by the peasants, but discovered nothing. In the same way, the
examining-magistrates, after a close inquiry lasting for several days,
found no clue capable of throwing the least light upon this inscrutable
tragedy. On the contrary, the investigations only led to further
mysteries and further improbabilities.
Thus it was ascertained that the block of stone came from where there
had been a landslip, at least forty yards away. And the murderer, in a
few minutes, had carried it all that distance and flung it on his
victim's head.
On the other hand, the murderer, who was most certainly not hiding in
the forest--for, if so, he must inevitably have been discovered, the
forest being of limited extent--had the audacity, eight days after the
crime, to come back to the turn on the hill and leave his goat-skin coat
there. Why? With what object? There was nothing in the pockets of the
coat, except a corkscrew and a napkin. What did it all mean?
Inquiries were made of the builder of the motor-car, who recognized the
limousine as one which he had sold, three years ago, to a Russian. The
said Russian, declared the manufacturer, had sold it again at once. To
whom? No one knew. The car bore no number.
Then again, it was impossible to identify the dead woman's body. Her
clothes and underclothing were not marked in any way. And the face was
quite unknown.
Meanwhile, detectives were going along the national road in the
direction opposite to that taken by the actors in this mysterious
tragedy. But who was to prove that the car had followed that particular
road on the previous night?
They examined every yard of the ground, they questioned everybody. At
last, they succeeded in learning that, on the Saturday evening, a
limousine had stopped outside a grocer's shop in a small town situated
about two hundred miles from Saint-Nicolas, on a highway branching out
of the national road. The driver had first filled his tank, bought some
spare cans of petrol and lastly taken away a small stock of provisions:
a ham, fruit, biscuits, wine and a half-bottle of Three Star brandy.
There was a lady on the driver's seat. She did not get down. The blinds
of the limousine were drawn. One of these blinds was seen to move
several times. The shopman was positive that there was somebody inside.
Presuming the shopman's evidence to be correct, then the problem became
even more complicated, for, so far, no clue had revealed the presence of
a third person.
Meanwhile, as the travellers had supplied themselves with provisions, it
remained to be discovered what they had done with them and what had
become of the remains.
The detectives retraced their steps. It was not until they came to the
fork of the two roads, at a spot eleven or twelve miles from
Saint-Nicolas, that they met a shepherd who, in answer to their
questions, directed them to a neighbouring field, hidden from view
behind the screen of bushes, where he had seen an empty bottle and other
things.
The detectives were convinced at the first examination. The motor-car
had stopped there; and the unknown travellers, probably after a night's
rest in their car, had breakfasted and resumed their journey in the
course of the morning.
One unmistakable proof was the half-bottle of Three Star brandy sold by
the grocer. This bottle had its neck broken clean off with a stone. The
stone employed for the purpose was picked up, as was the neck of the
bottle, with its cork, covered with a tin-foil seal. The seal showed
marks of attempts that had been made to uncork the bottle in the
ordinary manner.
The detectives continued their search and followed a ditch that ran
along the field at right angles to the road. It ended in a little
spring, hidden under brambles, which seemed to emit an offensive smell.
On lifting the brambles, they perceived a corpse, the corpse of a man
whose head had been smashed in, so that it formed little more than a
sort of pulp, swarming with vermin. The body was dressed in jacket and
trousers of dark-brown leather. The pockets were empty: no papers, no
pocket-book, no watch.
The grocer and his shopman were summoned and, two days later, formally
identified, by his dress and figure, the traveller who had bought the
petrol and provisions on the Saturday evening.
The whole case, therefore, had to be reopened on a fresh basis. The
authorities were confronted with a tragedy no longer enacted by two
persons, a man and a woman, of whom one had killed the other, but by
three persons, including two victims, of whom one was the very man who
was accused of killing his companion.
As to the murderer, there was no doubt: he was the person who travelled
inside the motor-car and who took the precaution to remain concealed
behind the curtains. He had first got rid of the driver and rifled his
pockets and then, after wounding the woman, carried her off in a mad
dash for death.
* * * * *
Given a fresh case, unexpected discoveries, unforeseen evidence, one
might have hoped that the mystery would be cleared up, or, at least,
that the inquiry would point a few steps along the road to the truth.
