‘Much more surely, my dear man. It’s when I find people with cast-iron alibis that I begin to suspect them. Though Weldon’s two o’clock alibi seems to be as nearly cast-iron as anything can be. But it’s only when somebody comes along and swears himself black in the face that he saw Weldon behaving with perfect innocence at two o’clock precisely that I’ll begin seriously to weave a hempen neck-tie for him. Unless, of course—’
‘Well?’
‘Unless, I was going to say, there was a conspiracy between Weldon and some other person to kill Alexis, and the actual killing was done by the other person. I mean, supposing, for example, Weldon and our friend Bright were both in it, and Bright was scheduled to do the dirty deed at eleven o’clock, for example, while Weldon established his own alibi, and suppose there was some hitch in the arrangements so that the murder didn’t come off till two, and suppose Weldon didn’t know that and was still sticking to the original time-table – how about that?’
‘That’s supposing a lot. Bright – or whoever it was – has had plenty of time to communicate with Weldon. He wouldn’t be such a fool as not to let him know.’
‘True; I’m not satisfied with that suggestion. It doesn’t seem to fit Bright.’
‘Besides, Bright really has a cast-iron alibi for two o’clock.’
‘I know. That’s why I suspect him. But what I mean is that Bright is a free agent. Even if it was too dangerous to meet Weldon he could always have written or telephoned, and so could Weldon. You haven’t got anybody in jug who would fit the bill, I suppose? Or any sudden deaths? The only thing I can think of is that the accomplice may have been in some place where he couldn’t communicate with anybody – quod, or six foot of elm with brass handles.’
‘Or how about a hospital?’
‘Or, as you say, a hospital.’
‘That’s an idea,’ said Glaisher. ‘We’ll look into that, my lord.’
‘It can’t do any harm – though I haven’t much faith in it. I seem to have lost my faith lately, as the good folks say. Well, thank Heaven! it’s nearly dinner-time, and one can always eat. Hullo – ullo – ullo! What’s all the excitement?’
Superintendent Glaisher looked out of the window. There was a noise of trampling feet.
‘They’re carrying something down to the mortuary. I wonder—’
The door burst open with scant ceremony and Inspector Umpelty surged in, damp and triumphant.
‘Sorry, sir,’ he said. ‘Good-evening, my lord. We’ve got the body!’
XXI
THE EVIDENCE AT THE INQUEST
‘At the word, “I’m murdered,”
The gaolers of the dead throw back the grave-stone,
Split the deep ocean, and unclose the mountain
To let the buried pass.’
Death’s Jest-Book
Friday, 26 June
The inquest upon the body of Paul Alexis was held on June 26th, to the undisguised relief and triumph of Inspector Umpelty. For years (it seemed to him) he had been trying to make an investigation about nothing tangible. But for Harriet’s photographs, he might, in his more worried moments, have begun to think that the body was a myth. Now, however, here it definitely was: a real, solid – or comparatively solid – body. True, it was not quite so informative as he had hoped. It was not served out to him complete with a ticket, marked in plain figures: ‘Suicide, with care’, or ‘This Year’s Murder-Model; Body by Bright’. However, there was the corpse, and that was something gained. To quote Lord Peter (who seemed to be specialising in the provision of mnemonics), he might now say:
‘ ’ T would make a man drink himself dead on gin-toddy
To have neither a corpus delicti nor body;
But now though by destiny scurvily tricked, I
At least have a corpse – though no corpus delicti.’
There was some little debate whether the whole matter should be thrashed out at the inquest or the complicated series of clues and suspicions suppressed and the inquest adjourned for further inquiries. In the end, however, it was decided to let matters take their course. Something useful might come out; one never knew. In any case, the possible suspects must know by this time pretty well where they stood. Certain clues – for example, the horseshoe – could, of course, be kept up the sleeves of the police.
The first witness to give evidence was Inspector Umpelty. He explained briefly that the body had been found tightly wedged into a deep crevice at the far end of the Grinders reef, from which it had been recovered with considerable difficulty by means of dredging-tackle and diving. It had apparently been washed into that position by the heavy seas of the previous week. When found, it was considerably distended by internal gases, but had not floated, being heavily weighted down by the presence of a cash-belt containing £300 in gold. (Sensation.)
The Inspector produced the belt and the gold (which the jury inspected with curiosity and awe), and also a passport found on the deceased; this had recently been visa’d for France. Two other items of interest had also been discovered in the dead man’s breast-pocket. One was the unmounted photograph of a very beautiful girl of Russian type, wearing a tiara-shaped head-dress of pearls. The photograph was signed in a thin, foreign-looking hand with the name ‘Feodora’. There was no mark of origin on the photograph, which either had never been mounted, or had been skilfully detached from its mount. It was in a fairly good state of preservation, having been kept in one of the compartments of a handsome leather note-case, which had protected it to some extent. The note-case contained nothing further but a few currency notes, some stamps, and the return half of a ticket from Wilvercombe to Darley Halt, dated 18th June.
