The Sun.
London, England, 1827-01-19 00:00:00

The learned counsel then proceeded to comment upon that part of
the Doctor's affidavit which stated that he heard of the elopement
of Mrs. Bligh when visiting Mrs. Edward%
The Lotto CHANCELLOR inquired whether the date of the
elopement appeared ?
Mr. ifouNE replied, on the 30th or 31et of July.—ln coati.

nuation, the learned counsel observed, that it would he better for
the reputation of Dr. Bulkeley, that his evidence should he re-
jected altogether. Though he stated that Mr. Wellesley spoke to
him without reserve of his adulterous connexion with Mrs. Bligh,
he (Dr. Buikeley) did not expostulate with him on its criminality:
he stated, indeed, that he remonstrated with Mr. 'Wellesley and
Mrs. Bligh upon the imprudence and gross indecency of letting
their amours be made public, but not upon their infamous crimes
He (Mr. Horne) would ask if such a man was to be believed?
Would hie Lordship regard one syllable he said, in a case where
he came voluntarily forward, and might say as much or as little
as he liked ? If I had been the author of this affidavit,"
said Mr. Horne, " I would rat'ier it should he imputed to me
that Iliad been guilty of deliberate perjury, in the strong terms
in which such a charge had been conveyed by the A ttorneye
General, than that this paragraph should he believed : I think
I should appear to the public in a better character if such a state-
ment was not believed. I sincerely believe that Dr. Bulkeiey
is less guilty as a perjured man than if he had spoken truth."—
The copy of the hostile communication was forthcoming; and it
would be proved by the evidence of Dr. Bulkeley, as well as that
of Mr. Wellealey, that the latter had refused to give Captain
• Bligh satisfaction on the ground alleged in the message; but he
said, " Insult me, if you please ; give me any other ground, and
I will meet you," All this was actually in the hand-writing of
Dr. Bulkeley. The Learned Counsel then read two letters from
Mr. Wellesley to Captain Bligh, which stated that the writer could
not consent to the wishes ,f the latter, upon the circumstance of
the lapse of titnesince the case of offence (two months), the pre-
sent state of Mrs. Bligh's case, and the prejudice it would occa-
sion to the writer's reputation ; but that if the Duke of Wellington
or Lord Darnley—(here Mr. Wellesley, who sat behind Mr. Hart,
observed emphatically, "or Lord Darnley alone")—should consider
it, not derogatory to his honour, he would' meet him. The latter of
the two letters contained a declaration that Mrs. Bligh was as free
frOm guilt with the writer as any woman whatever. It thus ap-
peared, continued Mr. Hornet that Dr. Bulkeley stood in the peeu-
liar situation of a person who knew of the criminal conduct of the
adulterer and: the adulteress, yet lent his aid to conceal it ; and
thought it consisteut with morality,--with humanity,—to be
the bearer of a message which might have added the murder
of Captaiu Bligh 'to 'the.. black catalogue of crimes detailed in
his affidavit. Dr. Bulkeley, if he heaped affidavit on affidavit—
Pelion on Ossa—would not be 'entitled to belief; and he (Mr.
Horne) called upon the Courtnnt to suffer the character of Mr.
Wellesley, or of any other person, .te be affected by such testi-
mony. He (Mr. Horne) would presume to ask his Lordship
whether, in any similar case, during his 'Ong experience, when
the father had solemnly denied the allegations against him, the
Court had interfered, unless the facts were proved by evidence
amounting to demonstration ? He would also ask his Lordship,
whether, in a similar case, the Court had ever sent the question
to be decided by a Jury ?
The LORD CHANCELLOR—No.

Mr. HORNY—.In case of doubt, a jury was the best tribunal,
and the present case was most doubtful. It was singular that
Dr. Bulkeley, though considering himself an important witness,
had-not been put into the box at the trial in a Court of Law. It

was another peculiar feature of this case, that this witness could
volunteer his evidence in this Court, but not in. a Court of Law.
Here he was safe ; hut in a common Law Court he was open to
cross-examination. The law suit had set out with the adultery at
Naples, but had afterwards been contracted to the Inure decent de-
tails of that in England.
The LORD CHANCELLOR observed, that he understood that the
verdict of the jury was founded chiefly upon a letter which went
to prove an act of adultery in England.
The ATTORNEr•GE)tERAL remarked, that the grounds of the
verdict of the jury could only be known to themselves. Evi.
deuce had been, however, offered at the trial as to the adultery at
Naples.