But not at all. The corpse was simply placed beside the first corpse.
New problems were added to the old. The accusation of murder was shifted
from the one to the other. And there it ended. Outside those tangible,
obvious facts there was nothing but darkness. The name of the woman, the
name of the man, the name of the murderer were so many riddles. And then
what had become of the murderer? If he had disappeared from one moment
to the other, that in itself would have been a tolerably curious
phenomenon. But the phenomenon was actually something very like a
miracle, inasmuch as the murderer had not absolutely disappeared. He was
there! He made a practice of returning to the scene of the catastrophe!
In addition to the goat-skin coat, a fur cap was picked up one day; and,
by way of an unparalleled prodigy, one morning, after a whole night
spent on guard in the rock, beside the famous turning, the detectives
found, on the grass of the turning itself, a pair of motor-goggles,
broken, rusty, dirty, done for. How had the murderer managed to bring
back those goggles unseen by the detectives? And, above all, why had he
brought them back?
Men's brains reeled in the presence of such abnormalities. They were
almost afraid to pursue the ambiguous adventure. They received the
impression of a heavy, stifling, breathless atmosphere, which dimmed the
eyes and baffled the most clear-sighted.
The magistrate in charge of the case fell ill. Four days later, his
successor confessed that the matter was beyond him.
Two tramps were arrested and at once released. Another was pursued, but
not caught; moreover, there was no evidence of any sort or kind against
him. In short, it was nothing but one helpless muddle of mist and
contradiction.
An accident, the merest accident led to the solution, or rather produced
a series of circumstances that ended by leading to the solution. A
reporter on the staff of an important Paris paper, who had been sent to
make investigations on the spot, concluded his article with the
following words:
"I repeat, therefore, that we must wait for fresh events, fresh facts;
we must wait for some lucky accident. As things stand, we are simply
wasting our time. The elements of truth are not even sufficient to
suggest a plausible theory. We are in the midst of the most absolute,
painful, impenetrable darkness. There is nothing to be done. All the
Sherlock Holmeses in the world would not know what to make of the
mystery, and Arsene Lupin himself, if he will allow me to say so, would
have to pay forfeit here."
* * * * *
On the day after the appearance of that article, the newspaper in
question printed this telegram:
"Have sometimes paid forfeit, but never over such a silly thing as
this. The Saint-Nicolas tragedy is a mystery for babies.
"ARSENE LUPIN."
And the editor added:
"We insert this telegram as a matter of curiosity, for it is
obviously the work of a wag. Arsene Lupin, past-master though he be
in the art of practical joking, would be the last man to display
such childish flippancy."
Two days elapsed; and then the paper published the famous letter, so
precise and categorical in its conclusions, in which Arsene Lupin
furnished the solution of the problem. I quote it in full:
"Sir:
"You have taken me on my weak side by defying me. You challenge me,
and I accept the challenge. And I will begin by declaring once more
that the Saint-Nicolas tragedy is a mystery for babies. I know
nothing so simple, so natural; and the proof of the simplicity
shall lie in the succinctness of my demonstration. It is contained
in these few words: when a crime seems to go beyond the ordinary
scope of things, when it seems unusual and stupid, then there are
many chances that its explanation is to be found in superordinary,
supernatural, superhuman motives.
"I say that there are many chances, for we must always allow for
the part played by absurdity in the most logical and commonplace
events. But, of course, it is impossible to see things as they are
and not to take account of the absurd and the disproportionate.
"I was struck from the very beginning by that very evident
character of unusualness. We have, first of all, the awkward,
zigzag course of the motor-car, which would give one the impression
that the car was driven by a novice. People have spoken of a
drunkard or a madman, a justifiable supposition in itself. But
neither madness nor drunkenness would account for the incredible
strength required to transport, especially in so short a space of
time, the stone with which the unfortunate woman's head was
crushed. That proceeding called for a muscular power so great that
I do not hesitate to look upon it as a second sign of the
unusualness that marks the whole tragedy. And why move that
enormous stone, to finish off the victim, when a mere pebble would
have done the work? Why again was the murderer not killed, or at
least reduced to a temporary state of helplessness, in the terrible
somersault turned by the car? How did he disappear? And why, having
disappeared, did he return to the scene of the accident? Why did he
throw his fur coat there; then, on another day, his cap; then, on
another day, his goggles?
