Arsène Lupin Versus Herlock Sholmes, Maurice Leblanc [i read a book txt] 📗

you will listen to me for a few minutes, I think I can convince you. In the first place, a lady who signs herself 540 implores the protection of Arsène Lupin, who replies by asking for particulars. The lady replies that she is under the domination of an enemy⁠—who is Bresson, no doubt⁠—and that she is lost if someone does not come to her assistance. Lupin is suspicious and does not yet venture to appoint an interview with the unknown woman, demands the address and proposes to make an investigation. The lady hesitates for four days⁠—look at the dates⁠—finally, under stress of circumstances and influenced by Bresson’s threats, she gives the name of the street⁠—Murillo. Next day, Arsène Lupin announces that he will be in the Park Monceau at three o’clock, and asks his unknown correspondent to wear a bouquet of violets as a means of identification. Then there is a lapse of eight days in the correspondence. Arsène Lupin and the lady do not require to correspond through the newspaper now, as they see each other or write directly. The scheme is arranged in this way: in order to satisfy Bresson’s demands, the lady is to carry off the Jewish lamp. The date is not yet fixed. The lady who, as a matter of prudence, corresponds by means of letters cut out of a book, decides on Saturday and adds: Reply Echo 237. Lupin replies that it is understood and that he will be in the park on Sunday morning. Sunday morning, the theft takes place.”

“Really, that is an excellent chain of circumstantial evidence and every link is complete,” said the baron.

“The theft has taken place,” continued Sholmes. “The lady goes out on Sunday morning, tells Lupin what she has done, and carries the Jewish lamp to Bresson. Everything occurs then exactly as Lupin had foreseen. The officers of the law, deceived by an open window, four holes in the ground and two scratches on the balcony railing, immediately advance the theory that the theft was committed by a burglar. The lady is safe.”

“Yes, I confess the theory was a logical one,” said the baron. “But the second theft⁠—”

“The second theft was provoked by the first. The newspapers having related how the Jewish lamp had disappeared, someone conceived the idea of repeating the crime and carrying away what had been left. This time, it was not a simulated theft, but a real one, a genuine burglary, with ladders and other paraphernalia⁠—”

“Lupin, of course⁠—”

“No. Lupin does not act so stupidly. He doesn’t fire at people for trifling reasons.”

“Then, who was it?”

“Bresson, no doubt, and unknown to the lady whom he had menaced. It was Bresson who entered here; it was Bresson that I pursued; it was Bresson who wounded poor Wilson.”

“Are you sure of it?”

“Absolutely. One of Bresson’s accomplices wrote to him yesterday, before his suicide, a letter which proves that negotiations were pending between this accomplice and Lupin for the restitution of all the articles stolen from your house. Lupin demanded everything, ‘the first thing (that is, the Jewish lamp) as well as those of the second affair.’ Moreover, he was watching Bresson. When the latter returned from the river last night, one of Lupin’s men followed him as well as we.”

“What was Bresson doing at the river?”

“Having been warned of the progress of my investigations⁠—”

“Warned! by whom?”

“By the same lady, who justly feared that the discovery of the Jewish lamp would lead to the discovery of her own adventure. Thereupon, Bresson, having been warned, made into a package all the things that could compromise him and threw them into a place where he thought he could get them again when the danger was past. It was after his return, tracked by Ganimard and myself, having, no doubt, other sins on his conscience, that he lost his head and killed himself.”

“But what did the package contain?”

“The Jewish lamp and your other ornaments.”

“Then, they are not in your possession?”

“Immediately after Lupin’s disappearance, I profited by the bath he had forced upon me, went to the spot selected by Bresson, where I found the stolen articles wrapped in some soiled linen. They are there, on the table.”

Without a word, the baron cut the cord, tore open the wet linen, picked out the lamp, turned a screw in the foot, then divided the bowl of the lamp which opened in two equal parts and there he found the golden chimera, set with rubies and emeralds.

It was intact.

There was in that scene, so natural in appearance and which consisted of a simple exposition of facts, something which rendered it frightfully tragic⁠—it was the formal, direct, irrefutable accusation that Sholmes launched in each of his words against Mademoiselle. And it was also the impressive silence of Alice Demun.

During that long, cruel accumulation of accusing circumstances heaped one upon another, not a muscle of her face had moved, not a trace of revolt or fear had marred the serenity of her limpid eyes. What were her thoughts. And, especially, what was she going to say at the solemn moment when it would become necessary for her to speak and defend herself in order to break the chain of evidence that Herlock Sholmes had so cleverly woven around her?

That moment had come, but the girl was silent.

“Speak! Speak!” cried Mon. d’Imblevalle.

She did not speak. So he insisted:

“One word will clear you. One word of denial, and I will believe you.”

That word, she would not utter.

The baron paced to and fro in his excitement; then, addressing Sholmes, he said:

“No, monsieur, I cannot believe it, I do not believe it. There are impossible crimes! and this is opposed to all I know and to all that I have seen during the past year. No, I cannot believe it.”

He placed his hand on the Englishman’s shoulder, and said:

“But you yourself, monsieur, are you absolutely certain that you are right?”

Sholmes hesitated, like a man on whom a sudden demand is made and cannot frame an immediate reply. Then he smiled, and