REPORT OF THE PROCEEDINGS
His Lordship having taken his seat, the Prisoner was immediately put into the dock, and addressed by the Clerk of Arraigns in the following terms:
John Jasper, the charge against you is that you did feloniously, wilfully, and with malice aforethought, kill your nephew, Edwin Drood, in the City of Cloisterham, on the night of the 24th of December, 1860. Are you guilty, or not guilty?
The Prisoner: Not guilty.
The Clerk of Arraigns: Will the gentlemen of the Jury please rise, and sit down as I call their names? Mr. George Bernard Shaw, Sir Edward Russell, Dr. W. L. Courtney, Mr. W. W. Jacobs, Mr. Pett Ridge, Mr. Tom Gallon, Mr. Max Pemberton, Mr. Coulson Kernahan, Mr. Edwin Pugh, Mr. William de Morgan, Mr. Arthur Morrison, Mr. Francesco Berger, Mr. Ridgwell Cullum, Mr. Justin Huntly McCarthy, Mr. William Archer, Mr. Thomas Seccombe—you shall well and truly try the Prisoner at the Bar, John Jasper, for the murder of Edwin Drood, and a true verdict give according to the evidence.
Mr. George Bernard Shaw was elected Foreman.
Mr. Walters: I appear for the prosecution, my Lord.
Judge: Mr. Cuming Walters, I think, for the prosecution. Is there anyone with you?
Mr. Matz: I am with him, my Lord.
Mr. Cecil Chesterton: I appear for the defence, my Lord.
Judge: Mr. Chesterton, I think, for the defence. One s, I think. Is anyone with you?
Mr. Crotch: I am, my Lord.
[The Case for the Prosecution.]
Mr. Matz then proceeded to open the case for the prosecution in the following speech:
My Lord and Gentlemen of the Jury—
The case to be tried is one of murder—murder which we shall contend was premeditated, pre-arranged and carried out in a methodical and determined manner.
The Prisoner is John Jasper, Lay Precentor at Cloisterham Cathedral. The Prosecution will set itself to prove that on the night of the 24th December he murdered in that city his nephew Edwin Drood, an Engineer.
The said Edwin Drood was 21 years of age, and for some years was betrothed to Miss Rosa Bud in fulfilment of a dying wish of their respective parents (now deceased).
To this young lady the Prisoner acted as music master, and admittedly was enamoured of her, although he kept this fact secret from Edwin Drood.
On the evening in question—the 24th December—Edwin Drood and Neville Landless—a pupil of the Revd. Septimus Crisparkle—dined together with the Prisoner in his rooms in the Gate House adjoining the Cathedral.
The night was a terribly stormy one. After leaving the Prisoner, some time about midnight, the two young men took a walk to the river to see the effect of the storm onthe water, and returned to the house of the Revd. Septimus Crisparkle in Minor Canon Corner. Here Edwin Drood left his companion, intending to return to his Uncle’s lodgings.
Nothing has been heard or seen of him since.
Gentlemen, it is our painful duty to produce evidence to prove that Edwin Drood was murdered by his Uncle, the Prisoner. We contend that Jasper divested him of his watch and chain and his scarf pin, articles the Prisoner had, on another occasion, explained to the local jeweller he knew Drood to possess. The words he used were that he had “an inventory of them in his mind.”
We contend that Jasper then cast the body of his victim into a vault in the Cathedral precincts, the key of which, or a duplicate, he had previously become possessed of. There had also been placed in the vicinity a quantity of quicklime, and we submit that Jasper, having made some inquiries into its properties, used this for the purpose of removing all traces of the body in the shortest period of time. We submit that he got rid of the watch and chain and scarf pin in the river, either in the hope of disposing of material which the quicklime would not destroy, or to give the impression, should they be found, that the young man was drowned.
We shall in evidence show that the Prisoner hadmotivefor his crime, that he made elaborate preparations for its enactment, and that he succeeded in his terrible deed.
The evidence may be circumstantial only. But circumstantial evidence, I submit, may be extremely strong—as strong indeed as any direct evidence.
We shall show you that all the acts of John Jasper for some time previous to the committal of his atrocious crime were self-incriminatory. Not merely that, but they exhibit his mind working out the very means by which that crime was to be committed.Afterhis terrible deed was accomplished, his actions, to those who observed him closely, also indicated clearly his guilt.
The Prisoner, having made up his mind that, for his own selfish ends Edwin Drood must be killed, first chose the spot best suited to his purpose, and laid methodical plans to secure access to that spot. He paid visits to it in the company of one, Durdles, the Cloisterham stonemason, whom he drugged with doctored wine whilst there, in order that he might acquire secretly the key to a certain vault. He knew where quicklime could be procured without loss of time. He interviewed other persons, and timed the hour and everything else so thoroughly that nothing essential for his purpose was overlooked.
Now, gentlemen, it is necessary to refer briefly to some further facts bearing upon the history of this crime.