"Unusual, useless, stupid acts.
"Why, besides, convey that wounded, dying woman on the driver's
seat of the car, where everybody could see her? Why do that,
instead of putting her inside, or flinging her into some corner,
dead, just as the man was flung under the brambles in the ditch?
"Unusualness, stupidity.
"Everything in the whole story is absurd. Everything points to
hesitation, incoherency, awkwardness, the silliness of a child or
rather of a mad, blundering savage, of a brute.
"Look at the bottle of brandy. There was a corkscrew: it was found
in the pocket of the great coat. Did the murderer use it? Yes, the
marks of the corkscrew can be seen on the seal. But the operation
was too complicated for him. He broke the neck with a stone. Always
stones: observe that detail. They are the only weapon, the only
implement which the creature employs. It is his customary weapon,
his familiar implement. He kills the man with a stone, he kills the
woman with a stone and he opens bottles with a stone!
"A brute, I repeat, a savage; disordered, unhinged, suddenly driven
mad. By what? Why, of course, by that same brandy, which he
swallowed at a draught while the driver and his companion were
having breakfast in the field. He got out of the limousine, in
which he was travelling, in his goat-skin coat and his fur cap,
took the bottle, broke off the neck and drank. There is the whole
story. Having drunk, he went raving mad and hit out at random,
without reason. Then, seized with instinctive fear, dreading the
inevitable punishment, he hid the body of the man. Then, like an
idiot, he took up the wounded woman and ran away. He ran away in
that motor-car which he did not know how to work, but which to him
represented safety, escape from capture.
"But the money, you will ask, the stolen pocket-book? Why, who says
that he was the thief? Who says that it was not some passing tramp,
some labourer, guided by the stench of the corpse?
"Very well, you object, but the brute would have been found, as he
is hiding somewhere near the turn, and as, after all, he must eat
and drink.
"Well, well, I see that you have not yet understood. The simplest
way, I suppose, to have done and to answer your objections is to
make straight for the mark. Then let the gentlemen of the police
and the gendarmerie themselves make straight for the mark. Let them
take firearms. Let them explore the forest within a radius of two
or three hundred yards from the turn, no more. But, instead of
exploring with their heads down and their eyes fixed on the ground,
let them look up into the air, yes, into the air, among the leaves
and branches of the tallest oaks and the most unlikely beeches.
And, believe me, they will see him. For he is there. He is there,
bewildered, piteously at a loss, seeking for the man and woman whom
he has killed, looking for them and waiting for them and not daring
to go away and quite unable to understand.
"I myself am exceedingly sorry that I am kept in town by urgent
private affairs and by some complicated matters of business which I
have to set going, for I should much have liked to see the end of
this rather curious adventure.
"Pray, therefore excuse me to my kind friends in the police and
permit me to be, sir,
"Your obedient servant,
"ARSENE LUPIN."
* * * * *
The upshot will be remembered. The "gentlemen of the police and the
gendarmerie" shrugged their shoulders and paid no attention to this
lucubration. But four of the local country gentry took their rifles and
went shooting, with their eyes fixed skyward, as though they meant to
pot a few rooks. In half an hour they had caught sight of the murderer.
Two shots, and he came tumbling from bough to bough. He was only
wounded, and they took him alive.
That evening, a Paris paper, which did not yet know of the capture,
printed the following paragraphs:
"Enquiries are being made after a M. and Mme. Bragoff, who landed
at Marseilles six weeks ago and there hired a motor-car. They had
been living in Australia for many years, during which time they had
not visited Europe; and they wrote to the director of the Jardin
d'Acclimatation, with whom they were in the habit of corresponding,
that they were bringing with them a curious creature, of an
entirely unknown species, of which it was difficult to say whether
it was a man or a monkey.
"According to M. Bragoff, who is an eminent archaeologist, the
specimen in question is the anthropoid ape, or rather the ape-man,
the existence of which had not hitherto been definitely proved. The
structure is said to be exactly similar to that of _Pithecanthropus
erectus_, discovered by Dr. Dubois in Java in 1891.
"This curious, intelligent and observant animal acted as its
owner's servant on their property in Australia and used to clean
their motor-car and even attempt to drive it.
