Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

THE DRUCE CASE.

Peculiar Evidence.

London, November 16

Some extraordinary evidence was given yesterday by Richard Caldwell, of New York, who was called by George Hollamby Druce, the claimant to the Dukedom of Portland.

Caldwell, in cross-examination, deposed that an Italian and a Ger man, not Indian rajahs, paid him each in India, in Bank of England notes, for curing bulbous noses. He declared that he had treated the Duke vyith ointment.

When reminded that he had sworn that he used medicine, Caldwell said that he put medicine on the nose. He refused the Duke’s cheque —he was always paid iu bank notes. He kept no bank account. He pinned the bank notes inside his shirt.

Caldwell said that liveried men servants waited at table at Baker Street Bazaar, If it were correct that there were no bedrooms, dining room, or kitchen at the Bazaar, his story would be untrue. He stated there was no plate or inscription placed, on the coffin at the alleged sham burial of the Duke of Portland, to indicate death.

When,the Magistrate remarked that the finishing touch of deception was wanting, Caldwell said he merely executed the Duke’s orders. He adhered to the statement that he saw under-ground apartments at Welbeck Abbey in 1864, though counsel said these were not constructed until 187-2. The witness further stated that the Duke of Portland superintended the arrangements at the Bazaar on the day of the mock funeral. Caldwell said he was positive no funeral of Druce occurred on December 31st, 1864. Caldwell denied that he was ever in the service of Gilliland, owner of Rock Mile, Londonderry, in 1861. He knew Inch in New York. If Inch swore he and Caldwell had been in the service of Christie, of Londonderry, the statement was untrue. He admitted that he knew Matthew Ballantyne, of New York, but denied telling him in 1889 that he had been in the employ of Christie. It was his brother William, with whom he had changed names as a boyish prank. His brother had been accused of embezzling Christie’s money. When shown a document signed “ Robert Caldwell,” assigning all his property to Christie, Caldwell declared it to be the signature of his brother, now dead. They wrote, looked, and spoke exactly alike.

Caldwell continually contradicted his previous evidence. He deposed that 50 coaches, filled with all the servants from Welbeck Abbey, to whom the Duke paid 5s apiece, attended Druce’s funeral. He made other fantastic statements.

[About ten days ago Caldwell told the Court that about 1864, at the request of the Duke of Portland, he assisted him to organise Druce’s sham death and burial, in order to destroy evidence of his dual personality- Lead was placed in the coffin. The Duke gave him for curing a bulbous nose, and £SOOO for conducting a mock funeral, as well as other large gifts. Witness said he was the Duke’s guest at Baker Street Bazaar, and there passed as Druce. He stated that he ordered 50 mourning coaches for Druce’s funeral. Caldwell said he visited Australia during the late ’sixties, proceeding to America in 1871. Caldwell asserted that he consulted Sir Morrell Mackenzie professionally in 1855, though Dr Mackenzie was then only 17 years of age. Dr Mackenzie, a litfle later, introduced witness to the Duke of Portland. Caldwell claimed that he had cured two Indian rajahs of bulbous noses, receiving for each case.] London, Nov, 18. A thousand people have inspected the closely-guarded Druce grave in Highgate cemetery in which, it is alleged, a coffin containing lead was buried. Many ladies of title have seats on the bench at Clerkenwell, where the hearing of the Druce case has been transferred. Giving evidence in the case, Caldwell denied his identity with a brother accused of embezzlement. He was positive he passed through a partly-made tunnel between Welbeck and the work shop in 1864. He denied that he was ever the defendant in a police court, and swore positively that he had never lived in Londonderry with his wife, A Lady’s Testimony. London, November 19. At the hearing of the charge of perjury against Herbert Druce, Robert Caldwell, of New York, who was called on behalf of George Hollamby Druce, the claimant to the Dukedom of Portland, continued his evidence, Caldwell denied that he and his brother held a leasehold property in Londonderry in 1868. He denied assigning to 'Christy in 1871 an insurance policy on Robert Caldwell’s life. His brother might have told him he made the assignment, Mr Plovvden, the magistrate, put a series of searching questions to the witness, and remarked that some people believed Druce was a real person who died. Did any of these ask to see the corpse before burial 2 Caldwell: “No; they were unaware that he was dead until the funeral was over.” Mr Plowden did not permit the production of a copy of the diary on the ground that it was made by a third party. : Miss Robinson, the witness from New Zealand, stated that she also . copied it. , >. n, . „ 1 ,k . ~ 1., , a

Mr Plowden: “ Possibly, but the copy is unncessary. ’ ’ Miss Robinson testified that she knew Druce in 1861, and again as Druce at Wei beck Abbey in 1868, when she was introduced by Charles Dickens, whom she met at Boston, America, and at whose in stance she became engaged.. She received at Worksop, whereAVel - beck Abbey is situated, letters for Druce in the name of Madame Tussartl.

The remarks of Mr Avory, counsel for the defendant, objecting to the copy of the diary, showed that the date of th« manufacture of the paper whereon the original was written was questioned during its custody. Miss Robinson deposed that Charles Dickens, 1868, introduced her to Druce at Welbeck. She became his outside correspondent. Mr Plowden remarked that he thought Druce disappeared in 1864. He refused to admit the partial copy of the diary made by Miss Robinson when preparing her evidence. Another Claimant. New York, November 19. The New York papers report that Calkins, a merchant at Millville, New Jersey, claims the Portland estates as a descendant of the first Duke’s eldest son, who settled in America at the beginning of the last century.

Permanent link to this item
Hononga pūmau ki tēnei tūemi

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/MH19071121.2.12

Bibliographic details
Ngā taipitopito pukapuka

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXIX, Issue 3777, 21 November 1907, Page 3

Word count
Tapeke kupu
1,037

THE DRUCE CASE. Manawatu Herald, Volume XXIX, Issue 3777, 21 November 1907, Page 3

THE DRUCE CASE. Manawatu Herald, Volume XXIX, Issue 3777, 21 November 1907, Page 3

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert