better have answered the purpose. But the language of the evidence
speaks of the strip in question as 'found around the neck, fitting
loosely, and secured with a hard knot.' These words are sufficiently
vague, but differ materially from those of Le Commerciel. The slip
was eighteen inches wide, and therefore, although of muslin, would
form a strong band when folded or rumpled longitudinally. And thus
rumpled it was discovered. My inference is this. The solitary
murderer, having borne the corpse, for some distance, (whether from
the thicket or elsewhere) by means of the bandage hitched around its
middle, found the weight, in this mode of procedure, too much for his
strength. He resolved to drag the burthen - the evidence goes to show
that it wasdragged. With this object in view, it became necessary to
attach something like a rope to one of the extremities. It could be
best attached about the neck, where the head would prevent its
slipping off. And, now, the murderer bethought him, unquestionably,
of the bandage about the loins. He would have used this, but for its
volution about the corpse, the hitch which embarrassed it, and the
reflection that it had not been 'torn off' from the garment. It was
easier to tear a new slip from the petticoat. He tore it, made it
fast about the neck, and so dragged his victim to the brink of the
river. That this 'bandage,' only attainable with trouble and delay,
and but imperfectly answering its purpose - that this bandage was
employed at all, demonstrates that the necessity for its employment
sprang from circumstances arising at a period when the handkerchief
was no longer attainable -- that is to say, arising, as we have
imagined, after quitting the thicket, (if the thicket it was), and on
the road between the thicket and the river.
"But the evidence, you will say, of Madame Deluc, (!) points
especially to the presence of a gang, in the vicinity of the thicket,
at or about the epoch of the murder. This I grant. I doubt if there
were not a dozen gangs, such as described by Madame Deluc, in and
about the vicinity of the BarriΦre du Roule at or about the period of
this tragedy. But the gang which has drawn upon itself the pointed
animadversion, although the somewhat tardy and very suspicious
evidence of Madame Deluc, is the only gang which is represented by
that honest and scrupulous old lady as having eaten her cakes and
swallowed her brandy, without putting themselves to the trouble of
making her payment. Et hinc illµ irµ?
"But what is the precise evidence of Madame Deluc? 'A gang of
miscreants made their appearance, behaved boisterously, ate and drank
without making payment, followed in the route of the young man and
girl, returned to the inn about dusk, and recrossed the river as if
in great haste.'
"Now this 'great haste' very possibly seemed greater haste in the
eyes of Madame Deluc, since she dwelt lingeringly and lamentingly
upon her violated cakes and ale - cakes and ale for which she might
still have entertained a faint hope of compensation. Why, otherwise,
since it was about dusk, should she make a point of the haste? It is
no cause for wonder, surely, that even a gang of blackguards should
make haste to get home, when a wide river is to be crossed in small
boats, when storm impends, and when night approaches.
"I say approaches; for the night had not yet arrived. It was only
about dusk that the indecent haste of these 'miscreants' offended the
sober eyes of Madame Deluc. But we are told that it was upon this
very evening that Madame Deluc, as well as her eldest son, 'heard the
screams of a female in the vicinity of the inn.' And in what words
does Madame Deluc designate the period of the evening at which these
screams were heard? 'It was soon after dark,' she says. But 'soon
after dark,' is, at least, dark; and'about dusk' is as certainly
daylight. Thus it is abundantly clear that the gang quitted the
BarriΦre du Roule prior to the screams overheard (?) by Madame Deluc.
And although, in all the many reports of the evidence, the relative
expressions in question are distinctly and invariably employed just
as I have employed them in this conversation with yourself, no notice
whatever of the gross discrepancy has, as yet, been taken by any of
the public journals, or by any of the Myrmidons of police.
"I shall add but one to the arguments against a gang; but this one
has, to my own understanding at least, a weight altogether
irresistible. Under the circumstances of large reward offered, and
full pardon to any King's evidence, it is not to be imagined, for a
moment, that some member of a gang of low ruffians, or of any body of
men, would not long ago have betrayed his accomplices. Each one of a
gang so placed, is not so much greedy of reward, or anxious for
escape, as fearful of betrayal. He betrays eagerly and early that he
may not himself be betrayed. That the secret has not been divulged,
is the very best of proof that it is, in fact, a secret. The horrors
of this dark deed are known only to one, or two, living human beings,
and to God.
