, that no man is justified in advocating, even when unpaid, doctrines in which he does not himself believe. With respect to the press, it is possible that the writer of the second article may be a different individual from the person who wrote the first article; but even were he the same person, the bar at least have no right to find fault with him. § The press then may advantageously be considered as expressing the opinions of classes, not of individuals. It has greatly improved in the last quarter of a century, in consequence of the general improvement of all classes.