Читать книгу The Mystery Of A Wheel-Barrow - W. Humer Ferguson - Страница 4

Table of Contents

The following is an inventory of the objects placed upon the table at the inquest held on the body of the deceased:—

Item.—Twopence-halfpenny in good Victorian coin, and a French halfpenny; a pawn ticket for an indispensable article of dress.

Item.—An undarned stocking rescued from the jaws of the defunct.

Item.—One bottle of Opoponax, probably secreted by deceased upon his person in order to put our eminent detectives on the wrong scent.

Item.—A clay pipe (stemless), an ounce of shag tobacco, and a match box (effigy of distinguished personage).

Item.—One glove, size 9¼, green, one button (off).

Item.—Sundry lobster claws and champagne corks.

Item.—A treatise on “Temperance Lecturing,” and a copy of De Quincey’s “Murder as a Fine Art.”

Item.—A volume of Gabberau, with marginal notes.

Jehosophat Clawby, of the detective force, armed with a powerful magnifying glass, was present, in order, if possible, to discover a clue.

The barrowman Roysterer was the first witness called. A searching examination through Mr. Clawby’s magnifying glass was made, but revealed nothing of public interest, and witness was then cross-examined by the Coroner, who used for that purpose the well-known “Vade Mecum for Coroners.”

Q.—What were you doing last Thursday night on the St. Kilda Road?

A.—Don’t know.

Coroner.—Very good. Q.—Describe what you saw?

A.—I saw your honour doin’ the swell with a young person as—

Coroner.—Silence, sir! With respect to the corpse—to the case in hand—what did you see?

Witness.—Werry good, your honour. A.—I seed two swells, werry tight.

Q.—Were you sober?

Witness.—As a bloomin’ judge, your honour.

Coroner.—No comparisons of that kind, if you please.

Q.—Can you describe the gentleman in the dressing-gown?

Witness.—My attention was principally occupied by the lamp-post at the corner, and the gentleman was in the shadow.

Coroner.—Describe the shadow.

A.—Tall, fair, thin, with long moustache, and dressin’ gownd, wide-awake ‘at, and bloochers.

Q.—What did he say when he placed the corpse in the gutter?

Witness.—Go an’ ‘ang yourself, your honour.

Coroner.—If you dare to address me in that manner, I’ll commit you for contempt of court.

Witness.—That’s what ‘e said.

Coroner.—He said he would commit you?

Witness.—No, yer honour, “Go an’ ‘ang yourself.”

Coroner.—Yes, yes, I understand. Q.—Did he look back?

A.—No, he looked black, your honour.

Q.—Did you look after him?

A.—No, I ‘ad enough to do to look after the corpse.

Q.—When did you again see the dressing-gown?

A.—When ‘e came back and drove my barrer over me an’ ‘is mate.

Q.—Did you make any observation?

A.—Didn’t I just!—

Coroner.—There, that’ll do. No ornamental expressions here, if you please. Q.—What did you do next?

A.—Put the corpse in my barrer.

Q.—And then?

A.—Chucked it out agin.

Q.—For any particular reason?

A.—No, my lord, no. Larks, don’t yer know, mere larks.

Coroner.—I thought so. Q.—Did you speak to the deceased?

Witness.—Didn’t we just!—

Coroner.—Hush, that’ll do, witness. Q.—Then you proceeded with the defunct towards St. Kilda?

A.—Yes, yer honour, as far as the Grammar School.

Q.—Why did you stop there?

A.—The cove in the gownd said as ‘e wanted to finish the corpse’s education.

Q.—Did you assist in the process?

A.—No, yer honour. The cove says, says ‘e, as he’d made the diseased warm and comfortable; then ‘e gives me a tanner, and a few directions, and then ‘e slopes.

Q.—Did you notice his demeanour?

Witness.—His wot?

Coroner.—His demeanour.

Witness.—Didn’t know he ‘ad one on, your honour. If you mean ‘is gownd, it was buttoned up and fixed with a rope round ‘is waist.

Q.—Was his behaviour at all strange?

A.—Well, rayther. He says, says ‘e, “You’re a—”

Coroner.—Refrain from anything vulgar in my hearing if you please. Q.—When did you discover that deceased was dead?

A.—When ‘e alighted from my wehicle.

Q.—Did you assist him to alight?

A.—No, he wasn’t smokin’, yer honour.

Coroner.—I mean, did you help him out of your wheelbarrow.

