<p>"Let us now transport ourselves, in fancy, to this chamber. What shall we
first seek here? The means of egress employed by the murderers. It is not
too much to say that neither of us believe in pr�ternatural events.
Madame and Mademoiselle L'Espanaye were not destroyed by spirits. The
doers of the deed were material, and escaped materially. Then how?
Fortunately, there is but one mode of reasoning upon the point, and that
mode <i>must</i> lead us to a definite decision.—Let us examine,
each by each, the possible means of egress. It is clear that the assassins
were in the room where Mademoiselle L'Espanaye was found, or at least in
the room adjoining, when the party ascended the stairs. It is then only
from these two apartments that we have to seek issues. The police have
laid bare the floors, the ceilings, and the masonry of the walls, in every
direction. No <i>secret</i> issues could have escaped their vigilance.
But, not trusting to <i>their</i> eyes, I examined with my own. There
were, then, no secret issues. Both doors leading from the rooms into the
passage were securely locked, with the keys inside. Let us turn to the
chimneys. These, although of ordinary width for some eight or ten feet
above the hearths, will not admit, throughout their extent, the body of a
large cat. The impossibility of egress, by means already stated, being
thus absolute, we are reduced to the windows. Through those of the front
room no one could have escaped without notice from the crowd in the
street. The murderers <i>must</i> have passed, then, through those of the
back room. Now, brought to this conclusion in so unequivocal a manner as
we are, it is not our part, as reasoners, to reject it on account of
apparent impossibilities. It is only left for us to prove that these
apparent 'impossibilities' are, in reality, not such.</p>
<p>"There are two windows in the chamber. One of them is unobstructed by
furniture, and is wholly visible. The lower portion of the other is hidden
from view by the head of the unwieldy bedstead which is thrust close up
against it. The former was found securely fastened from within. It
resisted the utmost force of those who endeavored to raise it. A large
gimlet-hole had been pierced in its frame to the left, and a very stout
nail was found fitted therein, nearly to the head. Upon examining the
other window, a similar nail was seen similarly fitted in it; and a
vigorous attempt to raise this sash, failed also. The police were now
entirely satisfied that egress had not been in these directions. And, <i>therefore</i>,
it was thought a matter of supererogation to withdraw the nails and open
the windows.</p>
<p>"My own examination was somewhat more particular, and was so for the
reason I have just given—because here it was, I knew, that all
apparent impossibilities <i>must</i> be proved to be not such in reality.</p>
<p>"I proceeded to think thus—<i>� posteriori</i>. The murderers
did escape from one of these windows. This being so, they could not have
refastened the sashes from the inside, as they were found fastened;—the
consideration which put a stop, through its obviousness, to the scrutiny
of the police in this quarter. Yet the sashes <i>were</i> fastened. They
<i>must</i>, then, have the power of fastening themselves. There was no
escape from this conclusion. I stepped to the unobstructed casement,
withdrew the nail with some difficulty and attempted to raise the sash. It
resisted all my efforts, as I had anticipated. A concealed spring must, I
now know, exist; and this corroboration of my idea convinced me that my
premises at least, were correct, however mysterious still appeared the
circumstances attending the nails. A careful search soon brought to light
the hidden spring. I pressed it, and, satisfied with the discovery,
forbore to upraise the sash.</p>
<p>"I now replaced the nail and regarded it attentively. A person passing out
through this window might have reclosed it, and the spring would have
caught—but the nail could not have been replaced. The conclusion was
plain, and again narrowed in the field of my investigations. The assassins
<i>must</i> have escaped through the other window. Supposing, then, the
springs upon each sash to be the same, as was probable, there <i>must</i>
be found a difference between the nails, or at least between the modes of
their fixture. Getting upon the sacking of the bedstead, I looked over the
head-board minutely at the second casement. Passing my hand down behind
the board, I readily discovered and pressed the spring, which was, as I
had supposed, identical in character with its neighbor. I now looked at
the nail. It was as stout as the other, and apparently fitted in the same
manner—driven in nearly up to the head.</p>
<p>"You will say that I was puzzled; but, if you think so, you must have
misunderstood the nature of the inductions. To use a sporting phrase, I
had not been once 'at fault.' The scent had never for an instant been
lost. There was no flaw in any link of the chain. I had traced the secret
to its ultimate result,—and that result was <i>the nail.</i> It had,
I say, in every respect, the appearance of its fellow in the other window;
