Trial of John Jasper, lay precentor of Cloisterham Cathedral in the County of Kent, for the murder of Edwin Drood, engineerDickens Fellowship (London, England)
General
Trial of John Jasper, lay precentor of Cloisterham Cathedral in the County of Kent, for the murder of Edwin Drood, engineer
But you are asked to believe that he failed, after making all these
arrangements, and failed because he was dazed by opium, and only
dreamed of the particular act which he thought he had committed.
First remember the nature of the attack—the double nature of the
attack. It included strangling with a silk scarf, and that was to be
followed by the use of quicklime. If Drood escaped the one, surely
it was nothing short of a miracle that he escaped the other? And,
in any case, if he escaped why should he obligingly disappear to
the convenience of the man who attacked him, and to the very great
inconvenience of all the friends who loved him? John Jasper was a
lasting danger to all who remained behind. Edwin Drood could not so
entirely disappear from the realms of civilisation that he would not
possibly know what was going on in Cloisterham, and yet you are asked
to believe, Gentlemen, that this man upon whom a murderous attack had
been made, went away at a convenient moment, leaving his friends to
the persecution of the man who had assailed him, and leaving the way
clear for the assailant to pursue his own evil courses! I should say
it is almost inconceivable—or I should if my learned friend had not
so ingeniously conceived it; but that it is believable I don’t think
you will for a moment agree.
And what definite evidence has been produced to show that Jasper,
who had arranged all this for a definite period—Christmas Eve—was
suffering from opium at about that time? You have the evidence of
Canon Crisparkle that on the very morning of that day, when he met
him, he was in wonderfully fine voice, clear-headed, cheerful, in
a good temper. All this is absolutely proved by the direct and
unimpeached testimony of Canon Crisparkle. Where are the traces of
opium? There are no traces of opium. The supreme moment had come,
and Jasper was supremely ready for it. There were no traces of opium
on him when those two young men departed from his home. He could
not have soaked himself in opium during their short absence, and
then have recovered in time to make his accusation against Neville
Landless by the morning. But you are asked to believe that in that
short interval he had time to recover—that he was in a trance so deep
that he really thought he had committed a murder which he had not,
and yet, early the next morning was so clear-headed, so resolute
in purpose, so ready with a connected story which would fix the
crime on another person. And why should he have been eager to give
the alarm if he had the slightest doubt? A man risen from a trance
of opium might have some doubts: but he had none, and within a few
hours he was setting things in motion himself, giving the alarm. He
had Neville called back, a course he had decided on from the first;
he was going to fix the crime on Neville Landless; and within those
few hours he had carefully and deliberately carried out the entire
scheme. Why this immediate suggestion of murder? Why not a little
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