Chapter 4 mary roger mystery
(Sequel to "Murders at Morgle Road")
The footnotes we now intend to add may seem unnecessary when Mary Roger was first published, but the tragedy on which this novel is based has passed for several years, and adding them now, with a few words about the big picture, seems unnecessary. Easier to read.A young girl, Mary Cecilia Rogers, was murdered near New York.Although her death caused a long-term sensation, by the time this short story was written and published (November 1842), the mystery of the case had remained unsolved.In this article, the author traces the real basic facts of the murder of Mary Rogers in exhaustive detail by telling a story that happened to a Parisian shopgirl, and also describes some minor details.In this way, certain details in the novel can also be applied to the fact in order to find out the truth.
The Mary Roger Mystery was written far away from the scene of the atrocity.No investigative material other than the newspaper provided to the author.In this way, many things that the author can obtain by going to the scene to observe the situation are no longer available.However, one circumstance should also be explained: long after the novel was published, two persons (one of them, Mrs. Deluc) made confessions at different times, which not only fully confirmed the general conclusion, but also absolutely confirmed the All the details contemplated by that conclusion.
There are ideal series of facts parallel to the series of real facts, but it is also difficult to reconcile the two.Ideal series of facts are often modified by people and circumstances to make them seem perfect, but the result is equally imperfect.Such was the case with the Reformation.In place of the protesters came the Lutherans.
— Novaris: "The Moral Perspective"
There are occasional coincidences which seem to have such an accidental character that they seldom fail to astonish even the most sober thinker, and which give rise to a dubious ambiguity about the supernatural—for such coincidences are not acceptable to reason.This emotion, this feeling of half-belief which I have called, has never produced such full power as thought, but it is very difficult to completely overcome it without explaining it in the theory of chance (the term is called "probability prediction").But probability predictions are, by their very nature, purely mathematical, and so we apply unconventional theories, scientifically accurate, to the phantom and spirit of the most elusive conjectures.
We shall find that the extraordinary details which I now make public are, in chronological order, the earliest part of an almost incomprehensible series of coincidences, the continuation and conclusion of which the reader may find in the recent Mary Sethi in New York. Seen in The Leah Rogers Murders.
About a year ago I described some striking features of my friend Sir C. August Dupont in a work called "The Murders of Morgle Road."At that time, I didn't expect to talk about this topic in the future.This description of character is a conjecture of mine, but it is fully confirmed in a succession of curious circumstances which exemplify Dupont's peculiarity.I can give some more examples to testify, but I can't prove anything more.However, I have been more surprised by the astonishing development of events of late, discovering some far-fetched details.It would be strange if I should remain silent about what I saw so long ago after hearing the latest.
After the tragic end of the tragic death of Madame Les Pinnailles and her daughter, Sir Dupont mentally forgot the incident, and resumed his habits of melancholy meditation.I, who have always been inclined to meditate, immediately adapted to his temper and continued to stay in the room in Saint-Germain, peacefully sleeping in the moment, weaving the dull world around me into one after another fantasy dream .
But the fantasy is not undisturbed.It is easy to assume that the Parisian police were not impressed by my friend's part in the Rue Morgue scene.For them, DuPont has become a well-known name.Dupont hadn't even explained the essence of the naive reasoning he used to solve the mystery to Director Ge or anyone else—except me.It is not surprising, of course, that the situation was regarded as something of a miracle, or that Sir's analytical powers were the result of intuition.When others asked about this matter, his straightforward personality might allow him to correct other people's prejudices, but his lazy temper did not want him to be further agitated by topics that he had long lost interest in, so he became the policeman's attention. center of.The Police Department had drawn him to several cases, most notably the murder of a young girl named Mary Roger.
The incident took place about two years after the Morgue Road atrocity.Mary was the only daughter of the widow Estelle Roger.Her first and surname might have been immediately noticeable because of their resemblance to the unfortunate "cigar girl."The father died when the girl was an infant, and the mother and daughter lived together in the San Andre district until about eighteen months before the murder of which we are speaking.The old lady was served by Mary, and lived in a pension there until Mary was twenty-two.At that time the girl's astonishing beauty caught the attention of a perfumer.The man runs a shop in the underground shopping mall of the palace, and the main customers are the aggressive adventurers who haunt the vicinity.M. Le Blanc understood the advantage of having the beautiful Marie work in a perfume shop.The girl eagerly accepted his favorable terms, although the old lady hesitated too much.
Translator's Note: The "Penguin Edition" on which this translation is based has made a series of annotations, combining the "Cigar Girl" murder that actually happened in New York and the "Perfume Girl" murder that occurred in Paris as imagined by Edgar Allan Poe's novel. The names of people, places, events and circumstances corresponding to each other are annotated.Edgar Allan Poe's novel is actually based on this case in New York.Readers can analyze this novel as the "Cigar Girl" case in New York.Interestingly, the New York Police Department actually solved the "Cigar Girl" case in New York according to Edgar Allan Poe's analysis of the "Perfume Girl" case in this novel.Edgar Allan Poe did not have a police experience, which is a unique story in the history of literature.
What the shopkeeper had expected happened, and his shop immediately became famous for the charm of its lively shop girls.The girl, who had been with him for about a year, suddenly disappeared from the shop, baffled those who liked her.Mr. Le Blanc could not explain why she disappeared, but Mrs. Roger was anxious, frightened, and almost mad.The newspapers immediately picked up on the subject, and the police were ready to investigate seriously, but one fine morning a week later, Mary returned, unharmed, though slightly gloomy.She went to work at the counter in the perfume shop.Of course, except for inquiries of a private nature, all investigations were immediately stopped.M. Le Blanc was as clueless as ever.Mary and the old lady gave the same answer to all inquiries: they spent last week at a relative's house in the country.Things quieted down like this, and were largely forgotten.And the girl, apparently in order to avoid the trouble of curiosity, at last broke up with the perfumer and took refuge at her mother's house in the San André district.
About five months after returning home, her friends were again horrified by her sudden disappearance.Three days passed without news, and on the fourth day, her body was found floating on the Seine, somewhere on the opposite bank in the Saint-André district, not far from the remote residential area of Luermen.
The case was immediately confirmed as a homicide.Because of the cruelty of the method, the young beauty of the victim, especially her previous fame, the sentimental Parisians were extremely moved.I cannot recall another occasion in which I have seen an event which produced such a general tense effect.Whenever this high-profile topic was brought up for weeks, people often forgot even the big political issues of the day.Unusual efforts were made by the police department, and the Paris police were of course ordered to devote all their efforts to solving the case.