Neville Landless, upon whom Jasper cast suspicion of being the murderer, and his sister Helena, were both students in Cloisterham: the brother, a pupil of the Revd. Septimus Crisparkle, and the sister a pupil at Miss Twinkleton’s Academy in the city. They came from Ceylon, where they had been severely ill-treated, and had made several attempts to escape. On each occasion of the flight Helena “dressed as a boy and showed the daring of a man.” Neville, a highly strung and emotional youth, took immediate objection to Drood because of his “air of proprietorship” over Rosa; whilst Helena instinctively disliked Jasper because she saw that he loved Rosa and that Rosa feared him. It is worth noting as a significant fact that at the earliest stage Rosa appealed to Helena for aid and every assistance was promised to her.
A slight quarrel between Edwin Drood and Neville Landless took place in Jasper’s rooms, and undoubtedly Jasper goaded them on by his taunts. On this occasion Jasper gave them some mulled wine which had taken him a long time to mix and compound.They drank to the toast proposed by Jasper and their speech quickly became thick and indistinct, indicating that there was a sinister design in the mixing and compounding. Drood became boastful, and Neville Landless resented his tone, and at the height of the dispute, flung the dregs of his wine at Edwin Drood. Although posing as a Peacemaker Jasper actually fomented the hostility of these two young men. He seemed to delight in it and it enabled him subsequently to report to Crisparkle that Neville was “murderous.” Indeed he went so far as to assert that he “might have laid his dear boy at his feet, and that it was no fault of his that he did not.”
The Revd. Mr. Crisparkle talked with Helena and Neville on the latter’s rash conduct, and he expressed extreme regret and promised to exercise more caution in future. On another occasion Crisparkle visited Jasper, who read to him passages from his diary expressing fears for Drood’s safety. A few days later Drood, at the suggestion of Jasper, wrote and agreed to dine with him and Neville on Christmas Eve at the Gate house, Cloisterham—in order that the two young men should become friends. Their walk after dinner is evidence that this object was fully achieved.
We submit that, the whole plans having thus been prepared, the murder of Edwin Drood took place after the parting of the young men, and that John Jasper and no other was the murderer. In support of this we shall produce evidence to prove that Jasper acted in a highly incriminatory manner.
The next morning whilst great commotion was raging in the vicinity of the cathedral over the damage done by the storm, John Jasper broke into the crowd crying: “Where is my nephew?” as if everybody knew he was missing, whereas no one but the prisoner had any reason to think he was not in the Prisoner’s rooms. He even volunteered the statement that Drood had gone “down to the river last night, withMr. Neville, to look at the storm, and had not been back?” and demanded that Mr. Neville should be called.
These utterances were made to the Revd. Canon, and showed clearly that the murderer felt so confident that he had executed his deed with perfect thoroughness that no fear of discovery need enter his mind. But knowing his nephew was murdered he tried immediately to fix the deed upon another.
I must direct your attention to one other matter. John Jasper, whether guilty or not of murder, is indisputably a hypocrite, leading a double life. Like most criminals he was also capable of foolish mistakes. Had he not killed his “dear boy,” as he called him, he would have made investigations of his whereabouts, he would have refrained from courting inquiries, and would not have excited the hostility of Rosa Bud.
But, gentlemen, most criminals of the John Jasper type, make at least one error in the execution of their crime, which ultimately finds them out. Jasper made his. Having as I have said, divested Edwin Drood of his watch and chain and scarf pin, all the jewellery he was aware Drood had upon his person, he felt safe. But he left, unknown to him, on the person of the young man a valuable gold ring set with rubies and diamonds, and this ring quicklime could not consume. The ring was once the property of Rosa Bud’s mother and had been handed to Edwin Drood by Mr. Grewgious, Rosa Bud’s guardian, with strict instructions that he should give it to Rosa if he intended to marry her, or return it to Mr. Grewgious should Edwin and Rosa decide, as seemed likely, to break their betrothal.
This was a faithful promise and was witnessed by one, Bazzard, the clerk to the said Mr. Grewgious.
It so happened that on December 24th the young couple did break off their engagement. Therefore if Drood, by any chance, were now alive, that ring would have beenreturned to Mr. Grewgious, in accordance with his promise. But, gentlemen, it never has been returned, and why? We say because Drood is no longer alive, but dead, and that where the body was hidden after the murder, there that ring was hidden also.
Jasper knew of all the articles that were on the person of Edwin Drood, except that ring. He did not know of that because it had only been handed to Drood on the previous day.
Nor did Jasper know of the breaking off of the betrothal, else would there have been no object in his committing the murder. Evidence will be given that Drood promised Rosa he would not spoil his Uncle’s Christmas festivities by telling him of their decision to part as lovers.
The first time Jasper learnt the fact was on the day following the murder, when he heard it from Mr. Grewgious. He then instantly “gasped, tore his hair, shrieked,” swooned and “fell a heap of torn and miry clothes upon the floor.” From this we infer that the information was unexpected and a shock to him.
Sometime afterwards the Revd. Canon Crisparkle found the watch and chain and scarf pin, when walking near the weir, and he will be called to give evidence on this and other facts.
Now, gentlemen, let me read to you an extract from the diary of Jasper entered after this discovery. It reads thus—
“My dear boy is murdered. The discovery of the watch and shirt pin convinces me that he was murdered on that night, and that his jewellery was taken from him to prevent identification by its means.”
The word “murdered” was frequently in the mind of Jasper at this time, and he made use of it in several phrases in his diary, which clearly demonstrates that he was attempting to create the impression that his nephew was murdered, and, by using the words, hoped to divert attention from himself.