"The question that is being asked is where are M. and Mme. Bragoff?
Where is the strange primate that landed with them at Marseilles?"
The answer to this question was now made easy. Thanks to the hints
supplied by Arsene Lupin, all the elements of the tragedy were known.
Thanks to him, the culprit was in the hands of the law.
You can see him at the Jardin d'Acclimatation, where he is locked up
under the name of "Three Stars." He is, in point of fact, a monkey; but
he is also a man. He has the gentleness and the wisdom of the domestic
animals and the sadness which they feel when their master dies. But he
has many other qualities that bring him much closer to humanity: he is
treacherous, cruel, idle, greedy and quarrelsome; and, above all, he is
immoderately fond of brandy.
Apart from that, he is a monkey. Unless indeed ...!
* * * * *
A few days after Three Stars' arrest, I saw Arsene Lupin standing in
front of his cage. Lupin was manifestly trying to solve this interesting
problem for himself. I at once said, for I had set my heart upon having
the matter out with him:
"You know, Lupin, that intervention of yours, your argument, your
letter, in short, did not surprise me so much as you might think!"
"Oh, really?" he said, calmly. "And why?"
"Why? Because the incident has occurred before, seventy or eighty years
ago. Edgar Allan Poe made it the subject of one of his finest tales. In
those circumstances, the key to the riddle was easy enough to find."
Arsene Lupin took my arm, and walking away with me, said:
"When did you guess it, yourself?"
"On reading your letter," I confessed.
"And at what part of my letter?"
"At the end."
"At the end, eh? After I had dotted all the i's. So here is a crime
which accident causes to be repeated, under quite different conditions,
it is true, but still with the same sort of hero; and your eyes had to
be opened, as well as other people's. It needed the assistance of my
letter, the letter in which I amused myself--apart from the exigencies
of the facts--by employing the argument and sometimes the identical
words used by the American poet in a story which everybody has read. So
you see that my letter was not absolutely useless and that one may
safely venture to repeat to people things which they have learnt only to
forget them."
Wherewith Lupin turned on his heel and burst out laughing in the face of
an old monkey, who sat with the air of a philosopher, gravely
meditating.
VIII
LUPIN'S MARRIAGE
"Monsieur Arsene Lupin has the honour to inform you of his
approaching marriage with Mademoiselle Angelique de
Sarzeau-Vendome, Princesse de Bourbon-Conde, and to request the
pleasure of your company at the wedding, which will take place at
the church of Sainte-Clotilde...."
"The Duc de Sarzeau-Vendome has the honour to inform you of the
approaching marriage of his daughter Angelique, Princesse de
Bourbon-Conde, with Monsieur Arsene Lupin, and to request...."
Jean Duc de Sarzeau-Vendome could not finish reading the invitations
which he held in his trembling hand. Pale with anger, his long, lean
body shaking with tremors:
"There!" he gasped, handing the two communications to his daughter.
"This is what our friends have received! This has been the talk of Paris
since yesterday! What do you say to that dastardly insult, Angelique?
What would your poor mother say to it, if she were alive?"
Angelique was tall and thin like her father, skinny and angular like
him. She was thirty-three years of age, always dressed in black stuff,
shy and retiring in manner, with a head too small in proportion to her
height and narrowed on either side until the nose seemed to jut forth in
protest against such parsimony. And yet it would be impossible to say
that she was ugly, for her eyes were extremely beautiful, soft and
grave, proud and a little sad: pathetic eyes which to see once was to
remember.
She flushed with shame at hearing her father's words, which told her the
scandal of which she was the victim. But, as she loved him,
notwithstanding his harshness to her, his injustice and despotism, she
said:
"Oh, I think it must be meant for a joke, father, to which we need pay
no attention!"
"A joke? Why, every one is gossiping about it! A dozen papers have
printed the confounded notice this morning, with satirical comments.
They quote our pedigree, our ancestors, our illustrious dead. They
pretend to take the thing seriously...."
"Still, no one could believe...."
"Of course not. But that doesn't prevent us from being the by-word of
Paris."
"It will all be forgotten by to-morrow."
"To-morrow, my girl, people will remember that the name of Angelique de
Sarzeau-Vendome has been bandied about as it should not be. Oh, if I
could find out the name of the scoundrel who has dared...."
