Star.
London, England, 1811-06-18 00:00:00

TO THE EDITOR.

SlR—According to my promise I send the following
statement, requesting its insertion in your paper :
It is well known I was Counsel for ColonolUrnanLE,
in his prosecution of Mrs. CLARKE and others for con-
spiracy ; and though I had not the honour of that
Gentleman's acquaintance previously, I necessarily
had many communications with him, in which, as it
was my duty, I freely, and without reserve, stated in
confidence every thing I knew tending to assist his
cause ; ani among other matters, mentioned decla-
rations often and openly made to myself and others,
las to the expectations entertained by Mr. STOKES, in
consequence of what he called « his efforts towards
the restoration to power of his Royal Highness the
I Duke of YORK."

Communications thus made, I did not expect Co-
lonel WARDLE to repeat, without my permission ; I
was therefore surprised to find it reported in a daily
paper, as part of his speech on a late occasion, that I
had told him " Mr. STOKES had, at my table, made
" assertions contrary to his oath :" much more was
I surprised shortly after at receiving a letter from
&rem, calling peremptorily on me to declare whe-
ther I had so sod to Colonel WARDLE or not. This
I conceived Sr.,Kgs had no right to demand; at least
it seemed to me he should have first ascertained the
fact, and not pl.,ced reliance on mere report. I there-
fore declined answering his letter, lest, by any possl-
bail. 1 should involve my client in any difficulty,
and determined to take all responsibility on myself,
until farther and more accurately informed. •
With this view I called on Colonel WARDLE, feel-
ing myself entitled to explanation from him. And
here, much as 1 condemn his indiscretion on this oc-
casion, yet it is but justice to him to state, that he did
not hesitate to give every explanation in his power ;
and I have now before me a letter, in which he says
that his speech was misrepresented, and that he did
not use the expressions ascribed to him. His letter
states, " that he had been ir!formul by a respectable
" character, that I had declared at a public dinner in
" the City that Stamm had made assertions contrary
44 to the evidence he afterwards gave upon the trial."
Now, as I am not in the habit of attending public
dinners or political meetings, this information c..,:rld
not have been quite correct ; and had Mr. S I'UK:Z
Itaken the right course by prudently applying for cx. I
planation where alone he could receive it correctly, I 1
'big
have been spared the painful necessity of stat- I
'mg facts unpleasant to all parties.
As to my client, Colonel WARDLE, I ought farther , I
to say, that he assured me he did not intend to make
the declaration in the House, without a previous com-
munication with me on the subject, but that the sud-
denness of the occasion did not allow him to do so.
However, although he could say no mote, it was but ;
a slender satisfaction to me When the matter had been I
thus brought before the public, first by him, and af-
terwards by the rude and wanton statement ofSrostes.
Thus situated, I feel it a duty to my own character
explicitly to state what I did say to Colonel WARDLE.
I told him, and I now repeat it, that before Mrs.
CLARKE'S trial, STOKES had often said to me, and
to others, without the least reserve, and with appa.
rent boast, that he expected high promotion for his
exertions in restoring to power his Royal Highness
the Duke of YORK: and he had gone so far as to
declare, he would not be content with any appoint-
ment for Iris services under the value of 412,000 a
year ; assigning as his reason, thit if he took a
place, he must give up his business. How far this
was true I know not, I merely state his assertions;
nor shall I stop to enquire whether they are con-
sistent with his evidence on the trial. Suffice it for
me to say, I am FULLY prepared, by witnesses whose
truth and honour cannot be impeached, to prove my
assertions, and shall be ready to do it, when called
upon its an authorised way. I, therefore, now leave
the public to determine, to whom the rude expression,
, made by STOKES, applies, of " false and scandalous."
In answering the statements contained in Mr.
S roitas'sletter, 'cannot overlook that passage in which
he would insinuate, that I sought hisacquaintance from
the unbecoming motive of obtaining business; this is,
however, a bad compliment to himself; but to such un-
generous assertions, the independence of my profes-
sional life furnishes, I hope, the best answer.
My acquaintance with Mr. STOKES was casual ;
he married a Lady long known to Mrs. ALLEY and
myself—hence the intimacy arose ; but from the day
of Mrs. CLARKE'S trial my servants had orders to say
we were engaged, should he call to visit us.
At the same time I admit, that on meeting our mu•
tual friends I did not speak unkindly of him ; it was
not my with to injure him ; nothing but self-defence
could have urged me to the present public disclosure ;
and if by accident Mrs. ALLEY or myself had met him
at a friend's house, I hope we should have remeni- i
bered the respect due to our host ; but I must add, I
we have deserted esteemed friencts.because we knew i
they received his visits.
Again, he would dare insinuate I disclosed the se-
crets of my clients—shallow onan ! Does he forget
that my client had himself, most imprudently, disco-
vered every thing appertaining to his cause on the mo•
tion for anew tt ial, and thus lett no secret to disclose ?
One observation more, and I have done. He con-
eludes his letter of June 10 with this remarkable sen-
tence—" I hope I shall not have to send a friend be-
fore I get an answer, as was the case with the former
letter." Well said, brave man ! So, then, I was
bullied into the answer. If his assertion be correct,

the conclusion is against me; if untrue, what must
people think of Mr. &roam ? I shall now state the
fact, which is, that I neither saw any friend of his,
nar slid I hear from him through any personal com•
munication, before-he received my answer; it it is
otherwise, the fact is recent, and Mr. STOKES can
prove it.
Henceforth I shall not condescend to notice Mr.
Smites through any other medium than the law.

PETER ALLEY.