(1) Although suspicion that But in the absence of any
murder had been committed trace of poison in the dead
arose in the first instance only woman's body, it is difficult to
from the return to its shelf of see how the criminal can be
the "Treatise on Strophanthus brought to justice, except by
Hispidus," subsequent developments,
e.g., the disappearance of (a) A confession.
the Poison Arrow, the introduction
into the case of the ill-famed (b) The commission of another
Jean Cladel, Ann Upcott's story crime of a similar kind.
of her visit to the Treasure Hanaud's theory--once a
Room, and now the mystery of poisoner always a poisoner.
Mrs. Harlowe's pearl necklace,
make out a prima facie case for
inquiry.
(2) If murder was committed, Ann Upcott's story may be
it is probable that it was partly or wholly false. She
committed at half-past ten at night knew that Mrs. Harlowe's
when Ann Upcott in the Treasure bedroom was to be opened and
Room heard the sound of a examined. If she also knew that
struggle and the whisper, "That the pearl necklace had
will do now." disappeared, she must have realised
that it would be advisable for
her to tell some story before its
disappearance was discovered,
which would divert suspicion
from her.
(3) It is clear that whoever It is possible that the
committed the murder, if murder disappearance of the necklace is in
was committed, Betty Harlowe no way connected with the
had nothing to do with it. She murder, if murder there was.
had an ample allowance. She
was at M. Pouillac's Ball on
the night. Moreover, once
Mrs. Harlowe was dead, the necklace
became Betty Harlowe's
property. Had she committed the
murder, the necklace would not
have disappeared.
(4) Who then are possibly
guilty?
(i) The servants. (i) All of them have many
years of service to their credit.
It is not possible that any of
them would have understood
enough of the "Treatise on
Strophanthus Hispidus" to make
use of it. If any of them were
concerned it can only be as an
accessory or assistant working
under the direction of another.
(ii) Jeanne Baudin the nurse. No one suspects her. Her
record is good.
More attention might be given
to her. It is too easily accepted
that she has nothing to do
with it.
(iii) Francine Rollard. She She was frightened of the police
was certainly frightened this as a class, rather than of being
afternoon. The necklace would accused of a crime. She acted
be a temptation. her part in the reconstruction
scene without breaking
Was it she who bent over Ann down. If she were concerned, it
Upcott in the darkness? could only be for the reason
given above, as an assistant.
(iv) Ann Upcott. Her introductions may be
explicable on favourable grounds.
Her introduction into the Until we know more of her
Maison Grenelle took place history it is impossible to judge.
through Waberski and under
dubious circumstances. She is
poor, a paid companion, and the
necklace is worth a considerable
fortune.
She was in the house on the Her account of the night of
night of Mrs. Harlowe's death. the 27th April may be true from
She told Gaston he could turn beginning to end.
out the lights and go to bed
early that evening. She could
easily have admitted Waberski
and received the necklace as the
price of her complicity.
The story she told us in the In that case the theory of a
garden may have been the true murder is enormously strengthened.
story of what occurred adapted. But who whispered, "That
It may have been she who will do now"? And who was
whispered "That will do now." bending over Ann Upcott when
She may have whispered it to she waked up?
Waberski.
Her connection with Waberski
was sufficiently close to make
him count upon Ann's support
in his charge against Betty.
(v) Waberski.
He is a scoundrel, a would-be
blackmailer.
He was in straits for money
and he expected a thumping
legacy from Mrs. Harlowe.
He may have brought Ann
Upcott into the house with the
thought of murder in his mind.
Having failed to obtain any
profit from his crime, he accuses
Betty of the same crime as a
blackmailing proposition.
As soon as he knew that But he would have collapsed
Mrs. Harlowe had been exhumed and equally if he had believed that
an autopsy made he collapsed. no murder had been committed
He knew, if he had used himself at all.
the poison arrow, that no trace
of poison would be found.
He knew of Jean Cladel, and
according to his own story was
in the Rue Gambetta close to
Jean Cladel's shop. It is possible
that he himself had been visiting
Cladel to pay for the solution of
Strophanthus.
If murder was committed the two people most obviously suspect are Ann
Upcott and Waberski working in collusion.
To this conclusion Jim Frobisher was reluctantly brought, but even
whilst writing it down there were certain questions racing through
his mind to which he could find no answer. He was well aware that he
was an utter novice in such matters as the investigation of crimes;
and he recognised that were the answers to these questions known to
him, some other direction might be given to his thoughts.
Accordingly he wrote those troublesome questions beneath his
memorandum--thus: