CHAPTER XXXV.
LADY WHARTON STARTLES THE COURT.
When the jury re-assembled on Wednesday the excitement created by themystery had reached fever heat, and long before the Court was opened acrowd of people had gathered round the doors. Numbers of influentialpersons had applied for admission, and as many of these wereaccommodated as the limited space at the disposal of the Coroner wouldpermit. The first day's proceedings had whetted curiosity, and manymembers of the aristocracy were present to hear the evidence whichLady Wharton was to give, the nature of which had been kept a profoundsecret. The learned professions were adequately represented; the stagesent some of its best actors and actresses, and literature some of itsmost famous authors. Never in the history of crime had a gathering sonotable assembled at the initial inquiry into the circumstances of amystery murder.
The murdered man had been buried the previous day, and a vastconcourse of people had attended the funeral. Reginald--still veryweak--and Florence were the chief mourners, and in their carriage wereInspector Robson and his wife. There was but one other mourningcarriage, and this was occupied by Dick and the poor charwoman who hadbeen fitfully employed domestically by the deceased. The newspapersdevoted columns to descriptions of the funeral and to those pictorialsketches of personages and incidents which have become almost a crazein up-to-date journalism. Standing by the grave, Dick, looking overthe heads of the people, saw Gracie and her mother and Dr. Vinsen,side by side. Mrs. Death was in tears, Gracie wore her accustomedimpassive expression, and Dr. Vinsen bared his halo to the skies.
"My young friend, my dear young friend," he said, sidling up to Dick,"this is the end of a crafty life, but let us extend our pity--ex-tendour pi-ty. The grave, like charity, covereth a multitude of sins. Wewill be clement; we will soften our judgment; it is the least we cando in the presence of death, in the solemn presence of death. If itteaches us a lesson, Mr. Samuel Boyd will not have lived in vain."
"What lesson?" asked Dick, half angrily; the voice, the manner, jarredupon him.
"The lesson of humility, of charity--sweet charity--of justice."
"You call the life that ends here," said Dick, pointing to the grave,"a crafty life. Where does justice come in?"
"Ah, my young friend," responded Dr. Vinsen, shaking his headremonstrantly, "ah, my dear young friend!"
"Meaning--what?" demanded Dick.
"Meaning that you are young, that you have much to learn, much tounlearn."
"You speak in enigmas," said Dick. "Good day."
"Not in anger," said Dr. Vinsen, gently, "not in anger, my dear youngfriend, lest the dead rise to reproach you."
"He is better where he is," said Dick, cynically. "I knew him--didyou?"
"I had not the privilege. In life we never met."
"But you take it very much to heart. Why?"
"My heart is large; it bleeds for all." He laid his hand upon theshoulder of Mrs. Death, and repeated, "It bleeds for all."
"More enigmas--more platitudes," said Dick, scornfully.
Dr. Vinsen looked at him with a pitying smile. "I fear I do not findfavour in your eyes."
"To speak plainly, you do not."
"To speak plainly is commendable. But give a reason for it."
"I cannot. You have a scientist for a friend."
"Dr. Pye? Yes."
"He will tell you that there are certain chemicals that will not mix."
"I do not need to be told. I know it."
"Well, then, Dr. Vinsen, _we_ don't mix; and there's an end of it."
"No, my young friend, not an end of it. The end is there, for him, foryou, for all. Better for some of us if we were in our graves." Therewas no change in his voice; it was mild, benignant, reproachful."Better, far better, for some of us if we were in our graves. Come,Mrs. Death; come, Gracie, my child."
They turned away, but not before Gracie had taken Dick's hand andkissed it.