"Let us sum up now the meagre yet certain fruits of our long
analysis. We have attained the idea either of a fatal accident under
the roof of Madame Deluc, or of a murder perpetrated, in the thicket
at the BarriΦre du Roule, by a lover, or at least by an intimate and
secret associate of the deceased. This associate is of swarthy
complexion. This complexion, the 'hitch' in the bandage, and the
'sailor's knot,' with which the bonnet-ribbon is tied, point to a
seaman. His companionship with the deceased, a gay, but not an abject
young girl, designates him as above the grade of the common sailor.
Here the well written and urgent communications to the journals are
much in the way of corroboration. The circumstance of the first
elopement, as mentioned by Le Mercurie, tends to blend the idea of
this seaman with that of the 'naval officer' who is first known to
have led the unfortunate into crime.
"And here, most fitly, comes the consideration of the continued
absence of him of the dark complexion. Let me pause to observe that
the complexion of this man is dark and swarthy; it was no common
swarthiness which constituted the sole point of remembrance, both as
regards Valence and Madame Deluc. But why is this man absent? Was he
murdered by the gang? If so, why are there only traces of the
assassinated girl? The scene of the two outrages will naturally be
supposed identical. And where is his corpse? The assassins would most
probably have disposed of both in the same way. But it may be said
that this man lives, and is deterred from making himself known,
through dread of being charged with the murder. This consideration
might be supposed to operate upon him now - at this late period -
since it has been given in evidence that he was seen with Marie - but
it would have had no force at the period of the deed. The first
impulse of an innocent man would have been to announce th
e outrage,
and to aid in identifying the ruffians. This policy would have
suggested. He had been seen with the girl. He had crossed the river
with her in an open ferry-boat. The denouncing of the assassins would
have appeared, even to an idiot, the surest and sole means of
relieving himself from suspicion. We cannot suppose him, on the night
of the fatal Sunday, both innocent himself and incognizant of an
outrage committed. Yet only under such circumstances is it possible
to imagine that he would have failed, if alive, in the denouncement
of the assassins.
"And what means are ours, of attaining the truth? We shall find these
means multiplying and gathering distinctness as we proceed. Let us
sift to the bottom this affair of the first elopement. Let us know
the full history of 'the officer,' with his present circumstances,
and his whereabouts at the precise period of the murder. Let us
carefully compare with each other the various communications sent to
the evening paper, in which the object was to inculpate a gang. This
done, let us compare these communications, both as regards style and
MS., with those sent to the morning paper, at a previous period, and
insisting so vehemently upon the guilt of Mennais. And, all this
done, let us again compare these various communications with the
known MSS. of the officer. Let us endeavor to ascertain, by repeated
questionings of Madame Deluc and her boys, as well as of the omnibus
driver, Valence, something more of the personal appearance and
bearing of the 'man of dark complexion.' Queries, skilfully directed,
will not fail to elicit, from some of these parties, information on
this particular point (or upon others) - information which the
parties themselves may not even be aware of possessing. And let us
now trace the boatpicked up by the bargeman on the morning of Monday
the twenty-third of June, and which was removed from the
barge-office, without the cognizance of the officer in attendance,
and without the rudder, at some period prior to the discovery of the
corpse. With a proper caution and perseverance we shall infallibly
trace this boat; for not only can the bargeman who picked it up
identify it, but the rudder is at hand. The rudder of a sail-boat
would not have been abandoned, without inquiry, by one altogether at
ease in heart. And here let me pause to insinuate a question. There
was no advertisement of the picking up of this boat. It was silently
taken to the barge-office, and as silently removed. But its owner or
employer - how happened he, at so early a period as Tuesday morning,
to be informed, without the agency of advertisement, of the locality
of the boat taken up on Monday, unless we imagine some connexion with
the navy - some personal permanent connexion leading to cognizance of
its minute in interests - its petty local news?
"In speaking of the lonely assassin dragging his burden to the shore,
I have already suggested the probability of his availing himself of a
boat. Now we are to understand that Marie RogΩt was precipitated from
a boat. This would naturally have been the case. The corpse could not
have been trusted to the shallow waters of the shore. The peculiar
marks on the back and shoulders of the victim tell of the bottom ribs
of a boat. That the body was found without weight is also
corroborative of the idea. If thrown from the shore a weight would
have been attached. We can only account for its absence by supposing
the murderer to have neglected the precaution of supplying himself
with it before pushing off. In the act of consigning the corpse to
the water, he would unquestionably have noticed his oversight; but
then no remedy would have been at hand. Any risk would have been
preferred to a return to that accursed shore. Having rid himself of
his ghastly charge, the murderer would have hastened to the city.