The investigation began as soon as the body was discovered, and it was believed that the murderer would not be able to get away with it for long.A week passed before I felt the need to offer a reward.Even then the reward was no more than a thousand francs.During this period of time, the investigation was very hard, although not necessarily all of them used their brains.Many people have been investigated aimlessly, and public outrage is increasing dramatically as the mystery remains unsolved.Ten days passed, and I felt that the bounty should be doubled.The second week finally passed, still nothing.The perennial prejudice against the police in Paris gave rise to several serious incidents at this time, and the police prefect took it upon himself to put "in order to catch the murderer" (if more than one person was involved, "only one of them must be caught) ’) mentions twenty thousand francs.While announcing the reward, it also promised complete immunity from criminal responsibility for those who came forward to expose the accomplices.An additional proclamation from the Town Council is posted where each bounty proclamation appears.In addition to the director's reward, an additional reward of ten thousand francs was added.In this way, the total bounty reached thirty thousand.Considering the low status of the girl and the frequency of such atrocities in a big city, this number is quite unusual.
No one now doubted that the murder case could be solved quickly, but although a few persons who might have helped to clarify the case were arrested, no evidence was found to establish the suspect, and they had to be released again.The strange thing is that three weeks have passed since the body was discovered, but no clues have been found.However, the incident, which aroused public outrage, did not reach the ears of Dupont and I, because we were absorbed in a study at the time, our attention was attracted, and we did not go out for almost a month. He meets with guests and glances at the editorials of the daily newspaper.The first person to bring news of the murder was Director Ge himself. He came to visit us very early in the afternoon on July 13, 18××, and sat with us until late.He was very troubled, because all his methods of pursuing the murderer failed.His reputation—he said with that characteristic Parisian air—was at stake, and even his honor was at stake.The eyes of the public were on him.In order to solve this mysterious case, he is willing to make any sacrifice.He ended the somewhat dull conversation with his happy admiration of DuPont's alleged strategy, and then cut straight to the point and offered DuPont a deal that must have been considered lucrative.The exact nature of that transaction I felt free to reveal, but the subject of its conversation did not concern me.
My friend rebuffed the compliment as best he could, but immediately accepted his deal, though the benefits were of a wholly temporary nature.As soon as the question was decided, the Superintendent began to explain his point of view, interspersed with his tirades on the evidence—though there was little evidence yet.He made many discourses, no doubt profound, and I added a sentence or two here and there as the night and sleepiness deepened.Du Pont sat firmly in the armchair he usually sat in, with a look of listening attentively.He wore glasses throughout the conversation, and an occasional glance behind the green lenses was enough to convince me that he was sleeping soundly during the leaden seven or eight footsteps before the Superintendent left, because he didn't make a sound. throat.
In the morning I went to the police station to fetch a full report of all the evidence, and went to the newspaper offices to buy the decisive papers which covered the tragic event from beginning to end.Excluding the parts that have been completely denied, the general content of the pile of materials is as follows:
On Sunday, June 22, 18, at about nine o'clock in the morning, Mary Roger left her mother's home on Pavel Road in the San Andreas.On going out she told Jacques Eustache (and only to him) that she was going to spend Sunday with her aunt in the Rue Drome.Drome Street is short and narrow, but densely populated, not far from the river, and the shortest distance from Mrs. Roger's pension is about two miles by the straightest road.Eustache, Marie's accepted suitor, also lived in the pension and dined there.He had originally planned to pick up his fiancée at dusk, but it rained heavily that afternoon. He thought she would spend the night at his aunt's house (as she had done in previous similar situations), and he felt that there was no need to keep the promise.As the night deepened, Mrs. Roger, who was in her seventies and frail, was heard expressing concern: "I'm afraid I'll never see Mary again." But no one paid attention to her words at the time.
On Monday, the fact that the girl did not go to the Rue Drome was established.A day passed without any news.Randomly searched in several places in and around the city.On the fourth day of her disappearance, no definite news about her has been found.On this day (Wednesday, June 25th) a Mr. Poway and his friends were investigating Mary's case near Luermen.It was on the banks of the Seine, facing the Rue de Pavel in the Saint-André district.He heard that some fishermen had just found a body floating in the river and dragged it to the bank.When Poway saw the corpse, he hesitated for a moment before confirming that it was the "Perfume Girl".His friend recognized it a little faster than he did.
The face of the corpse was covered with stained red blood, some of which flowed from the mouth, and the foam that drowned people often had was not found; the skin tissue was not discolored; there were bruises and finger marks on the throat; the arms were stiff and bent over the chest ; right hand gripped, left hand partially relaxed; left wrist with two circular contusions, evidently caused by two ropes or several strands of one rope bound; part of right wrist and whole back severely contused, especially on both shoulder blades above; in order to pull the corpse to the shore, the fisherman tied the corpse with a rope, but not all the contusions of the corpse were caused by this; the neck muscles were severely swollen, there were no obvious wounds, and there were no bruises from blows; around the neck A strap was found, fastened so tightly that it was completely sunk in the flesh and out of sight, tied behind the left ear in a knot which alone would have been fatal.The autopsy confidently determined the deceased's virginity status, noting that she had been subjected to brutal violence.The condition of the body at the time of discovery did not present difficulties for relatives and friends to identify it.
The clothes were badly damaged and messy. There was a strip of the coat about a foot wide, which was torn from the hem to the waist without breaking. It was wrapped around the waist three times and tied with a knot at the back.The linen under the coat was muslin, from which another eighteen-inch strip was torn--teared carefully and flat, and tied loosely around the neck, fastened with a knot.There is also a toque cord at the neck.The hat hangs on a rope.The knot in the milliner's cord is not made by women, but is a slipknot, or sailor's knot.
After the body was identified, it was not sent to the morgue as usual (this is a redundant form), but was rushed into the soil not far from the shore.It took a lot of effort for Poway to calm the matter down as much as possible.A few days passed without much public emotion, but a weekly paper finally seized on the subject and the body was exhumed for a second examination.But no new discoveries were made beyond what had already been noted.But this time I showed the clothes to my mother and relatives and friends, and fully confirmed that they were the ones the girl wore when she left home.
At this point people's agitation is growing over time.A few people were caught and released again.Eustache in particular was met with suspicion.At first he could not explain where he was on the Sunday that Mary left the house, and then he delivered a sworn statement to the superintendent, clearly explaining his actions every hour of that day.As time passed without new discoveries, a thousand contradictory rumors circulated.Reporters were busy coming up with ideas.The most notable of these was the claim that Marie Roger was alive, and that the body found on the Seine was another unlucky person.I should introduce the few paragraphs of text that express their meaning to readers. They are literal translations from a very well-run newspaper "Star".
