When I had entered the little sitting room and
shut the door, I turned to Barbara, awaiting
with some curiosity what she had to say to me. But
for a while she said nothing, standing before me
silently, and looking at me with a most disquieting
expression. All her calm self-possession had gone. I
could read nothing in her face but alarm and dismay.
“It is dreadful, Rupert!” she exclaimed, at length,
in a half-whisper. “It is like some awful dream! What
can it all mean? I don’t dare to ask myself the
question.”
I shook my head, for I was in precisely the same
condition. I did not dare to weigh the meaning of the
things that I had seen and heard.
Suddenly, the stony fixity of her face relaxed and
with a little, smothered cry she flung her arm around
my neck and buried her face on my shoulder.
“Forgive me, Rupert, dearest, kindest friend,” she
sobbed. “Suffer a poor lonely woman for a few
moments. I have only you, dear, faithful one; only your
strength and steadfastness to lean upon. Before the
others I must needs be calm and brave, must cloak my
own fears to support their flagging courage. But it is
hard, Rupert; for they see what we see and dare not put
it into words. And the mystery, Rupert, the horrible
shadow that is over us all! In God’s name, what can
it all mean?”
“That is what I ask myself, Barbara, and dare not
answer my own question.”
She uttered a low moan and clung closer to me,
sobbing quietly. I was deeply moved, for I realized the
splendid courage that enabled her to go about this
house of horror, calm and unafraid; to bear the burden
of her companions’ weakness as well as her own grief
and humiliation. But I could find nothing to say to
her. I could only offer her a silent sympathy,
holding her head on my shoulder and softly stroking her
hair while I wondered dimly what the end of it all
would be.
Presently she stood up, and, taking out her
handkerchief, wiped her eyes resolutely and finally.
“Thank you, dear Rupert,” she said, “for being so
patient with me. I felt that I had come to the end of
my endurance and had to rest my burden on you. It
was a great relief. But I didn’t bring you up here for
that. I wanted to consult you about what has to be
done. I can’t look to poor Tony in his present state.”
“What is it that has to be done?” I asked.
“There is the funeral. That has still to take place.”
“Of course it has,” I exclaimed, suddenly taken
aback; for amidst all the turmoils and alarms, I had
completely lost sight of this detail. “I suppose I had
better call on the undertaker and make the necessary
arrangements.”
“If you would be so kind, Rupert, and if you can
spare the time. You have given up the whole day to
us already.”
“I can manage,” said I. “And as to the time of the
funeral. I don’t know whether it could be arranged for
the evening. It gets dark pretty early.”
“No, Rupert,” she exclaimed, firmly. “Not in the
evening. Certainly not. I will not have poor Harold’s
body smuggled away in the dark like the dishonoured
corpse of some wretched suicide. The funeral shall
take place at the proper time, if I go with it alone.”
“Very well, Barbara. I will arrange for us to start
at the time originally fixed. I only suggested the
evening because—well, you know what to expect.”
“Yes, only too well! But I refuse to let a crowd
of gaping sight-seers intimidate me into treating my
dead husband with craven disrespect.”
“Perhaps you are right,” said I with secret approval
of her decision, little as I relished the prospect that it
opened. “Then I had better go and make the arrangements
at once. It is getting late. But I am loath to
leave you alone with Madeline and Wallingford.”
“I think, perhaps, we shall be better alone for the
present, and you have your own affairs to attend to.
But you must have some food before you go. You
have had nothing since the morning, and I expect a
meal is ready by now.”
“I don’t think I will wait, Barbara,” I replied.
“This affair ought to be settled at once. I can get some
food when I have dispatched the business.”
She was reluctant to let me go. But I was suddenly
conscious of a longing to escape from this house into
the world of normal things and people; to be alone for
a while with my own thoughts, and, above all, to take
counsel with Thorndyke. On my way out I called in
at the dining room to make my adieux to Madeline and
Wallingford. The former looked at me, as she shook
my hand, very wistfully and I thought a little
reproachfully.
“I am sorry you have to go, Rupert,” she said. “But
you will try to come and see us to-morrow, won’t you?
And spend as much time here as you can.”
I promised to come at some time on the morrow;
and having exchanged a few words with Wallingford,
took my departure, escorted to the street door by the
two women.
The closing of the door, sounding softly in my ears,
conveyed a sense of relief of which I felt ashamed.