There, at some obscure wharf, he would have leaped on land. But the
boat - would he have secured it? He would have been in too great
haste for such things as securing a boat. Moreover, in fastening it
to the wharf, he would have felt as if securing evidence against
himself. His natural thought would have been to cast from him, as far
as possible, all that had held connection with his crime. He would
not only have fled from the wharf, but he would not have permitted
the boat to remain. Assuredly he would have cast it adrift. Let us
pursue our fancies. - In the morning, the wretch is stricken with
unutterable horror at finding that the boat has been picked up and
detained at a locality which he is in the daily habit of frequenting
- at a locality, perhaps, which his duty compels him to frequent. The
next night, without daring to ask for the rudder, he removes it. Now
where is that rudderless boat? Let it be one of our first purposes to
discover. With the first glimpse we obtain of it, the dawn of our
success shall begin. This boat shall guide us, with a rapidity which
will surprise even ourselves, to him who employed it in the midnight
of the fatal Sabbath. Corroboration will rise upon corroboration, and
the murderer will be traced."
[For reasons which we shall not specify, but which to many readers
will appear obvious, we have taken the liberty of here omitting, from
the MSS. placed in our hands, such portion as details the following
up of the apparently slight clew obtained by Dupin. We feel it
advisable only to state, in brief, that the result desired was
brought to pass; and that the Prefect fulfilled punctually, although
with reluctance, the terms of his compact with the Chevalier. Mr.
Poe's article concludes with the following words. - Eds. {*23}]
It will be understood that I speak of coincidences and no more. What
I have said above upon this topic must suffice. In my own heart there
dwells no faith in prµter-nature. That Nature and its God are two, no
man who thinks, will deny. That the latter, creating the former, can,
at will, control or modify it, is also unquestionable. I say "at
will;" for the question is of will, and not, as the insanity of logic
has assumed, of power. It is not that the Deity cannot modify his
laws, but that we insult him in imagining a possible necessity for
modification. In their origin these laws were fashioned to embrace
all contingencies which could lie in the Future. With God all is Now.
I repeat, then, that I speak of these things only as of coincidences.
And farther: in what I relate it will be seen that between the fate
of the unhappy Mary Cecilia Rogers, so far as that fate is known, and
the fate of one Marie RogΩt up to a certain epoch in her history,
there has existed a parallel in the contemplation of whose wonderful
exactitude the reason becomes embarrassed. I say all this will be
seen. But let it not for a moment be supposed that, in proceeding
with the sad narrative of Marie from the epoch just mentioned, and in
tracing to its dΘnouement the mystery which enshrouded her, it is my
covert design to hint at an extension of the parallel, or even to
suggest that the measures adopted in Paris for the discovery of the
assassin of a grisette, or measures founded in any similar
ratiocination, would produce any similar result.
For, in respect to the latter branch of the supposition, it should be
considered that the most trifling variation in the facts of the two
cases might give rise to the most important miscalculations, by
diverting thoroughly the two courses of events; very much as, in
arithmetic, an error which, in its own individuality, may be
inappreciable, produces, at length, by dint of multiplication at all
points of the process, a result enormously at variance with truth.
And, in regard to the former branch, we must not fail to hold in view
that the very Calculus of Probabilities to which I have referred,
forbids all idea of the extension of the parallel: - forbids it with
a positiveness strong and decided just in proportion as this parallel
has already been long-drawn and exact. This is one of those anomalous
propositions which, seemingly appealing to thought altogether apart
from the mathematical, is yet one which only the mathematician can
fully entertain. Nothing, for example, is more difficult than to
convince the merely general reader that the fact of sixes having been
thrown twice in succession by a player at dice, is sufficient cause
for betting the largest odds that sixes will not be thrown in the
third attempt. A suggestion to this effect is usually rejected by the
intellect at once. It does not appear that the two throws which have
been completed, and which lie now absolutely in the Past, can have
influence upon the throw which exists only in the Future. The chance
for throwing sixes seems to be precisely as it was at any ordinary
time - that is to say, subject only to the influence of the various
other throws which may be made by the dice. And this is a reflection
which appears so exceedingly obvious that attempts to controvert it
are received more frequently with a derisive smile than with anything
like respectful attention. The error here involved - a gross error
redolent of mischief - I cannot pretend to expose within the limits
Poe, Edgar Allen - The Complete Works of Edgar Allen Poe Page 29