On the morning of Sunday, June 22, 18, Miss Roger left her mother's house, it is said, to visit her aunt or other relatives in the Rue De Long, and she has not been seen since.She was totally lost, never heard from...no one came forward to claim to have seen her after she left her mother's house that day...so we have no evidence that Miss Roger was alive after nine o'clock on Sunday, June 22nd, but It can also be proven that she was alive until then.By twelve o'clock on Wednesday morning, a woman's body was found floating beside the banks of the Luermen.Even if we assume that Mary Roger was thrown into the river less than three hours after she left her mother's house, it would have been no more than three days—to the exact hour.But even assuming she had been killed, it would be foolish to assume that the time of killing was long enough for the murderer to throw the body into the river before midnight.Those who commit such horrific crimes choose night over day... so we know that if the body found in the river is indeed Mary Roger, she will only be in the water for two days Half, up to three days.All experience shows that a drowned body, or a body thrown into water immediately after a violent murder, requires from six to ten days to decompose to such an extent that it can rise to the surface.Even if a cannon is fired above the corpse, it must be soaked for at least five to six days before it can float.At that time, if no one cares about it, it will still sink.Now, we ask, what is there in this case to make it contrary to the general laws of nature? . . . If the body lay bruised and bruised like that until Tuesday night, some trace of the murderer could always be found on the shore.There is another suspicious point: If the body was thrown into the water two days after death, could it surface so quickly?Also, would the criminal who committed the murder contemplated here throw the body overboard without adding a weight to sink it in?Precautions like that are easy to take.
Here the author goes on to argue that the body must have been in the water for "not just three days, but at least five three days" because it was so badly decomposed that Poway had difficulty identifying it.However, this last point was refuted.I will continue to translate below:
On what basis did Mr. Poway say that the body must be that of Mary Roger?He tore off the sleeves of his robes, saying he had found a sign of identity that pleased him.It was generally assumed that the marks consisted of several scars of some shape, but he just wiped his arm and found that it was hairy.We think this statement is too unspecific, and its reason is not difficult to understand: this statement is like saying that an arm is found in the sleeve, and no conclusion can be derived.Mr. Poway did not return that evening, but wrote to Mrs. Roger at seven o'clock on Wednesday evening, saying that her daughter's case was being investigated.Even if we admit that Mrs. Roger was unable to attend the autopsy because she was old and sad (which is a huge concession), if she thinks it is the body of Mary Roger, some people must think that the autopsy is worth attending.But none of them went.Not even the people who lived in the same building as them on Pavey Street, San André, talked about or heard anything about it.Mr. Eustache, Mary's fiancé and lover, who lived in the same building as her mother, testified on oath that he had not heard of the discovery of his fiancée's body until the next morning, when Mr. Poway went to his told him in his room.Our impression is that his reaction to such news was very cool.
In this way the paper conveyed the impression that Mary's friends and relatives were indifferent.This contradicts the assumption that relatives and friends believed it was Mary's body.The newspaper's insinuation was that Mary had left the city because of the accusations of her virginity involved, and that her friends and relatives were merely pretending not to know.When friends and relatives heard that a body like the girl's had been found in the Seine, they took the opportunity to convince the public that she was dead.But again, The Star is getting a little fucked up, and there's clear evidence that the apathy they imagine doesn't exist.The old lady was too weak and too sad to take part in any activity; and Eustache, far from being indifferent, received the news with a deranged deranged display of grief.Mr. Poway had to persuade a friend and relative to take care of him and not let him participate in the autopsy at the burial.Also, while The Star reported that the cost of reburial was borne by the public, an offer of a cheap private grave was flatly turned down by the family, and no one attended the funeral.I will say, however, that although The Star emphasized these circumstances to further the impression they intended to make, all this was well-founded.In a subsequent issue the paper also made an effort to bring Mr. Poway into suspicion.The editor said:
Now the situation has changed. Someone told this newspaper that Mrs. Beta once went to Mrs. Roger's house. Mr. Poway, who was about to go out, told her that the police were coming soon, and she——Mrs. If you disclose any information to the police, this matter will be left to him... Judging from the current situation of the case, Mr. Poway seems to have taken all the problems into his own head, making it as if nothing can be done without him .Because wherever you go, he's the one you run into... For some reason, he decided that no one but himself should interfere with the course of this matter.In a very special way he pushed aside the male relatives of the deceased in terms of inheritance.He also seemed to resent having his relatives look at the dead body.
The following facts added color to the suspicions which had thus been thrown upon Mr. Poway.A few days before the girl disappeared, a visitor came to Mr. Poway's office.No one was there, and the guest found a rose in the keyhole on the door, with "Mary" written on a writing board hanging nearby.
The general impression we can glean from the newspapers so far seems to be that Mary was murdered by a gang of desperadoes.It was ravaged and killed by them to cross the river.But the influential "Commerce Gazette" seriously refuted this prevailing view, and I quote a paragraph or two from its column:
We believe that the direction of the trace is wrong, so far it has been aimed at Luermen, but it is impossible for a young woman who has been watched by thousands of people to walk three blocks without a single person seeing her.No matter who it is, as long as they have seen her, they can recall it.Because everyone who knew her was interested in her, and when she went out the streets were full of people... She couldn't go all the way to Luermen or Rue Drome without being recognized by a dozen people.However, no one came forward to testify that they had seen her walk out of her mother's house.Moreover, apart from the intention she had told others, there was no evidence that she had indeed gone out.Her robe was torn and tied in a knot around her body, and her body was carried away like this as a package.If the murder had happened in Luermen, such a cleanup would not have been necessary - the fact that the body was found floating near the fence does not prove that it was thrown into the river there... Two pieces torn from the unfortunate girl's dress A strip of cloth, foot by foot, was tied under her chin and tied in a knot at the back of her head, probably to keep her from screaming.That's what people who don't use towels do.
However, a day or two before Director Ge came to see us, an important piece of news entered the police department, which seemed to overturn at least the main part of the argument of "Commerce".Two little boys—Mrs. Deluc's sons—were wandering in the woods near Luermen when they happened to enter a dense bush.There were three or four large stones in the wood, forming a sort of seat, with a back, and a footstool.A white skirt was placed on the taller stone, and a silk scarf on the second stone.A parasol, a pair of gloves and a hand towel bearing Mary Roger's name were also found there.Fragments of clothing were also found on the surrounding bushes.The ground had been trampled, the undergrowth had been broken, and there were signs of struggle.And it was found that the railing between the bush and the river had been dismantled, and there were traces of some kind of heavy object dragging past on the ground.
