Mr. Leaden, of Great James Street, Bedford Row, Sir Edward
Lyt- ton Bulwer's solicitor, has sent to the Morning Chronicle a copy or a letter he wrote to Lady Bulwer, on the subject of her quarrel with Sir Edward. A writer in the Morning Chronicle had said that the letter was " couched in offensive terms," and Mr. Loaden publishes it, avow. edly for the purpose of refuting the charge ; but at the same time it appears to be an exports statement, calculated to injure Lady Bulwer, This is the letter to Lady Bulwer- " Madam—when, some mouths ago, Mr. Hyde, as your solicitor, called on rue to demaud, first, au increase to the allowance you received from Sir Edward Bulwer, secondly, the entire custody of your children,—threatening, if these demands were not complied with, additions of a personal nature to a fiction by you then recently pub. Balled, and intitnating also hostile legal proceedings.—I replied to the lint demand, on the part of Sir Edward, by a reference to the memorandum given to him by your own trustees, a copy of which I enclose; and with regard to the second, 1 stilted that not- withstanding various hostilities and provocations, Sir Edward had still continued to allow to you the liberty of aceese to your children by visit or letter, (subject only to the restriction rendered neeessary by your withholding all ',minim, Alf an attempt to re• move them); and that the reasons tor withdrawing them bruin your entire custody had been given (with the evidence on which the reasons were based) to Sir Francis Boyle, as your relation and trustee, who considered them sufficient for Sir Edward's justig. cation."
I then proceeded to state, that, after these demands' and the threats Mat accom- panied them, Sir Edward felt himself obliged, as a thtlier no less than a husband, to authorize inquiry into the truth of certain information at that time volunteered to him; that it was now my duty to apprize her Ladyship that Sir Edward withdrew the access he had hitherto given to her children; and at the same time to point out to her, that if she deemed this refusal of further intercourse founded on erroneous eunvictious, there was open to her, by a recent act of Parliament, the tribunal of the Court of Chancery. I went on as follows- " I also take this opportunity. Madam, of observing, with respect to recent occur. reuses, that although Sir Edward Bulwer, by my advice and that of his counsel, unto. rized Mr. Lawson, us a solicitor of repute, to make such legalities noun, indispensable wherever proof may be needed in a court of law, yet that , plosions to his niteribringto stop the lawsuit you Intve lately engaged in, before the Police Correctienelle of Paris, Sir Edward instructed one to inquire minutely into the proceediegs of Mr. Lawson and Mr. Thackeray; and I beg to state, that I am persuaded those gentlemen never ter au iustant harboured the intention of abstracting your papers, or obtaining any testimony, the truth or probity of which would not bear the scrutiny, so invariably rigid, of aa English tribunal. Before such a tribunal in your own country, you have now the power to disprove every statement that can be shown to be either corrupt or untrue. " With this conviction I deemed it my duty, in conjunction with the eminent counsel employed at Paris, to advise Sir Edward Bulwer (and especially for the sake of his young daughter) to prevent a mere waste of scandal without use or result, in a suit which appeared to me frivolous, and based upon the most erroneous allegations. " At the same time permit me to remark, that if in that view 1 am mistaken, it was neither in the wish nor in the power of Sir Edward Bolwer, by any interference of his, to deprive you of redress; the plain, simple, and ordinary proceeding open to you being, as stated in court by the Avocet du Roi, to make application to the Ministers de Justice ; and if your complaint should be found, on examination. to he grave and tenable, the action would be undertakela in the name, and, even at the cost, of the legi- timate authorities."
I concluded by observing, that " since misrepresentations might very probably be tirade in the journals, upon matters so rarely intruded upon the public it would be nes cessary in such a case to publish this letter ; " and also by recapitulating the main points of my letter—viz. that no inquiries bad been made till, by the threats and de. mands of Mr. Bytie, they had appeared necessary, both ill regard to the defence of my client and to the custody of the children. That if those inquiries had been groundless, Lady Bulwer had her vindication in the Court of Chancery; anal that it the small per. tion of such inquiries, instituted in France, had been really conducted in the matinee Lady Buis% er's solicit would imply, that her distinct legal remedy, which Sir Edward could not prevent, was in applying iu the usual manner to the proper authorities of France.
Copy of the memorandum given by Sir Thomas Ger,y Cullum and Sir Francis Doyle, at the dune of the separation.
" The cause of the separation which has unhappily taken place lietwecn Mr. aud Mrs. E. L, 'Rawer is incompatibility of temper. The pecuniary terms contained in the agreement to which Mr. Bulwer has legally bound himself are, with reference Mille per. manent meaus at her disposal, in our judgments, liberal; and the couditions generally of the arrangelneot, as proposed by hint, honourable to butlt the parties concerned.
ToostAs Gsax CULLUM,
10. 11. puyl,E."
I beg tc add, that if the pecuniary terms of the arraugement were liberal, in refer- ence to the means of Sir Edward Bulwer, your Ladyship cannot but remember that they were yet more liberal in reference to your own personal ciaims before marriage, since the income so assured to you was four times the amount of the income you brought to Sir Edward, and about live times the amount Qt' the annuity or ,;ointure enjoyed by your mother, Mrs. Wheeler.
Paris, filst March 1540,
Previous page
