<h4><SPAN name="VIII" id="VIII">VIII</SPAN></h4>
<h3>FROM THE DIARY OF SHERLOCK HOLMES</h3>
<p><br/><i>Baker Street, January</i> 1.—Starting a diary in order to jot
down a few useful incidents which will be of no use to
Watson. Watson very often fails to see that an unsuccessful
case is more interesting from a professional point of view
than a successful case. He means well.</p>
<p><i>January</i> 6.—Watson has gone to Brighton for a few days,
for change of air. This morning quite an interesting little
incident happened which I note as a useful example of how
sometimes people who have no powers of deduction
nevertheless stumble on the truth for the wrong reason.
(This never happens to Watson, <i>fortunately</i>.) Lestrade
called from Scotland Yard with reference to the theft of a
diamond and ruby ring from Lady Dorothy Smith's wedding
presents. The facts of the case were briefly these: On
Thursday evening such of the presents as were jewels had
been brought down from Lady Dorothy's bedroom to the
drawing-room to be shown to an admiring group of friends.
The ring was amongst them. After they had been shown, the
jewels were taken upstairs once more and locked in the safe.
The next morning the ring was missing. Lestrade, after
investigating the matter, came to the conclusion that the
ring had not been stolen, but had either been dropped in the
drawing-room, or replaced in one of the other cases; but
since he had searched the room and the remaining cases, his
theory so far received no support. I accompanied him to
Eaton Square to the residence of Lady Middlesex, Lady
Dorothy's mother.</p>
<p>While we were engaged in searching the drawing-room,
Lestrade uttered a cry of triumph and produced the ring from
the lining of the arm-chair. I told him he might enjoy the
triumph, but that the matter was not quite so simple as he
seemed to think. A glance at the ring had shown me not only
that the stones were false, but that the false ring had been
made in a hurry. To deduce the name of its maker was of
course child's play. Lestrade or any pupil of Scotland Yard
would have taken for granted it was the same jeweller who
had made the real ring. I asked for the bridegroom's
present, and in a short time I was interviewing the
jeweller who had provided it. As I thought, he had made a
ring, with imitation stones (made of the dust of real
stones), a week ago, for a young lady. She had given no name
and had fetched and paid for it herself. I deduced the
obvious fact that Lady Dorothy had lost the real ring, her
uncle's gift, and, not daring to say so, had had an
imitation ring made. I returned to the house, where I found
Lestrade, who had called to make arrangements for watching
the presents during their exhibition.</p>
<p>I asked for Lady Dorothy, who at once said to me:</p>
<p>"The ring was found yesterday by Mr Lestrade."</p>
<p>"I know," I answered, "but which ring?"</p>
<p>She could not repress a slight twitch of the eyelids as she
said: "There was only one ring."</p>
<p>I told her of my discovery and of my investigations.</p>
<p>"This is a very odd coincidence, Mr Holmes," she said. "Some
one else must have ordered an imitation. But you shall
examine my ring for yourself." Where-upon she fetched the
ring, and I saw it was no imitation. She had of course in
the meantime found the real ring.</p>
<p>But to my intense annoyance she took it to Lestrade and said
to him:</p>
<p>"Isn't this the ring you found yesterday, Mr Lestrade?"</p>
<p>Lestrade examined it and said, "Of course it is absolutely
identical in every respect."</p>
<p>"And do you think it is an imitation?" asked this most
provoking young lady.</p>
<p>"Certainly not," said Lestrade, and turning to me he added:
"Ah! Holmes, that is where theory leads one. At the Yard we
go in for facts."</p>
<p>I could say nothing; but as I said good-bye to Lady Dorothy,
I congratulated her on having found the real ring. The
incident, although it proved the correctness of my
reasoning, was vexing as it gave that ignorant blunderer an
opportunity of crowing over me.</p>
<p><i>January</i> 10.—A man called just as Watson and I were having
breakfast. He didn't give his name. He asked me if I knew
who he was. I said, "Beyond seeing that you are unmarried,
that you have travelled up this morning from Sussex, that
you have served in the French Army, that you write for
reviews, and are especially interested in the battles of the
Middle Ages, that you give lectures, that you are a Roman
Catholic, and that you have once been to Japan, I don't
know who you are."</p>
<p>The man replied that he <i>was</i> unmarried, but that he lived
in Manchester, that he had never been to Sussex or Japan,
that he had never written a line in his life, that he had
never served in any army save the English Territorial force,
that so far from being a Roman Catholic he was a Freemason,
and that he was by trade an electrical engineer—I suspected
him of lying; and I asked him why his boots were covered
with the clayey and chalk mixture peculiar to Horsham; why
his boots were French Army service boots, elastic-sided, and
bought probably at Valmy; why the second half of a return
ticket from Southwater was emerging from his ticket-pocket;
why he wore the medal of St Anthony on his watch-chain; why
he smoked Caporal cigarettes; why the proofs of an article
on the Battle of Eylau were protruding from his
breast-pocket, together with a copy of the <i>Tablet</i>; why he
carried in his hand a parcel which, owing to the untidy way
in which it had been made (an untidiness which, in harmony
with the rest of his clothes, showed that he could not be
married) revealed the fact that it contained photographic
magic lantern slides; and why he was tattooed on the left
wrist with a Japanese fish.</p>
<p>"The reason I have come to consult you will explain some of
these things," he answered.</p>
<p>"I was staying last night at the Windsor Hotel, and this
morning when I woke up I found an entirely different set of
clothes from my own. I called the waiter and pointed this
out, but neither the waiter nor any of the other servants,
after making full enquiries, were able to account for the
change. None of the other occupants of the hotel had
complained of anything being wrong with their own clothes.</p>
<p>"Two gentlemen had gone out early from the hotel at 7.30.
One of them had left for good, the other was expected to
return.</p>
<p>"All the belongings I am wearing, including this parcel,
which contains slides, belong to someone else.</p>
<p>"My own things contained nothing valuable, and consisted of
clothes and boots very similar to these; my coat was also
stuffed with papers. As to the tattoo, it was done at a
Turkish bath by a shampooer, who learnt the trick in the
Navy."</p>
<p>The case did not present any features of the slightest
interest. I merely advised the man to return to the hotel
and await the real owner of the clothes, who was evidently
the man who had gone out at 7.30.</p>
<p>This is a case of my reasoning being, with one partial
exception, perfectly correct. Everything I had deduced would
no doubt have fitted the real owner of the clothes.</p>
<p>Watson asked rather irrelevantly why I had not noticed that
the clothes were not the man's own clothes.</p>
<p>A stupid question, as the clothes were reach-me-downs which
fitted him as well as such clothes ever do fit, and he was
probably of the same build as their rightful owner.</p>
<p><i>January</i> 12.—Found a carbuncle of unusual size in the
plum-pudding. Suspected the makings of an interesting case.
But luckily, before I had stated any hypothesis to
Watson—who was greatly excited—Mrs Turner came in and
noticed it and said her naughty nephew Bill had been at his
tricks again, and that the red stone had come from a
Christmas tree. Of course, I had not examined the stone with
my lens.</p>
<hr class="chap" />
<div style="break-after:column;"></div><br />