Sir Charles, who had meant slander, enveloped Mr. Bradley in a crimson glare.
Roger sped to the rescue. The combatants reminded him of a bull and a gadfly, and that is a contest which it is often good fun to watch. But the Crimes Circle had been founded to investigate the crimes of others, not to provide opportunities for new ones. Roger did not particularly like either the bull or the gadfly, but both amused him in their different ways; he certainly disliked neither. Mr. Bradley on the other hand disliked both Roger and Sir Charles. He disliked Roger the more of the two because Roger was a gentleman and pretended not to be, whereas he himself was not a gentleman and pretended he was. And that surely is cause enough to dislike any one.
“I’m glad you raised that point, Sir Charles,” Roger now said smoothly. “It’s one we must consider. Personally I don’t see how we’re to progress at all unless we come to some arrangement concerning the law of slander, do you?”
Sir Charles consented to be mollified. “It is a difficult point,” he agreed, the lawyer in him immediately swamping the outraged human being. A born lawyer will turn aside from any other minor pursuit, even briefs, for a really knotty legal point, just as a born woman will put on her best set of underclothes and powder her nose before inserting the latter in the gas-oven.
“I think,” Roger said carefully, anxious not to wound legal susceptibilities (it was a bold proposition for a layman to make), “that we should disregard that particular law. I mean,” he added hastily, observing the look of pain on Sir Charles’s brow at being asked to condone this violation of a lex intangenda, “I mean, we should come to some such arrangement as that anything said in this room should be without prejudice, or among friends, or—or not in the spirit of the adverb,” he plunged desperately, “or whatever the legal wriggle is.” On the whole it was not a tactful speech.
But it is doubtful whether Sir Charles heard it. A dreamy look had come into his eyes, as of a Lord of Appeal crooning over a piece of red tape. “Slander, as we all know,” he murmured, “consists in the malicious speaking of such words as render the party who speaks them in the hearing of others liable to an action at the suit of the party to whom they apply. In this case, the imputation being of a crime or misdemeanour which is punishable corporeally, pecuniary damage would not have to be proved, and, the imputation being defamatory, its falsity would be presumed and the burden of proving its truth would be laid upon the defendant. We should therefore have the interesting situation of the defendant in a slander action becoming, in essence, the plaintiff in a civil suit for murder. And really,” said Sir Charles in much perplexity, “I don’t know what would happen then.”
“Er—what about privilege?” suggested Roger feebly.
“Of course,” Sir Charles disregarded him, “there would have to be stated in the declaration the actual words used, not merely their meaning and general inference, and failure to prove them as stated would result in the plaintiff being nonsuited; so that unless notes were taken here and signed by a witness who had heard the defamation, I do not quite see how an action could lie.”
“Privilege?” murmured Roger despairingly.
“Moreover I should be of the opinion,” said Sir Charles, brightening, “that this might be regarded as one of those proper occasions upon which statements, in themselves defamatory, and even false, may be made if from a perfectly proper motive and with an entire belief in their truth. In that case the presumption would be reversed and the burden would be on the plaintiff to prove, and that to the satisfaction of a jury, that the defendant was actuated by express malice. In that case I rather fancy that the court would be guided almost wholly by considerations of public expediency, which would probably mean that——”
“Privilege!” said Roger loudly.
Sir Charles turned on him the dull eye of a red-ink fiend. But this time the word had penetrated. “I was coming to that,” he reproved. “Now in our case I hardly think that a plea of public privilege would be accepted. As to private privilege, the limits are of course exceedingly difficult to define. It would be doubtful if we could plead successfully that all statements made here are matters of purely private communication, because it is a question whether this Circle does constitute, in actual fact, a private or a public gathering. One could,” said Sir Charles with much interest, “argue either way. Or even, for the matter of that, that it is a private body meeting in public, or, vice versa, a public gathering held in private. The point is a very debatable one.” Sir Charles swung his glasses for a moment to emphasise the extreme debatability of the point.
“But I do feel inclined to venture the opinion,” he plunged at last, “that on the whole we might be justified in taking up our stand upon the submission that the occasion is privileged in so far as it is concerned entirely with communications which are made with no animus injuriandi but solely in performance of a duty not necessarily legal but moral or social, and any statements so uttered are covered by a plea of veritas convicii being made within proper limits by persons in the bona fide prosecution of their own and the public interest. I am bound to say however,” Sir Charles immediately proceeded to hedge as if horrified at having committed himself at last, “that this is not a matter of complete certainty, and a wiser policy might be to avoid the direct mention of any name, while holding ourselves free to indicate in some unmistakable manner, such as by signs, or possibly by some form of impersonation or acting, the individual to whom we severally refer.”
“Still,” pursued the President, faint but persistent, “on the whole you do think that the occasion may be regarded as privileged, and we may go ahead and mention any name we like?”
Sir Charles’s glasses described a complete and symbolical circle. “I think,” said Sir Charles very weightily indeed (after all it was an opinion which would have cost the Circle such a surprisingly round sum had it been delivered in chambers that Sir Charles need not be grudged a little weight in the delivering of it). “I think,” said Sir Charles, “that we might take that risk.”
