"It is of no particular importance, but would you tell us what the 'J' in your name stands for? It is usual to give the full name."
Mr. Pippet smiled. "As I have just been sworn," said he, "I have got to be careful in my statements. My impression is that the 'J' stands for Josiah, but that is only an opinion. I have always been accustomed to use the initial only."
"Then," said the coroner, "we will accept that as your recognized personal designation. There is no need to be pedantic. Now, Mr. Pippet, I don't think we need trouble you to go into details concerning the discovery of this case, but it would be useful if you could give us some further description of the man who came to claim the property. The descriptions which have been given are very sketchy and indefinite; can you amplify them in any way?"
Mr. Pippet reflected. "I took a pretty careful look at him," said he, "and I have a fairly clear mental picture of the man."
"You say you took a pretty careful look at him," said the coroner. "What made you look at him carefully?"
"Well, sir," Mr. Pippet replied, "the circumstances were rather remarkable. From his conversation with the attendant it was clear that something quite irregular had been happening; and when he mentioned the value of the case, it began to look like a serious crime. Then when he rushed out pell mell in search of a policeman, that struck me as a very strange thing to do. What was the hurry about? His own case was gone, and the one that was there wasn't going to run away. But I gathered that there was something in it that oughtn't to have been there. So when he came running out full pelt, I suspected that the cause of the hurry was behind him, not in front, and, naturally, my attention was aroused."
"You suspected that he might be making off?"
"It seemed a possibility. Anyway, I have never seen a man look more thoroughly scared."
"Then," said the coroner, "as you seem to have taken more notice of him than anyone else, perhaps you can give us a rather more complete description of him. Do you think you would recognize him if you should see him again?"
"I feel pretty sure that I should," was the reply; "but that is not the same as enabling other people to recognize him. I should describe him as a tall man, about five feet eleven, lean but muscular and broad across the shoulders. He had a long, thin face and a long, thin nose, curved on the bridge and pointed at the end. His hair and beard were nearly black, but his skin and eyes didn't seem to match them very well, for his skin was distinctly fair and his eyes were a pale blue. I got the distinct impression that his hair and beard were dyed."
"Was that merely an impression or had you any definite grounds for the suspicion?"
"At first, it was just an impression. But as he was running out he got between me and the electric light for a moment, and the light shone through his beard. Then I caught a glint of that peculiar red that you see in hair that is dyed black when the light shines through it, and that you never see in natural hair; a red with a perceptible tinge of purple in it."
"Yes," said the coroner, "it is very characteristic. But do you feel quite sure that you actually saw this colour? It is a very important point."
"I feel convinced in my own mind," replied Mr. Pippet, "but, of course, I might have been mistaken. I can only say that, to the best of my belief, the hair showed that peculiar colour."
"Well," said the coroner, "that is about as much as anyone could say, under the circumstances. Did you notice anything of interest in regard to the clothing? You heard Mr. Crump's evidence."
"Yes; and I don't think I can add much to it. The man was wearing a well-used dark blue serge suit, a blue cotton shirt with a collar to match, a soft felt hat and dark brown shoes. He had a wrist watch, but he seemed to have a pocket watch as well Anyway, he had what looked like a watch guard, made, apparently, of plaited twine."
"Is that all you can tell us about him, or is there anything else that you are able to recall?"
"I think I have told you all that I noticed. There wasn't much opportunity to examine him closely."
"No, there was not," the coroner agreed. "I can only compliment you on the excellent use that you made of your eyes in the short time that was available. And, if that is all that you have to tell us, I think that we need not trouble you any further."
He glanced at the foreman of the jury, and as that gentleman bowed to indicate that he was satisfied, Mr. Pippet was allowed to return to his seat, where he received the whispered congratulations of his daughter.
"That," said the coroner, addressing the jury, "concludes the evidence relating to the discovery of the remains. We shall now proceed to the evidence afforded by the remains themselves; and we will begin with that of the medical officer to whom the head was handed for expert examination. Dr. Humphrey Smith."
IV. THE FINDING OF THE JURY
The new witness was a man of about thirty with a clean shaved, studious face, garnished with a pair of horn-rimmed spectacles, and a somewhat diffident, uneasy manner. Having advanced to the table and taken his seat on the chair which had been placed for him close to that occupied by the coroner, he produced from his pocket a note book which he held unopened on his knee throughout the proceedings. In reply to the preliminary questions, he stated that his name was Humphrey Smith, that he was a bachelor of medicine, a member of the Royal College of Surgeons and a Licentiate of the Royal College of Physicians.
"You are the Police Medical Officer of this district, I believe," the coroner suggested.
"Temporarily, I hold that post," was the reply, "during the absence on sick leave of the regular medical officer."
"Quite so," said the coroner; "for the purposes of this inquiry, you are the Police Medical Officer."