The weekly Soleil expresses the following opinion on this thread, which reflects the general mood of the entire Parisian press:
These things had evidently been there at least three or four weeks, and had all grown moldy from the rain, hardened, stuck together, and had grass growing all around them, even on the things.The fibrous fiber of the parasol is strong, but the fibers inside are stuck, and the upper part that can be turned over and folded is also covered with mildew, rotten, and will tear if stretched... The strips of cloth torn from the coat in the bushes are about Three inches wide and six inches long, once mended.There was a strip of cloth from the skirt, without fringe, which looked as if it had been torn off and hung from a bush about a foot above the ground. ...therefore there is no doubt that the scene of this appalling atrocity has been found.
Along with this discovery, new evidence has also emerged.Madame Deluc testified that she owned a roadside tavern not far from the river opposite the Luermen.About three o'clock that Sunday afternoon, a young girl arrived at the hotel accompanied by a dark-complexioned young man, and the two stayed there for a while before leaving by taking a road that led into a nearby dense wood.The girl's dress attracted Madame Deluc's attention because it resembled one of her deceased relatives.She also paid special attention to a scarf worn by the girl.Not long after the two young men had left, a group of dubious people came, made a lot of noise, ate and drank without paying their bills.They also followed the path of the girl and the young man.At dusk, the group returned to the hotel and left across the river, seemingly in a hurry.
Not long after dark that day, Madame Deluc and her eldest son heard a woman screaming near the hotel, shrieking but short.Madame Deluc recognized not only the scarf found in the grove, but also the clothes found on the corpse.Now a cabman, Valence, also testified that he had seen Marie Roger, accompanied by a dark-complexioned young man, cross the Seine at a ford that Sunday morning.He—Valence—knows Mary, and there is no way of admitting it.The things found in the bushes were also confirmed by Mary's relatives and friends.
There is but one piece of evidence which I thus gather from the newspapers on Dupont's suggestion, but the consequences of this one seem to bear weight.It seems that, immediately after the discovery of the clothes described above, the body of Marie's fiancé Eustache was found dead, or nearly dead, at what is now believed to be the scene of the atrocity.A small vial labeled "Tincture of Lauda" was found beside him, empty.His breath showed that he had taken poison, and he died without a word.A letter was found on him briefly stating his love for Mary and his intentions for self-destruction.
"I need hardly tell you," said Dupont, after reading my notes, "that this case is much more complicated than that of Mogluna. It differs from that case in one important way. It is an ordinary case, although It's an example of a brutal crime. There's nothing particularly unusual about it. You can see that because it's normal, everyone thinks it's easy to solve. But it's also normal, and we should think it's hard. So they don't think it's necessary at first. Offered a reward, thinking that Director Ge's capable officers can immediately find out how and why such atrocities may have been carried out. They can conceive one or several criminal models and one or several criminal motives in their imagination. Because so many Patterns and motives can't actually be each, and they take it for granted that one is the other. But we're better off thinking of being prone to fantasies and thinking those fantasies seem desirable as a sign of a harder case than an easy one. So I It has been said that the intellect, in its search for truth, gropes its way by what stands above the ordinary. In cases like these, the question to be asked is not so much 'what happened' as 'what happened before A situation that has never been seen before'. When investigating Mrs. Lespinnaye's room, Director Ge's subordinates were dazzled by the unusual situation and lost confidence. Unusual is a harbinger of successful grasp with appropriate wisdom , and such intelligence could be thrown into despair by the so-so features of the 'Perfume Girl' case, but what that told the Superintendent's case was an easy victory.
"The case of Mrs. Les Pinnays and her daughter was established from the beginning of the investigation as a murder, and a suicide was ruled out. Here we also ruled out a suicide from the beginning. The state of the body when it was found in Luermen So that we don't have to worry about the big problem of suicide and homicide. But some people say that the body found is not Mary Roger, and there is a reward for catching that (or group of) murderers. We made a deal with the director for the murderer. Yes We both know this gentleman well, and know not to put too much faith in him. If we trace the murderer from the discovery of the body, and find that it is not Mary but someone else; Killing her, in both cases our efforts will be wasted, because the person I am dealing with is Mr. Director Ge. So, if it is not for justice, but for ourselves, our first step must be to confirm that the body is missing Mary Roger.
"To the public, the arguments of The Star carry weight. The newspaper's confidence in its weight is also seen in the opening words of an article on the subject. 'There are several morning papers today,' it said, 'As for the concluding article in the Sunday Star.' But it seems to me that the article is conclusive about nothing but that of the author's zeal. We should remember that the paper's The object is more to create a sensation, to gather topics, than to promote the truth. They pursue the truth only when circumstances seem to be in keeping with sensationalism. A newspaper which agrees only with the common opinion will not have the support of the public, regardless of How well-founded its opinions are, the reader regards only those who present sharply opposed opinions as profound. The reasoning of a case, like a work of literature, is quickest and most universally appreciated by the astonishing, but astonishing Literature and case handling are the least beneficial.
"What I'm trying to say is that the idea that Mary Roger was alive, invented by The Star, is popular with the masses not so much because it's plausible, but because it's astonishing and romantic comedy. Combining.To avoid the inconsistency of this journal from the beginning, we have to examine a few of its important arguments.
"The author's first purpose is to show the short time between Mary's disappearance and the discovery of the floating body, so that the body cannot be Mary's. Therefore, compressing the time to the shortest time immediately becomes the goal of the reasoner. In In haste to pursue this goal, he fell into an assumption from the start: 'Even assuming she was killed, it would be foolish to assume that the killing was early enough for the murderer to throw the body into the river before midnight.' We immediately have to ask why, of course. Is it stupid even to think that the murder happened within five minutes of the girl leaving the house? Why is it stupid to think that the murder happened at a certain hour of the day? Murders happen at any time, and , even if it happened at any time between nine o'clock in the morning and a quarter of an hour before midnight on a Sunday, there would still be time to 'throw the body into the river before midnight.' It appears that the exact meaning of this assumption is that the homicides were not Happened on Sunday. If we can admit even this assumption of The Star, then the Star can be given any liberty. 'Even assuming she has...' This paragraph, whether it was published in the Star No matter what it looks like, you can imagine that it actually exists in the author's head like that.
"Even assuming that she had been murdered, it would be foolish to assume that the killing was early enough for the murderer to throw the body into the river before midnight; we may say that, having made such an assumption, it also assumed (because The assumption we made) the body wasn't thrown into the water after midnight, and that would be foolish. Our words are really trivial, but not as forceful as his paper's."
