The Darrow Enigma, Melvin L. Severy [free biff chip and kipper ebooks TXT] 📗
- Author: Melvin L. Severy
- Performer: -
Book online «The Darrow Enigma, Melvin L. Severy [free biff chip and kipper ebooks TXT] 📗». Author Melvin L. Severy
that completely won the audience.]
At this point Maitland dismissed M. Godin and the court adjourned
for the day. That night M. Godin made his first call upon Gwen.
Their interview was private, and Gwen had nothing to say about it
further than that her caller had not hesitated to inform her that
he was aware a reward had been offered and that he considered he
had earned it. Maitland questioned her as to what he had claimed
as his due, but Gwen, with her face alternately flushed and ashen,
begged to be permitted to keep silence.
This attitude was, of course, not without its significance to
Maitland, and it was easy to see that M. Godin’s visit had much
displeased him. But he was not the only one who was displeased
that night. I regret that my promise of utter candour compels me
to bear witness to my own foolishness; for when Maitland found it
necessary to take Jeannette into the back parlour and to remain
there alone with her in earnest conversation one hour and twelve
minutes - I happened to notice the exact time - it seemed to me he
was getting unpleasantly confidential, and it nettled me. You may
fancy that I was jealous, but it was, most likely, only pique, or,
at the worst, envy. I was provoked at the nonchalant ease with
which this fellow did offhand a thing I had been trying to work
myself up to for several days, and had finally abandoned from sheer
lack of courage. Why couldn’t I carelessly say to her, “Miss
Jeannette, a word with you if you please,” and then take her into
the parlour and talk a “whole history.” Oh, it was envy, that’s
what it was! And then the change in Jeannette! If he had not been
making love to her - well, I have often wondered since if it were
all envy, after all
The next morning M. Latour’s trial was resumed, and Maitland again
put M. Godin upon the stand. The object of this did not appear at
the time, though I think the Judge fully understood it. Maitland’s
first act was to show the Judge and Jury a glass negative and a
letter, which he asked them to examine carefully as he held the
articles before them. He then passed the negative to M. Godin,
saying:
“Please take this by the lower corner, between your thumb and
forefinger, so that you may be sure not to touch the sight of the
picture; hold it to the light, and tell me if you recognise the
face.” M. Godin did as directed and replied without hesitancy: “It
is a picture of M. Latour.” “Good,” rejoined Maitland, taking back
the negative and passing him the letter; “now tell me if you
recognise that signature.” M. Godin looked sharply at the letter,
holding it open between the thumb and forefinger of each hand, and
read the signature, “‘Carl Cazenove.’ I should say that was M.
Latour’s hand.”
“Good again,” replied Maitland, reaching for the paper and appearing
somewhat disconcerted as he glanced at it. “You have smutched the
signature; - however, it doesn’t matter,” and he exhibited the paper
to the Judge and Jury. “The negative must have been oily - yes,
that’s where it came from,” and he quietly examined it with a
magnifying glass, to the wonderment of us all. “That is all, M.
Godin; thank you.”
As the celebrated detective left the stand we were all doing our best
to fathom what possible bearing all this could have upon Latour’s
confession. M. Godin for once seemed equally at a loss to comprehend
the trend of affairs, if I may judge by the deep furrows which
gathered between his eyes.
Maitland then proceeded to address the Court and to sum up his case,
the gist of which I shall give you as nearly as possible in his own
words, omitting only such portions as were purely formal,
uninteresting, or unnecessarily verbose.
“Your Honour and Gentlemen of the Jury: John Darrow was murdered and
the prisoner, M. Gustave Latour, has confessed that he did the deed.
When a man denies the commission of a crime we do not feel bound to
consider his testimony of any particular value; but when, on the
other hand, a prisoner accused of so heinous a crime as murder
responds to the indictment, ‘I am guilty,’ we instinctively feel
impelled to believe his testimony. Why is this? Why do we doubt
his word when he asserts his innocence and accept it when he
acknowledges his guilt? I will tell you. It is all a question of
motive. Could we see as cogent a motive for asseverating his guilt
as we find for his insisting upon his innocence, we should lend as
much credence to the one as to the other. I propose to show that M.
Latour has what seems to him the strongest of motives for confessing
to the murder of John Darrow. If I am able to do this to your
satisfaction, I shall practically have thrown M. Latour’s entire
testimony out of court, and nothing of importance will then remain
but the evidence of the government’s witness, M. Godin.”
A great wave of excitement swept over the room at these remarks.