I drew a deep breath and stepped forward briskly with
a feeling of emancipation that I condemned as selfish
and disloyal even as I was sensible of its intensity.
It was almost with a sense of exhilaration that I strode
along, a normal, unnoticed wayfarer among ordinary
men and women, enveloped by no cloud of mystery,
overhung by no shadow of crime. There was the
undertaker, indeed, who would drag me back into the
gruesome environment, but I would soon have finished
with him, and then, for a time, at least, I should be
free.
I finished with him, in fact, sooner than I had
expected, for he had already arranged the procedure of
the postponed funeral and required only my assent;
and when I had given this, I went my way breathing
more freely but increasingly conscious of the need for
food.
Yet, after all, my escape was only from physical
contact. Try as I would to forget for a while the
terrible events of this day of wrath, the fresh memories
of them came creeping back in the midst of those other
thoughts which I had generated by a deliberate effort.
They haunted me as I walked swiftly through the
streets, they made themselves heard above the rumble
of the train, and even as I sat in a tavern in Devereux
Court, devouring with ravenous appreciation a
well-grilled chop, accompanied by a pint of claret, black
care stood behind the old-fashioned, high-backed settle,
an unseen companion of the friendly waiter.
The lighted windows of Thorndyke’s chambers were
to my eyes as the harbour lights to the eyes of a
storm-beaten mariner. As I emerged from Fig Tree Court
and came in sight of them, I had already the feeling
that the burden of mystery and vague suspicion was
lightened; and I strode across King’s Bench Walk with
the hopeful anticipation of one who looks to shift his
fardel on to more capable shoulders.
The door was opened by Thorndyke, himself; and
the sheaf of papers in his hand suggested that he was
expecting me.
“Are those the depositions?” I asked as we shook
hands.
“Yes,” he replied. “I have just been reading through
them and making an abstract. Holman has left the
duplicate at your chambers.”
“I suppose the medical evidence represents the
‘complications’ that you hinted at? You expected
something of the kind?”
“Yes. An inquest in the face of a regular death
certificate suggested some pretty definite information;
and then your own account of the illness told one what
to expect.”
“And yet,” said I, “neither of the doctors suspected
anything while the man was alive.”
“No; but that is not very remarkable. I had the
advantage over them of knowing that a death
certificate had been challenged. It is always easier to
be wise after than before the event.”
“And now that you have read the depositions, what
do you think of the case? Do you think, for instance,
that the verdict was justified?”
“Undoubtedly,” he replied. “What other verdict was
possible on the evidence that was before the court?
The medical witness swore that deceased died from
the effects of arsenic poisoning. That is an inference,
it is true. The facts are that the man died and that
a poisonous quantity of arsenic was found in the body.
But it is the only reasonable inference and we cannot
doubt that it is the true one. Then again as to the
question of murder as against accident or suicide, it
is one of probabilities. But the probabilities are so
overwhelmingly in favour of murder that no others
are worth considering. No, Mayfield, on the evidence
before us, we have to accept the verdict as expressing
the obvious truth.”
“You think it impossible that there can be any error
or fallacy in the case?”
“I don’t say that,” he replied. “I am referring
exclusively to the evidence which is set forth in these
depositions. That is all the evidence that we possess.
Apart from the depositions we have no knowledge of
the case at all; at least I have none, and I don’t
suppose you have any.”
“I have not. But I understand that you think it at
least conceivable that there may be, after all, some
fallacy in the evidence of wilful murder?”
“A fallacy,” he replied, “is always conceivable. As
you know, Mayfield, complete certainty, in the most
rigorous sense, is hardly ever attainable in legal
practice. But we must be reasonable. The law has to be
administered; and if certainty, in the most extreme,
academic sense, is unattainable, we must be guided
in our action by the highest degree of probability that
is within our reach.”
“Yes, I realize that. But still you admit that a
fallacy is conceivable. Can you, just for the sake of
illustration, suggest any such possibility in the evidence
that you have read?”
“Well,” he replied, “as a matter of purely academic
interest, there is the point that I mentioned just now.
The body of this man contained a lethal quantity of
arsenic. With that quantity of poison in his body,
the man died. The obvious inference is that those two
facts were connected as cause and effect. But it is not
absolutely certain that they were. It is conceivable
that the man may have died from some natural cause
overlooked by the pathologist—who was already aware
of the presence of arsenic, from Detling’s information;
or again it is conceivable that the man may have been
murdered in some other way—even by the administration
of some other, more rapidly acting poison, which
was never found because it was never looked for.
