The successor of the Prospective Review, the National presented solid evaluations of leading press publications.

1. [Greg, W. R.]. “On the Just and the Unjust in the Recent Popular Discontent.” 1 (1855): 1–30.

Outlined the “many high reform functions and many solemn obligations” of the “periodical press.” Among these were to expose national grievances and, after “conscientious sifting,” individual wrongs; protect the weak against oppression; reveal charlatans, “incapacity,” and “corruption” in government; “allay popular passions” but identify legitimate discontent; save victims; and unmask criminals.

2. [Bagehot, Walter]. “The First Edinburgh Reviewers.” 1 (1855): 253–84.

Classed review writing as “one of the features of modern literature,” demonstrating its “casual character…temporary and fragmentary.” Reviewers had to “instruct so many persons”; all, sure they were “competent to think,” had to learn “to think rightly.” Essays in the Tatler and Spectator were too short to accomplish this goal. The Edinburgh Review introduced longer articles with “suitable views for sensible persons,” chiefly in the columns of Sydney Smith and Francis Horner.

3. [Powell, Baden]. “The Life and Writings of Dr. Thomas Young.” 2 (1856): 69–97.

Cited the articles of Young, a physician and scholar, in the Quarterly Review and the Transactions of the Royal Society.

4. [Greg, W. R.]. “The Present State of France.” 2 (1856): 123–56.

Approved the ‘gagging’ of journalism by Napoleon III because “some of the most widely circulated daily journals” were anti-British or Russian pawns. A free French press would ignite a newspaper war because British gazettes would retaliate.