_The Danvers Jewels_, published by RICHARD BENTLEY AND SON, and
written by an anonymous author who dedicates the work to his sister
"DI," (from whom he received some assistance in the story, otherwise
he would "never have said 'DI,'") is a short and well-told sensational
novelette in a shilling volume. There is a genuine vein of humour
running through it, which is so artistically managed as at first to
escape the reader's attention, who becoming more and more irritated
with the stupidity of the supposed narrator, gradually discovers that
the story which is being recounted by a middle-aged Indian Colonel,
who prides himself on being remarkably astute, and on possessing a
perfectly marvellous insight into character, is being recounted by a
conceited, shallow-pated old ass. I think it a fault that at the
very last, by some such accident as being in an assize town and being
invited to sit on the bench, he does not see the villain thoroughly
unmasked, placed in the dock, and condemned to death, or at least
penal servitude for life. The story, excellent as it is, seems to
me to want this finish. By the way, why, for no conceivable purpose,
quote on the title-page a line from the Old Testament which, as every
one remembering its context and after reading the book must see, has
no apparent bearing on the subject? Mistake this.
[Illustration: A work by "Q."]
_Deadman's Rock._ By "Q." Have Messrs. LOUIS STEVENSON and RIDER
HAGGARD combined under the signature of "Q." to write at all events
the first part of the weird and exciting Romance entitled _Deadman's
Rock_? If not let those two authors look to their laurels. There
is much in this book to remind the reader of _Treasure Island_,
especially the fiendish Sailor's uncouth chaunt, "Sing hey for the
deadman's eyes, my lads," which, however, is not a patch upon Mr.
STEVENSON'S "Ho! Ho! Ho! and a bottle of rum," in _Treasure Island_.
Then there is one line in "Q.'s" story, "And here a strange thing
happened," which must call to mind Mr. RIDER HAGGARD'S patent of "and
now a strange thing happened." "Q."--rious coincidence, isn't it? But
a "coincidence" is not likely to annoy Mr. HAGGARD.
In the first part the most impatient reader will find that he cannot
afford to skip a couple of lines without detriment to the narrative,
but in the second part he may skip handfuls, as the lovemaking is
common-place, and time is wasted over the tragedy which is written by
one of the heroes, and over the description of their life in London.
But on the other hand the scene in the gambling-house is exciting
and artistically worked up,--and coming immediately after this, the
lovemaking is uncommonly tame,--and the scene at the Theatre is also
very good, but after this there is a lull in the excitement until
the end approaches, when there is one very strong situation. But the
actual finish is weak. So the summing up is that the first part is
first-rate, and the second part is, on the whole, second-rate. But who
is "Q."?
That is the Q. and what is the A.? _Deadman's Rock_ is not a good book
for very nervous persons or children: for the latter _Almond Rock_
would be far preferable.
* * * * *