The LORD CHANCELLOR wished that it should not go forth to
the public, that affidavits could he made iu this Court with im-
punity. He had the power of directing a prosecution for perjury.
Mr. HORNE continued.—The other side had endeavoured to
produce evidence of the adultery on Mount Vesuvius, and failed.
After making several observations on the evidence of Dr. Bulkeley,
the learned counsel adverted to the letters of Mrs. Wellesley. He
said that if he might judge by the letters of Mrs. Wellesley, that
Jady was as eminent for underst*nding as she was for virtue, and
that, as was confessed on all hiztds, wai above all panegyric. To
impute duplicity.or falsehood to her, or to say that she was a mere
tool in the hands of her lusbarid,-and that her husband dic-
tated these letters to her, was equally ridiculous, and in bad
taste. These letters carried with them no inconsiderable im

portance, as far as Mr. Wellesley was concerned. The ques-
tion was not whether Mr. Wellesley had not committed adul-
tery with Mrs. Bligh—it was whether that adultery had baen
carried on in his own house, under the very eves, as it were,
-of his wife and family. It had been contended that this was
the cases and that this unfortunate degree of family scan-
dal and publicity had attached to the connexion ; and from
that it was contended, -that a man who could be guilty of
such gross misconduct, in such, a place, and with such per-
sons around him, was not entitled to the guardianship of his chil-
dren. The learned counsel next adverted to that part of the affi-
davit of Dr. Bulkeley which related to Mr. Wellesley's abstinence
from his wife's bed since a certain time, and declared that he
(Mr. Horne) believed Dr. Bulkeley had only fixed upon that pe-
riod in order to make it tally with his alleged commencement
of the adultery between Mrs. Bligh and Mr. Wellesley. It had
been asserted on his (Mr. Home's) side, that so far from being
anxious to have Mrs. Bligh under his own roof, Mr. Wellesley
had an entirely contrary feeling. Nothing could be more natural,
than that a man possessed of common prudence should have wished
to exclude a beautiful, and he (Mr. Horne) dared say, a fascina-
.• _ _ _ _ .

ting woman of this kind from the bosom of his own 'family. He
did not wish to be brought into such close contact with her.—
butt it appeared that Mrs. Wellesley, who was too pure for sus-
picion, and in whose mind, as in that of every virtuous female,
there was an absence of that process of reasoning which is com-
mon in that of mea, who vaderstand more of matters of this
uature,—it appeared that she (Mrs. Wellesley) resolved of her
own accord to admit Mrs. Bligh: to her house.
The LORD CHANCELLOR said it was certainly the impression
on his mind that Mrs. Wellesley had in her letters stated that she
found out the lodgings of Mrs. Bligh without the knowledge of
her husband.

Mr. HORNE said, that there could be no doubt of it.

The Loan CHANCELLOR here interrupted Mr. Horne, and in-
timated that he must now rise. His Lordship said, that as to-
morrow was the Seal, the present cause could not be continued,
and on Saturday the Court would not sit ; they must, therefore,
settle to-morrow when the argument in this case should be resumed.
The Court then rose.

A much greater crowd than we have witnessed on either of this
preceding days assembled to-day to hear the proceedings in this
case. After his Lordship had left the Court, the crowd still con-
tinued, and were evidently waiting to see Mr. Wellesley take his
departure. That gentleman, however, left the Court by the pri-
vate door at the side, and the majority of the persons in the hall
had no sooner perceived his disappearance, than they ran round to
meet him. Mr. Wellesley was followed across the square by at
least a hundred persons—men, women, and children. We heard
no symptom of disapprobation expressed as on the preceding day ;
the persons who followed him appeared to be actuated rather by
curiosity than by any other motive, and the boundary of every
body's ambition seemed to be to catch a glance of this natorious
person. The most anxious of the crowd were some women, with-
out bonnets, whose eagerness knew no bounds.

COURT OF KING'S BENCH, GUILDHALL, JAN. IS.
• LALNAGE V. PALMER, Just.
This was an action by the plaintift; a bill broker of Dublin, to
re;:sver from the defendant, a cattle-dealer residing in Liverpool,
the sum of 1,6041., being the amount of nine bills of exchange,
of which the
Plaintiff was the holder, and which were drawn and
accepted by several different persons, but all endorsed by the de-
fendant.
The Jury, without hesitation, found a verdict for the plaintiff
Damages, including the plaintiffs commission, 1,61 V. 4s. sd.