The Sun.
London, England, 1831-07-20 00:00:00

might have answered, because it tv, s his will and pleasure.
—(Hear.) He was accountable only to the King and to
Parliament; and if he made it a constant rule to consult
the Lord Lieutenant, it was• not because he was obliged to
do so, but because of his own responsibility. If, for in-
stance, an improper person was appointed, he was account-
able—he admitted it; bat if he consulted the Lord Lieu-
tenant he shared that responsibility with him. He must
say, however, that the mode of discussing the question, as
well as the question itself, was the most inconvenient that
could be imagined, because it resolved itself into this: that
an officer of the Crown, bolding a high and delicate trust,
before he had exercised that trust, should be called to an-
count by a previous discussion in Parliament. The very
same course might be adopted on the appointment of a
Judge; and the Lord Chancellor, who was supposed to re•
commend individuals as fit persons for the Bench, might as
well be called over the coals for such a recommendation.
It ought, in addition to this, to be remembered that the
appointment had not yet been made, for as soot as lie had
received his predecessor's letter, stating that there was an
indictment against Mr. Storks, he stopped the commission
at once.
The Earl of HAREWOOD explained.
The Duke of WELLINGTON said be rose only to
justify the conduct of his Noble and Learned Friend (Lord
Lyndhurst) in his absence. He would not, of course,
enter again into the question, but content himself with
stating that he had seen a letter, from which it appeared
that the son of Mr. Storks who communicated with the
Jury was not the coal-merchant, as had been represented,
but the attorney—(Hear)—independent of that, however,
he thought his Noble and Learned Friend was justified in
striking him out of the lists.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said lie had ra) intention
of bringing on a new discussion on the stbject, during the
absence of his Noble and Learned Friend, and certainly
should not hare done so, but in order to render justice to
the individual in question. The charge against this gentle-
man had been stated in that House—it had gone to all the
ends of the earth ; and he must say that he should con-
alder him ill-used, if his character should, for a day, re-
main unvindicated, if any satisfactory vindication could
be produced. Such a vindication bad been brought for-
ward, and he, therefore, thought it his duty to give it to
the House. The Noble Duke had alluded to a letter
which stated that the son of Mr. Storks who communi-
cated with the Jury was not the coal-merchant, but the
attorney ; and, from the cries of " Hear," with which
seine of their Lordahipa bad followed that statement, lie
bad no doubt but that they were ready to divide and re.
solve that it was not the son the coal merchant, hut the
son the attorney, who communicated with the Grand July
—that they knew this better than the mother who bore
him, or the father who begat him, or the individual hini-
self.—(Laughter.) He had also sear a letter, written by
the attorney, in which he declared that he never communi-
cated with the Grand Jury either directly or indirectly—
that he was in London at the time, and knew nothing of
the subject till his return. He concluded by stating that
his brother, a coal merchant, had given a slip of paper to
the Foreman of the Grand Jury. It might be necessary
for him (the Lord Chancellor) to state further, that the
prosecutor of Mr. Storks had made a declaration, in
writing, that he had brought forward the charge against
Mr. Storks on purpose.
Lord WYNFORD could not look upon the charge
against Mr. Storks as one of a venial nature, for he had
known a circumstance of an individual being sent to gaol
for •ix months for a similar offence.

The Earl of ELDON thought the best way to regulate
appointments of this kind was, for the Keeper of the
Great Seal to he guided by the recommendation of the
Lord Lieutenant; and he hoped this practice would be
adhered to for the future. During the period that he hail
the Seals he recollected only three cases in which this rule
had been departed from. Two of these occurred in the
county of Durham. On finding that the names of gen-
tletnen who had been on the commission had been struck
out by the Bishop of Durham, lie made inquiry into the
case, and that inquiry satisfied him that be should be jus-
tified in continuing them, and*he did so, notwithstanding
the omission of their names in the list. I❑ the third case,
the individual whose name had been struck out, after some
enquiry had been made, thought proper to retire of his
own accord. As regarded his own conduct in appoint-
ments of this kind, he was bound to say that he generally
took the advice and assertion of the Lords Lieutenant, be-
cause they were much more competent to judge than he
possibly could be. With regard to the charge against Mr.
Storks for perjury, it was only justice to state that, till
he was convicted, he must be presumed innocent ; and
when he was acquitted by the Grand Jury it would have
been unjust, supposing during the trill he had chosen to
retire, not to have immediately restored him. It was a
serious offence, however, to tamper with a Grand Jury ;
bnt that part of the question he would not enter into in
the absence of the Noble and Learned Lord, but more
especially because the facts of this case were not before
them. If the charge, however, were made out, in his
opinion be ought to be struck out of the list.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said that communicating
with a Grand Jury might vary from a case of great guilt
and corruption to one of a venial aspect. He was inclined
to think that their Lordships, if a discarded servant were
to come forward and offer evidence against any of them on
a Grand Jury, would not look upon it as a great crime to
point out such a circumstance to the Jury. At all events,
till the individual was indicted and convicted, he should not
think he was deserving of the blame imputed'to him.
The Marquis of CLEVELAND WWI understood to say
that he recollected the cases alluded to by the Noble and
Learned Lord (Eldon), and he believed his Lordship's at-
tention was first called to the subject by the sensation
which the omission caused in the county.
Earl GREY said he recollected the cases alluded to by
his Noble Friend. The names of two gentlemen bad been
struck out of the list by the Bishop of Durham, because
they had licensed a public-house against his wish. The
circumstance caused a strong sensation in the county, and
a strong representation was made to the Noble Lord on the
Woolsack. The Noble Lord, in consequence of this re-
presentation, took the subject into consideration, and re-
instated the Magistrates, notwithstanding they had been
struck out of the list by the Bishop of Durham.--(Hear.)
To the subject before their Lordships he had given the
best attention in his power, and he must say that nothing
could he more satisfactory than the conduct of his Noble
and Learned Friend. There was great objection, however,
to the desultory mode of discussing such a question, and
be hoped the conversation would drop.
Some of the Bills were then advanced a stage, and the
House adjourned at a Quarter past Seven.