The second item was more enigmatical. It was a sheet of quarto paper, covered with writing, but so stained with blood and sea-water that it was almost undecipherable. This paper had not been folded in the note-case, but tucked away behind it. Such writing as could be read was in printed capitals and in a purplish ink which, though it had run and smeared a good deal, had stood up reasonably well to its week’s immersion. A few sentences could be made out, but they were not of an encouraging nature. There was, for instance, a passage which began musically ‘SOLFA’, but swiftly degenerated into ‘TGMZ DXL LKKZM VXI’ before being lost in a dirty crimson stain. Further down came ‘AIL AXH NZMLF’, ‘NAGMJU KC KC’ and ‘MULBY MS SZLKO’, while the concluding words, which might be the signature, were ‘UFHA AKTS’.
The coroner asked Inspector Umpelty whether he could throw any light on this paper. Umpelty replied that he thought two of the witnesses might be able to do so, and stepped down to make way for Mrs Lefranc.
The lady of the lodgings, in a great state of nerves, tears and face-powder, was asked if she had identified the body. She replied that she had been able to do so by the clothes, the hair, the beard and by a ring which the deceased had always worn on his left hand.
‘But as for his poor face,’ sobbed Mrs Lefrane, ‘I couldn’t speak to it, not if I was his own mother, and I’m sure I loved him like a son. It’s all been nibbled right away by those horrible creatures, and if ever I eat a crab or lobster again, I hope Heaven will strike me dead! Many’s the lobster mayonnaise I’ve ate in the old days, not knowing, and I’m sure it’s no wonder if they give you nightmare, knowing where they come from, the brutes!’
The court shuddered, and the managers of the Resplendent and the Bellevue, who were present, despatched hasty notes by messenger to the respective chefs, commanding them on no account whatever to put crab or lobster on the menu for at least a fortnight.
Mrs Lefranc deposed further that Alexis had been acustomed to receive letters from foreign parts which took him a long time to read and answer. That after receiving the last of these on the Tuesday morning he had become strange and excited in his manner. That on the Wednesday he had paid up all outstanding bills and burnt a quantity of papers, and that that night he had kissed her and referred mysteriously to a possible departure in the near future. That he had gone out on the T
hursday morning after making rather a poor breakfast. He had not packed any clothes and had taken his latch-key as though he meant to return.
Shown the photograph: she had never seen it before; she had never seen the original of the portrait; she had never heard Alexis speak of anyone named Feodora; she knew of no ladies in his life except Leila Garland, with whom he had broken some time ago, and Mrs Weldon, the lady he was engaged to marry at the time of his death.
This, naturally, focused public attention on Mrs Weldon. Henry handed her a smelling-bottle and said something to her, and she responded by a faint smile.
The next witness was Harriet Vane, who gave a detailed account of the finding of the body. The coroner examined her particularly in the matter of the exact position of the body and the condition of the blood. Harriet was a good witness on these points, her training as a mystery-writer having taught her to assemble details of this kind coherently.
‘The body was lying with the knees drawn up, as though it had crumpled together in that position as it fell. The clothes were not disarranged at all. The left arm was doubled so as to bring the hand and wrist directly beneath the throat. The right arm and hand hung over the edge of the rock immediately beneath the head of the corpse. Both hands and both arms, as well as the front part of the body were saturated with blood. The blood had collected in a pool in a hollow of the rock just under the throat, and was still dripping down the face of the rock when I saw it. I cannot say whether there might not have been sea-water as well as blood in the hollow. There was no blood on the upper surface of the rock, or on any part of the body except the front and on the hands and arms. The appearance presented was as though the throat of the deceased had been cut while he was bending forward – as, for example, a person might do over a sink or basin. When I shifted the body the blood flowed freely and copiously from the severed vessels. I did not observe whether any splashes of blood had been dried by the sun. I do not think so, because the pool of blood and the blood beneath the corpse were sheltered from the direct rays of the sun by the corpse itself. When I lifted the corpse, the blood gushed out, as I said before, and ran down the rock. It was quite liquid and ran freely.
‘I handled the sleeves and breast of the coat and the gloves which the deceased was wearing. They were soaked in blood and felt limp and wet. They were not stiff at all. They were not sticky. They were limp and wet. I have seen bandages which had been soaked in blood some time previously and am acquainted with the stiffness and stickiness of clotted blood. The clothes were not like that at all. They appeared to have been soaked in fresh blood.
‘The body felt warm to the touch. The surface of the rock was hot, as it was a hot day. I did not move the body, except when I turned it a little over and lifted the head at first. I am sorry now that I did not attempt to drag it further up the beach, but I did not think I was strong enough to make a good job of it, and supposed that I should be able to get help quickly.’
The coroner said he did not think the jury could possibly blame Miss Vane for not having tried to remove the corpse, and complimented her on the presence of mind she had shown in taking photographs and carrying out investigations. The photographs were handed to the jury, and after Harriet had explained the various difficulties she had encountered before getting into communication with the police, she was allowed to step down.
