No. 396.
Mr. Birney to Mr. Evarts.

No. 63]

Sir: I am in receipt, since my residence at this post, of a great many letters from citizens of the United States, asking information in regard [Page 697] to supposed claims to estates in the Netherlands, and requesting suggestions as to the best method of establishing them. They come from all parts of the country, from Maine to California. The demands range from $12,000,000 down to a more manageable sum, and extend over a period embraced within the past 200 years.

Although neither the presentation nor prosecution of private claims is among the duties devolving upon me, I have been disposed to contribute such information to inquirers as I could conveniently find. But the letters, whether from lawyers or laymen, are almost without exception so entirely vague and indefinite that they rarely furnish any clew to an investigation. As there is little prospect of a cessation of such inquiries, and no doubt much time and money has been and will be uselessly expended, through the imposition of a certain class of a speculative turn of mind, who work upon the credulity of those who think they may have interests that can be realized, I have thought it might be well to address you a note containing a brief general statement upon the subject to which such letters relate, and if it meets your approval to put it in print, that I may attach it to more special answers sent to future inquirers.

It is altogether probable that most persons in the United States who write for information do so under the impression that it can be readily had, after the fashion in their own country, by stepping into a surrogate or probate office and examining the records. But in Holland there are no such offices open to the public for the record of wills. Wills in this country are deposited by the testator in the custody of the notary whom he requested to officiate as his draughtsman. He may select any notary he pleases. Notaries in Holland are usually appointed from the legal profession, and are functionaries of reliable character. Trusts of great value are safely committed to them. They are not admitted to the office until they have stood the test of a rigid examination as to their proficiency in the duties incumbent upon them. The will is filed in duplicate in the office of the notary, and its custody descends to his successor. The notary enters upon his register the title and subject-matter of each paper filed with him, with a corresponding number. This is examined each month by the procureur-general or district attorney, and, if found correct, is indorsed by him.

Ordinarily, there is no difficulty whatever, on the part of those concerned, in finding the notary who may have possession of a particular will. The friends and members of the family will remember very well who officiated in that capacity. But when a quarter or a half century has elapsed since the death of the testator, and inquiries come from abroad, accompanied by no statement as to the locality of the property and former residence of the deceased, or the time of his death, it is no easy matter, often, to find the officer or the successor sought for. Extensive advertisement is sometimes the only means of discovering heirs. Wills are so carefully drawn that contests about them seldom occur, and it is very rare that heirs prefer to have the testator proved not of sound mind and memory.

In numerous instances inquiries have been made by attorneys as to the judicial proceedings customary here upon the assertion of such claims. I will, as succinctly as possible, refer to their history and present course.

Many years ago the courts of the country exercised the right to appoint guardians for the persons and property of minors. In the fourteenth century there were established what were styled orphans’ courts. To them was delegated the care of the estates of deceased persons. At [Page 698] that period the courts had almost supreme power in their respective districts. The first mention of such delegation of power by any of them is that found in the statute published by the Countess of Margaritta on the 10th of May, 1318. At that time cities acted as distinct sovereignties, according to the authority bestowed. In 1351 Philip of Burgundy granted to the city of the Hague such an orphans’ court. On the 13th of May, 1355, Count William of Bavaria bestowed upon the city of Delft the right to establish a chamber for orphans’ court. In 1485 Maximilian, by a statute proclaimed on the 16th of November, extended more generally this right.

Under this system such claims were settled until 1809, when all orphans’ courts were abolished by the introduction of the French civil law throughout the kingdom of the Netherlands. The methods of procedure under this code were concluded by the principles laid down in Grotius and Yan Leuwen, who were to Dutch law what Blackstone has been to English and American law. On the 5th of March, 1852, the Staats General, or Parliament of the Netherlands, passed an act providing for the organization of a state commission whose duty it became to settle claims against the estates of deceased persons, as well as against the government. All the funds heretofore under the care of the orphans’ courts, or other officials, and undisposed of, passed into the custody of this commission. This act also provided that for any sum not paid over, and which had been within the jurisdiction of the orphans’ court, the municipality in which it was appointed should still be liable to any one establishing his right to it.

