The Sun.
London, England, 1829-08-29 00:00:00

SUMMER ASSIZES.

service.

ESTERN CIRCUIT—BRIDGEWATER, Auc. 27
OLDFIELD V. BUSH.

This, which was a case of criminal conversation,
has excited an immense degree of interest in this
part of the country. Th• defendant in the present
action indicted the plaintiff, a short time ago, for an
assault at the Quarter Sessions for the county, and
in the course of the proceeding sufficient transpired
to fix public attention very intensely upon the result
of this trial.

Mr, Seijeant WILDE (with whom were Messrs
ERSKINE, JEREMY, and BERE) conducted the plain.

tiff's case.
Mr. Serjeant MCREWETHER, Mr. EARLE, and
Mr. JARDINE appeared for the defence.
Mr. Seijeant WILDE said the plaintiff was for-
merly a woolstapler, who, having retired from busi-
ness, now resided at Frome. The defendant was a
medical man, hying in the same place. He had at-
tended the family of the plaintiff, and thus became
acquainted with his wife ; and the acquaintance, it
would be shown, had terminated in a connexion
which gave rise to the present action. The Learned
Gentleman, after detailing the facts which he pro-
posed to substantiate in evidence, proceeded to ob-
serve that the plaintiff would have been glad to have
been spared the necessity of bringing the present
action. He had parted with his wife on discovering
her criminality, and it must be admitted he had in-
dulged in considerable violence towards her and the
defendant ; but under all the circumstances of the
case, this was natural, though it might not be per-
fectly justifiable. This case was not presented to
the notice of the jury as one requiring large da-
mages. All he called upon them to say was whe-
ther the defendant bad debauched the wife of the
plaintiff or not ; and if they were of opinion that he
had so misconducted himself, it was for them to de-
cide upon the question of damages.
The marriage of Mr. and Mrs. Oldfield, on the
23d of December, 1823, was admitted.
Ann Gould, a pretty;looking girl, who gave her
evidence with great propriety, was the first witness
examined. She said I know the plaintiff, Mr.
Charles Oldfield. I entered his service on the 2(1
of May, 1825. His family consisted of himself, his
wife, and two sons of her's by a former marriage.
There was an apprentice named Morgan in the
house. I know the defendant Mr. Francis Bush :
he is a doctor, residing, as well, as the plaintiff, in
Frome. Mr. Bush was the medical person attend-
ing the family. In November, 1825, Mr. Oldfield
went to Wells to see his brother. He was absent
two days and one night. On the first evening of
Mr. Oldfield'a absence, Mr. Bush came to the home
between niniieeaanscllcet(ein o'clock.ifNrir. I
Oldfield
I d openedl‘,
a the door
at
home.
sfoali.dhnime: He asked if Mrs. Oldtield was at home. I
answered that she was. Mr. Bush went into the
room where Mrs. Oldfield was ; it was a room that
fronted the street, and was down stairs; it was
called the large parlour; on Mr. Bush coming, I
went into the kitchen ; the door is not more than
one yard and a half from one of the parlour-doors;
there are too doors to the parlour; I could hear
what took place in the parlour while I was in the
kitchen. I heard a noise in the parlour; I went to
the parlour-door after I heard the noise; I heard
Mrs. Oldfield say, " Don't, Sir, I don't understand
notMur.ndßerusstahndsaNillliastomitetlhviansg.
and .Mrs. Oldfield remained together in the room
in
gown rustle. Mr. Bush
rsahetbei
pe,oiliru;d:l3,b2)elotliritsimt
.vI
iioroc
itUoi
1,1.1
t B
i*l
6seiflokre they came out I heard
a sound of kissing in the room. Mrs. Oldfield let
Mr. Bush out, when he went, away ; she let him
out through the front door; that door opens not
into the street, but out at the side. 1 saw Mrs. Oki-

