Why did Holmes rule differently in the two free speech cases shank and Abrams?

In Schenck v. United States (1919), Justice Oliver WenDELL Holmes upheld the conviction of Charles Schenck for distributing anti-draft leaflets, emphasizing the "clear and present danger" test, particularly in wartime. Conversely, in Abrams v. United States (1919), Holmes dissented, arguing that the government should not suppress dissenting opinions unless they posed a direct and immediate threat, highlighting the importance of free speech in a democracy. His differing rulings reflected a tension between national security concerns and the protection of free expression, with Holmes ultimately leaning towards greater tolerance for dissent over time.