The D'Arblay mystery

by R. Austin Freeman

“We were therefore thrown back on the hypothesis of expediency, which was, in fact, the more probable one, and which became still more probable as the circumstances were further examined. But having assumed, as a working hypothesis, that this crime had been committed in pursuit of a definite purpose which was not revenge, the next question was: What could that purpose have been? And that question could be answered only by a careful consideration of all that was known of the parties to the crime: the criminal and the victim and their possible relations to one another.

“As to the former, the circumstances indicated that he was a person of some education, that he had an unusual acquaintance with poisons, and such social position and personal qualities as would enable him to get possession of them; that he was subtle, ingenious, and resourceful, but not far-sighted, since he took risks that could have been avoided. His mentality appeared to be that of the gambler, whose attention tends to be riveted on the winning chances, and who makes insufficient provision for possible failure. He staked everything on the chance of the needle-puncture being overlooked and the presence of the poison being undiscovered.

“But the outstanding and most significant quality was his profound criminality. Premeditated murder is the most atrocious of crimes, and murder for expediency is the most atrocious form of murder. This man, then, was of a profoundly criminal type, and was most probably a practicing criminal.

“Turning now to the victim, the evidence showed that he was a man of high moral qualities: honest, industrious, thrifty, kindly and amiable, and of good reputation—the exact reverse of the other. Any illicit association between these two men was, therefore, excluded, and yet there must have been an association of some kind. Of what kind could it have been?

“Now, in the case of this man, as in that of the other, there was one outstanding fact. He was a sculptor. And not only a sculptor, but an artist in the highest class of wax-work. And not only this. He was probably the only artist of this kind practicing in this country. For wax-work is almost exclusively a French art. So far as I know, all the wax figures and high-class lay figures that are made are produced in France. This man, therefore, appeared to be the unique English practitioner of this very curious art.

“The fact impressed me profoundly. To realize its significance we must realize the unique character of the art. Wax-work is a fine art; but it differs from all other fine arts in that its main purpose is one that is expressly rejected by all those other arts. An ordinary work of sculpture, no matter how realistic, is frankly an object of metal, stone, or pottery. Its realism is restricted to truth of form. No deception is aimed at but, on the contrary, is expressly avoided. But the aim of wax-work is complete deception; and its perfection is measured by the completeness of the deception achieved. How complete that may be can be judged by incidents that have occurred at Madame Tussaud’s. When that exhibition was at the old Baker-street Bazaar, the snuff-taker—whose arms, head, and eyes were moved by clock-work—used to be seated on an open bench; and it is recorded that, quite frequently, visitors would sit down by him on the bench and try to open conversation with him. So, too, the wax-work policeman near the outer door was occasionally accosted with questions by arriving visitors.

“Bearing this fact in mind, it is obvious that this art is peculiarly adapted to employment in certain kinds of fraud, such as personation, false alibi, and the like; and it is probable that the only reason why it is not so employed is the great difficulty of obtaining first-class wax-works.

“Naturally, then, when I observed this connexion of a criminal with a wax-work artist, I asked myself whether the motive of the murder was not to be sought in that artist’s unique powers. Could it be that an attempt had been made to employ the deceased on some work designed for a fraudulent purpose? If such an attempt had been made, whether it had or had not been successful, the deceased would be in possession of knowledge which would be highly dangerous to the criminal; but especially if a work had actually been executed and used as an instrument of fraud.

“But there were other possibilities in the case of a sculptor who was also a medallist. He might have been employed to produce—quite innocently—copies of valuable works which were intended for fraudulent use; and the second stage of the investigation was concerned with these possibilities. That stage was ushered in by Follett’s discovery of the guinea; the additional facts that we obtained at the Museum, and later, when we learned that the guinea that had been found was an electrotype copy, and that deceased was an expert electrotyper, all seemed to point to the production of forgeries as the crime in which Julius D’Arblay had been implicated. That was the view to which we seemed to be committed; but it did not seem to me satisfactory, for several reasons. First, the motive was insufficient—there was really nothing to conceal. When the forgeries were offered for sale, it would be obvious that some one had made them, and that some one could be traced by the purchaser through the vendor. The killing of the actual maker would give no security to the man who sold the forgeries, and who would have to appear in the transaction. And then, although deceased was unique as a wax-worker, he was not as a copyist or electrotyper. For those purposes, much more suitable accomplices might have been found. The execution of copies by deceased appeared to be a fact; but my own feeling was that they had been a mere by-product—that they had been used as a means of introduction to deceased for some other purpose connected with wax-work.

“At the end of this stage we had made some progress. We had identified this unknown man with another unknown man, who was undoubtedly a professional criminal. We had found, in the forged guinea, a possible motive for the murder. But, as I have said, that explanation did not satisfy me, and I still kept a look-out for new evidence connected with the wax-works.