it were run together within. The upper part, where it bad been
doubled and folded, was all _mildewed_ and rotten, and tore on being
opened.' In respect to the grass having '.grown around and over some
of them,' it is obvious that the fact could only have been
ascertained from the words, and thus from the recollections, of two
small boys; for these boys removed the articles and took them home
before they had been seen by a third party. But grass will grow,
especially in warm and damp weather, (such as was that of the period
of the murder,) as much as two or three inches in a single day. A
parasol lying upon a newly turfed ground, might, in a single week, be
entirely concealed from sight by the upspringing grass. And touching
that mildew upon which the editor of Le Soleil so pertinaciously
insists, that he employs the word no less than three times in the
brief paragraph just quoted, is be really unaware of the nature of
this mildew? Is he to be told that it is one of the many classes of
fungus, of which the most ordinary feature is its upspringing and
decadence within twenty-four hours?
"Thus we see, at a glance, that what has been most triumphantly
adduced in support of the idea that the articles bad been 'for at
least three or four weeks' in the thicket, is most absurdly null as
regards any evidence of that fact. On the other hand, it is
exceedingly difficult to believe that these articles could have
remained in the thicket specified, for a longer period than a single
week - for a longer period than from one Sunday to the next. Those
who know any thing of the vicinity of Paris, know the extreme
difficulty of finding seclusion unless at a great distance from its
suburbs. Such a thing as an unexplored, or even an unfrequently
visited recess, amid its woods or groves, is not for a moment to be
imagined. Let any one who, being at heart a lover of nature, is yet
chained by duty to the dust and heat of this great metropolis - let
any such one attempt, even during the weekdays, to slake his thirst
for solitude amid the scenes of natural loveliness which immediately
surround us. At every second step, he will find the growing charm
dispelled by the voice and personal intrusion of some ruffian or
party of carousing blackguards. He will seek privacy amid the densest
foliage, all in vain. Here are the very nooks where the unwashed most
abound - here are the temples most desecrate. With sickness of the
heart the wanderer will flee back to the polluted Paris as to a less
odious because less incongruous sink of pollution. But if the
vicinity of the city is so beset during the working days of the week,
how much more so on the Sabbath! It is now especially that, released
from the claims of labor, or deprived of the customary opportunities
of crime, the town blackguard seeks the precincts of the town, not
through love of the rural, which in his heart he despises, but by way
of escape from the restraints and conventionalities of society. He
desires less the fresh air and the green trees, than the utter
license of the country. Here, at the road-side inn, or beneath the
foliage of the woods, he indulges, unchecked by any eye except those
of his boon companions, in all the mad excess of a counterfeit
hilarity - the joint offspring of liberty and of rum. I say nothing
more than what must be obvious to every dispassionate observer, when
I repeat that the circumstance of the articles in question having
remained undiscovered, for a longer period - than from one Sunday to
another, in any thicket in the immediate neighborhood of Paris, is to
be looked upon as little less than miraculous.
"But there are not wanting other grounds for the suspicion that the
articles were placed in the thicket with the view of diverting
attention from the real scene of the outrage. And, first, let me
direct your notice to the date of the discovery of the articles.
Collate this with the date of the fifth extract made by myself from
the newspapers. You will find that the discovery followed, almost
immediately, the urgent communications sent to the evening paper.
These communications, although various and apparently from various
sources, tended all to the same point - viz., the directing of
attention to a gang as the perpetrators of the outrage, and to the
neighborhood of the BarriΦre du Roule as its scene. Now here, of
course, the suspicion is not that, in consequence of these
communications, or of the public attention by them directed, the
articles were found by the boys; but the suspicion might and may well
have been, that the articles were not before found by the boys, for
the reason that the articles had not before been in the thicket;
having been deposited there only at so late a period as at the date,
or shortly prior to the date of the communications by the guilty
authors of these communications themselves.
"This thicket was a singular - an exceedingly singular one. It was
unusually dense. Within its naturally walled enclosure were three
extraordinary stones, forming a seat with a back and footstool. And
this thicket, so full of a natural art, was in the immediate
vicinity, within a few rods, of the dwelling of Madame Deluc, whose
boys were in the habit of closely examining the shrubberies about
them in search of the bark of the sassafras. Would it be a rash wager
- a wager of one thousand to one -- that a day never passed over the
heads of these boys without finding at least one of them ensconced in
the umbrageous hall, and enthroned upon its natural throne? Those who
would hesitate at such a wager, have either never been boys
themselves, or have forgotten the boyish nature. I repeat -- it is
exceedingly hard to comprehend how the articles could have remained
in this thicket undiscovered, for a longer period than one or two
days; and that thus there is good ground for suspicion, in spite of
the dogmatic ignorance of Le Soleil, that they were, at a
comparatively late date, deposited where found.
