THE TAYLOR MILLIONS.

Wanganui Herald, Volume XLVIII, Issue 14065, 20 August 1913, Page 8

THE TAYLOR MILLIONS.

NON EXISTENT. ■ ; TO TUI! KIOTO)!. , ■ Sir,—After'.the lapsed some ten years the -'old myth .of .the alleged. “Ui'felaimptl Taylor Millions’'’ lijis again'-been (revived, a-ntlpublislicd .largely.,'.as air item of fact, in ..Britis:h,\ Amermun,: Canadian.--. anil in some in'-Tances '.Australian''•'newspapers, ami l ire'.opportunity is.too .tempting noi to-' liii. availed of bv agents of dubious character,for the purpose of exti-acting fees IVain .tnis pubhe. All the Taylors in Australia and New Zealiind arc' now. "receiving letters on flia-.svibjcct from al : leged nest, of .'kin agents (one . of whom operates in a '.iioiglibnnripg-{state)disking.' a’fee ol 2(;s tor information and particulars, of llie “Tnyhir .Unclaimed Estate”’ 'yptpuntijm to : V5,0()0J10!)V, which' they affirm awaits''flip next of kin. '. A .short, ■■.eatmheivf, of, ibe real facts may sago yoitr ..readcrs l i-mn' pU.yjiig ; .feAs'.aiid wasting. .their sebstaheb' in ■ pursuing a shadow.'-.. '. r_■ , 1 ■ 1 he'legend of these, millions is that pno . Peter, Taylor, h- native of Falkirk, left that' town in the early part of 1800, after a hitter find Violent quarrel with bis brother., and emigrated ,to Holland, where he married, a Dutch .lady,- and. .afterwards-added .the name -“Van Dor iiulet”-to his own. The bitterness entertained hy Taylor towards Ids brother, it is represented, was not 'softened ■ in , cipursp of time, ais the story is that he left a. considerable sum of money, computed ; to .auioniij, v,it!) added interest to eye:- five miliio.ns sterling (English money), to u : nephew inimed Feter'Taylor,!, .then resident in .Haarlem, with ,a proviso that. i.n vtheevent’ of the nephew dying without issue flip fortmio. should be For. 100 years and then, divided amongst his nest of kin.’ so that:' the byothcr. with; whom he hall .quarrelled,, could not receive any personal benefit. The nephew, it ;is alleged, ' died ■9O years • ago, leaving no issue, and the' millions arehow'-.distributable among the next .of kfn. 'Owing-to" tlte huge .sum said to have boon-at stake, enormous''numbers of the Taylor elan throughout the world put in claims, -more'' particularly those of British and American descent, and, the British and United States Consulates at Amsterdam were besieged . with enquiries by solicitors and others asking for iid'di'inalion, Wo ourselves made inquiries'at'the time, and were assured: by our agents . that no such an, unclaimed (.'•state existed.

In looking through our li Jo in the matter-:'t\:c note , that .Mr W. A. Glurrcliill. the British Consul-General at Amsterdam, umlcv ulnte the ttli of -November, • I.l* 1.1, in, reply to a correspondent, sent, him a_eopy_ of a circular lettc;-, wiiieh lie Tmd printed to save lime in replying to the enormous mass of corro'spoinlenee .he had received, on the subject. .which read.-.: “The British Consulate at' Amsterdam presents' his.coiiipllnicutfi and in reply to the enquiry conecimiiig an unclaimed estate in Holland begs to sty to-that the execution of the. ‘‘Law -of -Limitations, 1852.” disposed of all unclaimed estates in Holland- prior >o 1852, and that it is needless to iiiiiko further ••enquiries in the. ma t ter. ” .. On tlie. Gth bf November, 1911, the Frifish Consul again wrote ns follows-:—-

“J .'have your Jotter of the 2nd inst;, wisif.h was answered hv a circular card -in my,absence, and have replied Unit there arc no unclaimed estates- .in Holland' lilie (lie one in question. The linn of .Glasgow .solicitors who have received' from me full -.particulars concerning; the itdnii lustration' of old estates in Holland intendto publish, an article in the .Scottish newspapers in order to protect people a.maimd. unscrupulous persons who trade,on Tl,u?ir credulity.” , Ayahs, ou the 10th of November, 1.911, the- Consul, in imply to, an argument that '‘'Hie' Law of •■Limitations Act, 1852,”■ did iiot apply to .property held in •escrow, said:—“ln reply to your postcard and:loiter of the ,7th !hst, I beg to inform you that t know that a Glasgoty firm-ofi'solicitors arc prosecuting -enquiries ou'..behalf, off a number of the descendants of< : Peter Taylor. They appar-ently-believe';.Uhi.t the law of Jimitji.-uo.us ■do.ps not apni.y to property hold in escrow (a’ deed'\vlifoil clbo.s not come into,-exist-ence until the fulfilment of a conditiohV, .hut the succession'; laws of Holland, which-are based upon thecode.Napoloon, 'ami havei been, enforced for the last 10(1 .yea.rs, do, not-- allow 'property, to be hold jo bserpw. In other woiais. estates have to- ;bo-disfcrib'pted according to law, and noL.as acgorOihy.'td• tho wishes Ceccentric.'or, otherwise) of the toslptor.”Whiyhiugs iiavc; benm,. publicly given by the •'authorities in Holland ■ cautioning, persons against “the .perfect , lolly . of spending time '.or. money” towards the 'cajlectipn, of ■ what are, known as old Dutch-estates, The IJnited States Consul a,t .Amsterdani- souie years ago reported that 'for three months.■enquiries ou the above subject -were so numerous as to .-almost, baffle, .replies, a.pd, tlu'eate.a----c-d In interfere seriously with -the regular. bushiest; of his office, and- the Hank of Holland, in. which theunclaimed millions are alleged; lo.be deposited, does not, exist.. -Tit the Taylor, or .other unclaimed estates over had beep iu existence then; they would clearly,come within the provisions, of , the statute of limitations passed ; bv the Dutch Parliament, in 1852. by which all unclaimed 'inheritances are irrevocably escheated to the State after a lapse of live years. As the TJ.S. Consul at Amsterdam pithily reported regarding ' .these , unclaimed , millions.'. “They dp- not (exist, they are myths and will-o’-thp-.wisp fake's.” • ' v .The newspapers also'appeal- to,be at variance regarding, date's “in .the matter;, iSorne of them stale that the deceased Peter .Taylor, emigrated from Falkirk to; , Holland in 1821,; whilst others state . lie died there in 1785. In the latter case the :]0() years' would have elapsed’in I.BBn. whilst in the former case the period could not possibly lapse till after 1,921; so that in either case it is clear that the statements that 100 years has just claused since the death k of I biter Taylor, must bo incorrect.—Yours etc; LLOYD AND CO. Llo'd’s Next of Kin Offices, Melbourne, Htb August, 1010.