The Moonstone

  II

  As to your cousin's death, then, first.

  It appears to be established, beyond any reasonable doubt, that he waskilled (while he was asleep, or immediately on his waking) by beingsmothered with a pillow from his bed--that the persons guilty ofmurdering him are the three Indians--and that the object contemplated(and achieved) by the crime, was to obtain possession of the diamond,called the Moonstone.

  The facts from which this conclusion is drawn, are derived partly froman examination of the room at the tavern; and partly from the evidenceobtained at the Coroner's Inquest.

  On forcing the door of the room, the deceased gentleman was discovered,dead, with the pillow of the bed over his face. The medical man whoexamined him, being informed of this circumstance, considered thepost-mortem appearances as being perfectly compatible with murder bysmothering--that is to say, with murder committed by some person, orpersons, pressing the pillow over the nose and mouth of the deceased,until death resulted from congestion of the lungs.

  Next, as to the motive for the crime.

  A small box, with a sealed paper torn off from it (the paper containingan inscription) was found open, and empty, on a table in the room.Mr. Luker has himself personally identified the box, the seal, andthe inscription. He has declared that the box did actually contain thediamond, called the Moonstone; and he has admitted having given thebox (thus sealed up) to Mr. Godfrey Ablewhite (then concealed under adisguise), on the afternoon of the twenty-sixth of June last. The fairinference from all this is, that the stealing of the Moonstone was themotive of the crime.

  Next, as to the manner in which the crime was committed.

  On examination of the room (which is only seven feet high), a trap-doorin the ceiling, leading out on to the roof of the house, was discoveredopen. The short ladder, used for obtaining access to the trap-door (andkept under the bed), was found placed at the opening, so as to enableany person or persons, in the room, to leave it again easily. In thetrap-door itself was found a square aperture cut in the wood, apparentlywith some exceedingly sharp instrument, just behind the bolt whichfastened the door on the inner side. In this way, any person from theoutside could have drawn back the bolt, and opened the door, and havedropped (or have been noiselessly lowered by an accomplice) into theroom--its height, as already observed, being only seven feet. That someperson, or persons, must have got admission in this way, appears evidentfrom the fact of the aperture being there. As to the manner in whichhe (or they) obtained access to the roof of the tavern, it is to beremarked that the third house, lower down in the street, was empty, andunder repair--that a long ladder was left by the workmen, leading fromthe pavement to the top of the house--and that, on returning to theirwork, on the morning of the 27th, the men found the plank which they hadtied to the ladder, to prevent anyone from using it in their absence,removed, and lying on the ground. As to the possibility of ascendingby this ladder, passing over the roofs of the houses, passing back, anddescending again, unobserved--it is discovered, on the evidence of thenight policeman, that he only passes through Shore Lane twice in anhour, when out on his beat. The testimony of the inhabitants alsodeclares, that Shore Lane, after midnight, is one of the quietest andloneliest streets in London. Here again, therefore, it seems fair toinfer that--with ordinary caution, and presence of mind--any man, ormen, might have ascended by the ladder, and might have descended again,unobserved. Once on the roof of the tavern, it has been proved, byexperiment, that a man might cut through the trap-door, while lying downon it, and that in such a position, the parapet in front of the housewould conceal him from the view of anyone passing in the street.

  Lastly, as to the person, or persons, by whom the crime was committed.

  It is known (1) that the Indians had an interest in possessingthemselves of the Diamond. (2) It is at least probable that the manlooking like an Indian, whom Octavius Guy saw at the window of the cab,speaking to the man dressed like a mechanic, was one of the threeHindoo conspirators. (3) It is certain that this same man dressed likea mechanic, was seen keeping Mr. Godfrey Ablewhite in view, all throughthe evening of the 26th, and was found in the bedroom (before Mr.Ablewhite was shown into it) under circumstances which lead to thesuspicion that he was examining the room. (4) A morsel of torn goldthread was picked up in the bedroom, which persons expert in suchmatters, declare to be of Indian manufacture, and to be a species ofgold thread not known in England. (5) On the morning of the 27th, threemen, answering to the description of the three Indians, were observedin Lower Thames Street, were traced to the Tower Wharf, and were seen toleave London by the steamer bound for Rotterdam.

  There is here, moral, if not legal, evidence, that the murder wascommitted by the Indians.

  Whether the man personating a mechanic was, or was not, an accomplicein the crime, it is impossible to say. That he could have committed themurder alone, seems beyond the limits of probability. Acting by himself,he could hardly have smothered Mr. Ablewhite--who was the taller andstronger man of the two--without a struggle taking place, or a cry beingheard. A servant girl, sleeping in the next room, heard nothing. Thelandlord, sleeping in the room below, heard nothing. The whole evidencepoints to the inference that more than one man was concerned in thiscrime--and the circumstances, I repeat, morally justify the conclusionthat the Indians committed it.

  I have only to add, that the verdict at the Coroner's Inquest was WilfulMurder against some person, or persons, unknown. Mr. Ablewhite's familyhave offered a reward, and no effort has been left untried to discoverthe guilty persons. The man dressed like a mechanic has eludedall inquiries. The Indians have been traced. As to the prospect ofultimately capturing these last, I shall have a word to say to you onthat head, when I reach the end of the present Report.

  In the meanwhile, having now written all that is needful on the subjectof Mr. Godfrey Ablewhite's death, I may pass next to the narrative ofhis proceedings before, during, and after the time, when you and he metat the late Lady Verinder's house.