But he became so nervous of what he had written, that he declared to the Revd. Canon that he meant to “burn this year’s diary at the year’s end” and by so doing, as he evidently thought, destroy all evidence of his guilty conscience.
There is one more phase to touch upon.
It is admitted that John Jasper was secretly addicted to opium smoking and frequented a certain opium den in London kept by a person known as the “Princess Puffer.” Whilst under the influence of opium he babbled strangely, moaned, and uttered significant words in the hearing of the opium woman. This woman followed him more than once to Cloisterham and on one of these occasions, the fateful 24th December, she accosted Edwin Drood, and for the price of three and sixpence offered to tell him something. He paid her the money and she asked him first his name, and when he told her Edwin, she wanted to know, “Is the short of that name Eddy?...” Drood answered “It is sometimes called so.” “You be thankful your name is notNed,” she next replied, “because it is a threatened name: a dangerous name.” “Threatened men live long,” he assured her. Her reply was—
“Then Ned—so threatened is he, wherever he may be while I am a-talking to you, deary—should live to all eternity!”
Now, gentlemen, it is a striking and amazing fact that Jasper, and he only, called Edwin Drood “Ned”—the threatened name.
That very night Edwin Drood disappeared, and he has “never revisited the light of the sun.”
A few months passed and no trace of the body of the ill-fated young man having been found, Jasper, feeling he had cleared his way effectively, called at the Nun’s House(Miss Twinkleton’s Academy) one afternoon in the vacation, and taking Rosa unawares made passionate love to her. On being repulsed he vowed vengeance on Neville Landless—the man against whom he had already directed suspicion. So horrified was Rosa, she flew for safety to her guardian Mr. Grewgious at Staple Inn. A strict watch was kept upon Jasper by a person calling himself Mr. Datchery, with the result that he was eventually arrested.
Gentlemen, that is the case put to you as briefly as possible—it is the case you have to try.
We feel confident that the evidence we shall place before you will convince you that the prisoner has committed a foul crime, and that we can safely leave the issue to you. Painful as your duty may be, we look to you to give your verdict faithfully and fearlessly in the interests of justice and your fellow-men.
The Foreman: My Lord, one word. Did I understand the learned gentleman to say that he was going to call evidence?
Mr. Matz: Certainly.
The Foreman: Well, then, all I can say is, that if the learned gentleman thinks the convictions of a British jury are going to be influenced by evidence, he little knows his fellow countrymen!
Judge: At the same time, in spite of this somewhat intemperate observation——[The remainder of his Lordship’s words were inaudible.]
[Evidence of Anthony Durdles.]
Mr. Matz: Call Anthony Durdles.
Usher: Anthony Durdles! [That gentleman immediately entered the witness-box.]
Clerk of Arraigns: The evidence that you shall give before the Court and Jury, shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Mr. Walters: Your name is Durdles?
Witness: Durdles is my name.
Mr. Walters: Do you always call yourself Durdles?
Witness: I do; ’cause my nameisDurdles.
Mr. Walters: You are a stonemason, I believe?
Witness: Ay; Durdles is a stonemason.
Mr. Walters: Would you mind telling us where you work?
Witness: Durdles works anywhere he can, up and down, round about the Cathedral.
Mr. Walters: Round about the Cathedral. Thank you. Very good. Do you happen to know the prisoner, John Jasper?
Witness: Ay; I knows John Jarsper.
Mr. Walters: And did you ever happen to meet him anywhere near the Cathedral?
Witness: Yes; Durdles met Mister Jarsper near the Cathedral.
Mr. Walters: Perhaps you met him more than once?
Witness: Twice.
Mr. Walters: You met him twice. What did you go with him to the Cathedral for?
Witness: Well, sir; he——
Mr. Walters: Yes: speak up, please.
Judge: I must interpose. The witness cannot possibly know what Mr. Jasper went to the Cathedral for.
Mr. Walters: My Lord, with respectful submission to you, the prisoner might have told him.
Judge: But for that purpose you must examine the prisoner in chief.
Mr. Walters: I think, my Lord, that you will find a conversation took place between Durdles and the prisoner, and that I am perfectly justified in asking what the conversation was.
Judge: Yes; I think so.
Mr. Walters(to witness): Let us know what the conversation was between you and Mr. Jasper.
Witness: He says to me, “Is there anything new in the crypt?” and I says, “Anything new! Anything old, you mean.”
Mr. Walters: Yes?
Witness: Yes.
Mr. Walters: What happened then?
Witness: We went down in the crypt, and he give me a drink out of his bottle. Fine stuff it was, too.
Mr. Walters: And what about that bundle which I believe you carried?
Witness: He asked me if he could carry my bundle.
Mr. Walters: Yes?
Witness: Ay.
Mr. Walters: What was in your bundle?
Witness: Durdles knows what was in his bundle. Keys, among other things.
Mr. Walters: Oh, keys. And I suppose you let him carry your bundle?
Witness: I did. Well, I had another drink out of his bottle.
Mr. Walters: Did you happen on that occasion to see any quicklime lying about?
Witness: Well, there’s always quicklime lying about the crypt. Always.
Mr. Walters: You noticed it. Did Jasper happen to notice it?
Witness: He did. He asked me what it was for.
Mr. Walters: Oh, he asked you what it was for. And did you tell him?