And now, on Wednesday morning, the Coroner took his place, andaddressed the jury in the following terms:
"Upon the opening of this inquiry I advised you to keep an open mindrespecting it, and to turn a deaf ear to the strange rumours andreports which were in circulation. I feel it necessary to repeat thiscaution. The extraordinary statements which have appeared in thepublic press may or may not have a foundation of fact, but with thesestatements we have nothing to do, and I beg you to dismiss them. Youare here to give your verdict in accordance with the evidence whichwill be presented to you, and not in accordance with unauthorised andunverified rumour. If you do this without fear or favour you will haveperformed your duty. Before medical evidence is taken Inspector Robsonhas requested permission to make a statement, to which, as he is animportant witness in the case, I see no objection."
Inspector Robson was then called.
The Coroner: "Does the statement you wish to make, Inspector Robson,relate to the present inquiry?"
Inspector Robson: "It does, Mr. Coroner, though it has no directbearing upon it. A matter has come to my knowledge since Monday which,although it is purely of a private nature, I consider it my duty tomake public. Constable Applebee, in his evidence on that day,mentioned that on the night of the 5th, when he was in CatchpoleSquare, he saw a woman there whom he challenged, and who escaped fromhim. The incident was reported at the Bishop Street Station, and notewas taken of it. I wish to state that the lady he challenged is mydaughter."
"You were not aware of the fact when Constable Applebee was underexamination?"
"I was not. My daughter, hearing on Monday that the incident had beenmentioned in court, informed me that it was she who had visitedCatchpole Square on the night in question."
"Is there any special reason why she did not inform you of it before?"
"None. Had the matter been of importance she would have spoken of itearlier."
"Perhaps we had better hear from her own lips the reason of her visit.Is she in court?"
"She is."
"Let her be called."
Florence came forward. She was sitting between Reginald and hermother, who gave her an encouraging smile as she left them.
The Coroner: "You have heard what your father has said. There is noobligation upon you to state why you went to Catchpole Square at suchan hour on such a night; but we are ready to listen to any explanationyou may desire to make."
Florence: "I will answer any questions you ask."
"Previous to your visit where were you on that night?"
"At my husband's lodgings in Park Street, Islington. He was very ill,and I was nursing him."
"Did he send you for his father?"
"No, he was delirious. He spoke of his father several times, and itappeared to me to be my duty to make him acquainted with his son'sdangerous condition. There was no one else to go but myself, and Iwent to Catchpole Square because I considered it right to do so."
The Juror (who had taken so conspicuous a part in Monday'sproceedings): "When he spoke of his father, what were his precisewords?"
The Coroner: "I do not think the witness should be asked thatquestion."
Florence: "Oh, yes, there is nothing to conceal. He simply said, 'Myfather, my father!' and I gathered from that that he wished to seehim. It was natural that I should think so."
The Coroner: "Quite natural. You arrived at Catchpole Square, andknocked at the door of the deceased?"
"Yes, I knocked a good many times, but no one answered me. As I wasabout to leave the square I heard voices, and saw, very dimly, two menvery close to me. I did not know they were policemen, and one of themcalled out to me to stop, and caught hold of me. I was so frightenedthat I tore myself away, and ran out of the Square as quickly as Icould."
The Juror: "Did you know at that time that your husband was not ongood terms with his father?"
The Coroner: "You need not answer that question."
"I wish to answer every question. I did know it, and I knew that therewas no fault on my husband's part. It was
my hope that his illnesswould lead to a reconciliation between them. I thank God that myhusband is spared to me, but if he had died I should never haveforgiven myself if I had not made the attempt to bring his father tohim."
"Thank you, Mrs. Boyd; that is all we have to ask."
A buzz of admiration ran through the court as Florence returned to herseat by Reginald's side.
Dr. Talbot Rowbottom, of Harley Street, a member of the Royal Collegeof Surgeons and a doctor of medicine, was then called.
"You examined the body of the deceased?"
"Yes, on Sunday, at the request of Mr. Reginald Boyd, who wrote me anote to that effect. I had read of the discovery of the body in thenewspapers, and, anticipating an inquest, I called first upon you, ascoroner of the district, and received your permission to make theexamination."
"Did the deceased die a natural death?"
