A Review of the Case
The inspector found Superintendent Wilson in his room. As he told his
case, the superintendent kept his eyes closed, but every now and then
he gave an approving nod. His subordinate had done well, and it was
only right that this should be recognised. The inspector’s spirits
rose higher still as he saw the impression he was making.
Having told the full story, he came to the point on which he wanted
his superior’s assent.
“And now, sir, I think, as we have abundant evidence, I must ask you
to get a warrant made out at once for Walter Brooklyn’s arrest.”
It was then the inspector received his first check.
“Not quite so fast, my friend,” said the superintendent. “Do you mean
that, in your opinion, it is proved that Walter Brooklyn committed
these murders?”
“Surely,” said Inspector Blaikie, “after what I’ve just told you,
there can’t be the shadow of a doubt about it.”
Superintendent Wilson gave a short laugh, and sat upright in his
chair. He was beginning to enjoy himself.
“Ah, but I think there can. Come now. Let us take first only the
murder of John Prinsep, leaving out of account for the moment the
murder of George Brooklyn. Now, what evidence have you as to the
murder of John Prinsep?”
“First, that Walter Brooklyn’s walking-stick has been found in his
room, and secondly that Walter Brooklyn rang up from Liskeard House at
about 11.30 that night. He must have rung up from Prinsep’s room.
There are only two telephones in the building, one in the porter’s
room downstairs, connecting with the offices on the ground floor, and
the other, on a separate line, in Prinsep’s room. He couldn’t have
used the downstairs ’phone, because it was out of order that night.
Winter told me that.”
“Assume that you are right. Still, there is at least as strong
evidence that George Brooklyn was in the room that night, too.
Remember his handkerchief you picked up, and the draughtsman’s knife.
And in any case he was seen leaving the house at 11.30, and we know
from the discovery of his body in the grounds that he came back
afterwards.”
“Yes, I know that,” said the inspector.
“And do you mean to tell me that, in face of that evidence, you can
prove to a jury that it was Walter, and not George Brooklyn, who
killed Prinsep?”
“Perhaps not, if the case were taken alone. But it has to be
considered together with the other—the murder of George Brooklyn. The
double incrimination seems to me decisive.”
“Wait a bit. Next let us take George Brooklyn’s case, leaving aside
for the moment that of Prinsep. Now, there, what evidence have you?”
“The finding of the ferrule in the garden, and the strong motive
Walter Brooklyn had to put _both_ nephews of Sir Vernon out of the
way.”
“Motive by itself, however strong, is not enough; and the ferrule
evidence is rather slender. It may have been dropped previously.”
“Walter Brooklyn had not been to Liskeard House for more than a week
before the murder, and the ferrule was on his stick only three days
before.”
“I allow you that point. But, even if his stick was in the garden, it
does not follow that he was there. He may have lost it earlier.
Prinsep may have had it for all we know. Moreover, what of the
evidence which seems to show that Prinsep murdered George Brooklyn? He
was seen in the garden just before eleven o’clock. The cigar-holder
which he habitually used, and had been using that very evening, was
found broken on the spot where the murder was done. Moreover, I have
in my possession now a far more decisive piece of evidence. You told
me that you were sure the finger-prints on the stone club found in the
garden were those of Prinsep. You were perfectly correct. The
Finger-Print Department has compared them with the impressions of John
Prinsep’s hands, and these coincide beyond a doubt with the marks left
on the stone. You have not yet seen the reproductions, inspector. Here
they are.”
The superintendent took some papers and photographs from a drawer, and
handed them across the table to the inspector, who pored over them for
some time without speaking. Finally, he said, with something of a
sigh,—
“There can be no doubt they are the same. And, as you say, this throws
a quite new light on one of the murders. It seems to prove that George
Brooklyn was killed by Prinsep.”
“I do not regard it as proof positive: but it is certainly very strong
evidence, especially as the marks on the club are just where a man
would take hold in order to deal a smashing blow. The murderer used
both hands, you notice. The prints are quite distinct for both the
thumbs.”
“Yes, that is clear enough, although none of the impressions is quite
complete. Somehow a part of the marks had got rubbed off before the
club was properly examined.”
“These accidents will happen. It is only fortunate that the marks were
not destroyed beyond hope of identification. Perhaps you yourself,
inspector, or one of your subordinates, handled the club carelessly.
Or perhaps some one else handled it before you came on the scene.”
“No. I was most careful, and no one touched it after I appeared except
myself. The sergeant did not allow it to be touched at all until I
arrived. Miss Cowper, who first discovered the body, told me she had
not even noticed the weapon, much less handled it. She was too upset
to notice anything except the body.”
“Well, I suppose it does not greatly matter, as the identification of
the prints is still quite clear. There remains, of course, the bare
possibility that, while Prinsep did handle the club, he did not
actually kill George Brooklyn. But it is certain that the club was the
weapon used. The fragments of hair clotted with blood which are still
on it came quite definitely from the head of the deceased. The only
doubt in my mind is whether Prinsep was a powerful enough man to
strike such a blow. But I suppose we must take it that he was. It was
a terrific blow, I understand from the medical evidence.”