A.—Rayther, your lordship. What do you think?

Coroner.—Describe your manner of assisting him

Witness.—I jest took a run, stopped short, and elewated the shafts perpendic’ler.

Q.—Do you find that an expeditious mode of depositing your passengers?

A.—Werry much so, your worship,

Q.—Did the deceased make any observation?

A.—No, he was just too busy with ‘is stockin’s.

Q.—How did you find out he was dead?

A.—I tried to stand ’im on ‘is pins, and he fell into my barrow agin. So I carted him to the station.

Coroner.—Thank you, witness.—Stand down.

Dr. Robert Toiquejaime Shinbone was then called. The eminent practitioner made the following deposition:—

“I am a properly-qualified surgeon dentist? I made a post-mortem examination of the deceased. Externally, the corpse was fine and healthy, and it required much professional discernment on my part to pronounce life to be extinct. I made the usual professional experiments. I sent electric shocks up the legs, and extracted two incisors; I trod upon its toes without apology; I requested the loan of half-a-crown; and, as a decisive test, I made one of my most side-splitting jokes. Failing to elicit any sign of hilarity, I was clearly of opinion that deceased was defunct,” (Applause, which was immediately suppressed.)

“I then proceeded to make a post-mortem examination. I found the customary organs in their usual places, (Hear, hear.) The auricles of the heart were situated at its base. The brain was small, and contained, amongst a mass of cellular tissue, the germ of an idea (Sensation). The stomach was full; the feet healthy. There was a slight tendency to corns on the right foot. Upon probing an important bunion a spirituous odour was emitted. Deceased was most probably not a member of the Blue Ribbon Army. It is my opinion, as a dentist, that death was caused by the inhalation of chloroform.”

Coroner.—You have observed that the feet of the deceased were liable to the production of corns and bunions. Can you assert that death was not caused by the exposure of these growths after the removal of the stockings?

Dr. Shinbone.—As a professional dentist I can refute such a theory. The presence of pedal excrescences of the nature described will, at times, cause irritability of temper, and it is quite possible that the administration of chloroform while in this state would have a tendency to accelerate the fatal result.

Another wheel-barrow man was then called. He deposed:—

“My name is Clem Spankin. I remember Thursday night, as on the following day I was compelled to see a medical man, owing to contusions received in the lower extremity of my back through contact with the boot of a gentleman wearing a fawn-coloured dressing gown, who hailed me on the St. Kilda Road at half-past one o’clock in the morning, and requested me to wheel him to Powlett Street or put up with certain alternatives, and on my refusing he assailed me with my own produce and afterwards proceeded at a great pace in the direction named with a pipe in his mouth, singing, ‘We won’t go home till morning,’ which was essentially true, as he disappeared suddenly at two o’clock precisely at the corner of Powlett Street, at which moment the post-office clock struck the hour—” Here the witness stopped for breath.

Coroner.—Did you notice anything peculiar about the gentleman?

Witness.—No, your lordship, except that his boots were very hard. He wore a dressing-gown and a soft hat, and was fearful boozed, just like your lordship when I met your lordship on Wednes—”

Coroner (sternly).—Stand down.

The Coroner then summed up. He pointed out that deceased, according to evidence adduced, was undoubtedly dead. All the obtainable evidence was circumstantial, and, in consequence, convincing. He detailed with eloquent power the salient points of resemblance between the wheelbarrow case and several murder cases mentioned by De Quincey and Gaborault. Finally, he admitted that a wheel-barrow was not a legally recognised public conveyance, and in this he differed from the able editor of the Daily Muddler. He said that exposure to the cold, while using such means of transit, added to the fact that deceased was admittedly found dead in the act, apparently, of swallowing his hose, might have been the main cause of death; but, seeing that the eminent dentist had taken a different view of the matter, and had, moreover, scouted the profound corn-and-bunion hypothesis, he could only recommend the jury to give an unbiassed verdict to the effect that deceased had been maliciously, wilfully, and effectively murdered by a person preferring to remain, for the present, incognito.

The jury, having been provided with a Lindley-Murray (Victorian Edition), retired for deliberation. On their return they presented the appearance of having passed a mauvais quart d’heure, which the foreman explained was owing to an animated discussion on auxiliary verbs. Their verdict, he said, was in accordance with the impartial views expressed by the Coroner. A rider was added deprecating the inconvenient custom established by criminals and royalty of adopting an incognito.