These are undeniable possibilities. But I doubt if any
reasonable person would entertain them, seeing that
they are mere conjectures unsupported by any sort of
evidence. And you notice that the second possibility
leaves the verdict of wilful murder unaffected.”
“Yes, but it might transfer the effects of that verdict
to the wrong person.”
“True,” he rejoined with a smile. “It might transfer
them from a poisoner who had committed a murder
to another poisoner who had only attempted to commit
one; and the irony of the position would be that the
latter would actually believe himself to be the
murderer. But as I said, this is mere academic talk. The
coroner’s verdict is the reality with which we have to
deal.”
“I am not so sure of that, Thorndyke,” said I,
inspired with a sudden hope by his “illustration.” “You
admit that fallacies are possible and you are able to
suggest two off-hand. You insist, very properly, that
our opinions at present must be based exclusively on the
evidence given at the inquest. But, as I listened to
that evidence, I had the feeling—and I have it still—that
it did not give a credible explanation of the facts
that were proved. I had—and have—the feeling that
careful and competent investigation might bring to
light some entirely new evidence.”
“It is quite possible,” he admitted, rather drily.
“Well, then,” I pursued, “I should wish some such
investigation to be made. I can recall a number of
cases in which the available evidence, as in the present
case, appeared to point to a certain definite conclusion,
but in which investigations undertaken by you brought
out a body of new evidence pointing in a totally
different direction. There was the Hornby case, the case
of Blackmore, deceased, the Bellingham case and a
number of others in which the result of your investigations
was to upset completely a well-established case
against some suspected individual.”
He nodded, but made no comment, and I concluded
with the question:
“Well, why should not a similar result follow in the
present case?”
He reflected for a few moments and then asked:
“What is it that is in your mind, Mayfield? What,
exactly do you propose?”
“I am proposing that you should allow me to retain
you on my own behalf and that of other interested
parties to go thoroughly into this case.”
“With what object?”
“With the object of bringing to light the real facts
connected with the death of Harold Monkhouse.”
“Are you authorized by any of the interested parties
to make this proposal?”
“No; and perhaps I had better leave them out and
make the proposal on my own account only.”
He did not reply immediately but sat looking at me
steadily with a rather inscrutable expression which I
found a little disturbing. At length he spoke, with
unusual deliberation and emphasis.
“Are you sure, Mayfield, that you want the real facts
brought to light?”
I stared at him, startled and a good deal taken aback
by his question, and especially by the tone in which
it was put.
“But, surely,” I stammered, in reply. “Why not?”
“Don’t be hasty, Mayfield,” said he. “Reflect
calmly and impartially before you commit yourself to
any course of action of which you cannot foresee the
consequences. Perhaps I can help you. Shall we,
without prejudice and without personal bias, take a
survey of the status quo and try to see exactly where we
stand?”
“By all means,” I replied, a little uncomfortably.
“Well,” he said, “the position is this. A man has
died in a certain house, to which he has been confined
as an invalid for some considerable time. The cause
of his death is stated to be poisoning by arsenic. That
statement is made by a competent medical witness
who has had the fullest opportunity to ascertain the
facts. He makes the statement with complete
confidence that it is a true statement, and his opinion is
supported by those of two other competent
professional witnesses. It is an established fact, which
cannot be contested, that the body of deceased contained
sufficient arsenic to cause his death. So far as we can
see, there is not the slightest reason to doubt that the
man died from arsenical poisoning.
“When we come to the question, ‘How did the
arsenic find its way into the man’s body?’ there appears
to be only one possible answer. Suicide and accident
are clearly excluded. The evidence makes it
practically certain that the poison was administered to him
by some person or persons with the intent to compass
his death; and the circumstances in which the
poisoning occurred make it virtually certain that the arsenic
was administered to this man by some person or
persons customarily and intimately in contact with him.
“The evidence shows that there were eight persons
who would answer this description; and we have no
knowledge of the existence of any others. Those
persons are: Barbara Monkhouse, Madeline Norris,
Anthony Wallingford, the housemaid, Mabel Withers,
the cook, the kitchen-maid, Dr. Dimsdale and Rupert
Mayfield. Of these eight persons the police will
assume that one, or more, administered the poison; and,
so far as we can see, the police are probably right.”