The rules of this commission require that all persons making demand for funds under its control shall make a full statement of the case in writing, with proofs of descent and identity. A receipt is given for the papers, and within two months the commission announces its decision; if adverse, the claimant has the right of appeal to the courts.

This act also provides that, as soon as practicable after its taking effect, an advertisement should be inserted in the official journal known as the Staats Courant, notifying all claimants to any portion of the funds in their hands to make demand and proof; also, that after an interval of six months from the first there should be a second advertisement, and that after the lapse of five years from such second notice all estates to which claims had not been established should escheat to the state.

This law would dispose of such estates as were in the hands of the commission prior to 1852. It is scarcely reasonable to suppose that any government would hold itself responsible without limitation as to time for all waifs that may have fallen under its protection.

There are persons, however, who expend large sums upon travel and attorneys under the belief that this government has held in its treasury vast amounts, and is only waiting to welcome some one who will come and claim it. Not many months since, a respectable, zealous, and intelligent old lady from Brooklyn, N. Y., called upon me to inquire how she should approach the government to induce it to pay over without delay what was honestly due her as one of the heirs of a Dutch general who expired suddenly on horseback while engaged in a grand parade that occurred 200 years ago. She was accompanied by a French advocate whom she had engaged in France to prepare her brief in the case. He already had it printed in the shape of a large pamphlet. The lady claimed that the government had taken charge of the property, and had since been in the receipt of the usufruct. She admitted that the claim had become of such magnitude that if ordinary interest should be [Page 699] added to the principal no government in Europe had the ability to pay it. She was, however, willing to accept the principal and allow further time for the interest. She was fully determined, as she said, if Holland did not meet her expectations in doing what was right and just, to have the government dishonored in the eyes of all Europe. She called upon several of the embassies here to induce them to form a sort of alliance of the powers to bring a pressure to bear. This she did because there were heirs in Germany, France, England, and the United States. She was determined that her petition should be laid before the highest authority. For this purpose she waited at the door of the palace, and, when His Majesty the Bang appeared, she presented it in person. He referred it to his minister of finance, who very soon addressed a note to the applicant informing her that the whole matter had several times been thoroughly examined in the courts and decided adversely to claimants. I advised her that it would be more judicious to save the money she was expending upon steamers, hotels, and advocates.

A recent mail brought me a letter from a citizen of Marysville. He sets out by saying that he had written to President Hayes, asking him to interpose in regard to an estate left him in Holland, and that in reply my address had been sent him. He goes on to-State that several newspapers had notified him that his ancestor, who died 100 years ago, had left a large amount and directed that it should be put at interest for 100 years and then divided among his heirs; that this time having arrived it was ready to be distributed, and that the sum total was now $12,000,000. He desired the matter to be sifted to the bottom, and offers, on realizing premises, to compensate liberally. This was followed by letters from persons of the same name, written, one from Lebanon, N. J., one from Ulster County, New York, another from Washington, all solicitous about the same interest. But in no one of them was there mention of the time or place of death of the testator, nor the location or description of the property, nor was a copy of the newspaper notice inclosed; in fact no clew by which investigation could be commenced.

Of one thing such inquirers may be certain, and that is, the Holland Government never has ordered its notices to be inserted in foreign newspapers. Not long since a gentleman of fair intelligence called upon me and represented that he had just arrived from a voyage across the Atlantic, having been employed by parties who supposed they were heirs to an estate somewhere in Holland. I discovered that he had undertaken this business and made an expensive trip without the slightest knowledge as to the locality, or province, or part of the kingdom in which the testator had lived and died. I referred him to a competent barrister, by whom he was told that he would have to advertise in several of the leading newspapers for the notary who had the will. That discouraged him and he took his departure, no wiser than when he set off from New York. Advances may have been made sufficient for the trip, but not for advertising. I mention such instances to show that much is expended in such inquiries without avail.

I may add, however, that if any one in the United States has a dona-fide claim against the Government of Holland, or any of its officials, which can be clearly and satisfactorily shown, he may rely upon it that there is no government that will more promptly and fully meet the demand.

Hoping that these hints may not be without some service to the many persons in the United States who look wistfully to the fortunes coming to them from Holland,

I have, &c.,

JAMES BIRNEY.