We sent in the corrected ARC for Six For Gold a couple of
weeks ago, so the presses start rolling soon. Publication
date has been moved up slightly, and Sixfer will now appear
around Halloween, as if that celebration was not scary enough.
Having dealt with the in, now the out. And what is out is
our second story with Herodotus as sleuth (mentioned in
Eric's Bit above) now gracing bookstore shelves in The Mammoth
Book of Historical Whodunnits: Volume III (The Mammoth Book of New
Historical Whodunnits in the US) ed Mike Ashley. Stories in
this collection span three thousand years and we show up early
in the roll call with an account of how a strange Egyptian
ritual helps Herodotus solve a mysterious death.
Having cited an in and an out and told you what it's all about,
we now suggest a short break while readers do the hokey-cokey.
Just don't get into arguments about whether it's cokey or pokey,
if you please.
MARY'S BIT or A STRANGE CASE
Reading l9th century obituaries is fascinating because of
the light they shed in passing on different times and social
conditions. For example, what we now regard as relatively
minor childhood illnesses could and did carry off half a
family, clothing catching fire was a common cause of death
for both adult and child, and with little industrial
regulation fatal accidents, particularly in railway shunting
yards, are repeatedly recorded.
There were also, as today, less natural deaths. A month or
so ago I read an obituary relating an interesting sequence
of events, which had it not been a real life tragedy would
make a good basis for a short mystery story.
Late in the l890s neighbours realised animals on the farm
next door were neglected. Investigating, they went around the
back of the house and saw a ladder next to the window of the
second floor bedroom wherein slept the farm owner. The
dwelling had been ransacked and the farmer was found murdered
in his room, having been strangled, shot, and his head battered.
The day before, the farmer had reportedly quarrelled with
his housekeeper, who left in a huff to reside elsewhere.
There had also been some trouble between the farmer and the
housekeeper's son, who at one time also resided in the house
but was now working at a nearby location. Two days after the
murder, the son was arrested and a hearing set for the beginning
of the following week.
According to a war injury census taken eight years before
the farmer died, he was suffering impairment to both hearing
and sight as well as some paralysis as a result of military
service in the Civil War. In his mid-60s at the time of his
death, he was described as being a peaceful, honest person
-- although with a bit of a taste for liquor.
It was established that not long before he died, the farmer
had travelled to a nearby settlement where a large debt owed
to him was settled in cash. It seems he foolishly exhibited
this money during a visit to a saloon on his return home.
The farmer was fairly well off, and his will, made about six
months before he died, left all he possessed to his brother.
The obituary ended with the strange comment that this will
was likely to be contested, but the reporter did not say why
or by whom.
Supposing this outline formed the basis for a fictional
account of a crime, its writer could certainly point out a few
clues. For example, placing the ladder next to the bedroom
window demonstrates some knowledge of the layout of the house,
for most burglars would surely creep in downstairs. On the
other hand, they might decide to enter the house in that
fashion if they knew the farmer was incapacitated as
described above and the downstairs windows and doors were
securely bolted. This suggests someone who knew the man.
Alternatively, there is the possibility the murderer was
someone who was not a personal acquaintance, but had seen
his display of wealth at the saloon, followed him home,
waited until he retired, and then entered the house and
(going by the dreadful injuries) tried to force him to tell
where he had hidden the cash. It appears he did not reveal
its whereabouts since the house had been ransacked, and it
seems unlikely it would be searched and the ladder only then
put in place.
On the other hand, while the person responsible could hardly
have arrived with a ladder, it was a fair bet one could be
found on a farm. It may be the ladder was set by the window
as a red herring, since the farmer would surely welcome a
visit if someone he knew came calling that night and there
would be no need to enter the house by the window -- or was
it used as a means to *exit* the building? Was the money
located and taken away? No mention is made of any being
found in the ransacked house.
There is also the distinct possibility the quarrels and the
departure of both the housekeeper and her son was common
knowledge locally, and the way gossip travels in small
settlements it's fairly certain a fair number in the area
knew this elderly, semi-paralysed man who had come into a
large sum of money was currently living alone.
Then there is the odd hint someone might challenge the will.
According to a census taken some 50 years earlier, the
brother named as sole heir was the first born child, two
years older than the farmer. Was there someone with a closer
relationship who could challenge his inheritance?
The murdered man's closest relatives appear to be his
siblings. The farmer was the second child, and there were
three younger children -- a brother and two sisters. There
may have been others born after the census was taken, of
course. The parents might have still been alive, but it's
doubtful given by the time of the murder they would both be
in their lower 90s.
Is it possible there was an unknown wife and/or child(ren)?
The obituary stated that the farmer had been born on the
farm and always lived there. This is not to say that a wife
and family could not also have resided with him, but no
mention is made of either. Even if there were such relatives
and they came forward to challenge the will, it does not
seem likely they would prevail if the will was correctly
drawn up and witnessed. And then one might well ask what
information was known to the reporter to lead him to state
that such a challenge was likely? Why was the housekeeper's
son arrested for the murder? What caused the quarrel with
the housekeeper the day before the farmer died, and what was
the nature of the trouble between him and the housekeeper's
son? How many knew about the large sum of money the farmer
had at the time? Could there have been other motives for the
crime?
I wish I could tell you the answer to these questions, but I
haven't been able to find further information or establish
the end of this strange story.
Yet.
AND FINALLY
Two months hence memories of the torrid summer for 2005 will
be fading as fast as its suntans and we'll be enjoying the
cooler weather and glowing colours of autumn. Now, as a
brazen sun rises day after day, bent on hammering the earth
into submission on its iron anvil, we find some relief in
thinking it will not be much longer before fall arrives, for
the nights are already noticeably drawing in as another year
rolls along its appointed round.
And speaking of appointed rounds, William Cowper described
the postman as a whistling, light-hearted wretch bringing
grief to thousands and joy to a few. The same could well be
said of the electronic mail server which will bring you the
next issue of Orphan Scrivener on l5th October. But never
mind, you still have time to move or at least change your
email address. Otherwise, we'll see you then.
Best wishes
Mary R and Eric
who invite you to visit their home page, hanging out on the
virtual washing line at http://home.epix.net/~maywrite/
There you'll find the usual suspects, including more
personal essays, a list of author freebies, Doom Cat (an
interactive game written by Eric), and a jigsaw featuring
the handsome cover of Five For Silver. There's also an
Orphan Scrivener archive, so don't say you weren't warned!
Intrepid subscribers may also wish to pop over to visit
Eric's blog at http://www.journalscape.com/ericmayer/