"No. He met his death by strangulation."
"You have no doubt upon the subject?"
"Not the slightest."
"He could not have strangled himself?"
"From the condition of the body that is impossible."
"Does your examination of the body warrant you in saying that therewas resistance on the part of the deceased?"
"Great resistance. There is every indication of a violent strugglehaving taken place."
"So that the orderly state of the bed and bedclothes was unnatural?"
"Most unnatural. After the deed was done singular care must have beentaken to compose the limbs and arrange the bedclothes."
"Do you consider it likely that, during the struggle, the deceasedsucceeded in getting out of bed?"
"More than likely. I observed upon the body traces of bruises whichcould not have been produced had the deceased remained in bed. Therewas a bruise upon the shin of the right leg, another on the head, andanother on the right shoulder. These must have been caused by thedeceased coming into violent contact with heavy pieces of furniture.Above the left eye there was an abrasion from a similar cause."
"Was there any wound on the body such as might have been caused by aknife or a pistol?"
"No."
"Is the furniture in the bedroom of a sufficiently heavy character tocause the wounds and abrasions you spoke of?"
"There is no heavy furniture in the bedroom. My impression is that thedeceased was first attacked in his sleep, that he awoke, that in thecourse of the struggle he succeeded in getting out of bed, anddragged, or was dragged by his assailant or assailants, into theadjoining apartment, where the furniture is of a much more substantialdescription."
"Do you consider it likely that the deceased could have called forhelp during the struggle?"
"Not to any appreciable extent. The compression of the windpipe wasremarkable, and under such compression the capacity of the vocalchords must have been considerably weakened. Even had he succeeded inreleasing himself for a few moments he could not in that brief timehave regained control of his voice. The exhaustion would have been toogreat."
"Now, Dr. Rowbottom, you examined the body on Sunday, the l0th. Canyou state with some degree of precision on what approximate date thedeceased met his death?"
"He must have been dead at least eight days."
"That takes us back to Sunday, the 3rd?"
"Yes. And it is probable that he died the day before, on theSaturday."
At these words, which were uttered with decision, there was acommotion in the part of the court in which Lady Wharton was sitting,but the Coroner looking with some severity in that direction, herladyship, who had risen to her feet, obeyed the injunction of hercounsel not to speak. She sank back in her seat, and evinced heragitation by a vigorous fluttering of her fan. When the excitementcaused by this interruption had subsided, the Coroner continued.
"The deceased being in his night attire, we may take it that he diedeither on the night of Friday, the 1st of March, or on the night ofSaturday, the 2nd?"
"Certainly on one of those nights."
"Absolutely certain?"
"Absolutely certain."
Dr. John Webster, of Canonbury Square, and Dr. Lipman, of WimpoleStreet, who were next examined, corroborated in every respect theevidence of Dr. Rowbottom, and agreed with the conclusions at which hehad arrived. They spoke positively to the fact that the deceased hadbeen brutally murdered, and to the presumption that the murder hadtaken place either on the Friday or the Saturday night.
At this stage of the inquiry Mr. Finnis, Q.C., requested the Coronerto take Lady Wharton as the next witness. Her ladyship, he said, hadevidence of an extraordinary nature to give which would throw anentirely new light upon the inquiry, and it was most important thatthere should be as little delay as possible in hearing what she had tosay.
The Coroner: "Before Lady Wharton is examined there is officialinformation to lay before the jury. An officer from the detectivedepartment in Scotland Yard is present, and we will hear him first. Hehas duties elsewhere, and is anxious to be relieved from a longerattendance in this court than is absolutely necessary. His evidencewill open up matter which may have a bearing on the verdict. Call Mr.Lambert."
This gentleman, whose name is well known in association with manycelebrated criminal cases, stepped forward and was sworn.
"You are a detective in official service?"
"I am."
"You have visited the house of the deceased in Catchpole Square?"
"On three occasions. The first on Sunday, the second on Monday, thethird yesterday."