Witness: Yes; I told him it ’ud burn anything; burn your boots, and with a little handy stirring, it ’ud burn your bones.
Mr. Walters: It would burn your bones with handy stirring. And when he put that curious question to you, did it occur to you there was a reason for it?
Witness: Durdles thinks everybody ’as a reason for everything they says and does.
Mr. Walters: When he asked you would that quicklime burn, you thought he must have a reason for it?
Witness: Yes; so I did.
Mr. Walters: People use quicklime for quite innocent purposes, I believe, don’t they?
Witness: Yes.
Mr. Walters: They use it for cement?
Witness: Yes.
Mr. Walters: What else do they use it for?
Witness: Bodies.
Mr. Walters: Did you think, by the way he was making his inquiries, that he wanted to know if it would burn something else besides ordinary stuff?
Witness: I didn’t think as ’ow he wanted a heap of quicklime to burn his waste paper with.
Mr. Walters: What happened next? You had a drink out of the bottle, and you had a little talk: what happened then? Did you go home?
Witness: No; I fell asleep.
Mr. Walters: Oh, you fell asleep?
Witness: Yes.
Mr. Walters: Anything else?
Witness: I had a dream.
Mr. Walters: You had a dream before you woke up?
Witness: Yes.
Mr. Walters: What was the nature of that dream?
Witness: I dreamt that Mister Jarsper was a-moving around me, handling my keys, and I thought I was left alone in the dark. Then I see a light coming back, and then I found Mr. Jarsper waking me up, saying “Hi! wake up!”
Mr. Walters: Did you wake up?
Witness: Yes.
Mr. Walters: Did you remember how long you had been asleep?
Witness: A long time. I remember the clock struck two.
Mr. Walters: And you went in about midnight?
Witness: Yes.
Mr. Walters: You had two hours’ sleep?
Witness: Yes, I suppose so.
Mr. Walters: Anything else? Did you notice anything?
Witness: When I woke up, I sees my key on the ground, and I says, “I dropped you, did I?” So I picks it up, and asks Mister Jarsper for my bundle.
Mr. Walters: Did he give it to you?
Witness: Yes.
Mr. Walters: I think you had on that occasion a little conversation about a curious art of yours—tapping the tombs?
Witness: Yes; oh, yes—yes.
Mr. Walters: Would you mind telling the court?
Witness: I told him, with my little hammer I could tap and go on tapping, and I could tell whether anything was solid or whether it was hollow. For instance, I says, “Tap, tap, old ’un crumbled up in stone coffin in the vault!”
Mr. Walters: That’s what you said, is it?
Witness: Yes.
Mr. Walters: And what did Mr. Jasper say to that?
Witness: He said it was wonderful, and I says, “No; I ain’t going to take it as a gift, ’cause it’s all out o’ my own head.”
Mr. Walters: I understand you told him what you could do by tapping the walls—tell whether it was hollow or solid?
Witness: Yes, Durdles can tell whether it’s hollow or solid by its tap.
Mr. Walters: Was he interested in your conversation?
Witness: Very much, sir.
Mr. Walters: Did you happen to notice the Sapsea tomb?
Witness: Durdles knows the Sapsea tomb.
Mr. Walters: There is only one body in that tomb at present?
Witness: Yes.
Mr. Walters: Did you tap the Sapsea tomb with your hammer, and did it sound surprising there?
Witness: It sounded more solid than usual.
Mr. Walters: Since then, you have tapped it lately, and it sounds a little more solid?
Witness: Yes.
Mr. Chesterton: This is contrary to an understanding. This is a formal witness, not to be cross-examined.
Mr. Walters: Very well, I will go on. (To witness.) Did you meet him at another time?
Mr. Chesterton: This is only formal evidence.
Judge: What is the point?
Mr. Chesterton: You will find before you, my Lord, a document, and you will find there that certain witnesses who are to be cross-examined at length will be free to go beyond certain admitted evidence. The formal witnesses are not to do so.
Judge(after perusing the “Conditions”): Yes, I think I take your point, Mr. Chesterman—or Chesterton—whatever it is. The point, I understand, is that you are cross-examining this witness as if he were a principal witness of the trial.
Mr. Chesterton: In the second paragraph I think you will notice——
Mr. Walters: It is not of great importance to me.
Judge: One moment: I will see. (After reading the paragraph referred to.) I think you are justified up to the point to which you have gone, but I should recommend you to terminate it with some rapidity.
Mr. Walters: I only want to ask one question. (To witness.) You did have a conversation with Mr. Datchery?
Witness: Yes.
Mr. Chesterton: I ask you to say, my Lord, that the Jury must entirely disregard the statement about the tapping.
The Foreman: How are we to dismiss it from our minds, my Lord? It is a very difficult point.
Mr. Walters: I think I shall leave the Jury to draw their own conclusions. All I want to know from Durdles is, did he have a conversation with Datchery?
Witness: Yes.
Mr. Walters: Thank you. That is all.
Witness: Thank you, sir. I’ll drink your health on the way home, p’raps twice, and I won’t go home till morning.
[Durdles Cross-examined.]
Mr. Crotch: One moment, please.
Witness: Oh, beg pardon, sir, beg pardon.
Mr. Crotch: Now, Durdles, you know all about the destructive qualities of quicklime?