"But there are still other and stronger reasons for believing them so
deposited, than any which I have as yet urged. And, now, let me beg
your notice to the highly artificial arrangement of the articles. On
the upper stone lay a white petticoat; on the second a silk scarf;
scattered around, were a parasol, gloves, and a pocket-handkerchief
bearing the name, 'Marie RogΩt.' Here is just such an arrangement as
would naturally be made by a not over-acute person wishing to dispose
the articles naturally. But it is by no means a really natural
arrangement. I should rather have looked to see the things all lying
on the ground and trampled under foot. In the narrow limits of that
bower, it would have been scarcely possible that the petticoat and
scarf should have retained a position upon the stones, when subjected
to the brushing to and fro of many struggling persons. 'There was
evidence,' it is said, 'of a struggle; and the earth was trampled,
the bushes were broken,' - but the petticoat and the scarf are foun
d
deposited as if upon shelves. 'The pieces of the frock torn out by
the bushes were about three inches wide and six inches long. One part
was the hem of the frock and it had been mended. They looked like
strips torn off.' Here, inadvertently, Le Soleil has employed an
exceedingly suspicious phrase. The pieces, as described, do indeed
'look like strips torn off;' but purposely and by hand. It is one of
the rarest of accidents that a piece is 'torn off,' from any garment
such as is now in question, by the agency of a thorn. From the very
nature of such fabrics, a thorn or nail becoming entangled in them,
tears them rectangularly - divides them into two longitudinal rents,
at right angles with each other, and meeting at an apex where the
thorn enters - but it is scarcely possible to conceive the piece
'torn off.' I never so knew it, nor did you. To tear a piece off from
such fabric, two distinct forces, in different directions, will be,
in almost every case, required. If there be two edges to the fabric -
if, for example, it be a pocket- handkerchief, and it is desired to
tear from it a slip, then, and then only, will the one force serve
the purpose. But in the present case the question is of a dress,
presenting but one edge. To tear a piece from the interior, where no
edge is presented, could only be effected by a miracle through the
agency of thorns, and no one thorn could accomplish it. But, even
where an edge is presented, two thorns will be necessary, operating,
the one in two distinct directions, and the other in one. And this in
the supposition that the edge is unhemmed. If hemmed, the matter is
nearly out of the question. We thus see the numerous and great
obstacles in the way of pieces being 'torn off' through the simple
agency of 'thorns;' yet we are required to believe not only that one
piece but that many have been so torn. 'And one part,' too, 'was the
hem of the frock!' Another piece was 'part of the skirt, not the
hem,' - that is to say, was torn completely out through the agency of
thorns, from the uncaged interior of the dress! These, I say, are
things which one may well be pardoned for disbelieving; yet, taken
collectedly, they form, perhaps, less of reasonable ground for
suspicion, than the one startling circumstance of the articles'
having been left in this thicket at all, by any murderers who had
enough precaution to think of removing the corpse. You will not have
apprehended me rightly, however, if you suppose it my design to deny
this thicket as the scene of the outrage. There might have been a
wrong here, or, more possibly, an accident at Madame Deluc's. But, in
fact, this is a point of minor importance. We are not engaged in an
attempt to discover the scene, but to produce the perpetrators of the
murder. What I have adduced, notwithstanding the minuteness with
which I have adduced it, has been with the view, first, to show the
folly of the positive and headlong assertions of Le Soleil, but
secondly and chiefly, to bring you, by the most natural route, to a
further contemplation of the doubt whether this assassination has, or
has not been, the work of a gang.
"We will resume this question by mere allusion to the revolting
details of the surgeon examined at the inquest. It is only necessary
to say that is published inferences, in regard to the number of
ruffians, have been properly ridiculed as unjust and totally
baseless, by all the reputable anatomists of Paris. Not that the
matter might not have been as inferred, but that there was no ground
for the inference: - was there not much for another?
