Добавил:
ivanov666
Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз:
Предмет:
Файл:Memories and Adventures
.pdf
MEMORIES AND ADVENTURES
expect justice, but rather that you are up against an unavowed
Trade Union the members of which are not going to act the
blackleg to each other, and which subordinates the public interest to a false idea of loyalty. What confronts you is a determination to admit nothing which inculpates another offi cial, and
as to the idea of punishing another offi cial for offences which
have caused misery to helpless victims, it never comes within
their horizon. Even now, after the lapse of so many years, I can
hardly think with patience of the handling of this case.
The mistake that I made, so far as my own interests were
concerned, was that having got on the track of the miscreant
I let the police and the Home Offi ce know my results before
they were absolutely completed. There was a strong primâ fa-
cie case, but it needed the goodwill and co-operation of the
authorities to ram it home. That co-operation was wanting,
which was intelligible, in the case of the local police, since it
traversed their previous convictions and conclusions, but was
inexcusable in the Home Offi ce. The law offi cers of the Crown
upheld their view that there was not a primâ facie case, but
I fear that consciously or unconsciously the same trade union
principle was at work. Let me briefl y state the case that the
public may judge. I will call the suspect “X.” I was able to show:
1. That “X” had shown a peculiar knife or horse-lancet to
some one and had stated that this knife did the crimes. I had
this knife in my possession.
2. That this knife or a similar knife must have been used
in some of the crimes, as shown by the shallow incision.
281
ARTHUR CONAN DOYLE
3. That “X” had been trained in the slaughter-yard and the
cattle-ship, and was accustomed to brutal treatment of animals.
4. That he had a clear record both of anonymous letters
and of destructive propensities.
5. That his writing and that of his brother exactly fi tted
into the two writings of the anonymous letters. In this I had
strong independent evidence.
6. That he had shown signs of periodical insanity, and that
his household and bedroom were such that he could leave unseen at any hour of the night.
There were very many corroborative evidences, but those
were the main ones, coupled with the fact that when “X” was
away for some years the letters and outrages stopped, but began
again when he returned. On the other hand, when EdaljI was
put in prison the outrages went on the same as before.
It will hardly be believed that after I had laid these facts
before the Home Offi ce they managed to present the House
of Commons with the offi cial legal opinion that there was not
a primâ facie case, while a high offi cial of the Government said
to me: “I see no more evidence against these two brothers than
against myself and my brother.” The points I mention are taken from the paper I laid before the law offi cers of the Crown,
which lies before me as I write, so the facts are exactly as stated.
I had one letter in sorrow and also in anger from the Staffordshire police complaining that I should be libelling this
poor young man whose identity could easily be established.
I do not know what has become of “X” or how often he has
been convicted since, but on the last occasion of which I have
282
MEMORIES AND ADVENTURES
notes the magistrate said in condemning him to six months’
imprisonment with hard labour: “His character was extremely
bad, he having been convicted of arson, of stealing on three
occasions and of damage. On his own confession he had committed a deliberate and cruel theft from his aged mother and
it was impossible to overlook the seriousness of the case.” So
much for the inoffensive youth whom I had libelled! But what
about Edalji’s three years of gaol?
On September 18, 1907, I married Miss Jean Leckie, the
younger daughter of a Blackheath family whom I had known
for years, and who was a dear friend of my mother and sister.
There are some things which one feels too intimately to be able
to express, and I can only say that the years have passed without one shadow coming to mar even for a moment the sunshine of my Indian summer which now deepens to a golden
autumn. She and my three younger children with the kindly
sympathy of my two elder ones have made my home an ideally
happy one.
My wife’s people had a house at Crowborough, and there
they had gone to reside. As they were very attached I thought
it would be a happy arrangement not to s eparate them, so
I bought a house close by, named “Windlesham.” As I paid
for it by a sum of money which I recovered after I had been
unjustly defrauded of it, my friends suggested “Swindlesham”
as a more appropriate name. Thus it came about that in 1907
I left Undershaw, Hindhead, after ten years’ residence, and
moved myself and my belongings to the highlands of Sussex,
where I still dwell in the few months of settled life which give
me a rest between my wanderings.
283
ARTHUR CONAN DOYLE
Very soon after my marriage, having just got clear of the
EdaljI case, I became entangled in that of Oscar Slater. The one
was in a way the cause of the other, for since I was generally
given credit for having got EdaljI out of his troubles, it was
hoped by those who believed that Slater’s condemnation was
a miscarriage of justice that I might be able to do the same
for him. I went into the matter most reluctantly, but when
I glanced at the facts, I saw that it was an even worse case than
the EdaljI one, and that this unhappy man had in all probability no more to do with the murder for which he had been
condemned than I had. I am convinced that when on being
convicted he cried out to the judge that he never knew that
such a woman as the murdered woman existed he was speaking the literal truth.