“Right-ho!” said the President with relief.
CHAPTER VI
“I DARE say,” resumed Sir Charles, “that many of you will have already reached the same conclusion as myself, with regard to the identity of the murderer. The case seems to me to afford so striking a parallel with one of the classical murders, that the similarity can hardly have passed unnoticed. I refer, of course, to the Marie Lafarge case.”
“Oh!” said Roger, surprised. So far as he was concerned the similarity had passed unnoticed. He wriggled uncomfortably. Now one came to consider it, of course the parallel was obvious.
“There too we have a wife, accused of sending a poisoned article to her husband. Whether the article was a cake or a box of chocolates is beside the point. It will not do perhaps to——”
“But nobody in their sane senses still believes that Marie Lafarge was guilty,” Alicia Dammers interrupted, with unusual warmth. “It’s been practically proved that the cake was sent by the foreman, or whatever he was. Wasn’t his name Dennis? His motive was much bigger than hers, too.”
Sir Charles regarded her severely. “I think I said, accused of sending. I was referring to a matter of fact, not of opinion.”
“Sorry,” nodded Miss Dammers, unabashed.
“In any case, I just mention the coincidence for what it is worth. Let us now go back to resume our argument at the point we left it. In that connection, the question was raised just now,” said Sir Charles, determinedly impersonal, “as to whether Lady Pennefather may have had not an innocent accomplice but a guilty one. That doubt had already occurred to me. I have satisfied myself that it is not the case. She planned and carried through this affair alone.” He paused, inviting the obvious question.
Roger tactfully supplied it.
“How could she, Sir Charles? We know that she was in the South of France the whole time. The police investigated that very point. She has a complete alibi.”
Sir Charles positively beamed at him
. “She had a complete alibi. I have destroyed it.”
“This is what actually happened. Three days before the parcel was posted Lady Pennefather left Mentone and went, ostensibly, for a week to Avignon. At the end of the week she returned to Mentone. Her signature is in the hotel-register at Avignon, she has the receipted bill, everything is quite in order. The only curious thing is that apparently she did not take her maid, a very superior young woman of smart appearance and good manners, to Avignon with her, for the hotel-receipt is for one person only. And yet the maid did not stay at Mentone. Did the maid then vanish into thin air?” demanded Sir Charles indignantly.
“Oh!” nodded Mr. Chitterwick, who had been listening intently. “I see. How ingenious.”
“Highly ingenious,” agreed Sir Charles, complacently taking the credit for the erring lady’s ingenuity. “The maid took the mistress’s place; the mistress paid a secret visit to England. And I have verified that beyond any doubt. An agent, acting on telegraphic instructions from me, showed the hotel-proprietor at Avignon a photograph of Lady Pennefather and asked whether such a person had ever stayed in the hotel; the man averred that he had never seen her in his life. My agent showed him a snapshot which he had obtained of the maid; the proprietor recognised her instantly as Lady Pennefather. Another ‘guess’ of mine had proved only too accurate.” Sir Charles leaned back in his chair and swung his glasses in silent tribute to his own astuteness.
“Then Lady Pennefather did have an accomplice?” murmured Mr. Bradley, with the air of one discussing The Three Bears with a child of four.
“An innocent accomplice,” retorted Sir Charles. “My agent questioned the maid tactfully, and learned that her mistress had told her that she had to go over to England on urgent business but, having already spent six months of the current year in that country, would have to pay British income-tax if she so much as set foot in England again that year. A considerable sum was in question, and Lady Pennefather suggested this plan as a means of getting round the difficulty, with a handsome bribe to the girl. Not unnaturally the offer was accepted. Most ingenious; most ingenious.” He paused again and beamed round, inviting tributes.
“How very clever of you, Sir Charles,” murmured Alicia Dammers, stepping into the breach.
“I have no actual proof of her stay in this country,” regretted Sir Charles, “so that from the legal point of view the case against her is incomplete in that respect, but that will be a matter for the police to discover. In all other respects, I submit, my case is complete. I regret, I regret exceedingly, having to say so, but I have no alternative: Lady Pennefather is Mrs. Bendix’s murderess.”
There was a thoughtful silence when Sir Charles had finished speaking. Questions were in the air, but nobody seemed to care to be the first to put one. Roger gazed into vacancy, as if looking longingly after the spoor of his own hare. There was no doubt that, as matters stood at present, Sir Charles seemed to have proved his case.
Mr. Ambrose Chitterwick plucked up courage to break the silence. “We must congratulate you, Sir Charles, Your solution is as brilliant as it is surprising. Only one question occurs to me and that is the one of motive. Why should Lady Pennefather desire her husband’s death when she is actually in process of divorcing him? Had she any reason to suspect that a decree would not be granted?”
“None at all,” replied Sir Charles blandly. “It was just because she was so certain that a decree would be granted that she desired his death.”
“I—I don’t quite understand,” stammered Mr. Chitterwick.
Sir Charles allowed the general bewilderment to continue for a few more moments before he condescended to dispel it. He had the orator’s feeling for atmosphere.
