Ellery Queen’s Mystery Magazine. Vol. 5, No. 19, November 1944

The testimony was now all in, and I rose to make the defence. I went over the evidence and showed that there was nothing against the prisoner but the one fact of possession, always a strong one, I admitted, but in this case outweighed by the too apparent malice and guilt of the girl Murray, who had not only hated and plotted to ruin her, but had stolen from her herself. In proof of this, I alluded to her jealousy, her threats, and her too great readiness in throwing suspicion upon Selina; I dwelt upon the circumstance that a bit of plush which appeared to be a cutting from Mary Murray’s work was found upon the stolen dress although it had been packed away for a long time previous to being found in the prisoner’s possession. It had not been shown that Selina White ever had any plush or had ever been in Mary Murray’s room to obtain it. “Then how,” I asked, “did this detective shred find an opportunity to fasten itself upon the dress in a sudden transit from its owner’s trunk to a stranger’s travelling-bag? Perhaps,” I suggested, “Mary Murray might tell us. She had a similar shred attached to her shawl, and is it not possible, nay probable, that she could tell how and where its fellow became attached to the trimming of the stolen dress? Might it not have been caught in a temporary lodgment in her room, or by contact with her own clothes? How else?” In view of all the circumstances proved, it was easier to believe that Mary Murray had stolen the clothes and then put them in Selina White’s carpet-bag in order to ruin her than that Selina had stolen them.

I then touched upon the garnet ring, showing that it undoubtedly belonged to the prisoner, and had been taken from her carpet-bag when the stolen articles had been deposited there. The judge whispered a moment with one of the officers near him; then rose and pronounced Selina White innocent of the charge preferred against her. There was a loud burst of applause. I took Selina’s little cold hand in mine and told her she had better leave with me at once. We had just reached the door when Miles Allen joined us, shaking hands and laughing and talking so fast that one could hardly understand him. I learned this, however, that he and Selina loved each other too well to be far separated; that Selina had come to get work near Miles at his suggestion; that, owing to a series of blunders not so easily explained as frequently met with, she had failed to find him on her arrival, but that certain of meeting him soon she had spent her time in looking for employment till she was arrested for theft and lodged in jail. Miles declared himself to have been surprised beyond expression when on going to the court-room to make complaint of some wrong done to himself, he saw the very “girl he loved best” in the dock on trial.

But the lovers were happy now. And so was I, notwithstanding my old overcoat. I don’t know whether or not Miles Allen noticed that I was thinly clad and that spite of a strong effort of will, I showed great sensitiveness to the cold on reaching the outer air, but this I know, that the warm-hearted fellow gave into my hand (I don’t say paid for of course I never charged him or Selina anything) the price of one of the very best overcoats I ever wore.

There may be some who are desirous to know whatever more I can tell them about the garnet ring. I will therefore add that soon after the trial the morning papers reported Mary Murray to have been convicted of stealing a ring and fined twenty dollars, failing to pay which, she was sent to jail.

Death at the Porthole by Baynard Kendrick

We welcome the first appearance in EQMM of Baynard Kendrick whose Captain Duncan Maclain is easily the best-known blind detective on the contemporary scene — a worthy successor to Ernest Bramah’s Max Carrados, the first and most famous of all blind sleuths. Captain Maclain, you’ll remember, crashed Hollywood in a Class A picture — “Eyes in the Dark” starring Edward Arnold as the blind detective whose assistant was a Seeing Eye dog.