In one respect the Oscar Slater case was not so serious as
the EdaljI one, because Slater was not a very desirable member
of society. He had never, so far as is known, been in trouble
as a criminal, but he was a gambler and adventurer of uncertain morals and dubious ways – a German Jew by extraction,
living under an alias. Edalji, on the other hand, was a blameless youth. But in another aspect Slater’s case was worse than
that of Edalji, since the charge was murder. He was very nearly
hanged, and fi nally the life sentence was actually carried out,
so that the wrong was never righted and at the present moment the unfortunate man is in gaol. It is a dreadful blot upon
the administration of justice in Scotland, and such judicial
crimes are not, I am convinced, done with impunity even to
the most humble. Somehow – somewhere, there comes a national punishment in return.
284
MEMORIES AND ADVENTURES
The case was roughly this: an elderly woman, Miss Gilchrist,
was done to death most brutally in her fl at, while her servantmaid, Helen Lambie, was absent for ten minutes on an errand.
Her head was beaten to pieces by some hard instrument. The
neighbours were alarmed by the noise, and one of them, together with the maid, actually saw the murderer, a young man,
leave the fl at and pass him at the door. The police description at the time was by no means in agreement with Slater’s
appearance. Robbery did not appear to be the motive of the
crime, for nothing was missing unless it was a single diamond
brooch. On the other hand, a box of papers had been broken
into and left in disorder. The date was December 21, 1908.
And now comes the great fact which is admitted by all, and
which makes the whole case wildly improbable if not utterly
impossible. It was thought that a diamond brooch had been
taken. It was found out that a diamond brooch had also been
pawned by the Bohemian Slater, who had started for America. Was it not clear that he was the murderer? New York was
warned. Slater was arrested and in due time was returned to
Glasgow. Then came the fi asco. It was found beyond all doubt
that the brooch in question had been in Slater’s possession for
years, and that it had nothing to do with Miss Gilchrist at all.
This should have been the end of the case. It was too preposterous to suppose that out of all the folk in Glasgow the police had arrested the right man by pure chance – for that was
what it amounted to. But the public had lost its head, and so
had the police. If the case had completely gone to pieces surely
it could be reconstructed in some fresh form. Slater was poor
and friendless. He had lived with a woman, which shocked
285
ARTHUR CONAN DOYLE
Scotch morality. As one writer boldly said in the press: “Even
if he did not do it, he deserved to be condemned, anyhow.”
A case was made up in the most absurd manner. A half-crown
card of tools was found in his box with the sort of tools which
are found on such cards. The frail hammer was evidently
the instrument which had beaten in the woman’s skull. The
handle might have been cleaned. Then surely there had been
blood on it. The police description was already amended so
as to be nearer to Slater. He, a sallow, dark-haired Jew, was
picked out by witnesses from among a group of fair Scotsmen.
Some one had been seen waiting in the street for some nights
before. This some one was variously described by many witnesses. Some descriptions would fi t Slater, some were his very
opposite. The people who saw the murderer leave thought it
might be Slater, but were not sure. The chief witness, Adams,
was very short-sighted and had not his glasses. A clear alibi was
proved by Slater, but as his mistress and his servant girl were
the witnesses, it was not allowed. Whom could he produce
save the inmates of his house? No attempt was ever made to
show that Slater had any connection with Miss Gilchrist, or
with the maid, Lambie, and as Slater was really a stranger in
Glasgow, it was impossible to see how he could have known
anything about this retired old maid. But he was not too well
defended, while Mr. Ure, the Advocate-General of Scotland,
prosecuting for the State, thundered away in a most violent
speech in which several statements were made, uncorrected by
Judge Guthrie, which were very inexact, and which must have
powerfully swayed the jury. Finally, the Crown got a conviction by nine votes to six (fi ve “not proven “) – which, of course,
286
MEMORIES AND ADVENTURES
would have meant a new trial in England, and the wretched
foreigner was condemned to death. The scaffold was actually
erected, and it was only two mornings before his execution
that the order came which prevented a judicial murder. As it
was, the man became a convict – and is one still.
It is an atrocious story, and as I read it and realized the
wickedness of it all, I was moved to do all I could for the man.