The witness admitted that this was so, and the coroner proceeded: "You have had submitted to you for examination a case containing a human head. Will you give us an account of your examination and the conclusions at which you arrived?"
The witness reflected a few moments and then began his statement.
"At ten fifteen on the morning of the twenty-second of August, Inspector Budge called on me and asked me to come round to the police station to examine the contents of a case, in which he said were certain human remains. I went with him and was shown a wooden case, strengthened by iron straps. It had a hinged lid which was further secured by eight screws, which, however, had been extracted. On raising the lid, I saw what looked like the top of a man's head, surrounded by rags and articles of clothing which had been packed tightly round it. With the Inspector's assistance I removed the packing material until it was possible to lift out the head, which I then took to a table by the window where I was able to make a thorough examination.
"The head appeared to be that of a man, although there was hardly any visible beard or moustache and no signs of his having been shaved."
"You say that the head appeared to be that of a man. Do you feel confident that deceased was a man, or do you think that the head may possibly be that of a woman?"
"I think there is no doubt that deceased was a man. The general appearance was masculine, and the hair was quite short and arranged like a man's hair."
"That," remarked the coroner, "is not a very safe criterion in these days. I have seen a good many women who would have passed well enough for men excepting for their clothes."
"Yes, that is true," the witness admitted, "but I had the present fashion in mind when I formed my opinion; and, although there was extremely little hair on the face, there was more than one usually finds on the face of a woman—a young woman, at any rate."
"Then, are we to understand that this head was that of a young person?"
"The exact age was rather difficult to determine, but I should say that deceased was not much, if any, over thirty."
"What made it difficult to estimate the age of deceased?"
"There were two circumstances that made it difficult to judge the age. One was the physical condition of the head, and the other was the extraordinary facial character of this person."
"By the
physical condition, do you mean that it had undergone considerable putrefactive changes?"
"No, not at all. It was not in the least decomposed. It had been thoroughly embalmed, or, at least, treated with preservative substances—principally formalin, I think. There was quite a distinct odour of formalin vapour."
"Then it would appear that it was in quite a good state of preservation, which ought to have helped rather than hindered your examination."
"Yes, but the effect of the formalin was to produce a certain amount of shrinkage of the tissues, which naturally resulted in some distortion of the features. But it was not easy to be sure how much of the distortion was due to the formalin and how much to the natural deformity."
"Was the shrinkage in any way due to drying of the tissues?"
"No. The tissues were not in the least dry. It appeared to me that the formalin had been mixed with glycerine; and, as glycerine does not evaporate, the head has remained perfectly moist, but without any tendency to decompose."
"How long do you consider that deceased has been dead?"
"That," replied the doctor, "is a question upon which I could form no opinion whatever. The head is so perfectly preserved that it will last in its present condition for an almost indefinite time; and, of course, what applies to the future applies equally to the past. One can estimate the time that has elapsed since death only by the changes that have occurred in the interval. But, if there are no changes, there is nothing on which to form an opinion."
"Do you mean to say that deceased might have been dead for a year?"
"Yes, or even longer than that. A year ago the head would have looked exactly as it looks now, and as it will look a year hence. The preservatives have rendered it practically unchangeable."
"That is very remarkable," said the coroner, "and it introduces a formidable difficulty into this inquiry. For we have to discover, if we can, how, when and where this person met with his death. But it would seem that the 'when' is undiscoverable. You could give no limit to the time that has elapsed since death took place?"
"No. I could make no suggestion as to the time."
The coroner wrote this down and looked at what he had written with an air of profound dissatisfaction. Then he turned to the witness and opened a new subject.
"You spoke just now of the remarkable facial peculiarities of deceased. Can you describe those peculiarities?"
“I will try. Deceased had a most extraordinary and perfectly hideous face. The peculiar appearance was due principally to the overgrown condition of the lower part, especially the lower jaw. In shape, the face was like an egg with the small end upwards; and the jaw was not only enormously broad, but the chin stuck out beyond the upper lip and the lower teeth were spread out and projected considerably in front of the upper ones. Then the nose was thick and coarse and the ears stood out from the head; but they were not like ordinary outstanding ears, which tend to be thin and membranous. They were thick and lumpy and decidedly misshapen. Altogether, the appearance of the face was quite abnormal."
"Should you regard this abnormality as a deformity, or do you think it was connected with deceased's state of health?"
"I should hardly like to give an opinion without seeing the rest of the body. There is no doubt about the deformity; but whether it was congenital or due to disease, I should not like to say: There are several rather rare diseases which tend to produce malformations of different parts of the body."
"Well," said the coroner, "medical details of that kind are a little outside the scope of this inquiry. The fact which interests us is that deceased was a very unusual-looking person, so that there ought not to be much difficulty in identifying him. To come to another question; from your examination of this head, should you say that there is any evidence of special skill or knowledge in the way in which the head has been separated from the trunk?"