At that moment, Hyacinthe, the duke's valet, came in and said that
monsieur le duc was wanted on the telephone. Still fuming, he took down
the receiver and growled:
"Well? Who is it? Yes, it's the Duc de Sarzeau-Vendome speaking."
A voice replied:
"I want to apologize to you, monsieur le duc, and to Mlle. Angelique.
It's my secretary's fault."
"Your secretary?"
"Yes, the invitations were only a rough draft which I meant to submit to
you. Unfortunately my secretary thought...."
"But, tell me, monsieur, who are you?"
"What, monsieur le duc, don't you know my voice? The voice of your
future son-in-law?"
"What!"
"Arsene Lupin."
The duke dropped into a chair. His face was livid.
"Arsene Lupin ... it's he ... Arsene Lupin...."
Angelique gave a smile:
"You see, father, it's only a joke, a hoax."
But the duke's rage broke out afresh and he began to walk up and down,
moving his arms:
"I shall go to the police!... The fellow can't be allowed to make a fool
of me in this way!... If there's any law left in the land, it must be
stopped!"
Hyacinthe entered the room again. He brought two visiting-cards.
"Chotois? Lepetit? Don't know them."
"They are both journalists, monsieur le duc."
"What do they want?"
"They would like to speak to monsieur le duc with regard to ... the
marriage...."
"Turn them out!" exclaimed the duke. "Kick them out! And tell the porter
not to admit scum of that sort to my house in future."
"Please, father ..." Angelique ventured to say.
"As for you, shut up! If you had consented to marry one of your cousins
when I wanted you to this wouldn't have happened."
The same evening, one of the two reporters printed, on the front page of
his paper, a somewhat fanciful story of his expedition to the family
mansion of the Sarzeau-Vendomes, in the Rue de Varennes, and expatiated
pleasantly upon the old nobleman's wrathful protests.
The next morning, another newspaper published an interview with Arsene
Lupin which was supposed to have taken place in a lobby at the Opera.
Arsene Lupin retorted in a letter to the editor:
"I share my prospective father-in-law's indignation to the full.
The sending out of the invitations was a gross breach of etiquette
for which I am not responsible, but for which I wish to make a
public apology. Why, sir, the date of the marriage is not yet
fixed. My bride's father suggests early in May. She and I think
that six weeks is really too long to wait!..."
That which gave a special piquancy to the affair and added immensely to
the enjoyment of the friends of the family was the duke's well-known
character: his pride and the uncompromising nature of his ideas and
principles. Duc Jean was the last descendant of the Barons de Sarzeau,
the most ancient family in Brittany; he was the lineal descendant of
that Sarzeau who, upon marrying a Vendome, refused to bear the new title
which Louis XV forced upon him until after he had been imprisoned for
ten years in the Bastille; and he had abandoned none of the prejudices
of the old regime. In his youth, he followed the Comte de Chambord into
exile. In his old age, he refused a seat in the Chamber on the pretext
that a Sarzeau could only sit with his peers.
The incident stung him to the quick. Nothing could pacify him. He cursed
Lupin in good round terms, threatened him with every sort of punishment
and rounded on his daughter:
"There, if you had only married!... After all you had plenty of chances.
Your three cousins, Mussy, d'Emboise and Caorches, are noblemen of good
descent, allied to the best families, fairly well-off; and they are
still anxious to marry you. Why do you refuse them? Ah, because miss is
a dreamer, a sentimentalist; and because her cousins are too fat, or too
thin, or too coarse for her...."
She was, in fact, a dreamer. Left to her own devices from childhood, she
had read all the books of chivalry, all the colourless romances of
olden-time that littered the ancestral presses; and she looked upon life
as a fairy-tale in which the beauteous maidens are always happy, while
the others wait till death for the bridegroom who does not come. Why
should she marry one of her cousins when they were only after her money,
the millions which she had inherited from her mother? She might as well
remain an old maid and go on dreaming....
She answered, gently:
"You will end by making yourself ill, father. Forget this silly
business."
But how could he forget it? Every morning, some pin-prick renewed his
wound. Three days running, Angelique received a wonderful sheaf of
flowers, with Arsene Lupin's card peeping from it. The duke could not go
to his club but a friend accosted him:
"That was a good one to-day!"
"What was?"