I was aided by the opinion of Sir Herbert Stephen, who read
the evidence and declared that there was not even a primâ fa-
cie case against the man. I, therefore, started a newspaper agitation and wrote a small book with an account of the whole
matter. The consciences of some people responded, and fi nally
we got up suffi cient pressure to induce the Government to appoint a Commissioner, Sheriff Miller, to examine the case. It
was all to no purpose, and the examination was a farce. The
terms of reference were so narrow that the conduct of the police was entirely excluded, which was really the very thing at
issue, since we held that where their original evidence failed
them, they had strained many points in trying to build up
a case and to obtain a verdict. It was also decided that evidence
should not be on oath. The result was that there was no result,
nor could there be with such limitations. None the less, some
fresh evidence was put forward which further weakened the
already very weak case for the prosecution. For example, at the
trial it had been stated that Slater, on reaching Liverpool from
Glasgow, had gone to a Liverpool hotel under a false name, as
if he were trying to throw the police off his track. It was shown
that this was not true, and that he had signed the register with
his own Glasgow name. I say his Glasgow name, for he had sev-
287
ARTHUR CONAN DOYLE
eral pseudonyms in the course of his not too reputable career,
and, as a fact, he took his actual passage under a false name,
showing that he intended to make a clear start in America. He
was, according to his own account, pursued by some woman –
probably his lawful wife – and this covering of tracks was to
escape this huntress. The fact that he used his own name at the
hotel showed that the new name was for American rather than
for British use, and that he had no fear of Glasgow pursuit.
We could do no more, and there the matter rested. There
was a very ugly aftermath of the case, which consisted of what
appeared to be persecution of Mr. Trench, a detective who had
given evidence at the inquiry which told in favour of our view.
A charge was shortly afterwards made against both him and
a solicitor, Mr. Cook, who had been conspicuous upon Slater’s
side, which might well have ruined them both. As it was, it
caused them great anxiety and expense. There had been a most
unpleasant political fl avour to the whole proceedings; but on
this occasion the case came before a Conservative Judge, Mr.
Scott Dickson, who declared that it should never have been
brought into court, and dismissed it forthwith with contempt.
It is a curious circumstance that as I write, in 1924, Judge
Guthrie, Cook, Trench, Helen Lambie, Miller and others have
all passed on. But Slater still remains, eating out his heart at
Peterhead.
One strange psychic fact should be mentioned which was
brought to my notice by an eminent English K.C. There was
a Spiritualist circle which used to meet at Falkirk, and shortly
after the trial messages were received by it which purported
to come from the murdered woman. She was asked what the
288
MEMORIES AND ADVENTURES
weapon was which had slain her. She answered that it was
an iron box-opener. Now I had pondered over the nature of
certain wounds in the woman’s face, which consisted of two
cuts with a little bridge of unbroken skin between. They might
have been caused by the claw end of a hammer, but on the
other hand, one of the woman’s eyes had been pushed back
into her brain, which could hardly have been done by a hammer, which would have burst the eyeball fi rst. I could think of
no instrument which would meet the case. But the box-opener
would exactly do so, for it has a forked end which would make
the double wound, and it is also straight so that it might very
well penetrate to the brain, driving the eye in front of it. The
reader will reasonably ask why did not the Spiritualists ask
the name of the criminal. I believe that they did and received
a reply, but I do not think that such evidence could or should
ever be used or published. It could only be useful as the starting point of an inquiry.
There was one intervention during those years to which
I look back with satisfaction, and that was my protest against
the King’s Oath before the Coronation of King Edward. The
Oath was actually changed, and though my protest may have
had no effect upon that historic fact, it was none the less the
fi rst letter in “The Times” upon the subject.
It ran thus:
SIR, – Surely Colonel Sandys and the members of the Protestant Reformation Society should, looking at the matter simply from their own point of view, recognize that the surest way
to strengthen any creed is, as the whole history of the world
has proved, to persecute it. And it is mere juggling with words
289
ARTHUR CONAN DOYLE
to attempt to show that it is anything other than persecution
to hold up the Roman Catholic faith to obloquy in the Coronation Oath, while every other creed, Christian or non-Christian, is left unassailed. Is it not a shocking thing that, while Roman Catholic chapels throughout the whole Empire are still
draped in black for a deceased Monarch, his successor should
be compelled by law to insult the most intimate convictions of
these same mourners?
And is it not a most narrow and foolish policy, unworthy
of this tolerant age, that a young King should be forced to offend the feelings of great numbers of Irishmen, Canadians and
other subjects? I feel sure that, apart from Catholics, the great
majority of broadminded thinkers of any or of no denomination in this country are of opinion that the outcry of fanatics
should be disregarded, and that all creeds should receive the
same courteous and respectful treatment so long as their adherents are members of the common Empire. To bring these
medieval rancours to an end would indeed be an auspicious
opening of a new reign.
Yours faithfully,
ARTHUR CONAN DOYLE.
290
Соседние файлы в предмете [НЕСОРТИРОВАННОЕ]