but this fact was an absolute nullity (conclusive us it might seem to be)
when compared with the consideration that here, at this point, terminated
the clew. 'There <i>must</i> be something wrong,' I said, 'about the
nail.' I touched it; and the head, with about a quarter of an inch of the
shank, came off in my fingers. The rest of the shank was in the
gimlet-hole where it had been broken off. The fracture was an old one (for
its edges were incrusted with rust), and had apparently been accomplished
by the blow of a hammer, which had partially imbedded, in the top of the
bottom sash, the head portion of the nail. I now carefully replaced this
head portion in the indentation whence I had taken it, and the resemblance
to a perfect nail was complete—the fissure was invisible. Pressing
the spring, I gently raised the sash for a few inches; the head went up
with it, remaining firm in its bed. I closed the window, and the semblance
of the whole nail was again perfect.</p>
<p>"The riddle, so far, was now unriddled. The assassin had escaped through
the window which looked upon the bed. Dropping of its own accord upon his
exit (or perhaps purposely closed), it had become fastened by the spring;
and it was the retention of this spring which had been mistaken by the
police for that of the nail,—farther inquiry being thus considered
unnecessary.</p>
<p>"The next question is that of the mode of descent. Upon this point I had
been satisfied in my walk with you around the building. About five feet
and a half from the casement in question there runs a lightning-rod. From
this rod it would have been impossible for any one to reach the window
itself, to say nothing of entering it. I observed, however, that the
shutters of the fourth story were of the peculiar kind called by Parisian
carpenters <i>ferrades</i>—a kind rarely employed at the present
day, but frequently seen upon very old mansions at Lyons and Bordeaux.
They are in the form of an ordinary door, (a single, not a folding door)
except that the lower half is latticed or worked in open trellis—thus
affording an excellent hold for the hands. In the present instance these
shutters are fully three feet and a half broad. When we saw them from the
rear of the house, they were both about half open—that is to say,
they stood off at right angles from the wall. It is probable that the
police, as well as myself, examined the back of the tenement; but, if so,
in looking at these <i>ferrades</i> in the line of their breadth (as they
must have done), they did not perceive this great breadth itself, or, at
all events, failed to take it into due consideration. In fact, having once
satisfied themselves that no egress could have been made in this quarter,
they would naturally bestow here a very cursory examination. It was clear
to me, however, that the shutter belonging to the window at the head of
the bed, would, if swung fully back to the wall, reach to within two feet
of the lightning-rod. It was also evident that, by exertion of a very
unusual degree of activity and courage, an entrance into the window, from
the rod, might have been thus effected.—By reaching to the distance
of two feet and a half (we now suppose the shutter open to its whole
extent) a robber might have taken a firm grasp upon the trellis-work.
Letting go, then, his hold upon the rod, placing his feet securely against
the wall, and springing boldly from it, he might have swung the shutter so
as to close it, and, if we imagine the window open at the time, might even
have swung himself into the room.</p>
<p>"I wish you to bear especially in mind that I have spoken of a <i>very</i>
unusual degree of activity as requisite to success in so hazardous and so
difficult a feat. It is my design to show you, first, that the thing might
possibly have been accomplished:—but, secondly and <i>chiefly</i>, I
wish to impress upon your understanding the <i>very extraordinary</i>—the
almost pr�ternatural character of that agility which could have
accomplished it.</p>
<p>"You will say, no doubt, using the language of the law, that 'to make out
my case,' I should rather undervalue, than insist upon a full estimation
of the activity required in this matter. This may be the practice in law,
but it is not the usage of reason. My ultimate object is only the truth.
My immediate purpose is to lead you to place in juxtaposition, that <i>very
unusual</i> activity of which I have just spoken with that <i>very
peculiar</i> shrill (or harsh) and <i>unequal</i> voice, about whose
nationality no two persons could be found to agree, and in whose utterance
no syllabification could be detected."</p>
<p>At these words a vague and half-formed conception of the meaning of Dupin
flitted over my mind. I seemed to be upon the verge of comprehension
without power to comprehend—men, at times, find themselves upon the
brink of remembrance without being able, in the end, to remember. My
friend went on with his discourse.</p>
<p>"You will see," he said, "that I have shifted the question from the mode
of egress to that of ingress. It was my design to convey the idea that
both were effected in the same manner, at the same point. Let us now
revert to the interior of the room. Let us survey the appearances here.