"If my object," continued Dupont, "was only to prove my point of view with respect to the passage in The Star, I might safely ignore it. But our object is not the Star, but the truth. The sentence we're arguing has only one meaning in itself, and I've made that meaning clear. But the important point is this: we have to get behind the words and find out what they clearly intended to say but didn't. The meaning expressed. What the newspaperman wants to say is that no matter what time of day or night this murder is committed on Sunday, the murderers cannot get the body to the river before midnight. There is indeed a一个我要质疑的问题：他们假设作案的地点和处境使暴徒们认为有必要把尸体弄到河边去，可是，作案是既可能在河岸边，也可能在河中，因此，作为最平常最直接的处理方式，把尸体扔下河去，在任何时候都是可以的，晚上，白天，都行。你能理解，在这个问题上我没有提出任何我认为可能的看法。到目前为止，我的设想都还跟案件的事实没有关系。我只想提醒你当心《星星》的意见的总体的口气，要你注意它一开始就具有的片面性。
“那报纸为配合自己的既定看法，就像这样设置了界限，而且假定，如果那是玛丽·罗杰的尸体的话，它在水里的时间就只能很短。报纸下面又说：
一切经验表明，淹死的尸体或暴力杀害后立即扔进水里的尸体需要六至十天才能腐败到可以浮出水面的程度。即使在尸体上方开大炮，也得至少泡上五至六天才能浮起。那时如果没人管，它还会沉下去。
“这个断言已经得到巴黎所有报纸的默认，只有《箴言报》例外。不过《箴言报》反对的只是有关'淹死的尸体'那一段，它举出了五六个众所周知的尸体不到《星星》所坚持的时间就浮起的例子。但是《箴言报》的努力里却有个很不符合原则的道理。为了反驳《星星》的一般肯定，它只引用了些反对那肯定的特殊例外。但是，即使它可能举出五十个而不是五个尸体只两三天便浮起的例子，这五十个例子在那规律本身被驳倒之前仍然可以被看作是《星星》的规律的特例。只要还承认那规律，就还得承认《星星》的论点有充分的力量。而《箴言报》并没有否定它的论点，它所坚持的只是特例。因为《星星》的论点研究的只是尸体在不到三天的时间里浮到水面的或然率问题，并没有打算包含更多的道理。而除非那样幼稚地搜集到的例子能构成相反的规律，这个或然率就可能对《星星》的论点有利。
“你可以立即看出，如果要反驳关于这问题的任何论点，就必须驳倒那论点本身。为此，我们先得检验那规律的理论基础。一般说来，人体不会比塞纳河的水轻多少，也不会重多少。就是说，在自然状态下，人体的比重跟它所排除的同体积的纯水的比重大体相同。肥胖的、多肉的、骨头小的人和一般妇女的身体都比干瘦的、大骨头的和男人的要轻。河水的比重大小要受海洋潮汐的影响，但是，如果把潮汐忽略不计，我们可以说，即使是在纯水里也只有很少的人的身体会由于本身的原因而下沉。掉到河里的人如果能好好利用水的比重对付身体的比重，几乎全都是可以漂浮的——就是说，如果他让自己全身浸到水里，让尽可能少的部分留在水外的话。不会游泳的人的正确姿势是陆地行走的姿势：把头竭力向后仰，浸在水里，只留嘴和鼻孔露出水面。在这样的情况下，我们可以发现自己能够漂浮，没有困难，不费力气。不过，还有一点也很清楚：人体的比重和它所排除的水的体积所保持的平衡显然十分精微，一点细小的变化都可能使一方偏重。比如把胳臂伸到水面上，使胳臂失去浮力，就会增加体重，足以使脑袋整个下沉；而借助于一个极小的木块却可以让我们抬起头四面张望。可是，不习惯游泳的人在挣扎时，为了让头部保持常有的直立状态，手臂总想往上挥，结果却是口鼻下沉，在水下为呼吸而挣扎时让水呛到肺里，大量的水也进入胃里，于是原来存在于体腔内的空气和现在灌进体腔内的液体的差异使整个身体的重量增加。作为一般规律，这种差异已足够使身体下沉，但是对于骨头小和肌肉松弛、脂肪超常的人而言，却还不够。这样的人即使淹死了，仍然会漂浮在水面上。
“我们可以认为，沉在河底的尸体是会停留在河底的，直到由于某种方式使它的比重再次变得小于它所排开的水的比重为止。这种效果是腐败或其他原因造成的。腐败的结果是产生气体，使所有的细胞组织和体腔扩大，外形膨胀得狰狞可怕。膨胀达到相当的程度，尸体体积大量增加，而质量或重量并无变化，于是尸体因比重变得小于它所排开的水的比重，浮上水面。但是腐败要受无数条件的限制，也会因无数种作用而加速或减慢。例如，气候的冷暖、矿物质的含量或水的纯洁度、水的深浅、水的流动或停滞、尸体的特点、生前有没有生过病等。这样看来，我们显然很难为尸体因腐败而浮起的时间做出确切的规定。在某种情况之下，这种结果可以不到一个小时就出现，而在另外的情况下，也可能根本不出现。有一些化学浸渍剂就可以保存动物的尸体永不腐败，二氯化汞就是其一。但是除了腐败，还有可能（而且常常可能）由于植物性物质的酸性发酵，在胃里（或是由于其他原因，在其他体腔里）发酵，产生气体，造成足够的扩张，使尸体漂浮到水面。放大炮产生的效果不过是震动而已。震动可能把尸体从它被埋的淤泥或软土里震松，再加上已经准备的其他条件，就可以漂浮起来。震动也可以降低细胞组织的腐败部分的黏性，在气体的影响下使体腔扩大。