I was rather staggered by his bluntness. But I had
asked for his opinion and I had got it. After a brief
pause, I said:
“We are still, of course, dealing with the depositions.
On those, as you say, a presumption of guilt lies against
these eight persons collectively. That doesn’t carry
us very far in a legal sense. You can’t indict eight
persons as having among them the guilty party. Do
you take it that the presumption of guilt lies more
heavily on some of these persons than on others?”
“Undoubtedly,” he replied. “I enumerated them
merely as the body of persons who fulfilled the
necessary conditions as to opportunity and among whom the
police will—reasonably—look for the guilty person.
In a sense, they are all suspect until the guilt is fixed
on a particular person. They all had, technically, a
motive, since they all benefited by the death of
deceased. Actually, none of them has been shown to
have any motive at all in an ordinary and reasonable
sense. But for practical purposes, several of them can
almost be put outside the area of suspicion; the
kitchen-maid, for instance, and Dr. Dimsdale and yourself.”
“And Mrs. Monkhouse,” I interposed, “seeing that
she appears to have been absent and far away on each
occasion when the poison seems to have been
administered.”
“Precisely,” he agreed. “In fact, her absence would
seem to exclude her from the group of possible
suspects. But apart from its bearing on herself, her
absence from home on these occasions has a rather
important bearing on some of the others.”
“Indeed!” said I, trying rapidly to judge what that
bearing might be.
“Yes, it is this: the fact that the poisoning
occurred—as it appears—only when Mrs. Monkhouse was away
from home, suggests not only that the poisoner was
fully cognizant of her movements, which all the
household would be, but that her presence at home would
have hindered that poisoner from administering the
poison. Now, the different persons in the house would
be differently affected by her presence. We need not
pursue the matter any further just now, but you must
see that the hindrance to the poisoning caused by
Mrs. Monkhouse’s presence would be determined by
the nature of the relations between Mrs. Monkhouse
and the poisoner.”
“Yes, I see that.”
“And you see that this circumstance tends to
confirm the belief that the crime was committed by a
member of the household?”
“I suppose it does,” I admitted, grudgingly.
“It does, certainly,” said Thorndyke; “and that
being so, I ask you again: do you think it expedient
that you should meddle with this case? If you do,
you will be taking a heavy responsibility; for I must
remind you that you are not proposing to employ me
as a counsel, but as an investigator who may become a
witness. Now, when I plead in court, I act like any
other counsel; I plead my client’s case frankly as an
advocate, knowing that the judge is there to watch
over the interests of justice. But as an investigator
or witness I am concerned only with the truth. I never
give ex parte evidence. If I investigate a crime and
discover the criminal, I denounce him, even though he
is my employer; for otherwise I should become an
accessory. Whoever employs me as an investigator of
crime does so at his own risk.
“Bear this in mind, Mayfield, before you go any
further in this matter. I don’t know what your
relations are to these people, but I gather that they are
your friends; and I want you to consider very
seriously whether you are prepared to risk the possible
consequences of employing me. It is actually possible
that one or more of these persons may be indicted for
the murder of Harold Monkhouse. That would, in
any case, be extremely painful for you. But if it
happened through the action of the police, you would be,
after all, but a passive spectator of the catastrophe.
Very different would be the position if it were your
own hand that had let the axe fall. Are you
prepared to face the risk of such a possibility?”
I must confess that I was daunted by Thorndyke’s
blunt statement of the position. There was no doubt
as to the view that he took of the case. He made
no secret of it. And he clearly gauged my own state
of mind correctly. He saw that it was not the crime
that was concerning me; that I was not seeking justice
against the murderer but that I was looking to secure
the safety of my friends.
I turned the question over rapidly in my mind. The
contingency that Thorndyke had suggested was
horrible. I could not face such a risk. Rather, by far,
would I have had the murderer remain unpunished than
be, myself, the agent of vengeance on any of these
suspects. Hideous as the crime was, I could not bring
myself to accept the office of executioner if one of
my own friends was to be the victim.
I had almost decided to abandon the project and
leave the result to Fate or the police. But then came
a sudden revulsion. From the grounds of suspicion my
thoughts flew to the persons suspected; to gentle,
sympathetic Madeline, so mindful of the dead man’s
comfort, so solicitous about his needs, so eager to render
him the little services that mean so much to a sick man.
