The Roman hat mystery : $b A problem in deductionQueen, Ellery
General
The Roman hat mystery : $b A problem in deduction
Queen, Ellery
Detective and mystery stories; Fathers and sons -- Fiction; Novelists -- Fiction; Police -- New York (State) -- New York -- Fiction
“What tophats were there whose _presence_ was not out of the
ordinary—so natural and in so natural a place that they were not even
questioned? In the Roman Theatre, where all the costumes were hired
from Le Brun, the answer is simply: the rented tophats being used
for purposes of the play. Where would such tophats be? Either in the
actors’ dressing-rooms or in the general wardrobe room backstage. When
Ellery had reached this point in his reasoning he took Mrs. Phillips
backstage and checked up on every tophat in the actors’ rooms and the
wardrobe room. Every tophat there—and all were accounted for, none
being missing—was a property tophat bearing on its lining the Le Brun
insignia. Field’s hat, which we had proved to be a Browne Bros. topper,
was not among the property tophats or anywhere backstage.
“Since no one left the theatre Monday night with more than one tophat,
and since Monte Field’s hat was unquestionably taken out of the theatre
that same night, it was positively established that the murderer’s own
tophat must have been in the Roman all the time the house was sealed,
and was still there at the time of our second search. Now, the
only tophats remaining in the theatre were property tophats. It
therefore follows that the murderer’s own tophat (which he was forced
to leave behind because he walked out with Field’s) _must_ have been
one of the property hats backstage, since, let me repeat, these were
the only tophats of which it could physically have been one.
“In other words—one of these property tophats backstage belonged to the
man who left the theatre Monday night in full dress wearing Field’s
silk topper.
“If this man were the murderer—and he could scarcely be anyone
else—then our field of inquiry was narrowed to a considerable degree.
He could only have been either a male member of the cast who left the
theatre in evening clothes, or somebody closely connected with the
theatre and similarly dressed. In the latter case, such a person would
have had to have, first, a property tophat to leave behind; second,
undisputed access to the wardrobe and dressing-rooms; and, third, the
opportunity to leave his property tophat in either place.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account