field about half an hour after Mr. Bush was gone.
She appeared to be very much agitated. I know of
Mr. Oldfield having gone to Mr. Strong's to bottle
some wine. This was about a week after the time
just referred to. Mr. Strong lives nearly half
a mile from Mr. Oldfield's.. Mr. Oldfield did not
come home till after I had gone to bed. Before I
went to bed Mr. Bush came to my master's. I let
him in. He asked me if Mr. Oldfield was at home.
I told him he was not. He then asked for Mrs.
Oldfield. This was about 10 o'clock at night.—
Mrs. Oldfield was in the large parlour at the time.
Mr. Bush went into her. She remained in the
room. Mr. Bush remained from a quarter of an hour
to 20 minutes. During that time I was at the par-
low-door. I could not understand any thing that
was said, anti heard no other noise on that occasion
except talking and kissing. I believe Mr. Bush let
himself out that night. I saw Mr. Bush in my
master's house again in about a fortnight. My
master was absent. It was nearly 10 o'clock at
night when he came. Mrs. Oldfield was at home,
and in the small parlour. Mr. Bush went in to her.
There was a sofa in the room. There is a window
in the room, looking into the garden. I went round
to it and looked in, but that was on another occa-
sion : this time I went to the parlour-door. I
could hear them talking. I recollect my master
going to Bristol just before Christmas, 1825. He
remained about two nights. J saw Mr. Bush at
Mr. Oldfield's house on both those nights. He came
the first night between nine and ten. Mrs. Oldfield
was in the smaller parlour, where the sofa was.—
He went into the room to her. I was at the par-
lour-door. Mr. Bush remained about 1.5 minutes.
I could hear them talking and kissing. He came
again a little after ten on the following night. Mrg.
Oldfield was at home, and in the same room. I went
round to the parlour window, that looks into the
garden ; there were shutters to the window. There
was a candle in the room. I could see into the room
through a part of the under part of the shutter, that
did not fasten. I looked through : the candle was
standing on the large table, in the middle of the
• room. Part of the sofa came under the window.—
I could not see any thing that was upon the sofa,
but I could see the other parts of the room. I did
not see any thing, neither Mr. Bush nor Mrs. Old-
field, when I looked through. After looking for
about ten minutes I saw them; I saw Mr. Bush
first; he came from the sofa; I then saw Mrs. Old-
field ; she also came from the sofa. I saw Mrs.
Oldfield's face; she looked very red. I saw her as
she was milling the candle that was on the table in
the middle of the room. During the time of these
visits my mistress had not complained of being ill.
Mr. Bush did mot come at any time except at night
during this period. Mrs. Oldfield sent notes to Mr.
Bush's surgery, but no notes were brought back in
return. I remained twelvemonths in Mr. Oldfield's

Cross-examined—The first time I was in the
kitchen, very near the parlour, nobody was in the
house but myself, except Mrs. Oldfield and Mr.
Bush. On the second occasion I was also alone;
neither of Mrs. Oldtield's sons were with me, one
was at school, and the other in bed. The appren-
tice, Morgan, was not within on either of these
times. The first time was in November, 1825; my
master frequently went from home, but not to stay
out the whole night. Sometimes he was out the
whole night ; he was out a good deal at night, and
in the daytime also; he came home to meals. I
never saw him except sober. He did not often stay
out all night. He was from home all night on other
(N aiions, besides those I have mentioned, when
Mr. Bush visited my mistress. I should think,
from her appearance, that Mrs. Oldfield was about
40 at this time. She is not well-looking. She is
rather ugly ; she was unwell, and kept her bed two
days while I lived with her; she took medicine for
several weeks after that, but she was not taking me-
dicine during the greater part of the time I was
there. The first part of the time, from the end of
May to July, when she went to Bristol, Mrs. Old-
field was taking medicine. It carne from Mr. Bush's,
in large round bottles. It looked red, and there
were boxes of pills.
Thomas Hughes—l was an out-door apprentice
to Mr. Oldfield in 1825 and 1826. I was sent by
Mrs. Oldfield with notes to Mr. Bush's, between
October, 1825, and February, 1826. I was sent
several times with notes during this period. I after-
wards went with my master to Ann Gould, at Mr.
Rabbitts's, in consequence of what I communicated.
About nine days after our going to Ann Gould, Mrs.
Oldfield left the house, and did not return.

Re•examined by Mr. Serjeant WILDE—I was
asked about the notes just after Ann Gould had
made her statement to Mr. Oldfield. I then told
my master it was between October and February
that I had carried the notes. I remembered it, be-
cause it was in the winter time ; it was while Ann
Gould was in Mr. Oldfield's service.
Mr. Serjeant WILDE—That is the plaintiff's case.
Chief Justice TINDAL—Is that all ?