Witness: Yes.
Mr. Crotch: Do you say that quicklime will not destroy metals?
Witness: No; I don’t think quicklime will destroy metals.
Mr. Crotch: You don’t think it will?
Witness: No, I knows it won’t.
Mr. Crotch: Now, Durdles——
Judge: I must ask you to address the witness in more respectful terms, such as “Mr.” Durdles.
Mr. Crotch: Very well, my Lord.
Witness:MisterDurdles, sir.
Mr. Crotch(to witness): I understand you were employed round about the Cathedral, and that you know all about the crypt?
Witness: Yes, sir.
Mr. Crotch: Now, tell me what was the state of the windows in 1860.
Witness: Ay?
Mr. Crotch: I put it to you again. In what state were the windows of the crypt in 1860?
Witness: Do you mean clean or dirty?
Mr. Crotch: I put it to you they were in a very broken condition?
Witness: Yes, sir; always broken.
Mr. Crotch: As a matter of fact, they were not only broken, weren’t they, but partially boarded up?
Witness: Well, I can’t remember, sir.
Mr. Crotch: Can’t remember! You were constantly in the crypt!
Witness: Some of ’em.
Mr. Crotch: How many windows are there?
Witness: I don’t know.
Mr. Walters: I don’t suppose the witness is expected to count windows!
Witness: Thank you, sir.
Mr. Crotch: Well, now, Mr. Durdles, I will ask you another question. As a matter of fact, have you not on many occasions chased little boys and others out of the crypt?
Witness: Yes, and they’ve chased me.
Mr. Crotch: Where did these boys find their way into the crypt?
Witness: Ay?
Mr. Crotch: You don’t know?
Witness: No, I don’t.
Mr. Crotch: You swear you don’t know?
Witness: Ay, I swear I don’t know.
Mr. Crotch: You have never seen them creeping through the windows of the crypt?
Witness: Might be; when I’ve been sober.
Mr. Crotch: That’ll do. Now, you tell us that you met Mr. Datchery. Is that so?
Witness: Yes.
Mr. Crotch: Have you ever admitted Mr. Datchery to the Sapsea vault?
Mr. Walters: This is going far beyond—
Mr. Chesterton: If my learned friend will look at the first paragraph he will see that in cross-examination the formal witnesses may, in response to specific questions, give explanations not expressly contained in the book.
Mr. Walters: Then I must re-examine the witness.
Mr. Chesterton: Certainly.
Mr. Crotch: Now, Mr. Durdles, have you ever admitted Mr. Datchery to the Sapsea vault?
Witness: Not that I can remember.
Mr. Crotch: If you cannot remember admitting Datchery, do you at any time remember admitting anybody else?
Witness: No; I can’t say as I do.
Mr. Crotch: Thank you, Mr. Durdles.
Mr. Walters: I won’t trouble you to re-examine you, Mr. Durdles.
Witness: Well, good day. I’ll drink your health on the way home, and I won’t go home till morning—I beg your pardon, my Lord.
[Evidence of Reverend Canon Crisparkle.]
Mr. Walters: The Reverend Canon Crisparkle.
Usher: Reverend Canon Crisparkle.
[That gentleman responded to the call, and entering the witness box, was duly sworn.]
The Foreman: May I interpose for a moment? This gentleman has been called as the Reverend Septimus Crisparkle. I submit to your Lordship that his real name is Christopher Nubbles, a man who was tried before you on the information of a certain Mr. Chuckster, on the charge of being a snob, and you, in one of those summings-up which have made your name famous wherever the English language is spoken, found that the charge brought by Mr. Chuckster was well and truly proved. Now, I contend that Mr. Christopher Nubbles has gone to Cloisterham, become a Minor Canon, taken the name of Crisparkle, and is here obviously a more intolerable snob than ever.
Mr. Walters: Mr. Crisparkle; I believe you are a Minor Canon of Cloisterham Cathedral?
Witness: I am, sir.
Mr. Walters: I believe your identity has never been disputed until this moment?
Witness: Never. I am glad to be able to answer that impertinent reflection.
Mr. Walters: Do you happen to know John Jasper?
Witness: Very well. He was associated with me daily in the duties of the Cathedral.
Mr. Walters: Did he ever tell you about his affection for his nephew, Edwin Drood?
Witness: Constantly.
Mr. Walters: And did he, while in this confidential mood, also tell you of his great affection for Miss Rosa Bud?
Witness: No, I cannot charge my memory that he ever mentioned affection for her.
Mr. Walters: Well, then, in that matter John Jasper deceived you?
Witness: Well, shall we say deceived? Guilty of a lapse of confidence to a priest. Theologically speaking it would be deceit, perhaps.
Mr. Walters: I believe, Mr. Crisparkle, that you have been acting as tutor to Neville Landless?
Witness: Yes.
Mr. Walters: Do you mind telling the court the opinion you formed of that man’s character?
Witness: I should say a very impulsive man, but responsive to influence of any kind.
Mr. Walters: I think he has a sister?
Witness: Oh, yes: Miss Helena Landless.
Mr. Walters: Is he under her influence at all?
Witness: Yes, I should say she exercises a good and strong influence upon him.
