The Sun.
London, England, 1826-06-15 00:00:00

[TIDE 1110 It irznAti).]

The Judges of the Court of King's Bench, it crews, arc equally
divided upon this question...-viz,., whether a person hiring r.. pair
of post homes is liable for the acts of the driver? if we thought
that there were a shadow of law connected with its deeittion, we
would not presume to interpose between the doubts of such high
authorities ;, but taking it, se we du, to be merely a matter of
common sense, we apprehend, that people in general ran come
but to one conclusion, in common with the I.ord Chief Justice,
and Mr. Justice Littledale, as Ir:11 as with the Jury who tried
the casts—viz., that persons vvho have a driver and u pair of
forced upon them, in whom they have no property, or
choice, and over whom they have little or no caldron', must be
contented, if they have. not their. own necks broken, and
cannot he in any way responsible - for any other mischief
such driver and hones may he the cause of. if' tine were
otherwise any passenger in a stage-coach, and any pernun
getting into a. hackney-coach, would be responsible for the
nets of the drunken driver, or the sorry unmanageable steed,
by which their own lives hasie been enda►gered. The two learned
Judges who differ front their colleagues' upon the occasion, appear
to proceed upon an idea of the temporary controul which the
hirer possesses over the driver. But even this is imaginary
--the post•horse duty decides that matter; for, a man who has
hired a pair of horses to take him to ilounalow, cannot go to
Bernet or to Rumford, without subjecting himself, or rather, the
owner of the horses, to a pro'wcution from the titamp-oftice. In
short, the worthies who drive post-horses, and public conveyances,
take opportunities enough of showing their temporary paymasters,
that they are not their servants; and to suppose a man revolt.
sihie for that over which he has no controls', is contrary to every
ps itwiple t,f reason and common!tiense.---

['Tim nittvisu
't he principles a Welt we have avowed. with regard to the stie,Os
tient; are sotheiently tolerant ; but while we are willing to admit
the merit of individuals whose opinions are different front our
own, we de not mean to extend that indulgence to caws in which
neither ability nor integrity .can, be pleaded. While we lament
the errors of eenatons like Brougham, Mackintosh, Hume, Ice.;
we detest the factious and inconsistent behaviour of such been as
limit and Cobbett. cannot agree with. Sir Francis Burdett
and Sir Robert when they flatter the passions of a Weet.'
ininster or, a Southwark:mob, by tirade's against the. Stotelt and
Government; but we , reeuguil,e with pleasure many generous
trek* in their characters, which do honour to the English as a
nation. In such men as Una end Cobbett, if we except the la-
culty, which they certainly pewits, of producing an impresiduit
upon crowd, we can see lame of these redeeming qualities; we
rat give, them credit neither fur depth of penetration Mir generosity
of purpose. We ehouldrartainlylement the admission of such men
as these to the deliberative' assembly of a great nation ; but we have
too much coufidenctin the sound judgment of the English people,
even among the lowest orders, to suppose for a moment diet such will
be the result of the election in Samereet, er at Preston. Our country.•
men may smile at the shrewdness of Cobbett and the impudence of
linnt; init they, are too well aware of the necessity of other quell-,
ties in their Repreeentatives ever to confide their interests to such
demagogues as these, and we consider it almost superfluous.: to
make any remarks on the subject, In this respect, as well as on
sonattuther recent occaaione, we Wive been led to differ from those
who generelly agree with us in their opinions, We never thought
it probable that these men would be successful, and, we should al.
most consider it a libel on the English people to intimate such a
etspiciou. The poll at Preston has hitherto justified us in our
conclusions,- and, till the relative situation of tint cendidates suffer
avert/ considerable alteration, - we shall not, probably, think it ne.'
eeseary again ets whirrs' the public on the subject. it must be
extremely gratifying to all friends of social order to !emit that the'
Yorkshire filection is not to be contested. For our parts we sem
set no differentia of opinion between the contending parties in
molt of eleetions, sufficient to justify a Candidate in pruvoking
popular contest which could answer no purpose, if retried on suc-
cessfully, but that of personal aggrandiument. . .