Could I conceive of her as hiding under this appearance
of tender sympathy the purposes of a cruel and
callous murderess? The thing was absurd. My heart
rejected it utterly. Nor could I entertain for a moment
such a thought of the kindly, attentive housemaid; and
even Wallingford, much as I disliked him, was
obviously outside the area of possible suspicion. An
intolerable coxcomb he certainly was; but a
murderer—never!
“I will take the risk, Thorndyke,” said I.
He looked at me with slightly raised eyebrows, and
I continued:
“I know these people pretty intimately and I find
it impossible to entertain the idea that any of them
could have committed this callous, deliberate crime.
At the moment, I realize circumstances seem to
involve them in suspicion; but I am certain that there is
some fallacy—that there are some facts which did not
transpire at the inquest but which might be brought
to the surface if you took the case in hand.”
“Why not let the police disinter those facts?”
“Because the police evidently suspect the members
of the household and they will certainly pursue the
obvious probabilities.”
“So should I, for that matter,” said he; “and in
any case, we can’t prevent the police from bringing
a charge if they are satisfied that they can support it.
And your own experience will tell you that they will
certainly not take a case into the Central Criminal
Court unless they have enough evidence to make
a conviction a virtual certainty. But I remind you,
Mayfield, that they have got it all to do. There is
grave suspicion in respect of a number of persons,
but there is not, at present, a particle of positive
evidence against any one person. It looks to me as if it
might turn out to be a very elusive case.”
“Precisely,” said I. “That is why I am anxious
that the actual perpetrator should be discovered. Until
he is, all these people will be under suspicion, with the
peril of a possible arrest constantly hanging over them.
I might even say, ‘hanging over us’; for you, yourself,
have included me in the group of possible suspects.”
He reflected for a few moments. At length he
replied:
“You are quite right, Mayfield. Until the perpetrator
of a crime is discovered and his guilt established,
it is always possible for suspicion to rest upon the
innocent and even for a miscarriage of justice to occur.
In all cases it is most desirable that the crime should
be brought home to the actual perpetrator without
delay for that reason, to say nothing of the importance,
on grounds of public policy, of exposing and
punishing wrong-doers. You know these people and I do
not. If you are sufficiently confident of their
innocence to take the risk of associating yourself with the
agencies of detection, I have no more to say on that
point. I am quite willing to go into the case so far
as I can, though, at present, I see no prospect of
success.”
“It seems to you a difficult case, then?”
“Very. It is extraordinarily obscure and confused.
Whoever poisoned that unfortunate man, seems to
have managed most skilfully to confuse all the issues.
Whatever may have been the medium through which
the poison was given, that medium is associated equally
with a number of different persons. If the medicine
was the vehicle, then the responsibility is divided
between Dimsdale, who prepared it, and the various
persons who administered it. If the poison was mixed
with the food, it may have been introduced by any
of the persons who prepared it or had access to it on
its passage from the kitchen to the patient’s bedroom.
There is no one person of whom we can say that he
or she had any special opportunity that others had
not. And it is the same with the motive. No one had
any really, adequate motive for killing Monkhouse;
but all the possible suspects benefited by his death,
though they were apparently not aware of it.”
“They all knew, in general terms, that they had been
mentioned in the will though the actual provisions and
amounts were not disclosed. But I should hardly
describe Mrs. Monkhouse as benefiting by her husband’s
death. She will not be as well off now as she was
when he was alive and the whole of his income was
available.”
“No. But we were not including her in the group
since she was not in the house when the poison was
being administered. We were speaking of those who
actually had the opportunity to administer the poison;
and we see that the opportunity was approximately
equal in all. And you see, Mayfield, the trouble is
that any evidence incriminating any one person would
be in events which are past and beyond recall. The
depositions contain all that we know and all that we are
likely to know, unless the police are able to ascertain
that some one of the parties has purchased arsenic
from a chemist; which is extremely unlikely
considering the caution and judgment that the poisoner has
shown. The truth is that, if no new evidence is
forthcoming, the murder of Harold Monkhouse will take its
place among the unsolved and insoluble mysteries.”
“Then, I take it that you will endeavour to find
some new evidence? But I don’t see, at all, how you
will go about it.”
