PORTLAND PEERAGE. DISCLOSURES BY A LONDON PAPER.

Evening Post, Volume LXXV, Issue 27, 1 February 1908, Page 5

PORTLAND PEERAGE.

DISCLOSURES BY A LONDON PAPER.

DEUCE FAMILY HISTOBY. ALLEGED MISREPRESENTATION. By Telejjmph. — l'l ess Association. — Copyright. LONDON, 31st January. The Daily Chronicle says that neither George Hollamby Druco nor "G. Druce, Limited," is able to continue tho civil action for possession of the Portland estates. Hollamby Druce from tho outset had concealed essential facts, and had based his appeal for public support on deliberate reticence and misrepresentation. Tho Chronicle claims to possess documents showing that Mr. John Sheridan was associated with Anna Maria Druce's claim until his litigation ceased, and that ho sold for £200 to Mr. Trowinnard, who was Charles Edgar Druce's power of attorney in London, certain information which was cxpectsd to bo" useful in supporting Ed'gar'a claim. Then, in 1903, Mr. TrcwinnVd attended a conference between Georgo Hollamby Diuco and Mr. T. K. j V. Coburn in the chambers of a barrister in London, and informed Hollamby that ho was not the heir while Edgar remained alive. It was then resolved to caiuU to Edgar's solicitors to renew his power of attorney, granted to Mr. Trewinnard in 1899. The reply received referred them to a firm of solicitors in Lond.on, who advised that the Druce family's claims were based on insuflkicnt evidence, and were «iot worth pursuing. , Mr. Coburn than went to Australia and secured an agreement wheieby Edgar piofessed to transfer his rights and pledged hhm-clf not to interfere with Hollamby's proceedings on condition that he shared in the spoils in the event of success. The only basis for the claim advanced was an error in Charles Crickmer Druce's marriage certificate, inasmuch as tho bridegroom gave his father's name as Henry instead of Thomas. Similar errors wore made in thousands of certificates. The baptismal certificate proves that the bridegroom was Thomas Druce's eon. Mr. Sheridan, in March, 1904, joined tho Uollamby Druco camp and entered into an agreement by which he was to leceive from Hollamby a commission of 6£ per cent, on all property rocovered. Mr/ Coburn also promised Sheridan 3£ per cent, of the amount paid to Druce. Ilenco the 1907 DiuccPortland Company, which was i'oimcd into a new Druec-Portland Company to acquire Sheridan's assets. Sheridan, while selling certain illusory rights, withhold , liis knowledge that if there was an heir it wap Edgar and not Hol•lanlby Druce. i The lattir hud pub.iely dissociated himself from (hi?- flagrant flotation, but the fact rcmaiacd that hjs and Coburn's action made it possible.