“According to the law of England,” I observed to Mr Churchill, “Mrs Calmour is perfectly entitled to squander the property. The will has been duly proved, and unless we could show that this clever schemer’s title is base there is little chance of ousting her.” “What are the pleas upon which we could upset her right to possession?” “Probably a clever lawyer, if you could find such an individual, might suggest several. At present I can only think of two.” “And they are?” The illegality of Mr Calmour’s marriage and the existence of a will posterior to the one that has been proved.” “Miss Bell! You give me new hope! There may really be another will in existence, or rather, there may have been. When I come to think of it, it is not likely that such a will would have been kept so long, even if it had ever been penned. To suppress a will is a serious thing, and culprits do not, I should imagine, carefully preserve the evidence of their own guilt.” “There you are quite wrong. There are innumerable instances on record of people who have been punished for grave crimes that would never have been brought home to them but for their own incredible carelessness. A letter, an article of wearing apparel, a trivial trinket – these have often been the principal factors in elucidating criminal puzzles.” “Then you really think Mrs Calmour has kept the real will back?” “My dear sir! I never said any such thing. I only supposed it possible that, to secure the property, Mrs Calmour had suppressed her husband’s final testament, in which case it might safely be concluded that it would have been entirely in your or your wife’s favour, since the will that was eventually proved required a lot of very clever scheming on the successful legatee’s part.” “Just so, and I mean to act on the supposition that you have made a correct guess at the true state of affairs. The idea that the marriage was not legal cannot be entertained for a moment. There are too many proofs to the contrary, worse luck.” “So you think. But we are accustomed to look at a case from every point of view. An exhaustive analysis of Mrs Calmour’s past might disclose the existence of a prior right on the part of some accommodating individual, who is content to remain in the background for the sake of a liberal share of the plunder.”