"Whom did you find in charge there?"
"Mr. Richard Remington, who gave me every facility for a thoroughexamination of the premises."
"Describe what steps you took, and their result."
"I first examined the bedroom and the adjoining office. On the floorof both rooms I observed the marks of a man's footsteps, with stainsof blood which had been trodden upon. In three places the footmarkswere partially outlined in these stains, and I took photographs ofthem."
"Are these the photographs?"
"Yes."
The Coroner passed the photographs to the jury.
"How do you form the conclusion that they are the footsteps of a man?"
"The boots are those of a man, and the size, No. 8, is an unusual sizefor a woman."
"Were there marks of other footsteps?"
"None."
"Could these footsteps have been made by the deceased?"
"No. The deceased was flat-footed; the man who wore the boots had adefined arch in his soles. Here are photographs of the soles ofdeceased's boots; you will see a marked difference in the size andshape."
The photographs were produced, and examined by the Coroner and thejury.
"After searching the bedroom and the adjoining office you proceeded toanother part of the premises."
"With your permission I will first finish with these two rooms."
"Very well. Proceed."
"The walls of the office are partially hung with old tapestry, and Iobserved in one place that a hand had clutched it. The finger marksare still discernible, and the tapestry has not returned to itsoriginal folds. This indicates that, during a struggle, one of the menhad caught hold of it. Upon parts of the wall not covered withtapestry are scratches which seem to have been made by finger nails."
"Recent scratches?"
"Made within the last two or three weeks."
"Do you consider it certain that there was a struggle between thedeceased and his assailant?"
"I am positive there was."
"In that case would there not have been, in addition to the definedblood stains of footmarks, smears of blood upon the floor?"
"I was coming to that. There is no doubt that a prolonged struggletook place, but the absence of blood-smears, such as would have beencaused by the naked feet of the deceased, proves that the wound fromwhich the blood proceeded could not have been inflicted during thestruggle."
"Before or after?"
"After. If blood had dropped upon the floor before the str
uggle itwould have taken some time to dry, and signs of dragging feet wouldhave been observable. Besides, there would have been blood-stains onthe naked feet of the deceased. There were none. Examining farther Idiscovered a bullet in the wall, which I extracted, and which musthave been fired within the last two or three weeks. The bore is .320,the barrel of the pistol, four inch. The weapon used was probably aColt's ejector revolver."
"Probably, you say. Did you not find the pistol?"
"No. I inquired of Mr. Remington whether he had found one. He hadnot."
"So that you cannot say whether the shot was fired by the deceased orhis assailant?"
"I cannot say."
"Was that the only bullet you found?"
"The only one. My examination of these two rooms concluded, I turnedmy attention to other parts of the house. On the stairs leading fromthe street door to the bedroom I picked up two pieces of brown paper,with small pieces of wax adhering to them."
"Did you examine the back of the premises?"
"Yes. Over the basement rooms, which had not been used for aconsiderable time, was a window which had been broken from without,and broken by an unskilled hand."
"How do you arrive at the conclusion that the window was broken fromwithout?"
"By the splinters of glass on the floor of the room, and by the brokenpieces remaining in the panes, the jagged edges of which are averification of my statement."
"We should like to hear your reason for saying that the hand thatbroke the window was unskilled?"
"A regular burglar would have been provided with tools which wouldhave enabled him to cut the glass without running the risk of personalinjury."
"But might not such a man have adopted these rougher means for thepurpose of averting suspicion?"
"I have never known it done by a skilled burglar. It was through thiswindow that the man effected an entrance. Continuing my investigationI came to the wall which surrounds the back of the house, and there Ireceived confirmation of the theory I had formed. The man had broughtwith him a rope to which a grapnel was attached. This rope he hadthrown up from the outside until the grapnel caught in the mortar atthe top of the wall. Then he climbed up; the rest was easy. The marksof the grapnel are plainly discernible, and the freshness of theloosened mortar proves that but a short time has elapsed since he paidhis last visit."