“What!” each said to himself, “is it possible that this lawyer will
try to prove that Latour, despite his circumstantial confession,
did not commit the murder after all?” We did not dare let such a
thought take hold of us, yet could not see what else could explain
Maitland’s remarks. Is it any wonder, therefore, that we all waited
breathlessly for him to continue? M. Godin’s face was dark and
lowering. It was evident he did not propose to have his skill as a
detective, - and with it the Darrow reward, - set aside without a
struggle - at least so it seemed to me. The room was as quiet as
the grave when Maitland continued.
“I shall show you that M. Godin’s testimony is utterly unreliable,
and, moreover, that it is intentionally so.”
This was a direct accusation, and at it M. Godin’s face became of
ashen pallor. I felt that he was striving to control his anger and
saw the effort that it cost him as he fastened Maitland with a
stiletto-like look that was anything but reassuring. George did
not appear to notice it and continued easily:
“I shall prove to you beyond a doubt that, in the actual murder of
John Darrow, only one person was concerned, - by which I mean, that
only one person was outside the east window when he met his death.
I shall also show that M. Latour was not, and could not by any
possibility have been, that person. [At this juncture Browne arose
and walked toward the door. He was very pale and looked anything
but well. I thought he was going to leave, but he reseated himself
at the back of the room near the door.] I shall convince you that
M. Latour’s description of the way the murder was committed is false.”
All eyes were turned toward Latour, but he made no sign either of
affirmation or dissent. With his eyes closed and his hands falling
listlessly in front of him, he sat in a half-collapsed condition,
like one in a stupor. M. Godin shifted uneasily in his chair, as
if he could not remain silent much longer. Maitland proceeded with
calm deliberation:
“Mr. Clinton Browne - “
But he did not finish the sentence. At the name “Mr. Clinton Browne”
he was interrupted by a sudden commotion at the rear of the room,
followed by a heavy fall which shook the whole apartment. We all
turned and looked toward the door. Several men had gathered about
someone lying upon the floor, and one of them was throwing water in
the face of the prostrate man. Presently he revived a little, and
they bore him out into the cooler air of the corridor. It was
Clinton Browne. The great tension of the trial, his own strong
emotions, and the closeness of the room had doubtless been too much
for him. I could not but marvel at it, however. Here were delicate
women with apparently little or no staying power, and yet this
athlete, with the form of a Mars and the fibre of a Hercules, must
be the first to succumb. Verily, even physicians are subject to
surprises!
When quiet had been fully restored Maitland continued:
“I was about to say when the interruption occurred that Mr. Clinton
Browne and Mr. Charles Herne would both testify to the fact that a
very sensible time elapsed between the delivery of the blow and the
death of the victim. You will see, therefore, that I shall prove to
your satisfaction that Mr. Darrow’s death did not result from prussic
acid, as stated by the prisoner. I shall show you that a chemical
analysis of the wound made in my laboratory shortly after the murder
gave none of the well-known prussic-acid reactions. I shall prove
to you that John Darrow sprang to his feet after receiving the blow
which caused his death. That he clutched at his throat, and that,
after an effort consuming several seconds, he spoke disjointedly.
I shall convince you that if he had been poisoned in the manner
described he would have been dead before he could have so much as
raised his hand to his throat. We have been very particular to
make sure the exact nature of the poison which it is claimed was
used, so there can be no possible doubt upon this point. I shall
show you further that the little Capucin monkey which M. Latour says
he killed is still alive, and I will produce him, if necessary, and
will challenge M. Latour, or anyone else for that matter, to put him
through the drill which it is claimed he has been taught. I shall
inform you that, since I claim the monkey had no part in Mr. Darrow’s
death, I could not, during my examination of the prisoner, have been
stating anything from knowledge when I spoke of the manner in which
he had trained the animal, and gave details which M. Latour accepted
as those of the murder. My sole effort was to state a plausible way,
in order to see if the prisoner would not adopt it as the actual
course pursued. I also coupled with this the killing of the monkey
(though I knew the animal was still alive), that I might see if M.
Latour would follow my lead in this also. You have seen that he did
so; that he indorsed my guesses where they were purely guesses, and
that he also accepted the one statement I knew to be false. I shall
therefore ask you to consider about what the chances are that a
series of guesses like those which I made would represent the exact
facts as M. Latour has claimed, while at the same time you do not
lose sight of the undeniable fact that upon the only detail regarding
which I had positive information, M. Latour bore false testimony.”
Here Maitland whispered to Jenkins, who in turn spoke to the sheriff
or some other officer of the court. I would have given a good deal
just then to have been able to translate M. Godin’s thoughts. His
face was a study. Maitland immediately resumed:
“It has been positively stated by M. Latour that he gambled with Mr.
Darrow on Decatur Street between the 1st and 15th day of March. This
is false. In the first place it can be shown that while Mr. Darrow
occasionally played cards at his own home, he never gambled,
uniformly refusing to play
Comments (0)