Mr. Serjeant IItIEREwETHER addressed the Jury
for the defence, and observed that he represented a
gentleman, who for a period of thirty-two years had
practised as a physician in the town in which he was
now resident, without the slightest imputation on
his character. This was a struggle on the part of
his client for that which was dearer to him than
existence, his reputation. The present was a case
which, if he could represent it to the Jury aright, he
felt little doubt, would end in rescuing the character
of his client from all suspicion, and driving the
plaintiff from the Court covered with infamy. The
Learned Serjeant commented on the evidence by
which it was endeavoured to make out the plaintiff's
case, which he characterised as one of mere sur-
mise and suspicion. Supposing, for the sake of
argument, that the facts sworn to by the first wit-
ness were of a questionable nature, they bad not
been followed up by that species of subsequent con-
duct which in such cases generally came in aid of
evidence which was merely circumstantial. It was
tolerably evident that the suspicions of the female
witness bad been excited, and she fancied matters
to confirm her prepossessions. A profound observer
of human nature had said, " it often happens that
men see a little, imagine a great deal, and so jump
to a conclusion." This was the case in the
present instance. A slighter or more insufficient
case, on the plaintiff's own showing, had never been
brought into a Court of Justice. His Learned
Friend had talked of the plaintiff being reluctant
to come into a Court of Justice; before the case
for the defence was concluded, the Jury would
not wonder at his reluctance. His Learned Friend
had not ventured to talk of large damages, he (Mr.
Serjeant Merewether) stood there to address them,
not on the subject of damages, but of character ;
and for the purpose of vindicating a medical man
from a gross and unfounded charge proceeding from
so foul and infamous a quarter. In September,
1823, Mr. Oldfield married his present wife, a widow
lady, about the age that had been described by the
plaintiff's witness. She had previously lived the
wife of a gentleman of some property—her character
unimpeached and unimpeachable. She had two
children by that marriage, and her husband showed
his sense of her merit by leaving
.her a considerable
property, part of which was now in the possession
of the plaintiff. Mrs. Gregg (tha.t was the lady's
name previous to her marriage with the plaintiff)
united herself to Mr. Oldfield—it was unnecessary
to say under very unhappy auspices. Before a month
s o elapsedm e (i
disease,
founde,
communicated herself infectedto
.her
rwbi with
hera v
husband.loath-
rtehsee
nftaecdt
bi in
—(A strong sensation was excited in Court by this
statement.)--The defendant was called in upon the
occasion, and 110:vasrealt.tticetmaipatleyddtioscbleosreedp
defence of his character thus assailed by the plain-
tiff. His attendance upon the lady, which wits ne•
ctleisesaprillaYinsteifer ast affording evidence of the grossest
violation of confidence. The Learned Serjeant Pro-
ceeded to observe how easily the visits of Mr. Bush
might have,been misconstrued, under these circum-
stances. Ihe personal inspection necessary in such
a case might readily be mistaken for something of a
very different character. Having detailed the pat-

titulars of the illness of plaintiff and his wife, and
the attendance of Mr. Bush, the Learned Counsel
stated that the notes which had been made a subject
of accusation against his client, were written to him
by Mrs. Oldtield on purely medical matters. He
would prove to the Jury, that after Mrs. Oldfield
had left her husband's heuse, through his own mis-
conduct, not her's, it was necessary that she should
be attended by a physician, in consequence of the
injury she had experienced while living with her
husband.

The following witnesses were called for the de-
fence :

John Nichols—l am 19 years of age, and have
been five years apprentice to Mr. Bush, the defend-
ant. I was living with him in October, 1825. It
was part of my duty to compound medicines for his
patients. I know Mr. Oldfield and his wife. Wit-
ness went on to state, that in September, 1824, he
compounded medicines for them. He continued to
do so up to January, 1826. Hs delivered the me-
dicines himself. They were intended for both Mr.
and Mrs. Oldfield, and were such medicines as
would be administered in cases of syphilis. There
were mercurial pills, lotions, and sulphate of zinc
sent. Mr. Oldfield had often come to the surgery
and obtained medicines of this description for him-
self and Mrs. Oldfield., In cases like theirs, it was
usual to inspect the person of the patient. Witness
recollected notes being sent to Mr. Bush's by Mrs.
Oldfield's servant. They were from Mrs. Oldfield,
and related exclusively to surgical matters and the
supply of medicines.
Francis Bush, jun., defendant's son, a young man
of 20, who had served his apprenticeship to his fa-
ther, proved the fact of the plaintiff having con-
sulted the defendant in September, or the beginning
of October, 1825, relative to a disease of a parti-
cular nature with which he was afflicted. He him-
self had examined the plaintiff's person, and found
him affected by primary and secondary symptoms of
syphilis.
Dr. Bradfield was then called, and deposed to
having attended Mrs. Oldfield for syphilis, subse-
gnently to November, 1826.
Mr. Serjeant WILDE said he never would sur-
render a case while his duty to his client appeared
to demand his perseverance in the cause. In the
present instance, however, he thought the case sa-
tisfactorily explained where circumstances were du-
bious, and answered in other respects.
The LORD CHIEF JUSTICE said, the conduct of
the plaintiff's Counsel was very proper indeed.—
He had doubted the strength of the case from the
first, still he thought there were facts which re-
quired explanation ; they had now been put beyond
doubt, and the defendant's character stood as high
as ever.

A verdict for the defendaant was then recorded,
and received with loud expressions of approbation.
The trial lasted till eight o'clock.
Mr. Justice Burrough is rather worse to-day.