"Is it your opinion that there was more than one visit?"
"As to that I have formed no opinion."
"All this must have taken some time?"
"Yes, and was done at night when there were few people about. Thestreet on which the dead wall abuts is but little frequented. Themovements of the policeman on the beat were doubtless carefullynoted."
"Should you say that robbery was the object of this burglariousentrance?"
"It is a fair presumption."
"Did you search the clothes of the deceased?"
"Yes. Mr. Remington had gone through the pockets before I came, andhad replaced what he found in them."
The Juror who had asked previous questions: "How do you know that?"
"He told me so. The watch and chain had not been taken, and there wasmoney in his purse, a AL5 note and some gold and silver, AL9 18s. inall. I opened the safe; there were no articles of value in it. Ifthere had been any before the death of the deceased they had beenremoved, and the key put back in its original place."
"You found no burglars' tools about?"
"None."
"Nor tools of any kind?"
"No."
"There were desks and drawers in the room adjoining the bedroom. Didany of the locks appear to have been forced?"
"No."
"I have no further questions to ask you, Mr. Lambert. Call LadyWharton."
Expectation ran high at this summons. The scenes in Court in which herladyship had played a principal part, and her excited comments upon avital point in the inquiry, had caused her evidence to be lookedforward to with intense interest.
The Coroner: "We understand that you have a communication ofimportance to make to the jury, and we are now prepared to hear whatyou have to say. You were acquainted with the deceased?"
Lady Wharton: "Whom do you mean by the deceased?"
The Coroner: "You are here to answer questions, Lady Wharton, not toask them."
Lady Wharton: "But I do ask them. I want to know whom you mean by thedeceased."
The Coroner: "Mr. Samuel Boyd, of course. You were acquainted withhim?"
"I was very slightly acquainted with him. As a matter of fact I sawhim only twice in my life. The first time was on the evening ofFriday, the 1st of March. Lord Wharton had entered into certainfinancial transactions with Mr. Boyd, which did not come to myknowledge till a week or two before that date. Some settlement had tobe made respecting these transactions, and Lord Wharton being ill, Iundertook the business, having also a little business of my own to dowith him. So far as I am aware there was no person in the house exceptMr. Boyd when I called upon him in Catchpole Square. The businessbeing of a private nature I entered alone, and ordered my servant towait outside for me in the Square."
"At what hour was this visit paid?"
"At eight o'clock, and I remained with him thirty or forty minutes. Ihad brought with me some bills signed by Lord Wharton and endorsed bymy brother, Lord Fairfax. In return for these bills I should havereceived bills not then due. It slipped my mind at the time, and Iwrote to him about them, and about another matter as well. In hisreply he promised to bring the old bills to our place in Bournemouthon Thursday night, the 7th."
"A moment if you please. Do you say that you received a letter fromthe deceased on a date subsequent to Friday, the 1st of March?"
"I say that I received a letter from Mr. Samuel Boyd on the 6th ofMarch, and that I saw him on the night of the 7th."
So great was the commotion in the Court at this statement that it wastwo or three minutes before order was restored.
The Coroner: "Do you seriously assert this, Lady Wharton, in the teethof the medical evidence that Mr. Samuel Boyd met his death on thenight of the 1st or the 2nd of March?"
Lady Wharton: "A fig for the medical evidence! Mr. Samuel Boyd wasalive last Thursday night, and it is my belief that he is alive atthis moment!"
The Coroner: "Surely, surely, Lady Wharton----"
Lady Wharton (interrupting excitedly): "And surely, surely, Mr.Coroner! Am I to believe the evidence of my senses? I tell you I sawthe man last Thursday night, and had a conversation with him; and ashis body has not been found, Mr. Samuel Boyd is alive now, and iskeeping out of the way, like the thief and scoundrel he is, for thepurpose of robbing me!"
Samuel Boyd of Catchpole Square: A Mystery Page 36