HC Deb 14 November 1884 vol 293 cc1723-5
MR. SEXTON

asked the First Lord of the Treasury, with regard to the estate of Mrs. Helen Blake, late of 4, Earl's Terrace, Kensington, deceased, intestate, What is the amount of the annual rent received from the real estate, and what is the amount of the personal estate, and how it is invested and applied; why, in view of the fact that the "card" found among the papers of the deceased lady (admitted to be in her handwriting), in which she described herself as "daughter of William L. Sheridan, Esq. of Baltimore, U.S.A. and Galway, Ireland," the Treasury did not advertise for heirs in the Galway papers; in what respect Mr. William P. Sheridan, of Galway, failed to satisfy the Chief Clerk in Chancery of his relationship to the deceased; if, considering the fact that no register of marriages in the Catholic Church in Ireland was kept at the beginning of the present century, the Lords of the Treasury will insist on legal proof of the marriage of the parents of Mrs. Helen Blake being produced with reference to the claim of William Patrick Sheridan; and, whether, and in view of the statement in the "card," already quoted, and of the representation made to Her Majesty in favour of the claim of William Patrick Sheridan, by the Catholic Archbishop of Tuam, the Protesant Bishop of Tuam, the Catholic Bishop of Galway, the High Sheriff of Galway, and other distinguished persons, the Lords of the Treasury will afford to the said William Patrick Sheridan any further information contained in the papers of the late Mrs. Helen Blake, and will institute an inquiry to satisfy themselves as to whether his claim has a just foundation?

MR. COURTNEY

I have been requested to answer this Question. The net annual value of the real estate in the case of Mrs. Blake is about £1,000. The net amount of the personal estate was about £93,000, of which about £19,000 went in intended, legacies, and the remainder is retained by the Crown. The advertising in such cases is directed by the Court, and the Treasury have no control over it. But this case was so widely known that there was every opportunity for anyone to apply who thought they had a claim, and, in fact, very many did so, including W. P. Sheridan. The Court had before it the piece of paper described as a card when ordering the advertisements. The case has been decided judicially, and we have no knowledge of the reasons for the decision nor any power to vary it. Any person wishing to reopen the question should take legal advice and act accordingly. So far as any discretion was left us by the order of Court, we have carefully investigated the various applications with the best legal advice at our command, and have come to the conclusion that no one has established, even approximately, any claim to be related to the deceased. If W. P. Sheridan had established any primâ facie case he would have been entitled to see all the papers; but he has not done so.

MR. SEXTON

said, he would call attention to the matter on a future occasion.

MR. STANLEY LEIGHTON

asked was there any information in the hands of the Treasury which had not been given to the public—any information that had been kept concealed?

MR. COURTNEY

I do not think it would be judicious to answer that Question.

MR. STANLEY LEIGHTON

I would ask the hon. Gentleman, is he aware that the Indian Government publish a register, giving all the information in their possession respecting cases of intestacy, and whether there is any reason why similar information should not be given in this country?