The drawers of the bureau, it is said, had been rifled, although many
articles of apparel still remained within them. The conclusion here is
absurd. It is a mere guess—a very silly one—and no more. How
are we to know that the articles found in the drawers were not all these
drawers had originally contained? Madame L'Espanaye and her daughter lived
an exceedingly retired life—saw no company—seldom went out—had
little use for numerous changes of habiliment. Those found were at least
of as good quality as any likely to be possessed by these ladies. If a
thief had taken any, why did he not take the best—why did he not
take all? In a word, why did he abandon four thousand francs in gold to
encumber himself with a bundle of linen? The gold <i>was</i> abandoned.
Nearly the whole sum mentioned by Monsieur Mignaud, the banker, was
discovered, in bags, upon the floor. I wish you, therefore, to discard
from your thoughts the blundering idea of <i>motive</i>, engendered in the
brains of the police by that portion of the evidence which speaks of money
delivered at the door of the house. Coincidences ten times as remarkable
as this (the delivery of the money, and murder committed within three days
upon the party receiving it), happen to all of us every hour of our lives,
without attracting even momentary notice. Coincidences, in general, are
great stumbling-blocks in the way of that class of thinkers who have been
educated to know nothing of the theory of probabilities—that theory
to which the most glorious objects of human research are indebted for the
most glorious of illustration. In the present instance, had the gold been
gone, the fact of its delivery three days before would have formed
something more than a coincidence. It would have been corroborative of
this idea of motive. But, under the real circumstances of the case, if we
are to suppose gold the motive of this outrage, we must also imagine the
perpetrator so vacillating an idiot as to have abandoned his gold and his
motive together.</p>
<p>"Keeping now steadily in mind the points to which I have drawn your
attention—that peculiar voice, that unusual agility, and that
startling absence of motive in a murder so singularly atrocious as this—let
us glance at the butchery itself. Here is a woman strangled to death by
manual strength, and thrust up a chimney, head downward. Ordinary
assassins employ no such modes of murder as this. Least of all, do they
thus dispose of the murdered. In the manner of thrusting the corpse up the
chimney, you will admit that there was something <i>excessively outr�</i>—something
altogether irreconcilable with our common notions of human action, even
when we suppose the actors the most depraved of men. Think, too, how great
must have been that strength which could have thrust the body <i>up</i>
such an aperture so forcibly that the united vigor of several persons was
found barely sufficient to drag it <i>down!</i></p>
<p>"Turn, now, to other indications of the employment of a vigor most
marvellous. On the hearth were thick tresses—very thick tresses—of
grey human hair. These had been torn out by the roots. You are aware of
the great force necessary in tearing thus from the head even twenty or
thirty hairs together. You saw the locks in question as well as myself.
Their roots (a hideous sight!) were clotted with fragments of the flesh of
the scalp—sure token of the prodigious power which had been exerted
in uprooting perhaps half a million of hairs at a time. The throat of the
old lady was not merely cut, but the head absolutely severed from the
body: the instrument was a mere razor. I wish you also to look at the <i>brutal</i>
ferocity of these deeds. Of the bruises upon the body of Madame L'Espanaye
I do not speak. Monsieur Dumas, and his worthy coadjutor Monsieur Etienne,
have pronounced that they were inflicted by some obtuse instrument; and so
far these gentlemen are very correct. The obtuse instrument was clearly
the stone pavement in the yard, upon which the victim had fallen from the
window which looked in upon the bed. This idea, however simple it may now
seem, escaped the police for the same reason that the breadth of the
shutters escaped them—because, by the affair of the nails, their
perceptions had been hermetically sealed against the possibility of the
windows having ever been opened at all.</p>
<p>"If now, in addition to all these things, you have properly reflected upon
the odd disorder of the chamber, we have gone so far as to combine the
ideas of an agility astounding, a strength superhuman, a ferocity brutal,
a butchery without motive, a <i>grotesquerie</i> in horror absolutely
alien from humanity, and a voice foreign in tone to the ears of men of
many nations, and devoid of all distinct or intelligible syllabification.
