“First, that Walter Brooklyn’s walking-stick has been found in his room, and secondly that Walter Brooklyn rang up from Liskeard House at about 11.30 that night. He must have rung up from Prinsep’s room. There are only two telephones in the building, one in the porter’s room downstairs, connecting with the offices on the ground floor, and the other, on a separate line, in Prinsep’s room. He couldn’t have used the downstairs ’phone, because it was out of order that night. Winter told me that.” “Assume that you are right. Still, there is at least as strong evidence that George Brooklyn was in the room that night, too. Remember his handkerchief you picked up, and the draughtsman’s knife. And in any case he was seen leaving the house at 11.30, and we know from the discovery of his body in the grounds that he came back afterwards.” “Yes, I know that,” said the inspector. “And do you mean to tell me that, in face of that evidence, you can prove to a jury that it was Walter, and not George Brooklyn, who killed Prinsep?” “Perhaps not, if the case were taken alone. But it has to be considered together with the other—the murder of George Brooklyn. The double incrimination seems to me decisive.” “Wait a bit. Next let us take George Brooklyn’s case, leaving aside for the moment that of Prinsep. Now, there, what evidence have you?” “The finding of the ferrule in the garden, and the strong motive Walter Brooklyn had to put _both_ nephews of Sir Vernon out of the way.” “Motive by itself, however strong, is not enough; and the ferrule evidence is rather slender. It may have been dropped previously.” “Walter Brooklyn had not been to Liskeard House for more than a week before the murder, and the ferrule was on his stick only three days before.” “I allow you that point. But, even if his stick was in the garden, it does not follow that he was there. He may have lost it earlier. Prinsep may have had it for all we know. Moreover, what of the evidence which seems to show that Prinsep murdered George Brooklyn? He was seen in the garden just before eleven o’clock. The cigar-holder which he habitually used, and had been using that very evening, was found broken on the spot where the murder was done. Moreover, I have in my possession now a far more decisive piece of evidence. You told me that you were sure the finger-prints on the stone club found in the garden were those of Prinsep. You were perfectly correct. The Finger-Print Department has compared them with the impressions of John Prinsep’s hands, and these coincide beyond a doubt with the marks left on the stone. You have not yet seen the reproductions, inspector. Here they are.” The superintendent took some papers and photographs from a drawer, and handed them across the table to the inspector, who pored over them for some time without speaking. Finally, he said, with something of a sigh,—