Judge: I should suggest that question is very improper. We are all under the influence of each other to a great extent. I am as much under the influence of the foreman of the Jury that I almost entirely agree with the view that he takes of the situation when he mentions it. But I think it is not quite proper to say “Is he under the influence of his sister?” Surely?
Mr. Walters: But, my Lord, this gentleman knows both parties, and is perfectly acquainted with their relationships.
Witness: Yes, well.
Judge: I——
Mr. Walters: I will not press the point. I will ask you, Mr. Crisparkle, have you any influence?
Witness: Is that proper, my Lord?
Judge: Quite proper.
Witness: I should say I have done my best. I have talked to him from time to time and found him very anxious to profit by any words I was able to say.
Mr. Walters: You said he was impetuous. Perhaps he has one or two little faults of that sort. Would you regard them as dangerous?
Witness: No, no; oh no. The faults of an undisciplined boy.
Mr. Walters: Has he any good qualities?
Witness: Many, which appear to me to far outweigh the others.
Mr. Walters: Suppose Neville Landless had a little quarrel with another young man. Would you attach much importance to it?
Witness: No, I think not: very little, I think. Hot-tempered youth—soon over. He would be the first to regret it.
Mr. Walters: Did you know Edwin Drood?
Witness: Yes.
Mr. Walters: And you heard of a quarrel between him and Neville Landless?
Witness: Yes.
Mr. Walters: Who told you about that quarrel?
Witness: Well, in the first instance, Neville Landless mentioned it to me when he came back to my house. He said he had made a bad beginning and was sorry. But immediately afterwards John Jasper came to the house, and gave me what I am bound to say was a very different account indeed.
Mr. Walters: This is the John Jasper who had already deceived you?
Witness: Who had perhaps misled me by suppression.
Mr. Walters: He was the John Jasper who was Edwin Drood’s rival for Rosa Bud?
Witness: It would appear so.
Mr. Walters: You say he gave a strong account of the quarrel—Is that correct?
Witness: It is more than correct. He said, when he came into the room, that he had had an awful time with him. I said, “Surely not as bad as that!” and he said “Murderous—murderous!”
Mr. Walters: Are you sure he used the word “Murderous”?
Witness: I am absolutely certain.
Mr. Walters: What did you say to that?
Witness: I said, “I must beg you not to use quite such strong language.” He continued to use even stronger terms. He said there was something tigerish in Neville’s blood. He was afraid he would have struck his dear boy, as he called him, down at his feet.
Mr. Walters: You are quite sure those were his words?
Witness: Absolutely.
Mr. Walters: And I suppose, following on that, you asked for an explanation from Neville? Did you have any conversation with him?
Witness: Yes, a long conversation with him in company with his sister.
Mr. Walters: Was Jasper satisfied with the explanation given to him?
Witness: No, I’m afraid not. A few days afterwards, when I was endeavouring to make peace between the two combatants, and arranged a meeting, Jasper took the opportunity to show me his diary, in which he had written his fears and suspicions in regard to his dear boy’s safety.
Mr. Walters: Fears and suspicions?
Witness: That was the phrase.
Mr. Walters: May we take it then, that this man was always harping on danger and using the word “Murder,” and influencing your mind against Neville Landless?
Witness: I am afraid that was the impression which I derived.
Mr. Walters: Was that the impression left in your mind after the conversation with John Jasper?
Witness: Yes.
Mr. Walters: I think you know that on the Christmas Eve following, there was a friendly little party?
Witness: Yes; I was instrumental in arranging it.
Mr. Walters: Following on that, Neville Landless was, on the following day, to start on a walking expedition?
Witness: Yes.
Mr. Walters: Did he tell you all about it?
Witness: Oh, yes.
Mr. Walters: He was quite frank?
Witness: Quite frank.
Mr. Walters: Did he start to carry out his plans?
Witness: He started.
Mr. Walters: On the Christmas morning, early?
Witness: Yes.
Mr. Walters: Do you remember that Christmas Eve?
Witness: Perfectly.
Mr. Walters: Why?
Witness: Especially because of the beauty of Evensong that day. John Jasper was in splendid voice that day, and I congratulated him when he came out of the Cathedral. I said he must be in very good health.
Mr. Walters: Very good health: did he say anything?
Witness: He said hewasin very good health, and that the black humours werepassing from him, and that he would have to burn his diary—consign it to the flames—that was the phrase.
Mr. Walters: He also laughed?
Witness: He went laughing up the postern gate.
Mr. Walters: Do you mind telling us whether laughing was common with John Jasper.
Witness: No.
Mr. Walters: In short, you thought it an exceptional piece of good humour?
Witness: Yes; he made that impression on me.
Mr. Walters: Do you remember what sort of night it was?
Witness: A terrible night of storm.
Mr. Walters: Let us get on to the next morning. The next morning what happened?
Witness: Before I was about, while I was still in my dressing room, I was aware of a great noise at my gate, and there I saw John Jasper, insufficiently attired, crying very loudly to me in the house. I looked out, and asked what was the matter, and he said, “Where is my nephew?” Naturally, I said to him, “Why should you ask me?” and he said, “Last evening, very late, he went down to the river to see the storm, in company with Mr. Neville Landless,” since when nothing had been heard of him. And then he said, “Call Mr. Neville.” I told him Neville had already started.