“Nor do I,” said he. “There seems to be nothing
to investigate. However, I shall study the depositions
and see if a careful consideration of the evidence offers
any suggestion for a new line of research. And as the
whole case now lies in the past, I shall try to learn as
much as possible about everything and everybody
concerned. Perhaps I had better begin with you. I don’t
quite understand what your position is in this
household.”
“I will tell you with pleasure all about my relations
with the Monkhouses, but it is a rather long story, and
I don’t see that it will help you in any way.”
“Now, Mayfield,” said Thorndyke, “don’t begin by
considering what knowledge may or may not be helpful.
We don’t know. The most trivial or seemingly
irrelevant fact may offer a most illuminating suggestion. My
rule is, when I am gravelled for lack of evidence, to
collect, indiscriminately, all the information that I
can obtain that is in the remotest way connected with
the problem that I am dealing with. Bear that in
mind. I want to know all that you can tell me, and
don’t be afraid of irrelevant details. They may not
be irrelevant, after all; and if they are, I can sift them
out afterwards. Now, begin at the beginning and tell
me the whole of the long story.”
He provided himself with a note-book, uncapped his
fountain pen and prepared himself to listen to what I
felt to be a perfectly useless recital of facts that could
have no possible bearing on the case.
“I will take you at your word,” said I, “and begin at
the very beginning, when I was quite a small boy. At
that time, my father, who was a widower, lived at
Highgate and kept the chambers in the Temple which I now
occupy. A few doors away from us lived a certain
Mr. Keene, an old friend of my father’s—his only
really intimate friend, in fact—and, of course, I used
to see a good deal of him. Mr. Keene, who was
getting on in years, had married a very charming woman,
considerably younger than himself, and at this time
there was one child, a little girl about two years old.
Unfortunately, Mrs. Keene was very delicate, and soon
after the child’s birth she developed symptoms of
consumption. Once started, the disease progressed rapidly
in spite of the most careful treatment, and in about two
years from the outset of the symptoms, she died.
“Her death was a great grief to Mr. Keene, and
indeed, to us all, for she was a most lovable woman; and
the poor little motherless child made the strongest
appeal to our sympathies. She was the loveliest little
creature imaginable and as sweet and winning in nature
as she was charming in appearance. On her mother’s
death, I adopted her as my little sister, and devoted
myself to her service. In fact, I became her slave;
but a very willing slave; for she was so quick and
intelligent, so affectionate and so amiable that, in spite
of the difference in our ages—some eight or nine
years—I found her a perfectly satisfying companion. She
entered quite competently into all my boyish sports and
amusements, so that our companionship really involved
very little sacrifice on my part but rather was a source
of constant pleasure.
“But her motherless condition caused Mr. Keene a
good deal of anxiety. As I have said, he was getting
on in life and was by no means a strong man, and he
viewed with some alarm the, not very remote,
possibility of her becoming an orphan with no suitable
guardian, for my father was now an elderly man,
and I was, as yet, too young to undertake the charge.
Eventually, he decided, for the child’s sake, to marry
again; and about two years after his first wife’s death
he proposed to and was accepted by a lady named
Ainsworth whom he had known for many years, who had
been left a widow with one child, a girl some two years
younger than myself.
“Naturally, I viewed the advent of the new Mrs.
Keene with some jealousy. But there was no occasion.
She was a good, kindly woman who showed from the
first that she meant to do her duty by her little
step-daughter. And her own child, Barbara, equally
disarmed our jealousy. A quiet, rather reserved little
girl, but very clever and quick-witted, she not only
accepted me at once with the frankest friendliness but,
with a curious tactfulness for such a young girl,
devoted herself to my little friend, Stella Keene, without
in the least attempting to oust me from my position.
In effect, we three young people became a most united
and harmonious little coterie in which our respective
positions were duly recognized. I was the head of the
firm, so to speak, Stella was my adopted sister, and
Barbara was the ally of us both.
“So our relations continued as the years passed; but
presently the passing years began to take toll of our
seniors. My father was the first to go. Then followed
Mr. Keene, and after a few more years, Barbara’s
mother. By the time my twenty-fifth birthday came
round, we were all orphans.”
“What were your respective ages then?” Thorndyke
asked.
Rather surprised at the question, I paused to make a
calculation.
