Samuel Boyd of Catchpole Square: A Mystery

by B. L. Farjeon

"Constable Applebee was on his beat, which embraced Catchpole Square, and during the storm which came on suddenly at two in the morning, he took refuge in Deadman's Court, which you will recollect is the only approach to the Square. During a lull in the storm the constable stepped from his shelter to reconnoitre the houses in the Square. He had not been there a minute before the door of Samuel Boyd's house was flung open, and a man ran out, almost into the constable's arms. This man was Richard Remington."

CHAPTER LXIII.

[CONTINUATION OF THE TRIAL.]

"His outer garments were such as a Mongolian wears, and in his hand was the mask of a Chinaman's face. He carried also in his hand a hollow cane of the reign of Charles the Second, in which, as you will presently hear, a singular discovery was made. It is not for me to say why this disguise was assumed; it is sufficient to state the fact. In response to Constable Applebee's calls for assistance Detective Lambert came up, and afterwards Constable Pond and another. The prisoner gave no explanation of his singular disguise, but made some rambling statement to the effect that the murderers of Samuel Boyd were in the house. In compliance with his urgent and reiterated requests the officers Lambert and Applebee accompanied him into the house, and made a thorough search, from top to bottom, without discovering any person there. Remington was then taken to the police station, and charged. When he was searched a document was found upon him of a nature so incriminating, and so direct in its terms, as to furnish the strongest proof of the guilt of the prisoner, Reginald Boyd. The defence will probably call this evidence presumptive; I call it conclusive. The document runs as follows:--

(Mr. Marlow here read the Memoranda made by Samuel Boyd on the night of Friday, March 1st, with which our readers are already acquainted.^[1])

"You will perceive that the document is dated the 1st of March, and there can be no doubt that it was the last writing made by Samuel Boyd before he was cruelly murdered. That he was in dread of violence at the hands of his son is clear. No reference is made in the document to the prisoner Remington, but there is a presumptive accusation against the missing man, Abel Death, of being in a conspiracy to rob him. Observe also the reference to the latchkey possessed by his son, and the words, 'If he does not get in through the front door he will find some other way; he is better acquainted with the ins and outs of this house than I am myself.' In this voice from the grave--for so it may be aptly termed--is revealed a deplorable state of feeling between father and son which strengthens the case against the prisoner Boyd. They were at enmity; each accused the other of robbery or attempted robbery, and matters thus were ripe for violence. Is it too wild a presumption that Remington removed the incriminating document for the purpose of shielding his confederate, and, by implication, himself? The document informed them, also, that Samuel Boyd had not yet made his will, and that if he died that night his son would become heir at law. A strange feature in the case is that the paper was not immediately destroyed, but there are numbers of instances in which criminals have been brought to justice by over-confidence and by their neglect to attend to small matters over which they believed themselves to have absolute control. In addition to this document another remarkable discovery was made at the police station. On the night of the murder Lady Wharton had deposited with Samuel Boyd certain valuable jewels as security for an advance of money to be made to her, and up to last Monday night no trace of these jewels had been discovered. Now, the Charles the Second cane carried from the house by the prisoner Remington was hollow, and in it were found the missing jewels. Lady Wharton will be called to identify them. Against Remington a search of his lodgings furnished further evidence. Under his bed was found a rope and grapnel, which he purchased on Friday the 1st of March----"

Mr. Pallaret: "Will the date be proved?"

Mr. Marlow: "The shopkeeper from whom he purchased it will give evidence of the date. It may be asked, what object could there have been in Remington purchasing a rope and grapnel to get over the wall at the back when Reginald Boyd, with whom we accuse him of being in collusion, possessed a key to the front door? The answer to that is that they deemed it necessary to be prepared, in case the street door was chained and bolted. Or it may have been done, and the rope and grapnel used, to divert suspicion from themselves, and to make it appear that burglars unacquainted with the premises had effected an entrance and committed the crime. It is most suspicious that in Remington's evidence at the inquest he made no allusion to the rope and grapnel, although the statement of Detective Lambert was before him. For what other reason than to screen himself could he have been guilty of the suppression? Another piece of evidence will be forthcoming. Before either of the prisoners was arrested Detective Lambert, during his examination of the house, took photographs of the bloody footprints leading from Samuel Boyd's bedroom to the small window at the back, through which the person or persons effecting an unlawful entrance had passed. Since Remington's arrest photographs have been taken of the soles of his boots, and they exactly correspond with those of the bloody footprints. As to another startling incident in this remarkable crime--the visit of the man disguised as Samuel Boyd to Lady Wharton in Bournemouth--we have only conjecture, and I make no comment upon it other than that it is a mystery which has yet to be elucidated.

"I have now gone through the principal features of the murder and its attendant circumstances, and I think your worship will agree with me that there is no course open to you except to put the prisoners on their trial at the Criminal Court."

At the conclusion of this address the general opinion of the disinterested persons in court was that the accused were guilty, and that there was no escape for them. There were, however, seated at the solicitors' table a few more experienced who judged from Mr. Pallaret's manner that he by no means despaired of an acquittal. A twisted note had been handed to him, on which was written, "He is the man. Call Joseph Pitou."