“Have you formed any theory to account for the facts in this case?” I asked.
“Yes, I have several theories, one of which I especially favor, and I am awaiting with great interest such new facts as may indicate to me which of these theories is probably the correct one.”
“It’s no use your trying to pump him, Berkeley,” said Jervis. “He is fitted with an information valve that opens inward. You can pour in as much as you like, but you can’t get any out.”
Thorndyke chuckled. “My learned friend is, in the main, correct,” he said. “You see, I may be called upon any day to advise on this case, in which event I should feel remarkably foolish if I had already expounded my views in detail. But I should like to hear what you and Jervis make of the case as reported in the newspapers.”
“There now,” exclaimed Jervis, “what did I tell you? He wants to suck our brains.”
“As far as my brain is concerned,” I said, “the process of suction isn’t likely to yield much except a vacuum, so I will resign in favor of you. You are a full-blown lawyer, whereas I am only a simple G.P.”
Jervis filled his pipe with deliberate care and lighted it. Then, blowing a slender stream of smoke into the air, he said:
“If you want to know what I make of the case from that report, I can tell you in one word—nothing. Every road seems to end in a cul-de-sac.”
“Oh, come!” said Thorndyke, “this is mere laziness. Berkeley wants to witness a display of your forensic wisdom. A learned counsel may be in a fog—he very often is—but he doesn’t state the fact baldly; he wraps it up in a decent verbal disguise. Tell us how you arrive at your conclusion. Show us that you have really weighed the facts.”
“Very well,” said Jervis, “I will give you a masterly analysis of the case—leading to nothing.” He continued to puff at his pipe for a time with slight embarrassment, as I thought—and I fully sympathized with him. Finally he blew a little cloud and commenced:
“The position appears to be this: Here is a man seen to enter a certain house, who is shown into a certain room, and shut in. He is not seen to come out, and yet, when the room is next entered, it is found to be empty; and that man is never seen again, alive or dead. That is a pretty tough beginning.
“Now, it is evident that one of three things must have happened. Either he must have remained in that room, or at least in that house, alive; or he must have died, naturally or otherwise, and his body have been concealed; or he must have left the house unobserved. Let us take the first case. This affair happened nearly two years ago. Now, he couldn’t have remained alive in the house for two years. He would have been noticed. The servants, for instance, when cleaning out the rooms, would have observed him.”
Here Thorndyke interposed with an indulgent smile at his junior: “My learned friend is treating the inquiry with unbecoming levity. We accept the conclusion that the man did not remain in the house alive.”
“Very well. Then did he remain in it dead? Apparently not. The report says that as soon as the man was missed, Hurst and the servants together searched the house thoroughly. But there had been no time or opportunity to dispose of the body, whence the only possible conclusion is that the body was not there. Moreover, if we admit the possibility of his having been murdered—for that is what concealment of the body would imply—there is the question: ‘Who could have murdered him?’ Not the servants, obviously, and as to Hurst—well, of course, we don’t know what his relations with the missing man may have been—at least, I don’t.”
“Neither do I,” said Thorndyke. “I know nothing beyond what is in the newspaper report and what Berkeley has told us.”
“Then we know nothing. He may have had a motive for murdering the man or he may not. The point is that he doesn’t seem to have had the opportunity. Even if we suppose that he managed to conceal the body temporarily, still there was the final disposal of it. He couldn’t have buried it in the garden with the servants about; neither could he have burned it. The only conceivable method by which he could have got rid of it would have been that of cutting it up into fragments and burying the dismembered parts in some secluded spots or dropping them into ponds or rivers. But no remains of the kind have been found, as some of them probably would have been by now, so that there is nothing to support this suggestion; indeed, the idea of murder, in this house at least, seems to be excluded by the search that was made the instant the man was missed.
“Then to take the third alternative: Did he leave the house unobserved? Well, it is not impossible, but it would be a queer thing to do. He may have been an impulsive or eccentric man. We can’t say. We know nothing about him. But two years have elapsed and he has never turned up, so that if he left the house secretly he must have gone into hiding and be hiding still. Of course, he may have been the sort of lunatic who would behave in that manner or he may not. We have no information as to his personal character.
“Then there is the
