The Darrow Enigma, Melvin L. Severy [free biff chip and kipper ebooks TXT] 📗

among these twenty-odd names is that of

the man I want. Is there any possibility of this crime having been

committed by a woman?’ was my next question, and my answer was, ‘Yes,

a possibility, but it is so decidedly improbable that I may count it

out for the time being.’ Accordingly, I set aside all the female

names, which cut my list down to eighteen. Several of the applicants

had only signed the initials of their given names, and the attendant,

copying them from the slips, had done likewise; so I was obliged to

go to the registration clerk to determine this question of sex, and,

while there, I also ascertained the age of each applicant - that is,

of all but two. The registrar could give me no information regarding

J. Z. Weltz, or B. W. Rizzi. When I told him that one of the clerks

had copied the names for me from application slips, he informed me

that if I would go back to her I would undoubtedly find she had taken

the two last-mentioned names from the green slips used in applying

for books for hall use, as neither J. Z. Weltz nor B. W. Rizzi was a

card-holder.

 

“I decided to let these two names rest a while, and to give my

attention to the others. After careful deliberation I felt

reasonably sure your father’s assassin could not fail to be a man

of mature judgment and extraordinary cunning, probably a man past

middle life - at all events, I could safely say he was over

twenty-one years of age. Proceeding upon this assumption my list

was reduced to ten names. But how should I further continue this

process of exclusion? This was the question which now confronted

me. I could think of but one way, apart from personally making the

gentlemen’s acquaintance, which I did not then wish to do, and that

was to ascertain what other books they had borrowed immediately

before and after they had read ‘The Sign of the Four.’ This was

the course I determined to pursue.

 

“If you ask me why I so persistently followed an investigation, a

successful outcome of which anyone must recognise would be little

short of miraculous, I can only say that I felt impelled to do so.

Perhaps the impulse was due to my habit of testing patiently and

thoroughly each new theory which impresses me as having any degree

of probability, and perhaps it was due to something else - Cleopatra,

perhaps, eh, Doctor? - I don’t know. I determined, however, to

thoroughly satisfy myself regarding these ten men. I made a careful

list, with the assistance of an attendant, of ten books taken by

each man, five taken just prior to ‘The Sign of the Four,’ and the

other five just following it. I made no deductions until the list

was completed, although I began to see certain things of interest

as we worked upon it. At length the whole hundred titles were spread

before me, and I sat down to see what I could make of them. I

purposely reserved consideration of the books borrowed by Weltz and

Rizzi until the last, because I had been able to learn nothing of

them, and considered, therefore, that they were the most difficult

persons in the list about whom to satisfy myself. I found the

other eight exhibited no system in their reading. One had read

- I think I can remember the books in the order in which they were

borrowed - ‘Thelma,’ ‘Under Two Flags,’ ‘David Copperfield,’ ‘The

Story of an African Farm,’ ‘A Study in Scarlet,’ ‘The Sign of the

Four,’ ‘The Prisoner of Zenda,’ ‘The Dolly Dialogues,’ ‘The Yellow

Aster,’ ‘The Superfluous Woman,’ and ‘Ideala.’ This is a fair sample

of the other seven. Not so, however, with Messrs. Weltz and Rizzi.

The reading of these men at once impressed me as having a purpose

behind it.

 

“I will read you a list of the books taken by Weltz and Rizzi, just

to see what you will make out of it:

 

WELTZ RIZZI

 

I.“Lecons de Toxicologic,” 1.“Traite de Toxicologic,”

par M. Orifia. par C. P. Galtier.

 

2.“The Poisons of Asps and 2.“The Poisons of Asps and

Other Stories,” by Florence Other Stories,” by Florence

Marryat. Marryat.

 

3.“A Practical Essay on 3.“A Practical Essay on

Cancer,” by C. T. Johnson. Cancer,” by C. T. Johnson.

 

4.“The Sharper Detected 4.“The Sharper Detected

and Exposed,” by R. Houdin. and Exposed,” by R. Houdin.

 

5.“The Sign of the Four,” 5.“The Sign of the Four,”

by A. Conan Doyle. by A. Conan Doyle.

 

6.“Cancer, a New Method of 6.“Legal Chemistry: A

Treatment,” by W. H. Guide to the Detection of

Broadbent. Poisons, Examinations of

Stains, etc., as Applied to=20

Chemical Jurisprudence.”

From the French of A. Naquet=20

by J. P. Battershall, Nat.Sc.D.

 

7.“Reports of Trials for 7.“Traite Pratique des =20

Murder by Poisoning,” Maladies Cancerences,”

by G. L. Browne and C. par H. Lebert.

G.Stewart. =20

 

8.“A Practical Treatise on 8.“A Practical Treatise on

Poisons,” by 0. H. Costill. Poisons,” by 0. H. Costill.

 

9.“Poisons, Their Effects 9.“A Treatise on Poisons in

and Detection,” by Alexander Relation to Medical=20

Wynter Blyth. Jurisprudence, Physiology,

and the Practice of Physic,”=20

by R. Christison,M.D., F.R.S.E.

