represented by a single
organ, as that the _House of Commons_ should be represented by a
single organ. The organ, for instance, that represented on the
education question the Rev. Mr. Moody Stuart, would most miserably
misrepresent the party who advocate the views of the great father of
the Free Church--the late Dr. Chalmers.

The organ that represented the peculiar beliefs held, regarding the
personal advent, by the party to which Mr. Bonar of Kelso belongs,
would greatly misrepresent those of the party to which Mr. David Brown
of Glasgow and Mr. Fairbairn of Saltoun belong. The organ that
advocated Dr. Cunningham's and Dr. James Buchanan's views of the
College question, would be diametrically opposed to the view of Dr.
Brown of Aberdeen and Mr. Gray of Perth. The organ that contended for
an ecclesiastical right to legislate on the temporalities according to
the principle of Mr. Hay of Whiterig, would provoke the determined
opposition of Mr. Makgill Crichton of Rankeillour. The organ that took
part with the Evangelical and Sabbath Alliances in the spirit of Dr.
Candlish of St. George's, would have to defend its position against
Mr. King of St. Stephen's of the Barony; and the organ that espoused
the sentiments held on tests by Mr. Wood of Elie, would find itself in
hostile antagonism with those entertained on the same subject by Mr.
Gibson of Kingston. And such are only a few of the questions, and
these of an ecclesiastical or semi-ecclesiastical character, regarding
which a diversity of views, sentiments, and opinions in the Free
Church renders it impossible that it can be adequately represented by
any one organ, even should that organ be of a purely ecclesiastical
character. But a newspaper is _not_ of a purely ecclesiastical
character; and there are subjects on which it may represent a vast
majority of the people of a Church, without in the least degree
representing the Church itself, simply because they are subjects on
which a Church, as such, can hold no opinions whatever.

It is, for instance, not for a Church to say in what degree she
trusts the Whigs or suspects the Tories--or whether her suspicion be
great and her trust small--or whether she deem it more desirable that
Edinburgh should be represented by Mr. Cowan, than mis-represented
by Mr. Macaulay. These, and all cognate matters, are matters on
which the Church, as such, has no voice, and regarding which she
can therefore have no organ; and yet these are