“问题的整个原理摆在了我们面前，我们就可以用它轻松地检验《星星》的主张了。'一切经验表明，'那报纸说，'淹死的尸体或暴力杀害后立即扔进水里的尸体需要六至十天才能腐败到可以浮出水面的程度。即使在尸体上方开大炮，也得至少泡上五至六天的才能浮起。那时如果没人管，它还会沉下去。'
“现在看来，这一整段肯定是一种不合事理、也站不住脚的编造。'一切经验'并没有表明'淹死的尸体'需要六至十天才能腐败到可以浮出水面的程度。科学和经验都表明，尸体浮起的时间并不是、也肯定不是固定不变的。还有，如果有的尸体因为开炮而漂浮的话，也未必'如果没人管，它还会沉下去'，那得腐败到产生气体时才行。但是我还想让你注意他们所说的'淹死的尸体'和'暴力杀害后立即扔进水里的尸体'的区别——作者虽然承认那区别，却仍然把两者归成了一类。我已经说明了快淹死的人的比重是怎么会大于他同体积的水的比重的。如果他不因挣扎而把手举出水面，不在水里大口吸气，就完全不至于沉没了。大口吸气就用水取代了原来存在于肺里的空气。但是'暴力杀害后立即扔进水里的尸体'却不可能这样挣扎，也不可能在水里大口吸气。因此，后一类情况的尸体，作为一般规律，是完全不会下沉的，对这个事实，《星星》显然无知。到腐败发展到极高的程度时，到大量的肌肉跟骨头分家时，我们才真会见不到尸体了，不过不是在那以前。
“因为尸体只三天就漂了起来，所以它不是玛丽·罗杰的尸体，我们对这说法现在怎么看呢？如果是淹死的，因为是妇女，她很可能就并不下沉，即使下沉也可能二十四小时或不到二十四小时就漂浮了起来。但是没有人认为玛丽是淹死的。既然扔下水前就已经死了，她是可能在随后的任何时候漂出水面被人发现的。
“'但是，'《星星》又说，'如果尸体像那样遍体鳞伤地摆在岸上一直到星期二的晚上，那么凶手的某些踪迹总是可以在岸上发现的。'刚开始时我们很难从这话中看出推理者的意图。他其实是打算预防一种他所想象的对自己理论产生的障碍。那理论是：尸体在岸上放了两天，它的腐败过程要比泡在水里快。他假定，如果那样，尸体星期三就有可能浮出水面，而且认为只有在这种情况下它才可能如此。因此，他急于表明尸体并不曾在岸上摆过，因为如果在岸上摆了，'凶手的某些踪迹总是可以在岸上发现的'。你笑了，估计是笑那结论。你不明白尸体在岸边摆放的时间为什么能使凶手的踪迹变得更加明显。我也不明白。
“'还有，犯下这儿所设想的这种凶案的罪犯，'那报纸接下去说，'难道会不加上一个让尸体下沉的重物就扔它下水吗？那样的预防措施是很容易采取的。'请注意这儿这可笑的思想混乱！没有人否认，甚至连作者也没有否认，发现的尸体是被杀死的。暴行的迹象太明显。可我们的推理人的目的只想说明尸体不是玛丽的。他希望证明玛丽没有被杀害——而不仅仅是尸体不是玛丽的。可他的说法只证明了那不是玛丽。这儿有一个没有挂重物的尸体，而扔尸体的凶手是不会忘记挂重物的，因此它不是被凶手扔到河里的。如果说他还证明了什么的话，这就是他所证明的全部道理。他甚至连尸体是谁的问题也没有接触到。你看，《星星》煞费苦心否定的不过是它刚才承认的东西。'我们完全相信，'它说，'他们发现的尸体是一个被杀害的女性。'
“即使在这个主题的这一部分里，这也还不是推理者不知不觉推翻了自己的推断的唯一例子。我已经说过，它明显的目的是尽量缩短玛丽的失踪跟尸体被发现之间的时间，但是我们发现，它强调的是从那姑娘离开母亲家后就没人见过她。'我们没有证据，'它说，'说明罗杰小姐6月22日星期天九点之后还在人世。'由于它那论点显然是片面的，它至少该撇开这个问题。因为如果有人看见了玛丽，比如说在星期一或星期二，那么有关的时间就缩得更短了。而按照它的推理，死者是那位女店员的可能性也随之大大减少。不过，发现《星星》坚持它的论点，充分相信它会促进总的论辩，倒也很好玩。
“现在我们再来细读一下这篇文章里谈波威鉴定尸体的部分。关于手臂上的毛，《星星》显然不真诚。波威先生不是白痴，在鉴定尸体时绝不会简单地强调手臂上有毛。没毛的手臂是没有的。《星星》这儿这太空泛的用语不过是对见证人的用语的歪曲。见证人一定是提出了那毛的特点的：颜色、质地、长短，或是生长处具备的特点什么的。
“'她的脚很小，'那报纸说，'可拥有很小的脚的人有无数个。她的吊袜带也不能证明什么，她的鞋也不能证明什么，因为鞋和吊袜带都是论包卖的。她帽子上的花也是这样。波威先生竭力坚持一个推论：他们发现吊袜带的钩子折回去缩短过。可这并不说明什么，因为大部分妇女都觉得买吊袜带回家再按照腿的大小调整长短，要比在店里试来试去好些。'在这个问题上，我们很难认为推理人是严肃的。即使波威先生在搜寻玛丽的尸体时发现了一具跟失踪的姑娘身段外形大体相应的尸体，他也有理由认为搜寻取得了成功，根本用不着涉及服装问题。如果在大体的高矮和轮廓之外，他又在手臂上发现了样子特别的毛，而那是他在活着时的玛丽身上见过的，他就更可以理直气壮地坚持自己的意见了。那标志性的毛的特色或异常都很可能提高确认的分量。如果尸体的脚也很小，像玛丽的脚一样，那么尸体是玛丽的或然率就不仅是按算术比例增加，而是按几何比例多倍增加，或是积累性地增加了。如果在这一切之上再加上失踪那天她所穿的大家认识的鞋，即使那鞋是'论包卖的'，也可以把或然率提高到差不多确认的程度。在单独存在时不能用以确认身份的东西，作为旁证，却可以是极有把握的证据。如果再加上与失踪的姑娘帽子上的花朵相同的花朵，那就什么也不用再找了。哪怕只有一朵花也不需要再找了——再找出两朵、三朵或者更多，还能有什么意思？证据的连续增加是证明力的无数倍增加。不是证据加上证据，而是百倍千倍个证据。如果已经在死者身上发现了她活着时用的吊袜带，还要继续找，我们就差不多成了笨蛋了。而我们发现的这个吊袜带又是缩短过挂钩弄紧过的，跟玛丽离家前不久的缩短方法一样。这时如果还要怀疑，那准是发了疯，或是想弄虚作假了。《星星》不把缩短的吊袜带看作例外，除了说明它坚持错误，不能说明别的。挂钩吊袜带的弹性本身就说明那缩短之反常。为自行调整而制造的东西是很少需要外力调整的。就最严格的意义而言，玛丽这吊袜带需要做那种调整，已经肯定是一种特例。只凭这吊袜带就可以强有力地证明尸体就是玛丽的。可那尸体并不是因为发现它有失踪姑娘的吊袜带或是鞋和帽子上的花、她的脚或手臂上的某个特别标志，或跟她一样的高矮胖瘦和外形轮廓而确认的，而是因为它每一条都是，全部都有。如果在这样的情况之下，仍然可以证明《星星》编辑持怀疑态度，那就不必为他成立什么疯狂调查委员会了——他早就认定了做律师废话的应声虫才算精明，而律师们又大部分满足于做法庭那正经八百的劝世箴言的应声虫。我愿意在这儿指出，对智者来说，法庭不认可的证据有许多是最好的证据，因为法庭本身必须在有关证据的大原则（写成了书的、公认的大原则）的指导之下，而大原则是不肯为特例让路的。这种坚持不懈地遵守原则、对抵触原则的例外置若网闻的情况，肯定是个在任意长的时期里都能够达到最大真理的方式。就总体而言，这做法虽也符合原则，但它产生的个别错误肯定会数不胜数。