 

10.“Poisons, Their Effects 10.“Poisons, Their Effects

and Detection,” by Alexander and Detection,” by Alexander =20

Wynter Blyth. Wynter Blyth.

 

“There, do you wonder that the perusal of that list excited me?

Come, now, before I go any further, tell me what you make of it,

Doc,” and he passed it to me.

 

“There seems to me to be a singular unanimity of purpose existing

between these two men,” I said; “not only as regards the

subject-matter of their reading, but in no less than six cases they

have both perused the same volume. This never happened by chance.

Clearly, they are acquaintances, and are working together toward

some common end. I should think it very likely, judging from their

interest in cancers and toxicology, that they were medical students.

Numbers four and five don’t exactly seem to strengthen my medical

hypothesis, but they are only two out of the ten. That’s about all

I can make out of it;” and I returned the list to him.

 

“Your views in the matter,” replied Maitland, “are precisely those

which first occurred to me, and I am not sure but I should still

hold them, had I been obliged to decide solely from the evidence I

have submitted to you. It was clear to my mind from the first that

some common purpose actuated both Weltz and Rizzi. With a view to

ascertaining where they lived as a preparatory step toward learning

more of them, I consulted a Boston directory, only to learn that it

contained no such names. I was about to examine some of the

directories of neighbouring towns when it occurred to me that the

easiest way to find their places of residence would be to consult

the green slips upon which they had procured their books, and I

accordingly asked the attendant to kindly let me look at them.

While she was collecting the slips I re-examined the list of books

taken by Weltz and Rizzi, especially those which had been taken by

both men. One thing at once struck my attention, and that was that

most of these latter were large books which would take a long time

to peruse and would require to be borrowed several times for hall

use, were they to be examined with any care. I put this fact down

for future reference and gave my attention to the green slips, the

whole twenty of which the attendant now placed before me. The

residence of Weltz was given as No. 15 Staniford Place, Boston,

while that of Rizzi was No. 5 Oak Street, Boston. I was about to

walk over to Oak Street to see if Rizzi were still there when, in

returning the slips to the attendant, I noticed a peculiarity

in Weltz’s ‘z’ which I had thought I had seen in Rizzi’s signature.

I immediately compared the slips. There was the same oddly shaped

‘z’ in both. It was made like this” - and he handed us a slip of

paper with this z* upon it.

 

“You see,” he continued, “it is so unusual a way of making the

letter that it at once attracted my attention, notwithstanding the

fact that Rizzi wrote with his left hand. Closer examination

revealed other peculiarities, as in the r*‘s, common to both hands.

Well, to make a long story short, I satisfied myself that the same

person wrote the whole twenty slips and was, moreover, ambidextrous.

This I considered as a very promising discovery, so much so, indeed,

that I gave up an engagement I had for the evening and decided to

camp right there until the Library closed. Happily the books I had

been consulting were still on the table. I picked out those borrowed

under the names of Weltz and Rizzi, and began a most careful

examination of them. I had been working about two hours when I

discovered something that fairly took my breath away. I was not

sure that I was right, but I knew that, if my microscope bore me out,

I would be able to stake my life that the murderer of John Darrow

had read that book. I was aware, however, that even then I should

not be able to name the man who had put his mark upon the book, but

I could take oath that the record was made by the same hand that

committed the murder.

___________________________________________________________________

 

transcriber’s note: the symbols designated z* and r* are shown as

script which is not reproducible here.

___________________________________________________________________

 

“I was too excited to do more till this had been settled, so I

besought the official in charge to let me take all the books home

with me, if only for a day, explaining to him the vital importance

of my request. He readily consented and I hastened home with the

whole lot. You may imagine with what interest I put the page I

wished to examine under my microscope and laid beside it the piece

of glass which, you will perhaps remember, I cut from a window of

the room in which the murder was committed. I believe I have never

yet explained to Miss Darrow why I preserved that bit of glass.

There were two reasons for it. The house had been primed that day

and there were two smutches of paint upon the glass and two almost

identical smutches upon the sill. One was a sinuous line, as if

the glass had been struck with a short bit of rope, - or possibly

rubber tubing since no rope-like texture was visible, - which had

previously been soiled with the paint from the sill. The other mark

was that of a human thumb. I had seen at the World’s Fair an exhibit

of these thumbmarks collected by a Frenchman who has made an

exhaustive study of the subject, and had learned there for the first

time that no two thumbs in the world can make the same mark. I knew,

therefore, that this slip of glass would at any time tell me whether

or not a suspected man were guilty. I had not failed to get the

thumbmarks of the men who painted the house on that day, as well

as those of every other person known to be about the place. The

marks upon the glass could not, by any possibility, have been made

by any of them. The deduction was inevitable. They were made by

the man who stood by the window when the murder was committed.

 

“You will be surprised when I tell you it was some moments before

I could summon up courage to