Mr. Walters: When this conversation took place between you and John Jasper, did it occur to you that he was dazed, as if suffering from the effect of drugs?
Witness: No.
Mr. Walters: Did it strike you that he was particularly clear-headed?
Witness: I think so. Yes: he was very clear-headed.
Mr. Walters: Was he concise and clear in his remarks?
Witness: Yes, perfectly clear.
Mr. Walters: If anybody told you he was suffering from the effect of drugs, or was dazed or bewildered, would your observation bear that out?
Witness: No, indeed.
Mr. Walters: What did you do in respect of Mr. Neville?
Witness: We sent some men after him, and Mr. Jasper and I followed. Directly we came up with him, Jasper said, “Where is my nephew?” and Neville said, “Why do you ask me?”
Mr. Walters: What did Jasper say?
Witness: He said, “He was last seen in your company”—or words to that effect.
Mr. Walters: When he said that, what sort of impression did it cause on you? What did you think it meant?
Witness: I am sorry to say I had the unpleasant impression that he meant to suggest that Neville Landless was in some way responsible for Drood’s disappearance.
Mr. Walters: Once more he was suggesting murder?
Witness: Yes, that was the impression.
Mr. Walters: And once more suggesting that Neville Landless was the murderer?
Witness: That was so, undoubtedly.
Mr. Walters: This man, Neville Landless, with this terrible charge hanging over him; did he come back readily?
Witness: Yes.
Mr. Walters: Did he answer any questions put to him?
Witness: Quite frankly.
Mr. Walters: Some time afterwards, you made a discovery, I think. Would you mind telling the Court what it was?
Witness: I was walking along by the river, some two miles above where these young men had gone for their walk—by the weir, in fact,—when I saw something shining brightly. Looking more closely, I thought it was a jewel. I immediately dived in, being fortunately a good swimmer, and found that it was a gold watch and chain. The chain was hanging on the timbers. Later I found in the mud a gold scarf-pin. The watch had the initials E. D. engraved on it.
Mr. Walters: Did you tell Jasper you had discovered these things?
Witness: At once.
Mr. Walters: Did he say anything about it?
Witness: Nothing at the time, but a few days later, when we were disrobing in the vestry, he showed me the diary to which I have alluded.
Mr. Walters: Did it contain any reference to it?
Witness: I cannot charge my memory with the exact words, but something to this effect—“My poor boy is certainly murdered. The discovery of the watch and scarf-pin leaves that beyond doubt. They were no doubt thrown away to prevent identification of the body”—or words to that effect.
Mr. Walters: One moment, Mr. Crisparkle. Am I right in saying that once more Murder was suggested to you?
Witness: Yes.
Mr. Walters: And that Neville Landless was pointed to as the murderer?
Witness: Yes.
Mr. Walters: And so that would be the impression left on your mind by your conversation with Jasper?
Witness: Yes.
Mr. Walters: Whether it was right or wrong, that would be the impression left?
Witness: Whether right or wrong, that would undoubtedly be the impression.
Mr. Walters: Thank you, Mr. Crisparkle.
The Foreman: May I ask one question, my Lord?
Judge: Certainly.
The Foreman: Do I understand the witness to say that the prisoner was a musician?
Witness: He was, my Lord.
Foreman: His case looks black indeed.
[Canon Crisparkle Cross-examined.]
Mr. Crotch: Canon Crisparkle, you referred to the night of the preliminary quarrel and the return of Neville Landless. Do you remember accusing Neville of intoxication?
Witness: Quite well.
Mr. Crotch: You said, “You are not sober”?
Witness: I did so.
Mr. Crotch: Do you remember his reply?
Witness: He said, “Yes; I am afraid that is true, although I took very little to drink.”
Mr. Crotch: “Although I can satisfy you at another time that I had very little to drink.” I put it, those were the words he used?
Witness: Doubtless.
Mr. Crotch: You said you went down to the weir, which is two miles from the river?
Witness: No; two miles from the point at which Edwin Drood and Neville Landless went down to watch the storm. It is two miles higher up.
Mr. Crotch: And it was there you found the articles you have described?
Witness: That is so.
Mr. Crotch: What was the position of the watch and chain?
Witness: It was adhering to the timbers. Where two timbers crossed, it had become fixed.
Mr. Crotch: As though somebody had gone down with a hammer and nail and hung it up deliberately?
Witness: No, that I would not say.
Mr. Crotch: Was the pin in the mud?
Witness: In the mud.
Mr. Crotch: This was ordinary loose mud?
Witness: Yes, a kind of sludge.
Mr. Crotch: Did you find anything else?
Witness: No.
Mr. Crotch: Nothing else at all?
Witness: No.
Mr. Crotch: Now, Canon Crisparkle, I have just one question of some delicacy to ask. I hope you won’t be offended. Is it not a fact that you are in love with Helena Landless?
Mr. Walters: My lord, my lord, I must object. I think this is a secret to a man’s breast, and my friend has no right to try to get it out.
Witness: My Lord, I have no objection to answer the question. The lady will appear before you shortly, and when you see her you will not be surprised that my heart is a little affected.
Mr. Crotch: Thank you, Canon Crisparkle.
Mr. Walters: Canon Crisparkle, one word please, as to the exact position of the weir. I think you have not been carefully examining the exact position lately? You could not testify whether it was two miles, one mile, or one and a half miles, and would not commit yourself to an actual distance?