What result, then, has ensued? What impression have I made upon your
fancy?"</p>
<p>I felt a creeping of the flesh as Dupin asked me the question. "A madman,"
I said, "has done this deed—some raving maniac, escaped from a
neighboring <i>Maison de Sant�.</i>"</p>
<p>"In some respects," he replied, "your idea is not irrelevant. But the
voices of madmen, even in their wildest paroxysms, are never found to
tally with that peculiar voice heard upon the stairs. Madmen are of some
nation, and their language, however incoherent in its words, has always
the coherence of syllabification. Besides, the hair of a madman is not
such as I now hold in my hand. I disentangled this little tuft from the
rigidly clutched fingers of Madame L'Espanaye. Tell me what you can make
of it."</p>
<p>"Dupin!" I said, completely unnerved; "this hair is most unusual—this
is no <i>human</i> hair."</p>
<p>"I have not asserted that it is," said he; "but, before we decide this
point, I wish you to glance at the little sketch I have here traced upon
this paper. It is a <i>fac-simile</i> drawing of what has been described
in one portion of the testimony as 'dark bruises, and deep indentations of
finger nails,' upon the throat of Mademoiselle L'Espanaye, and in another,
(by Messrs. Dumas and Etienne,) as a 'series of livid spots, evidently the
impression of fingers.'</p>
<p>"You will perceive," continued my friend, spreading out the paper upon the
table before us, "that this drawing gives the idea of a firm and fixed
hold. There is no <i>slipping</i> apparent. Each finger has retained—possibly
until the death of the victim—the fearful grasp by which it
originally imbedded itself. Attempt, now, to place all your fingers, at
the same time, in the respective impressions as you see them."</p>
<p>I made the attempt in vain.</p>
<p>"We are possibly not giving this matter a fair trial," he said. "The paper
is spread out upon a plane surface; but the human throat is cylindrical.
Here is a billet of wood, the circumference of which is about that of the
throat. Wrap the drawing around it, and try the experiment again."</p>
<p>I did so; but the difficulty was even more obvious than before. "This," I
said, "is the mark of no human hand."</p>
<p>"Read now," replied Dupin, "this passage from Cuvier."</p>
<p>It was a minute anatomical and generally descriptive account of the large
fulvous Ourang-Outang of the East Indian Islands. The gigantic stature,
the prodigious strength and activity, the wild ferocity, and the imitative
propensities of these mammalia are sufficiently well known to all. I
understood the full horrors of the murder at once.</p>
<p>"The description of the digits," said I, as I made an end of reading, "is
in exact accordance with this drawing. I see that no animal but an
Ourang-Outang, of the species here mentioned, could have impressed the
indentations as you have traced them. This tuft of tawny hair, too, is
identical in character with that of the beast of Cuvier. But I cannot
possibly comprehend the particulars of this frightful mystery. Besides,
there were <i>two</i> voices heard in contention, and one of them was
unquestionably the voice of a Frenchman."</p>
<p>"True; and you will remember an expression attributed almost unanimously,
by the evidence, to this voice,—the expression, '<i>mon Dieu!</i>'
This, under the circumstances, has been justly characterized by one of the
witnesses (Montani, the confectioner,) as an expression of remonstrance or
expostulation. Upon these two words, therefore, I have mainly built my
hopes of a full solution of the riddle. A Frenchman was cognizant of the
murder. It is possible—indeed it is far more than probable—that
he was innocent of all participation in the bloody transactions which took
place. The Ourang-Outang may have escaped from him. He may have traced it
to the chamber; but, under the agitating circumstances which ensued, he
could never have re-captured it. It is still at large. I will not pursue
these guesses—for I have no right to call them more—since the
shades of reflection upon which they are based are scarcely of sufficient
depth to be appreciable by my own intellect, and since I could not pretend
to make them intelligible to the understanding of another. We will call
them guesses then, and speak of them as such. If the Frenchman in question
is indeed, as I suppose, innocent of this atrocity, this advertisement
which I left last night, upon our return home, at the office of 'Le
Monde,' (a paper devoted to the shipping interest, and much sought by
sailors,) will bring him to our residence."</p>
<p>He handed me a paper, and I read thus:</p>
<p>CAUGHT—<i>In the Bois de Boulogne, early in the morning of the—inst.,</i>
(the morning of the murder,) <i>a very large, tawny Ourang-Outang of the
Bornese species. The owner, (who is ascertained to be a sailor, belonging
to a Maltese vessel,) may have the animal again, upon identifying it
satisfactorily, and paying a few charges arising from its capture and
keeping. Call at No. ——, Rue ——, Faubourg St.