“至于对波威的含沙射影的攻击，你是愿意立即撇开的。对这个好人的真诚性格，你已摸到了底。他是个无事忙，浪漫不少，头脑不多。像他这样性格的人，一旦真正激动起来，往往会引起过分敏感或别有用心的人的疑心。从你的笔记看来，波威先生曾多次接受《星星》编辑的采访，而且得罪了他，因为他曾向那编辑大胆指出：尽管那编辑持那种观点，按照清楚的事实来看，那尸体还真是玛丽的。'他坚持肯定，'那报纸说，'尸体就是玛丽的，但是在我们已经批评过的细节之外，却提不出令人信服的细节。'可是，即使不可能再提出什么更有力的证据让人信服的话，也可以指出，在这种情况下，提不出让人相信的理由，是可以理解的。没有比对某人是谁的印象更模糊的东西了。谁都认识自己的邻居，但是要求为确认邻居提出理由的人却十分罕见。《星星》的编辑没有理由为波威先生说不出道理的推断而生气。
“我们会发现，他所陷入的嫌疑处境倒更像是我所假定的'浪漫的无事忙'，而不是推理者所影射的什么罪行。接受了这个较为宽容的解释之后，理解起钥匙孔里的玫瑰、记事板上的'玛丽'、'把男性继承人挤到一边'、'对让他们看尸体反感'、'警告B太太别在他（波威先生）回来之前向警察透露信息'，和他似乎做过的决定'除了自己谁也不干预这事的进程'，就不会有什么困难了。我觉得似乎无可怀疑的是，波威在追求玛丽，而玛丽也对他卖弄过风情。他奢望人家会认为他享有跟她最充分的亲昵和信任，对此我不想说什么。由于已经有证据充分驳斥了《星星》的主张——说什么她的母亲和其他亲戚态度冷淡（这跟亲友们相信尸体是'香水姑娘'的假定是抵触的），我们现在就假定尸体是谁的问题已经令我们充分满意地解决了，再接着分析。”
“那么你对《商业报》的意见，”说到这儿我问他，“有何感想？”
“在精神上，它们比在这个问题上已经发表的意见要值得注意得多。它从前提出发所进行的推理，是有原则而且敏锐的，但至少在两个问题上它的前提却是以不完整的观察为基础的。《商业报》希望暗示玛丽是在离母亲家门不远的地方被一群粗野的歹徒带走的。'像这样一位受到好几千人注意的年轻妇女，'那报纸强调，'走过三个街区竟没有一个人看见，是不可能的。'这是长期住在巴黎的人的看法，是一个公众人物、在城里走来走去、却大体局限在公共机关附近的人的看法。他感觉自己不可能离开写字台走了十来个街区却没有人认出他，而且招呼他。他知道自己对别人和别人对自己的交情，却把自己的知名度跟那'香水姑娘'的知名度作了比较，觉得差别不大，随即得出结论：那姑娘走路时也会跟他一样有人认识。可这种情况只有在她的路线跟他一样、具有按部就班一成不变的性质，而且在有限的地区的同一类人之间往来时才有可能。他在固定的时间里、在有限的范围里往来，那里到处都有因为职业性质类似而对他感到兴趣、乐意注意他的人。但是玛丽的来往路线一般看来是随意的。而在这个特定的案例里，我们倒觉得她走的路跟她往常走的路很可能极不相同。我们觉得，《商业报》中的那种比较，只有在两个人走过了巴黎全城时才好确定。那时假定两人的熟人人数相等，那么两人分别遇见的熟人的人数也就可能相等。就我而言，我倒是觉得，玛丽在任何时候从自己住处去姨妈家，无论在众多的路里选了哪一条，一个熟人也没有遇见的可能性不但是有的，而且非常大。在充分地、恰当地分析了这个问题之后，我们必须在心里坚持一条：即使是巴黎最知名的人士，他的熟人数目与巴黎的整个人口相比也都微乎其微。
“但是不管《商业报》所提出的设想看来能有多大说服力，考虑到那姑娘出门的时间，它那说服力也还会大打折扣。'她出门时满街都是人。'《商业报》说。但是并不如此。那是上午九点。每天上午九点满街都是人，那不错，但星期天例外。星期天上午九点人们都在家里准备上教堂。细心的人都不能不注意到每个星期天早上八点至十点左右城里那特别冷清的气氛。十点到十一点街上倒是很拥挤，但没有上面所说的那么早。
“《商业报》在观察上似乎还有个缺陷。'从那不幸的姑娘裙子上撕下来的两英尺长一英尺宽的一片，'它说，'系在了她的下巴下面，在后脑勺打了结，那很有可能是为了制止她叫喊。这是不用手巾的人干的事。'这话是否有可靠的根据，我们以后再讲，但是编者说'不用手巾的人'时，他指的是最下层的歹徒。可这话描写的恰好是那些哪怕没有衬衫也得带上手巾的歹徒。你一定曾经注意到，近几年来，口袋里的手巾对于地道的歹徒而言，是如何绝对的必要。”
“我们对《太阳》周刊的文章该怎么看呢？”我问。
“可惜那报纸的作者不是天生的鹦鹉，否则他倒可能是同辈中的佼佼者。他只不过重复别人作品里已发表过的意见而已——从一份份的报纸上收集了资料，其勤奋倒是值得表扬的。'这些东西在那里，'他说，'显然至少有三四周……这骇人听闻的暴行现场已经找到。'可《太阳》周刊重新提到的事实远远没有解开我心里对这些问题的疑惑。我们以后还要把它们跟这个题目的另一部分放到一起检验。