“My own age,” I replied, “was, as I have said,
twenty-five. Barbara would then be twenty-two and
Stella sixteen.”
Thorndyke made a note of my answer and I
proceeded:
“The death of our elders made no appreciable
difference in our way of living. My father had left me a
modest competence and the two girls were fairly
provided for. The houses that we occupied were beyond
our needs, reduced as we were in numbers and we
discussed the question of sharing a house. But, of
course, the girls were not really my sisters and the
scheme was eventually rejected as rather too
unconventional; so we continued to live in our respective
houses.”
“Was there any trustee for the girls?” Thorndyke
asked.
“Yes, Mr. Brodribb. The bulk of the property was,
I believe, vested in Stella, but, for reasons which I
shall come to in a moment, there was a provision that,
in the event of her death, it should revert to Barbara.”
“On account, I presume, of the tendency to
consumption?”
“Exactly. For some time before Mr. Keene’s death
there had been signs that Stella inherited her mother’s
delicacy of health. Hence the provisions for Barbara.
But no definite manifestations of disease appeared until
Stella was about eighteen. Then she developed a
cough and began to lose weight; but, for a couple of
years the disease made no very marked progress, in
fact, there were times when she seemed to be in a fair
way to recovery. Then, rather suddenly, her health
took a turn for the worse. Soon she became almost
completely bed-ridden. She wasted rapidly, and, in
fact, was now the typical consumptive, hectic,
emaciated, but always bright, cheerful and full of plans
for the future and enthusiasm for the little hobbies that
I devised to keep her amused.
“But all the time, she was going down the hill steadily,
although, as I have said, there were remissions and
fluctuations; and, in short, after about a year’s definite
illness, she went the way of her mother. Her death
was immediately caused, I understand, by an attack
of hemorrhage.”
“You understand?” Thorndyke repeated,
interrogatively.
“Yes. To my lasting grief, I was away from home
when she died. I had been recently called to the bar
and was offered a brief for the Chelmsford Assizes,
which I felt I ought not to refuse, especially as Stella
seemed, just then, to be better than usual. What made
it worse was that the telegram which was sent to recall
me went astray. I had moved on to Ipswich and had
only just written to give my new address, so that I did
not get home until just before the funeral. It was a
fearful shock, for no one had the least suspicion that
the end was so near. If I had supposed that there was
the slightest immediate danger, nothing on earth would
have induced me to go away from home.”
Thorndyke had listened to my story not only with
close attention but with an expression of sympathy
which I noted gratefully and perhaps with a little
surprise. But he was a strange man; as impersonal as
Fate when he was occupied in actual research and yet
showing at times unexpected gleams of warm human
feeling and the most sympathetic understanding. He
now preserved a thoughtful silence for some time after
I had finished. Presently he said:
“I suppose this poor girl’s death caused a
considerable change in your way of living?”
“Yes, indeed! Its effects were devastating both
on Barbara and me. Neither of us felt that we could
go on with the old ways of life. Barbara let her house
and went into rooms in London, where I used to visit
her as often as I could; and I sold my house, furniture
and all and took up residence in the Temple. But even
that I could not endure for long. Stella’s death had
broken me up completely. Right on from my boyhood,
she had been the very hub of my life. All my thoughts
and interests had revolved around her. She had been
to me friend and sister in one. Now that she was gone,
the world seemed to be a great, chilly void, haunted
everywhere by memories of her. She had pervaded my
whole life, and everything about me was constantly
reminding me of her. At last I found that I could bear
it no longer. The familiar things and places became
intolerable to my eyes. I did not want to forget
her; on the contrary, I loved to cherish her memory.
But it was harrowing to have my loss thrust upon me
at every turn. I yearned for new surroundings in
which I could begin a new life; and in the end, I
decided to go to Canada and settle down there to
practise at the Bar.
“My decision came as a fearful blow to Barbara, and
indeed, I felt not a little ashamed of my disloyalty to
her; for she, too, had been like a sister to me and,
next to Stella, had been my dearest friend. But it
could not be helped. An intolerable unrest had
possession of me. I felt that I must go; and go I did,
leaving poor Barbara to console her loneliness with her
political friends.
