New-York tribune., 1907-11-09
4 HISTORY OF THE CASE.

me Druce claim first came into the English
courts IN lsss' when Mrs. Anna Maria Druce, widow
o. George Druce. and mother OF George Hollanby
bruce made sundry unsuccessful attempts TO have
the coffin Of her late father-in-la opened alleging
that 1t would be found to contain only lead.
george Aouamby Druce that time in Au-
stralia- employed. IL said. as a domestic SER
Vant- In an interview printed in March, 1898 Mrs
Druce stated:
The marriage on October 60 1851 at New Wind.
sor, Berkshire. between my late husbands father
and his second wife, in which the names were
recorded as Thomas Charles Druce and Annie Nav
was IN reality between the Marquis of Tttchfeld
afterward the fifth Duke OF Portland and the IL
legitimate daughter OF the fifth Earl of Berkeley -
II was over this Annie May Berkeley that the
late duke, while MARQUIS of Tftchfeld o,1arrelIed
win his brother Lord George Bentinck. the latter
cylng suddenly soon afterward Welbeck Abbey
Druce is said 10 have lived with her for wears and
then TO have married her the death Of his first
wife. Elizabeth Crickmer, the grandmother of the
present claimant
curious feature Of the case was the discovery
last year, by workTnen who were dernolishing Har-
court House, the Cavendish Square dwelling OF the
Duke Of Portland. OF a subterranean passage lead
ing therefrom 10 the building on Baker street
formerly occupied by Druce's Bazaar. The claim
ant says that the duke. while living his double
life, used this underground passage. leaving Har-
court House as the Duke of Portland and arriving
at Baker street Druce and vice versa
The suit Of the claimant is being pressed by a
limited liability company formed for the purpose.
The directors are given as the claimant himself
and George and John Crickmer. 4 Mrs. Margaret
Hamilton has testified that she knew the fifth
duke both as Mr.. Druce and as the Duke Of Port
Iand' and that she was aware of the fact that he
had married Elizabeth Crickmer the grandmother
Of the present claimant
George Druce says he was born in 1s41 and went
70 Australia in 1855. returning to England four
years later After this, he adds facts which came
into his possession showed that the Duke of Port
land owned the bazaar referred to In the case and
ne decided TO claim the estates, and for that pur-
pose formed the limited liability company
The original action in the case was brought TO
eject Lord Howard de Walden from the London
property which his father inherited from the fifth
luxe or Portland through the supposed failure of
the direct line. The contention has been that IL
uls suit was successful the establishing of the
Claimants title TO the other estates held by the
Duke Of Portland would follow natural Sc
quence within comparatively short time
IL has been admitted that eXhumation order
would finally settle the point whether Druce really
died and was buried. Such order was granted
by the consistory of the Court of St Pauls in 1898
upon the application Of Mrs. Anna Maria Druce.
but in 1893 the Queens Bench Division of the High
court Of Justice granted a rule TO prohibit the
order from being carried into effect without the
sanction Of the Home Secretary who thereupon
denied the application
The income from the Duke of Portlands estates
is estimated at not less than 81 900 a year, and
II was this basis that the shares of the limited
inability company were placed the market Ten
thousand ordinary shares were issued at S each
and 1000 deferred shares were issued at Is cents
each
Caldwells affidavit. which before
Frederick X. Seward, OF New York County. on
April 18 1907. published in full in THE New
York Times" June %. It quickly pointed
Out at the time that in 1856. when Caldwell
according 70 that affidavit that he consulted GER
tain eminent surgeons. including Sir More Mac
kenAe, in regard the bulbous condition OF
Druce's nose, Sir Morell only eighteen years
Old and boy at school. and not graduated
from the University Of London until six years later.