THE DRUCE BURIAL MYSTERY.

Auckland Star, Volume XXIX, Issue 226, 24 September 1898, Page 4 (Supplement)

THE DRUCE BURIAL MYSTERY.

MRS DRUCE WINS

SIR FRANCIS JEUNE DECIDES TO

OPEN THE COFFIN.

(From Our Special Correspondent.)

LONDON, August 13

Mrs Druce has gained her point, and the mystery of the Highgate vault will soon be cleared up. Your readers will remember that when the Druce case was last before Dr. Tristram the Chancellor, in order to preA-ent any unnecessary laceration of the tender feelings of Thomas Charles Druce's kith and kin. preA-ailed upon the contending parties to refer the matter to Sir Francis Jeune. aa-_o as judge in the suit entered in the Probate Court Avould say Avhether the opening of the coffin alleged to contain Mr F. C. Druce's remains Avas necessary for the purposes of justice. Sir Francis heard the arguments of the opposing counsel on Wednesday last in Chambers. The principal issues raised by Mrs Druce's opponents. Avho are Mr Alexander. Young, Mr Herbert Druce, or May, and other representatiA-cs of the dead man's children, were that such a course as suggested had never been adopted before; and also that the effect of the application would be to cause a desecration of the most sacred feelings of the deceased's descendants. Further, they tendered affidavits of medical men Avho attended "'J? C. Druce' in his last illness. Sir Francis, however, stated that he could not quite acquiesce in the 'feelings of horror' suggested, that in any case justice AA-ould have to be done, that it was clear that the most important evidence as to whether the will Avas properly executed Avas to be ascertained from the fact whether the coffin contained the body of the testator or not, and finally that it would be sufficient for him at this stage if the petitioner made out a prima facie case.

The affidavits of an old salesman at the Baker-street Bazaar and others AA-ere put in on behalf of the applicant for the purpose of making out such a ease, but Sir "Francis held that they AA-ere not sufficient, and that the evidence of the lady who had been so often referred to must be given. Mr Statham (Mrs Druce's counsel) protested that he could not have a 'rehearsal' of his AA-hole case at that period, but, on the understanding that only the immediately important part of her testimony should be disclosed and cross-examined upon, agreed to call her, and at the adjourned hearing yesterday the lady appeared. Her name is Mrs Hamilton, and she is the witness on aa_iosc evidence the main part of Mrs Druce's case stands. Her affidavit sets forth that she knCAv 'T. C. Drucc' Avell, that she saAV him in '66, two years after his alleged death; that she "then spoke to and -joked with him on the subject of his burial; that he only replied to the effect that he wished to hear no more about the matter; and that she saw him again in 1576. when he looked much older ancl complained of not being well. On all these points Mrs Hamilton was severely cross-examined by Mr Bargrave Deane, but she stuck to her assertions throughout, and when told .hat if she made mis-statements she might be prosecuted for perjury, replied with dignity, T am fully aware of that, sir.' Mr Deane then desired to offer evidence on the other side, and put in several affidavits, but the President took the view that he had before him. a case involving a substantial issue, that he had heard substantial evidence, and had therefore decided to address a letter to the Chancellor of the Consistory Court requesting the latter to assist the Probate Court by directing the grave to be opened. This is a great triumph for Mrs Druce, for although Mr Deane intimated he rnigh. possibly appeal the petitioner would, should that course be taken, produce the shorthand notes o_ the proceedings at the Consistory Court, wherein counsel said that if Sir Francis Jeune thought the grave should be opened he would offer no further opposition.

I Mr Statham, by the way, promises ito 'astonish the otherside' when he fully unfolds his case in the Probate Court, and hints darkly at revelations concerning .one of the alleged witnesses to the will of 'T. C. Druce.' Provided no appeal is made against Sir Francis Jeune's decision, a further sitting of the Consistory Court will be held, and the Chancellor will then grant Mrs Druce the faculty ordering the exhumation. Meanwhile, the petitioner is jubilating over her victory. She has been working in the matter for five long years, and now—well, she said to an interviewer the other day that by Christmas her son would be the Duke of Portland. There is, one would think, enough romance in the case already, but Mrs Druce has imported a little more by averring that for some months past her footsteps have been dogged by two men, 'tall, dark, and looking like' Spaniards (oh for the villains of the penny novelette) and has recently received a mysterious warning from some unknown person that efforts were being made to kidnap her. Mrs Druce has published her intention of being present^ at the exhumation, and after the coffin has been opened she means to go out to Sydney to bring back her son-the lawful heir to the Portland estates and titles.' In the interval that young man should shun all tall, dark, Span-ish-looking men, lest evil befall him. The Portland estates are worth a little caution, to say nothing of the "tltleS. . , ?■,:' "; . i