Every public joúrnal has, or shoulid have.a distïnct iiulividuality. A public journal thath is it not, -:m allego 11 valid n 'ii for rxistinj. Nor, a little refleotion will show that a paper oafcnot Ije truc tj its public miasion, and bm under the aomipation of iimI t'iicndsliiijs, or ;my bJodofpotBonaFplodgys ; thal il canimot, consisLi'iitly with the tlu'ory ofit.s Mi1 irminablo rclati'iiis t i Ú'.r public as AtclligeHöor an3 nióTTitor, speftk ia tlio voice ofp aersonality ; and that it lias no nght to bo coatcnt with :ny moiuory but thtre whichis iiideftitified with hisfory, or -n-ith :my niHgeCSpbagrvation hót cöextcisfivie with any qxqessiblo knowWdg or aoiitüinporary i.icts and evcnts. But it is not tho cditorship of a paper, it may 1asküd, cssciitially personal? Wall, but is not tho odilor's onpafcity simply ministerial? In the strtctest sense oí' llio word, it is nothing more nor loss than tlia functioii of' fitly deliveraog, through ccrtain mechanica! iustrumontalitios possessed by tin; p ipcr, the mnlligenoe, tho reason, und the conscionco to tho service of which tii.' ]■!]! t is il, dicatëd as a wholly ifhperjsonul institution. The editor has no right p speak in his personal charactcr ; he ess no righi to mako tlic paper his i;ronal orjian, or tho organ of' any lixcluivi- romïiiaation of persons, and yet proiend that it is a public journal, and enjtlod, as such, to public oüiifiJsncu and oquost.