“Yes, but a man not unusually strong can, by using his opportunities,
get in a very big blow. I do not think there is much in that.”
“Quite so. Then I take it you agree that, in face of the evidence, it
would be quite impossible to arrest Walter Brooklyn on the charge of
having murdered George Brooklyn?”
The inspector sighed. “Yes,” he said, “you are right. I thought the
case was getting straightened out, but it now seems darker than ever.”
Then a thought came into the inspector’s mind; and his expression
brightened. “But,” he went on, “if Prinsep murdered George Brooklyn,
that makes it certain that George Brooklyn cannot have murdered him.
It means that the evidence against Walter Brooklyn holds so far as the
murder of Prinsep is concerned.”
“I think you are forgetting a difficulty. Prinsep was last seen in the
garden shortly after eleven. But George Brooklyn was seen leaving the
house at 11.30. After that, he must somehow have come back, got into
the garden, and been murdered. That would take some time.”
The inspector nodded.
“But Walter Brooklyn, who rang up his club from Prinsep’s rooms at
11.30, was back at his club before midnight. That leaves very little
time. If the theory you advance is true, how do you fit in the times?
George Brooklyn could hardly have got back into the garden and got
himself killed, before a quarter to twelve. It would take Walter
Brooklyn five minutes to get out of the house and back to his club.
That leaves less than ten minutes for Prinsep to go up to his room and
for Walter Brooklyn to murder him.”
“That sequence of time is difficult; but it is not impossible. Crime
is usually a pretty rapid business. Probably Walter and George came
back into the garden together, and the two murders followed in rapid
succession. Prinsep killed George, and he and Walter went upstairs
together. Then Walter killed him while they were discussing his
affairs. You remember the papers I found lying on the table?”
“Perhaps, but that seems to me exceptionally quick work—so quick that
my instinct is to doubt whether it is the right explanation. After
all, there is no direct evidence that Walter Brooklyn did murder
Prinsep.”
“Surely the walking-stick and the telephone message together are very
strong evidence?”
“Not strong enough, I am certain, to obtain a conviction. The
telephone message was sent some time before George Brooklyn was
killed. And don’t forget that, a moment ago, you thought your evidence
that Walter Brooklyn had murdered George Brooklyn equally strong. Yet
already you are practically convinced that he did not.”
“I am still convinced that he was there when the murder took place in
the garden.”
“Ah, that is another matter. He may have been present at both murders,
and yet committed neither.”
“I see now what you are driving at. You mean that there may be a
fourth man involved?”
“That may be so; but I was not quite sure on that point. What the
evidence seems to me to establish beyond reasonable doubt is that some
meeting of the three men—Prinsep and George and Walter Brooklyn—took
place at Liskeard House that night. That meeting was followed
by—probably resulted in—the death of two of the three. There may have
been others present. That is for you to find out. But I am clear that
the next step is to discover what this meeting was about, and who was
there. If we knew that, it would probably throw a new light on the
whole situation.”
“In the circumstances, there is still, it seems to me, every reason
for arresting Walter Brooklyn. He was certainly present, whether he
committed murder or not.”
“I think it will be best to leave him at large for the time being. We
have, I think, ample evidence of his presence in the house, but not of
his having had a guilty hand in the murders. I think, instead of
arresting him, it will be far better for you to see him, and find out
all you can about what happened that night.”
“Very well. I will try to see him at once. Ought I to warn him that
what he says may be used against him?”
“I must leave that to your judgment. And now, inspector, I fancy you
are a bit discouraged by the result of our talk. You came here with
your mind made up, and you have found that the case is not so
straightforward as it was beginning to appear. But that is no reason
at all for being discouraged. The evidence you have gathered is of the
greatest value. It has enabled us to put our hand on some one who, we
are practically sure, knows all about the murders, whether or not he
actually committed one of them. Once again, let me congratulate you on
a very fine day’s work.”
The inspector was only in part reassured by Superintendent Wilson’s
conclusion. He had been watching his superior intently, and had
noticed the keen critical joy with which he had demolished the
apparently overwhelming case against Walter Brooklyn. The inspector
had been compelled to admit, even to himself, the force of his
superior’s arguments; but, when he left the room, he remained, somehow
in spite of this, convinced that Walter Brooklyn was not merely an
accessory, but the actual murderer of one, if not of both men, and
with a strong suspicion that the apparently conclusive evidence that
Prinsep had killed George Brooklyn had a flaw in it somewhere, if only
he could find it.
But he could not attend to his instincts for the moment. His next
business was to see Walter Brooklyn, and find out from him all he
could. At the least, Walter must know a great deal. Most probably he
knew the whole story. But how much would he tell?