“I stayed in Canada nearly two years and meant to
stay there for good. Then, one day, I got a letter
from Barbara telling me that she was married. The
news rather surprised me, for I had taken Barbara
for an inveterate spinster with a tendency to avoid
male friends other than myself. But the news had
another, rather curious effect. It set my thoughts
rambling amidst the old surroundings. And now I
found that they repelled me no longer; that, on the
contrary, they aroused a certain feeling of home-sickness,
a yearning for the fuller, richer life of London
and a sight of the English countryside. In not much
more than a month, I had wound up my Canadian
affairs and was back in my old chambers in the Temple,
which I had never given up, ready to start practice
afresh.”
“That,” said Thorndyke, “would be a little less than
three years ago. Now we come to your relations with
the Monkhouse establishment.”
“Yes; and I drifted into them almost at once.
Barbara received me with open arms, and of course,
Monkhouse knew all about me and accepted me as an
old friend. Very soon I found myself, in a way, a
member of the household. A bedroom was set apart
for my use, whenever I cared to occupy it, and I came
and went as if I were one of the family. I was
appointed a trustee, with Brodribb, and dropped into the
position of general family counsellor.”
“And what were your relations with Monkhouse?”
“We were never very intimate. I liked the man and
I think he liked me. But he was not very approachable;
a self-contained, aloof, undemonstrative man,
and an inveterate book-worm. But he was a good man
and I respected him profoundly, though I could never
understand why Barbara married him, or why he
married Barbara. I couldn’t imagine him in love. On the
other hand I cannot conceive any motive that any
one could have had for doing him any harm. He
seemed to me to be universally liked in a rather
lukewarm fashion.”
“It is of no use, I suppose,” said Thorndyke, “to
ask you if these reminiscences have brought anything
to your mind that would throw any light on the means,
the motive or the person connected with the crime?”
“No,” I answered; “nor can I imagine that they will
bring anything to yours. In fact, I am astonished that
you have let me go on so long dribbling out all these
trivial and irrelevant details. Your patience is
monumental.”
“Not at all,” he replied. “Your story has interested
me deeply. It enables me to visualize very clearly at
least a part of the setting of this crime, and it has
introduced me to the personalities of some of the
principal actors, including yourself. The details are not
in the least trivial; and whether they are or are not
irrelevant we cannot judge. Perhaps, when we have
solved the mystery—if ever we do—we may find
connections between events that had seemed to be totally
unrelated.”
“It is, I suppose, conceivable as a mere, speculative
possibility. But what I have been telling you is mainly
concerned with my own rather remote past, which can
hardly have any possible bearing on comparatively
recent events.”
“That is perfectly true,” Thorndyke agreed. “Your
little autobiography has made perfectly clear your own
relation to these people, but it has left most of
them—and those in whom I am most interested—outside the
picture. I was just wondering whether it would be
possible for you to amplify your sketch of the course
of events after Barbara’s marriage—I am, like you,
using the Christian name, for convenience. What I
really want is an account of the happenings in that
household during the last three years, and especially
during the last year. Do you think that, if you were
to turn out the garrets of your memory, you could draw
up a history of the house in Hilborough Square and its
inmates from the time when you first made its
acquaintance? Have you any sort of notes that would help
you?”
“By Jove!” I exclaimed. “Of course I have. There
is my diary.”
“Oh,” said Thorndyke, with obviously awakened
interest. “You keep a diary. What sort of diary is it?
Just brief jottings, or a full record?”
“It is a pretty full diary. I began it more than
twenty years ago as a sort of schoolboy hobby. But it
turned out so useful and entertaining to refer to that I
encouraged myself to persevere. Now, I am a
confirmed diarist; and I write down not only facts and
events, but also comments, which may be quite
illuminating to study by the light of what has happened. I
will read over the last three years and make an
abstract of everything that has happened in that
household. And I hope the reading of that abstract will
entertain you; for I can’t believe that it will help you to
unravel the mystery of Harold Monkhouse’s death.”
“Well,” Thorndyke replied, as I rose to take my
leave, “don’t let your scepticism influence you. Keep in
your mind the actual position. In that house a man
was poisoned, and almost certainly feloniously
poisoned. He must have been poisoned either by some
one who was an inmate of that house or by some one
who had some sort of access to the dead man from
without. It is conceivable that the entries in your diary
may bring one or other such person into view. Keep
that possibility constantly before you; and fill your
abstract with irrelevancies rather than risk omitting
anything from which we could gather even the most
shadowy hint.”