Germain—au troisi�me.</i></p>
<p>"How was it possible," I asked, "that you should know the man to be a
sailor, and belonging to a Maltese vessel?"</p>
<p>"I do <i>not</i> know it," said Dupin. "I am not <i>sure</i> of it. Here,
however, is a small piece of ribbon, which from its form, and from its
greasy appearance, has evidently been used in tying the hair in one of
those long <i>queues</i> of which sailors are so fond. Moreover, this knot
is one which few besides sailors can tie, and is peculiar to the Maltese.
I picked the ribbon up at the foot of the lightning-rod. It could not have
belonged to either of the deceased. Now if, after all, I am wrong in my
induction from this ribbon, that the Frenchman was a sailor belonging to a
Maltese vessel, still I can have done no harm in saying what I did in the
advertisement. If I am in error, he will merely suppose that I have been
misled by some circumstance into which he will not take the trouble to
inquire. But if I am right, a great point is gained. Cognizant although
innocent of the murder, the Frenchman will naturally hesitate about
replying to the advertisement—about demanding the Ourang-Outang. He
will reason thus:—'I am innocent; I am poor; my Ourang-Outang is of
great value—to one in my circumstances a fortune of itself—why
should I lose it through idle apprehensions of danger? Here it is, within
my grasp. It was found in the Bois de Boulogne—at a vast distance
from the scene of that butchery. How can it ever be suspected that a brute
beast should have done the deed? The police are at fault—they have
failed to procure the slightest clew. Should they even trace the animal,
it would be impossible to prove me cognizant of the murder, or to
implicate me in guilt on account of that cognizance. Above all, <i>I am
known.</i> The advertiser designates me as the possessor of the beast. I
am not sure to what limit his knowledge may extend. Should I avoid
claiming a property of so great value, which it is known that I possess, I
will render the animal at least, liable to suspicion. It is not my policy
to attract attention either to myself or to the beast. I will answer the
advertisement, get the Ourang-Outang, and keep it close until this matter
has blown over.'"</p>
<p>At this moment we heard a step upon the stairs.</p>
<p>"Be ready," said Dupin, "with your pistols, but neither use them nor show
them until at a signal from myself."</p>
<p>The front door of the house had been left open, and the visitor had
entered, without ringing, and advanced several steps upon the staircase.
Now, however, he seemed to hesitate. Presently we heard him descending.
Dupin was moving quickly to the door, when we again heard him coming up.