“I referred at the beginning of my remarks to a piece of knowledge which had come into my possession and which had helped me materially towards my solution. I am now prepared to disclose, in strict confidence, what that piece of knowledge was.
“You already know that there was talk of an engagement between Sir Eustace and my daughter. I do not think I shall be violating the secrets of the confessional if I tell you that not many weeks ago, Sir Eustace came to me and formally asked me to sanction an engagement between them as soon as his wife’s decree nisi had been pronounced.
“I need not tell you all that transpired at that interview. What is relevant is that Sir Eustace informed me categorically that his wife had been extremely unwilling to divorce him, and he had only succeeded in the end by making a will entirely in her favour, including his estate in Worcestershire. She had a small private income of her own, and he was going to make her such allowance in addition as he was able; but with the interest on the mortgage on his estate swallowing up nearly all the rent he was getting for it, and his other expenses, this could not be a large one. His life, however, was heavily insured in accordance with Lady Pennefather’s marriage settlements, and the mortgage on the estate was in the nature of an endowment policy, and lapsed with his death. He had therefore, as he candidly admitted, very little to offer my daughter.
“Like myself,” said Sir Charles impressively, “you cannot fail to grasp the significance of this. According to the will then in existence, Lady Pennefather from being not even comfortably off would become a comparatively rich woman on her husband’s death. But rumours are reaching her ears of a possible marriage between that husband and another woman as soon as the divorce is complete. What is more probable than that when such an engagement is actually concluded, a new will will be made?
“Her character is already shown in a strong enough light by her willingness to accept the bribe of the will as an inducement to divorce. She is obviously a grasping woman, greedy for money. Murder is only another step for such a woman to take. And murder is her only hope. I do not think,” concluded Sir Charles, “that I need to labour the point any further.” His glasses swung deliberately.
“It’s uncommonly convincing,” Roger said, with a little sigh. “Are you going to hand this information over to the police, Sir Charles?”
“I conceive that failure to do so would be a gross dereliction of my duty as a citizen,” Sir Charles replied, with a pomposity that in no way concealed how pleased he was with himself.
“Humph!” observed Mr. Bradley, who evidently was not going to be so pleased with Sir Charles as Sir Charles was. “What about the chocolates? Is it part of your case that she prepared them over here, or brought them with her?”
Sir Charles waved an airy hand. “Is that material?”
“I should say that it would be very material to connect her at any rate with the poison.”
“Nitrobenzene? One might as well try to connect her with the purchase of the chocolates. She would have no difficulty in getting hold of that. I regard her choice of poison, in fact, as on a par with the ingenuity she has displayed in all the other particulars.”
“I see.” Mr. Bradley stroked his little moustache and eyed Sir Charles combatively. “Come to think of it, you know, Sir Charles, you haven’t really proved a case against Lady Pennefather at all. All you’ve proved is motive and opportunity.”
An unexpected ally ranged herself beside Mr. Bradley. “Exactly!” cried Mrs. Fielder-Flemming. “That’s just what I was about to point out myself. If you hand over the information you’ve collected to the police, Sir Charles, I don’t think they’ll thank you for it. As Mr. Bradley says, you haven’t proved that Lady Pennefather’s guilty, or anything like it. I’m quite sure you’re altogether mistaken.”
Sir Charles was so taken aback that for a moment he could only stare. “Mistaken!” he managed to ejaculate. It was clear that such a possibility had never entered Sir Charles’s orbit.
“Well, perhaps I’d better say—wrong,” amended Mrs. Fielder-Flemming, quite drily.
“But my dear madam——” For once words did not come to Sir Charles. “But why?” he fell back upon, feebly.
“Because I’m sure of it,” retorted Mrs. Fielder-Flemming, most unsatisfactorily.
Roger had been watching this exchange with a gradual change of feeling. From being hypnotised by Sir Charles’s persuasiveness and self-confidence into something like reluctant agreement, he was swinging round now in reaction to the other extreme. Dash it all, this fellow Bradley had kept a clearer head after all. And he was perfectly right. There were gaps in Sir Charles’s case that Sir Charles himself, as counsel for Lady Pennefather’s defence, could have driven a coach-and-six through.
“Of course,” he said thoughtfully, “the fact that before she went abroad Lady Pennefather may have had an account at Mason’s isn’t surprising in the least. Nor is the fact that Mason’s send out a complimentary chit with their receipts. As Sir Charles himself said, very many old-fashioned firms of good repute do. And the fact that the sheet of paper on which the letter was written had been used previously for some such purpose is not only not surprising, when one comes to consider; it’s even obvious. Whoever the murderer, the same problem of getting hold of the piece of notepaper would arise. Yes, really, that Sir Charles’s three initial questions should have happened to find affirmative answers, does seem little more than a coincidence.”
Sir Charles turned on this new antagonist like a wounded bull. “But the odds were enormous against it!” he roared. “If it was a coincidence, it was the most incredible one in the whole course of my experience.”
“Ah, Sir Charles, but you’re prejudiced,” Mr. Bradley told him gently. “And you exaggerate dreadfully, you know. You seem to be putting the odds at somewhere round about a million to one. I should put them at six to one. Permutations and combinations, you know.”
The Poisoned Chocolates Case Page 6