“目前我们还要在其他的调查上花工夫。你一定不会没有注意到，尸体检验得极其马虎。当然，死者是谁马上就确定了，或是应该确定了，但是有些问题还有待确定。死者遭到抢劫没有？死者离家时戴了首饰没有？如果戴了，在发现时还戴着吗？这些都是很重要的问题，可是证词里一个字没提。还有一些东西同样重要，却也没有引起注意。为了自我满足，我们还得亲自调查。欧斯塔什的问题必须重新检验。我并不怀疑这个人，但是办事要讲究方法。我们得弄清楚他对自己那个星期天的行踪所作的宣誓证词是否有效、是否可靠——这种性质的宣誓证词很快就会给弄得神神秘秘的了。如果证词没有问题，我们才可以不理他。不过，如果发现证词里有欺骗，他的自杀就有可能成为他涉嫌的旁证。好在没有发现证词有欺骗。他的自杀不难解释，我们就用不着偏离常规思路进行分析了。
“我现在要建议的是，丢开这个惨案的内在问题，把注意力集中到惨案外围去。在这样的调查里把调查局限于直接的问题，完全忽略侧面的或次要的事件，不是很罕见的错误。法庭总把证据和讨论局限于表面上与案情有关的范围，那是一种错误。经验证明，真正的哲学也总证明，大部分或更大部分的真理都是在表面上无关的事物里出现的。现代科学之所以提倡'在没有预见到的东西上进行猜测'，正是基于这一原则的精神实质（不拘泥于字面的意义）。但是你也许并没有理解我的意思。人类的历史不断地表明，数量最大的、价值最高的发现都得归功于侧面的、偶然的、意外的事件。因此，为了进步，必须尽可能最大程度地允许从机会里产生极大地超出了常规预计范围的发明。把未来的东西置于幻想的基础上已不再是哲学的问题。意外已被承认为基础的一部分。我们把机会变成了绝对的计算问题，把意料之外的和没有想象到的变成了学校里的数学公式。
“我再重复一遍，一切真理的更大部分都是从侧面事物里出现的，我之所以要把对这个案子的调查从频繁而无成果的领域转向惨案当时的周围情况，根据的就是上述道理所涉及的精神原则。在你检查那些宣誓证词是否有效时，我要比你更广泛地检查一下报纸。到目前为止，我们所察看的只是已经调查的范围。但是，如果我们按我的建议，对公开出版物作全面搜索，却没有找到可以引出调查方向的细节的话，那倒会成了稀奇事。”
我按照杜邦的建议仔细检查了宣誓证词的情况，结果完全相信证词有效，随之也还了欧斯塔什一个清白。与此同时，杜邦却在各种报纸上进行着仿佛漫无目的的搜索。一周之后他把下面的摘要放到了我的面前。
大约三年半以前，同一个玛丽·罗杰从布兰先生在王宫地下商场的香水铺消失了，引起了一场混乱，与目前的混乱非常近似。一周之后她又在她习惯的柜台边出现了，还跟过去一样，只是脸色苍白了些，不完全正常。布兰先生和她的妈妈都说她只不过到乡下朋友家去了一趟。事情很快就平静下来。我们认为现在这件事也只是同样性质的重复，说不定一周或一月之后她又会回到我们身边的。
——《晚报》，星期一，6月23日。
昨天一家晚报也谈到一位名叫罗杰的小姐过去的神秘失踪。大家都知道她从布兰先生的香水铺失踪后，是跟一位青年海军军官在一起的。那人以放荡著名。人们假定她幸好因为争吵回到了家里。本报对那位现在驻扎在巴黎的罗萨略的名声表示怀疑，但是出于明显的原因，暂不公开谈论这个问题。
——《墨丘利报》，星期二，6月24日。
一场性质极其凶残的暴行前天在本城附近出现。一位先生带着妻子和女儿黄昏前不久花钱请六个年轻男人划船送他们过河——那时那几个人正在塞纳河边划船玩。到了对岸，三个客人下船走到已看不见船的地方，女儿却发现阳伞还在船上，便回船去取伞，却被那群流氓抓住，带到水上，堵住嘴，残酷地施暴，最后又被送到离她跟她父母上船处不远的地方。歹徒暂时还逍遥法外，警察正在追踪，有的歹徒即将被捉拿归案。
——《晨报》，6月25日。
本报收到一两封来信，其目的在确定门奈为最近暴行的作案人。但因门奈先生经法律审查证明完全无罪，而几封来信的论点却是热情高于深度，本报认为不宜发表。
——《晨报》，6月28日。
本报从显然不同的来源收到若干来信，措辞强硬，坚决肯定不幸的玛丽·罗杰落入星期天在本城附近活动的多个犯罪团伙之一之手已是不争的事实。本报也肯定倾向于这一假定。不久本报将辟版面公布部分来信。
——《晚报》，6月30日。
星期一，与税务处有联系的一个游艇工人看见一艘空游艇顺塞纳河而下，船帆置于船底。该工人把游艇拖去了游艇管理处。次日清晨游艇又被人从管理处弄走，未通知任何人。现船舵仍存该游艇管理处。
——《信息报》，6月26日。
读了这些不同的摘要，我感到不但似乎与问题无关，而且看不出其中任何一件能以什么方式与我们手边的问题发生联系。我等待着杜邦解释。
“我目前的打算，”他说，“还不是分析第一和第二段摘要。我把它们抄下来，只是为了让你看出警察无能到了什么程度。我从总监那儿得知，他们还没有为审查报纸上暗示的那位海军军官做过任何工作，但是要说在玛丽的两次失踪之间找不出可以假定的联系，只能算是愚蠢。我们不妨承认第一次私奔的结果是情人之间的争执和上当者的回家。现在我们准备来检查一下第二次私奔（假定我们已经知道有第二次私奔）。第二次私奔是欺骗者再次追求的后果，而不是另一个人的活动。我们打算把它看做是与旧情郎的'和解'，而不是与新相好的开始。已经跟玛丽私奔过一次的那人再次要求私奔的可能性和另一个人向她提出私奔的机会之比是十比一。在这儿我还得提请你注意一个事实：已经肯定的第一次私奔和假定的第二次私奔之间的时间只比战舰往返航行一次的大体时间多几个月。那情人的第一次的卑鄙打算是因为非出海不可才中止的吗？他回来后又抓住时机打算达到他那没有完全达到或根本没有达到的卑鄙目的吗？对这一切我们还不知道。
“不过你会说，第二例里出现的不是我们所想象的私奔，当然不是，但是我们是否也准备说连遭到挫折的意图也没有呢？除开欧斯塔什（也许还得除开波威），我们还没有发现玛丽有为人所知的光明正大的公开追求者——没有谁谈起过。那么亲友们（至少大部分亲友）不知道的那个秘密追求者是谁呢？星期天早上玛丽和那人会了面，非常信任他，毫不犹豫地跟他去到鲁尔门那孤独的树林里，又跟他一直流连到夜幕降临。我想问，那位为大部分亲友所不知道秘密恋人是谁？罗杰太太在玛丽出走的早上那奇特的预感又是什么意思？她说：'我担心再也见不到玛丽了。'
“但是，即使我们不能设想罗杰太太知道她女儿私奔的打算，难道就不能设想那姑娘有这样的意图吗？在离家之前她告诉别人她要到德龙路她姨妈家去，还要求欧斯塔什天黑时去接她。第