He did not turn back a second time, but stepped up with decision, and
rapped at the door of our chamber.</p>
<p>"Come in," said Dupin, in a cheerful and hearty tone.</p>
<p>A man entered. He was a sailor, evidently,—a tall, stout, and
muscular-looking person, with a certain dare-devil expression of
countenance, not altogether unprepossessing. His face, greatly sunburnt,
was more than half hidden by whisker and <i>mustachio.</i> He had with him
a huge oaken cudgel, but appeared to be otherwise unarmed. He bowed
awkwardly, and bade us "good evening," in French accents, which, although
somewhat Neufchatelish, were still sufficiently indicative of a Parisian
origin.</p>
<p>"Sit down, my friend," said Dupin. "I suppose you have called about the
Ourang-Outang. Upon my word, I almost envy you the possession of him; a
remarkably fine, and no doubt a very valuable animal. How old do you
suppose him to be?"</p>
<p>The sailor drew a long breath, with the air of a man relieved of some
intolerable burden, and then replied, in an assured tone:</p>
<p>"I have no way of telling—but he can't be more than four or five
years old. Have you got him here?"</p>
<p>"Oh no, we had no conveniences for keeping him here. He is at a livery
stable in the Rue Dubourg, just by. You can get him in the morning. Of
course you are prepared to identify the property?"</p>
<p>"To be sure I am, sir."</p>
<p>"I shall be sorry to part with him," said Dupin.</p>
<p>"I don't mean that you should be at all this trouble for nothing, sir,"
said the man. "Couldn't expect it. Am very willing to pay a reward for the
finding of the animal—that is to say, any thing in reason."</p>
<p>"Well," replied my friend, "that is all very fair, to be sure. Let me
think!—what should I have? Oh! I will tell you. My reward shall be
this. You shall give me all the information in your power about these
murders in the Rue Morgue."</p>
<p>Dupin said the last words in a very low tone, and very quietly. Just as
quietly, too, he walked toward the door, locked it and put the key in his
pocket. He then drew a pistol from his bosom and placed it, without the
least flurry, upon the table.</p>
<p>The sailor's face flushed up as if he were struggling with suffocation. He
started to his feet and grasped his cudgel, but the next moment he fell
back into his seat, trembling violently, and with the countenance of death
itself. He spoke not a word. I pitied him from the bottom of my heart.</p>
<p>"My friend," said Dupin, in a kind tone, "you are alarming yourself
unnecessarily—you are indeed. We mean you no harm whatever. I pledge
you the honor of a gentleman, and of a Frenchman, that we intend you no
injury. I perfectly well know that you are innocent of the atrocities in
the Rue Morgue. It will not do, however, to deny that you are in some
measure implicated in them. From what I have already said, you must know
that I have had means of information about this matter—means of
which you could never have dreamed. Now the thing stands thus. You have
done nothing which you could have avoided—nothing, certainly, which
renders you culpable. You were not even guilty of robbery, when you might
have robbed with impunity. You have nothing to conceal. You have no reason
for concealment. On the other hand, you are bound by every principle of
honor to confess all you know. An innocent man is now imprisoned, charged
with that crime of which you can point out the perpetrator."</p>
<p>The sailor had recovered his presence of mind, in a great measure, while
Dupin uttered these words; but his original boldness of bearing was all
gone.</p>
<p>"So help me God," said he, after a brief pause, "I will tell you all I
know about this affair;—but I do not expect you to believe one half
I say—I would be a fool indeed if I did. Still, I am innocent, and I
will make a clean breast if I die for it."</p>
<p>What he stated was, in substance, this. He had lately made a voyage to the
Indian Archipelago. A party, of which he formed one, landed at Borneo, and
passed into the interior on an excursion of pleasure. Himself and a
companion had captured the Ourang-Outang. This companion dying, the animal
fell into his own exclusive possession. After great trouble, occasioned by
the intractable ferocity of his captive during the home voyage, he at
length succeeded in lodging it safely at his own residence in Paris,
where, not to attract toward himself the unpleasant curiosity of his
neighbors, he kept it carefully secluded, until such time as it should
recover from a wound in the foot, received from a splinter on board ship.
His ultimate design was to sell it.</p>
<p>Returning home from some sailors' frolic the night, or rather in the
morning of the murder, he found the beast occupying his own bed-room, into
which it had broken from a closet adjoining, where it had been, as was
thought, securely confined. Razor in hand, and fully lathered, it was
sitting before a looking-glass, attempting the operation of shaving, in
which it had no doubt previously watched its master through the key-hole
of the closet. Terrified at the sight of so dangerous a weapon in the
possession of an animal so ferocious, and so well able to use it, the man,
for some moments, was at a loss what to do. He had been accustomed,
however, to quiet the creature, even in its fiercest moods, by the use of
a whip, and to this he now resorted. Upon sight of it, the Ourang-Outang
sprang at once through the door of the chamber, down the stairs, and
