So George went on: “As Mr. Pringle says, the fact of Jeff’s disappearance at this exact time and possible place strengthened all of the otherwise far-fetched ‘ifs’ twenty-fold. For that reason I stopped any translation of Jeff’s letter, though I had barely begun it, to state in full my theory, or rather my hypothesis, based on the remarkable conjunction of a hinted conspiracy, the occasion and motive of a conspiracy, and what was in all likelihood the consummation of that conspiracy, with both Jeff and Tillotson as victims. “We will now take up the consideration of the letter. See if it does not reinforce my hypothesis on every point, until, as block after block falls inevitably into place, ordered and measured, it becomes a demonstration. “To begin with, the reference to the ‘French Revolution’ is to the paragraph that I finished reading to him a few minutes before he left me, telling of a man secretly and falsely imprisoned in the Bastille by a _lettre de cachet_, a letter of hiding, procured by some powerful personage; a man whose one vain thought and hope and prayer was to have some word of his wife--of his dear wife. And there, I have no doubt, is where Jeff got the idea for this dear, sudden wife of his. Shall I read the paragraph for you?” He should; and did. “And from that paragraph--as I told Jeff in the very last words I spoke to him--Dickens got the inspiration for his novel, ‘A Tale of Two Cities.’ What did Jeff say? In effect, that a great writer could find material for a novel from any page. ‘A Tale of Two Cities!’ And here are the two cities, El Paso and Juarez, side by side--as closely associated as Sodom and Gomorrah, of which, indeed, they remind me at times. Could he, under the circumstances, say any plainer: ‘I am in Juarez, in a strong and secret prison’?” “That seems likely enough,” admitted Leo grudgingly. “It is plain,” said Billy. “It is there; it must mean something; it means that.” “Keep that in mind, then, and consider all the other hints in the light of that admitted message. Weigh them and their probable meaning in connection with this plain warning. “He speaks of Antony’s great oration. He actually quotes two words of it: ‘Honorable men!’ Therefore, it was important; he wished to put unusual emphasis on it. Three other important things were called to our attention by being mentioned twice: one vital point, which I will take up later--in fact, the last of all--was distinctly referred to no less than four times. But this is the only direct quotation in the letter.