"I think that there is a suggestion of some skill and knowledge. Not necessarily very much. But the separation was effected in accordance with the anatomical relations, not in the way in which it would have been done by an entirely ignorant and unskilful person. The head had been separated from the spinal column—that is, from the top of the backbone—by cutting through the ligaments that fasten the backbone to the skull; whereas a quite ignorant person would almost certainly have cut through the neck and through the joint between two of the neck vertebrae."
"You think that it would not require much skill to take the head off in the manner in which it was done?"
"No; it would be quite easy if one knew where to make the cut. But most people do not."
"You think, then, that the person who cut off this head must have had some anatomical knowledge?"
"Yes; but a very little knowledge of anatomy would suffice."
"Do you think that such knowledge as a butcher possesses would be sufficient?"
"Certainly. A butcher doesn't know much anatomy, but he knows where to find the joints."
"And now, to take another question; can you give us any information as to the cause of death?"
"No," was the very definite reply. "I examined the head most carefully with this question in view, but I could find no trace of any wound, bruise, or mark of violence, or even of rough treatment. There was no clue whatever to the cause or mode of death."
There was a brief pause while the coroner glanced through his notes. Then, looking up at the jury, he said:
"Well, gentlemen, you have heard what the doctor has to tell us. It doesn't get us on very far, but, of course, that is not the doctor's fault. He can't make evidence. Would any of you like to ask him any further questions? If not, I think we need not occupy any more of his time."
Once more he paused with his eyes on the jury; then, as no one made any sign, he thanked the witness and gave him his dismissal.
The next witness was a smart-looking uniformed inspector of the City Police who stepped up to his post with the brisk, confident air of one familiar with the procedure. He stated that his name was William Budge, and, having rattled through the preliminaries, gave a precise and business-like account of the circumstances in which he made the acquaintance of the "remains" in the cloak room. From this he proceeded to the examination of the case in collaboration with the medical officer. His description of the case tallied with that given by Mr. Crump, but he was able to supply a few further details.
"Mr. Crump referred in his evidence," said the coroner, "to a private label on this case. You examined that, of course?"
"Yes. It was a piece of card—half of a stationer's postcard—fastened to the lid of the case with four tacks. It had a name and address written on it in plain block letters with a rather fine pen. The name was J. Dobson and the address was 401 Argyle Square, King's Cross, London."
"Four hundred and one!" exclaimed the coroner.
The witness smiled. "Yes, sir. Of course, there's no such number, but I went there to make sure."
"You did not extract any other information from the label?"
"I did not make a particular examination of it. I took it off carefully with the proper precautions and handed it to the superintendent."
"You did not test it for finger-prints?"
"No, sir. That would not be in my province."
"Exactly!" said the coroner, "and it is not really in ours." He paused for a few moments and then asked:
"Have you any idea, Inspector, where this case might have come from, or what its original contents might have been?"
"I should say," was the reply, "that it originally contained some kind of provisions and that it formed part of a ship's stores. It is very usual for firms who supply provisions to ships to send them out in cases of this kind. The lids are screwed down for security in transit, but furnished with hinges for convenience when they are in use on board. There was no mark on the wood to indicate where the case came from. The issuer's name and address was probably on a label which has been taken off."
"Did you find anything that seemed to confirm your surmise that thi
s case had formed part of a ship's stores?"
"Yes. When the doctor had taken the head out, I took out the clothes and rags that had been used for packing and went over them carefully. Most of them seemed to be connected with a vessel of some sort. I made out a list, which I have with me."
He produced an official-looking note book, and, at the coroner's request, read out the list of items.
"At the top, immediately surrounding the head, was a very old, ragged blue jersey, such as fishermen wear. There was no mark of any kind on it, but there were some ends of thread that looked as if a linen tab had been cut off. Next, there was a pair of brown canvas trousers, a good deal worn and without any marks or any name on the buttons, and an old brown canvas jumper. Then there were several worn-out cotton swabs such as they use on board ship, three longish ends of inch-and-a-half manilla rope, and, at the bottom of the case, a ragged oil-skin coat. So the whole contents looked like the throw-outs collected from some ship's fo'c'sle, or from the cabin of a barge or some other small craft."
"Do you associate these cast-off things with any particular kind of vessel?"
"As far as the things themselves are concerned, I do not. But the case rather suggests a deep-water craft. A barge or a coaster can pick up her provisions at the various ports of call, and hardly needs the quantity of stores that this case suggests."
"And what about the other case—the case that was stolen? Do you connect it with the one that contained the head?"
The Inspector reflected. "There is not much information available at present," said he, "and what there is you have had in Crump's evidence. It appears that the two cases were exactly alike; and, if that is so, they might have come from the same source. Evidently, the man who brought in the case with the head in it knew all about the other case, and what was in it."
Dr. Thorndyke Omnibus Vol 6 Page 32