“(Sharply.) ‘Yes, perfectly sure.’ “‘Then to what did it refer?’ “‘I have already said that it referred to the money I should get under the will.’ “‘Yet you weren’t sure you were to get a penny?’ “‘I can’t be sure, I thought the lawyer had told me.’ “‘You know he has denied that.’ “‘Yes, but he may be wrong.’ “‘But if he is right, you didn’t know you had inherited a penny?’ “‘I have told you I strongly suspected he had left me something.’ “‘If he had, why was there any doubt about your getting it?’ “‘I thought it might be disputed.’ “‘On what grounds?’ “‘Undue influence, I suppose.’ “‘Now I want to be fair to you. Do you seriously suggest that the Jury should believe that “It will be O.K.” referred, and referred only, to a legacy the very existence of which was unknown to you?’ “‘It is the truth; as I say, I believe the lawyer _had_ told me about it.’ * * * * * “Those are the salient passages,” said Myers, “but there was much else. Patty’s character disappeared beneath the rain of questions, but her reputation for pluck was never more convincingly justified. “Her counsel in his re-examination set himself to counteract the very perilous impression left by these answers. * * * * * “‘Had you heard anything which made you realise there was a serious risk that your marriage would not take place?’ “‘I knew that people, enemies of mine, were warning Mr. Eagles about me.’ “‘And you were afraid he would act on their advice?’ “‘Yes, he had spoken to me about it.’ “‘About this legacy--had you good reasons for suspecting its existence?’ “‘Yes, Mr. Eagles frequently said he would see that I was provided for if anything happened to him.’ “‘When you referred to the risk, can you explain a little more clearly what was in your mind?’ “‘Well, I thought it might be disputed on the ground of undue influence--not that I have used any, but, as I have said, I have many enemies.’ * * * * * “To understand the beauty--to criminologists--of this duel concerning the letter, the whole of Patty’s examination and cross-examination should be closely studied. For five long hours Patty’s life was hanging by a thread. “Sir Leonard, in order to neutralise the deadly implications in her letter, had been compelled reluctantly to reveal that she had a very strong motive. If she knew of the legacy she had 30,000 good reasons for shooting Richard; if she was ignorant of it, that terrible word ‘risk’ could not be explained. “In my opinion they were the five finest hours the Old Bailey has given us. “When the Attorney-General got up to make his closing speech everyone felt it was touch and go. He was perfectly fair, but perfectly firm. The evidence he marshalled would have been deadly but for the conflict in the medical evidence and the absence of the revolver. He characterised Patty’s answers about the letter as incredible.