Detective and mystery stories; England -- Social life and customs -- 19th century -- Fiction; Murder -- Investigation -- Fiction
Nevertheless, Hilliston is afraid of the truth coming to light. He
denies that the garnet scarfpin ever existed, while Mrs. Bezel said she
saw it herself. If the lawyer is not afraid, why should he tell a
deliberate lie? It is his word against that of Mrs. Bezel, and as her
statement is backed up by the description in the novel, I believe she is
telling the truth. Can it be possible that the scarfpin belonged to
Hilliston and was dropped by him in the garden of The Laurels on the
night of the struggle?
Here Hilliston proves an alibi. He stated to Claude that at the hour of
three o'clock, when the crime was presumably committed, he was at the
ball in the Horriston Town Hall. If that can be proved, he must,
perforce, be innocent.
Another supposition: Can Mrs. Larcher be actually guilty of her
husband's death, and, knowing this, is Hilliston anxious to stop Claude
in his investigations lest he should learn so terrible a truth? I cannot
believe this, for Mrs. Larcher, or Bezel, set the ball rolling herself,
and were she guilty she certainly would not have run such risk.
Then, again, Jeringham fled on the night of the murder. For what reason?
If Hilliston killed Larcher why should Jeringham fly? If Mrs. Bezel
killed her husband why should Jeringham fly? I see no reason in his
flight, and yet if he were guilty and Hilliston knew him to be guilty
why should he try and screen him at the present time? Altogether the
case is so confusing that I do not know what to think or whom to
suspect.
I wonder what has become of Mona Bantry and her child? Mrs. Bezel said
she had not seen the girl or her brother for twenty-five years. Yet they
must be somewhere. Circumstances point to Jenny Paynton having heard the
story of the tragedy from Denis, for no one else could have revealed the
episode of the scarfpin, or have described the jewel. If Denis told her
he must live at Thorston, and if he lives there his sister must be with
him. If this pair, who were in the house on the night of the murder, can
be found, the truth may come to light.
After searching Thorston and finding out all I can from the
Bantrys,--presuming them to be there,--it is my intention to go down to
Horriston and find out someone who remembers the case. In spite of the
lapse of time there must be some old people alive who danced at that
ball in their hot youth. They may be able to say if George Larcher was
there present in the character of Darnley, and at what time Hilliston
left the ball. I may also hear what they think of Jeringham, and of the
conduct of Mrs. Bezel. In making these investigations I shall not take
Claude, as I shrewdly suspect the opinions of these oldsters regarding
his mother are anything but flattering to that lady. If I go to
Horriston I must go alone.
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