Witness: No; we are not in mathematics.
Mr. Walters: If I told you it was a little nearer the Cathedral, you would not dispute it?
Witness: Not for a moment.
Mr. Walters: Thank you, Canon Crisparkle. That will do.
[Evidence of Helena Landless.]
Mr. Walters: Call Helena Landless.
Usher: Helena Landless!
[That lady was conducted to the witness-box, and duly sworn.]
Mr. Walters: What is your name, please?
Witness: Helena Landless.
Mr. Walters: And you have a brother named Neville?
Witness: Yes; a twin brother.
Mr. Walters: Is there a great bond of sympathy between you and your brother?
Witness: A very great bond.
Mr. Walters: Is it so strong that you have an intimate understanding of each other?
Witness: We almost know each other’s thoughts.
Mr. Walters: And I think you are accustomed to exercise influence on him—perhaps to lead him?
Witness: It always has been so.
Mr. Walters: Where did you live when young?
Witness: In Ceylon.
Mr. Walters: With your parents?
Witness: No. My parents died when we were young, and a step-father brought us up.
Mr. Walters: How did he treat you?
Witness: Very badly indeed. He was always cruel and harsh to us.
Mr. Walters: Ever beat you?
Witness: We were whipped like dogs, and we ran away.
Mr. Walters: How old were you when you first ran away?
Witness: Seven.
Mr. Walters: Who suggested running away?
Witness: I did.
Mr. Walters: And did your brother follow you?
Witness: He always followed me.
Mr. Walters: You planned everything?
Witness: I always planned.
Mr. Walters: Weren’t you afraid to run away?
Witness: I was afraid of nothing to be free.
Mr. Walters: What did you do in order to make a flight successful?
Witness: I cut off my hair, and dressed myself as a boy.
Mr. Walters: That needed a great amount of daring?
Witness: Well, the occasion needed all the daring I could command.
Mr. Walters: And when it needs all the daring you can command, you don’t mind daring?
Witness: No.
Mr. Walters: As a matter of fact, you did it, I think, not only for yourself, but for your brother?
Witness: I think more for him than for myself.
Mr. Walters: And you love your brother very much?
Witness: Dearly.
Mr. Walters: Still?
Witness: Yes.
Mr. Walters: Would you do as much again, Miss Landless?
Witness: I would; and more.
Mr. Walters: As much for anybody else you love?
Witness: If I loved them dearly enough.
Mr. Walters: You have lately come to England. When you came, tell us where you resided.
Witness: I went to Miss Twinkleton’s at the Nun’s House, and my brother went to Mr. Crisparkle’s.
Mr. Walters: I believe the Nun’s House is an Academy?
Witness: Yes.
Mr. Walters: Other girls there?
Witness: Yes, several.
Mr. Walters: Miss Rosa Bud there?
Witness: Yes.
Mr. Walters: Ever meet her?
Witness: Yes.
Mr. Walters: Ever become friends with her?
Witness: Yes; very great friends.
Mr. Walters: Did you form an estimate of her character?
Witness: I thought she was a sweet, lovable girl, but shy and timid.
Mr. Walters: Not got your daring?
Witness: No.
Mr. Walters: She was learning music, I think? Who was her tutor?
Witness: John Jasper.
Mr. Walters: Do you remember a party at Canon Crisparkle’s shortly after your arrival?
Witness: On the night of our arrival.
Mr. Walters: Who was there?
Witness: Myself, Miss Twinkleton, and Rosa Bud, and Edwin Drood, and John Jasper.
Mr. Walters: You are sure John Jasper was there?
Witness: Yes; I noticed him particularly.
Mr. Walters: Why?
Witness: Because of his strange manner towards Rosa Bud.
Mr. Walters: How?
Witness: He watched her closely. During the evening she sang to his accompaniment, and his eyes were fixed on her the whole time with a most peculiar expression, and this seemed to trouble Rosa, although she was not looking at him. Suddenly she covered her face with her hands, burst into tears, and said she was frightened and wanted to be taken away.
Mr. Walters: You don’t think it was pure imagination on her part? She was frightened?
Witness: Yes.
Mr. Walters: When people are frightened there is danger about generally. Did you think there was any danger in his looking at her?
Witness: I thought there was danger in his looks.
Mr. Walters: Did you ever speak to her about it?
Witness: Yes. She said she was terrified at him; that he haunted her like a ghost, and that he made secret love to her.
Mr. Walters: And she didn’t like it?
Witness: She begged me to take care of her, and stay with her.
Mr. Walters: Did you promise to do so?
Witness: I said I would protect her.
Mr. Walters: Be very careful. If this man frightened her, would he not equally frighten you?
Witness: In no circumstances.
Mr. Walters: That is because you are a woman of daring?
Witness: I suppose so.
Mr. Walters: If you promised to shield and protect her, you did not content yourself with words. Did you take any action?
Witness: I kept a sort of watch on John Jasper.
Mr. Walters: Why on Jasper?
Witness: Because I felt that he menaced Rosa’s peace and happiness.
Mr. Walters: You thought he was the source of the danger?
Witness: No one but Jasper.
Mr. Walters: Had she any enemies?
Witness: No; she was too sweet and lovable.