The next witness was the police-surgeon, Dr Fenchurch. From his examination of the photographs and of the body he had formed the opinion that the throat of the deceased had been completely severed by a single blow with a sharp-bladed instrument. The lobsters and crabs had eaten away the greater part of the soft tissues, but the photographs were here of very great value, since they showed definitely that the throat had been cut at the first attempt, without any preliminary surface gashing. This was borne out by the condition of the muscular tissue, which showed no sign of any second cut. All the great vessels and muscles of the neck, including the carotid and jugular veins and the glottis, had been clearly cut through. The wound commenced high up under the left ear, and proceeded in a downward direction to the right side of the throat, extending backwards as far as the vertebral column, which had, however, not been nicked. He concluded that the cut had been made from left to right. This was characteristic of suicidal throat-cutting by a right-handed person; the same appearance would, however, be produced by a homicidal cut, provided the murderer were standing behind his victim at the time.
‘Such a wound would, of course, produce a great effusion of blood?’
‘It would.’
‘In the case of a murderer, standing in the position you describe, his hands and clothes would necessarily be very much stained?’
‘His right hand and arm, probably. His clothes might not be stained at all, since they would be protected by the body of his victim.’
‘Did you carry out a post-mortem on the body to ascertain if there was any other possible cause of death?’
The doctor, smiling slightly, said that he had, in the ordinary course of things, opened up the head and body, but had seen nothing of a suspicious nature.
‘In your opinion, what was the cause of death?’
Dr Fenchurch, still smiling slightly, said that in his opinion the cause of death was acute haemorrhage, coupled with the severance of the respiratory canal. In fact, the deceased had died of having his throat cut.
The coroner, who was a lawyer and seemed unwilling to let the medical witness have his own way entirely, persisted.
‘I am not trying to quibble over absurdities,’ he remarked, acidly. ‘I am asking you whether we are to understand that the death was actually caused by the wound in the throat, or whether there is any possibility that the deceased was killed in some other way, and the throat cut afterwards to produce the appearance of suicidal throat-cutting?’
‘Oh, I see. Well, I can say this: that the throat-cutting was undoubtedly the immediate cause of death. That is, the man was undoubtedly alive when his throat was cut. The body was completely drained of blood. In fact, I have never seen a body drained so completely. There was some very slight clotting about the heart but it was remarkably little. This, however, is no more than one might expect from the great extent of the wound. If the man had been already dead when the wound was inflicted, there would, of course, have been little or no bleeding.’
‘Quite so. It is as well to have that clear. You said that the throat-cutting was the immediate cause of death. What precisely did you mean by that?’
‘I meant to exclude the bare possibility that the deceased might also have taken poison. It is not unusual to find suicides doubling their precautions in this way. As a matter of fact, however, the internal organs showed no signs of anything of this nature having taken place. If you wish, I can have an analysis made of the visceral contents.’
‘Thank you; perhaps it would be as well. It would equally, I suppose, be possible that the man had been previously drugged by some other party before the delivery of the blow, or slash, that cut his throat?’
‘Certainly. A soporific might have been administered beforehand in order to make the attack more easy.’
Here Inspector Umpelty rose and begged to draw the coroner’s attention to the evidence of Harriet and the photographs that the deceased had walked to the rock on his own feet and alone.
‘Thank you, Inspector; we shall come to that later. Permit me to finish with the medical evidence. You heard Miss Vane’s account of her finding the body, Doctor, and her statement that at ten minutes past two the blood was still liquid. What inference do you draw as regards the time of the death?’
‘I should say that it had occurred within a very few minutes of the finding of the body. Not earlier than two o’clock at the outside.’
‘And would a person die quickly from the effects of having his throat cut in the manner described?’
‘He would die immediately. The heart and arteries might continue to pump blood for a few seconds by spasmodic muscular contraction, but the man would
be dead from the moment that the great vessels were severed.’
‘So that we may take it that the wound was actually inflicted certainly not earlier than two o’clock?’
‘That is so. Two o’clock is the extreme limit. I myself should incline to put it later.’
‘Thank you. There is just one more question. You have heard that a razor was found in proximity to the body. Inspector, would you kindly hand the exhibit to the witness. In your opinion, Doctor, is the appearance of the wound consistent with its having been inflicted by that weapon?’
‘Decidedly so. This, or a similar razor, would be an ideal instrument for the purpose.’
‘In your opinion, would great physical strength be required to deliver such a blow with that, or a similar weapon?’
‘Considerable strength, yes. Exceptional strength, no. Much would depend upon the circumstances.’
‘Will you explain what you mean by that?’
‘In the case of a determined suicide, wounds of this kind have been known to be inflicted by persons of quite ordinary or even poor physique. In the case of homicide, much would depend on whether the victim was able to offer any effective resistance to the attack.’
‘Did you find any other marks of violence on the body?’
‘None whatever.’
‘No signs of throttling or bruising?’
‘None. There was nothing remarkable beyond the natural action of the water and the complete absence of post-mortem staining. I attribute the latter to the small amount of blood present in the body and also to the circumstance that the body was not left lying in one position, but was washed from the rock shortly after death and tumbled about in the water.’
‘In your opinion, does the condition of the body suggest suicide or homicide?’
‘In my opinion, and taking all the circumstances into consideration, suicide appears rather more probable. The only point to set against it is the absence of surface cuts. It is rather rare for a suicide to be completely successful at the first attempt, though it is not by any means unknown.’