"Let us reflect now upon 'the traces of a struggle;' and let me ask
what these traces have been supposed to demonstrate. A gang. But do
they not rather demonstrate the absence of a gang? What struggle
could have taken place - what struggle so violent and so enduring as
to have left its 'traces' in all directions - between a weak and
defenceless girl and the gang of ruffians imagined? The silent grasp
of a few rough arms and all would have been over. The victim must
have been absolutely passive at their will. You will here bear in
mind that the arguments urged against the thicket as the scene, are
applicable in chief part, only against it as the scene of an outrage
committed by more than a single individual. If we imagine but one
violator, we can conceive, and thus only conceive, the struggle of so
violent and so obstinate a nature as to have left the 'traces'
apparent.
"And again. I have already mentioned the suspicion to be excited by
the fact that the articles in question were suffered to remain at all
in the thicket where discovered. It seems almost impossible that
these evidences of guilt should have been accidentally left where
found. There was sufficient presence of mind (it is supposed) to
remove the corpse; and yet a more positive evidence than the corpse
itself (whose features might have been quickly obliterated by decay,)
is allowed to lie conspicuously in the scene of the outrage - I
allude to the handkerchief with the name of the deceased. If this was
accident, it was not the accident of a gang. We can imagine it only
the accident of an individual. Let us see. An individual has
committed the murder. He is alone with the ghost of the departed. He
is appalled by what lies motionless before him. The fury of his
passion is over, and there is abundant room in his heart for the
natural awe of the deed. His is none of that confidence which the
presence of numbers inevitably inspires. He is alone with the dead.
He trembles and is bewildered. Yet there is a necessity for disposing
of the corpse. He bears it to the river, but leaves behind him the
other evidences of guilt; for it is difficult, if not impossible to
carry all the burthen at once, and it will be easy to return for what
is left. But in his toilsome journey to the water his fears redouble
within him. The sounds of life encompass his path. A dozen times he
hears or fancies the step of an observer. Even the very lights from
the city bewilder him. Yet, in time and by long and frequent pauses
of deep agony, he reaches the river's brink, and disposes of his
ghastly charge - perhaps through the medium of a boat. But now what
treasure does the world hold - what threat of vengeance could it hold
out - which would have power to urge the return of that lonely
murderer over that toilsome and perilous path, to the thicket and its
blood chilling recollections? He returns not, let the consequences be
what they may. He could not return if he would. His sole thought is
immediate escape. He turns his back forever upon those dreadful
shrubberies and flees as from the wrath to come.
"But how with a gang? Their number would have inspired them with
confidence; if, indeed confidence is ever wanting in the breast of
the arrant blackguard; and of arrant blackguards alone are the
supposed gangs ever constituted. Their number, I say, would have
prevented the bewildering and unreasoning terror which I ha
ve
imagined to paralyze the single man. Could we suppose an oversight in
one, or two, or three, this oversight would have been remedied by a
fourth. They would have left nothing behind them; for their number
would have enabled them to carry all at once. There would have been
no need of return.
"Consider now the circumstance that in the outer garment of the
corpse when found, 'a slip, about a foot wide had been torn upward
from the bottom hem to the waist wound three times round the waist,
and secured by a sort of hitch in the back.' This was done with the
obvious design of affording a handle by which to carry the body. But
would any number of men hare dreamed of resorting to such an
expedient? To three or four, the limbs of the corpse would have
afforded not only a sufficient, but the best possible hold. The
device is that of a single individual; and this brings us to the fact
that 'between the thicket and the river, the rails of the fences were
found taken down, and the ground bore evident traces of some heavy
burden having been dragged along it!' But would a number of men have
put themselves to the superfluous trouble of taking down a fence, for
the purpose of dragging through it a corpse which they might have
lifted over any fence in an instant? Would a number of men have so
dragged a corpse at all as to have left evident traces of the
dragging?
"And here we must refer to an observation of Le Commerciel; an
observation upon which I have already, in some measure, commented. 'A
piece,' says this journal, 'of one of the unfortunate girl's
petticoats was torn out and tied under her chin, and around the back
of her head, probably to prevent screams. This was done by fellows
who had no pocket-handkerchiefs.'
"I have before suggested that a genuine blackguard is never without a
pocket-handkerchief. But it is not to this fact that I now especially
advert. That it was not through want of a handkerchief for the
purpose imagined by Le Commerciel, that this bandage was employed, is
rendered apparent by the handkerchief left in the thicket; and that
the object was not 'to prevent screams' appears, also, from the
bandage having been employed in preference to what would so much
Poe, Edgar Allen - The Complete Works of Edgar Allen Poe Page 28