thence, through a window, unfortunately open, into the street.</p>
<p>The Frenchman followed in despair; the ape, razor still in hand,
occasionally stopping to look back and gesticulate at its pursuer, until
the latter had nearly come up with it. It then again made off. In this
manner the chase continued for a long time. The streets were profoundly
quiet, as it was nearly three o'clock in the morning. In passing down an
alley in the rear of the Rue Morgue, the fugitive's attention was arrested
by a light gleaming from the open window of Madame L'Espanaye's chamber,
in the fourth story of her house. Rushing to the building, it perceived
the lightning rod, clambered up with inconceivable agility, grasped the
shutter, which was thrown fully back against the wall, and, by its means,
swung itself directly upon the headboard of the bed. The whole feat did
not occupy a minute. The shutter was kicked open again by the
Ourang-Outang as it entered the room.</p>
<p>The sailor, in the meantime, was both rejoiced and perplexed. He had
strong hopes of now recapturing the brute, as it could scarcely escape
from the trap into which it had ventured, except by the rod, where it
might be intercepted as it came down. On the other hand, there was much
cause for anxiety as to what it might do in the house. This latter
reflection urged the man still to follow the fugitive. A lightning rod is
ascended without difficulty, especially by a sailor; but, when he had
arrived as high as the window, which lay far to his left, his career was
stopped; the most that he could accomplish was to reach over so as to
obtain a glimpse of the interior of the room. At this glimpse he nearly
fell from his hold through excess of horror. Now it was that those hideous
shrieks arose upon the night, which had startled from slumber the inmates
of the Rue Morgue. Madame L'Espanaye and her daughter, habited in their
night clothes, had apparently been occupied in arranging some papers in
the iron chest already mentioned, which had been wheeled into the middle
of the room. It was open, and its contents lay beside it on the floor. The
victims must have been sitting with their backs toward the window; and,
from the time elapsing between the ingress of the beast and the screams,
it seems probable that it was not immediately perceived. The flapping-to
of the shutter would naturally have been attributed to the wind.</p>
<p>As the sailor looked in, the gigantic animal had seized Madame L'Espanaye
by the hair, (which was loose, as she had been combing it,) and was
flourishing the razor about her face, in imitation of the motions of a
barber. The daughter lay prostrate and motionless; she had swooned. The
screams and struggles of the old lady (during which the hair was torn from
her head) had the effect of changing the probably pacific purposes of the
Ourang-Outang into those of wrath. With one determined sweep of its
muscular arm it nearly severed her head from her body. The sight of blood
inflamed its anger into phrenzy. Gnashing its teeth, and flashing fire
from its eyes, it flew upon the body of the girl, and imbedded its fearful
talons in her throat, retaining its grasp until she expired. Its wandering
and wild glances fell at this moment upon the head of the bed, over which
the face of its master, rigid with horror, was just discernible. The fury
of the beast, who no doubt bore still in mind the dreaded whip, was
instantly converted into fear. Conscious of having deserved punishment, it
seemed desirous of concealing its bloody deeds, and skipped about the
chamber in an agony of nervous agitation; throwing down and breaking the
furniture as it moved, and dragging the bed from the bedstead. In
conclusion, it seized first the corpse of the daughter, and thrust it up
the chimney, as it was found; then that of the old lady, which it
immediately hurled through the window headlong.</p>
<p>As the ape approached the casement with its mutilated burden, the sailor
shrank aghast to the rod, and, rather gliding than clambering down it,
hurried at once home—dreading the consequences of the butchery, and
gladly abandoning, in his terror, all solicitude about the fate of the
Ourang-Outang. The words heard by the party upon the staircase were the
Frenchman's exclamations of horror and affright, commingled with the
fiendish jabberings of the brute.</p>
<p>I have scarcely anything to add. The Ourang-Outang must have escaped from
the chamber, by the rod, just before the break of the door. It must have
closed the window as it passed through it. It was subsequently caught by
the owner himself, who obtained for it a very large sum at the <i>Jardin
des Plantes.</i> Le Don was instantly released, upon our narration of the
circumstances (with some comments from Dupin) at the bureau of the Prefect
of Police. This functionary, however well disposed to my friend, could not
altogether conceal his chagrin at the turn which affairs had taken, and
was fain to indulge in a sarcasm or two, about the propriety of every
person minding his own business.</p>
<p>"Let him talk," said Dupin, who had not thought it necessary to reply.
"Let him discourse; it will ease his conscience, I am satisfied with
having defeated him in his own castle. Nevertheless, that he failed in the
solution of this mystery, is by no means that matter for wonder which he
supposes it; for, in truth, our friend the Prefect is somewhat too cunning
to be profound. In his wisdom is no <i>stamen.</i> It is all head and no
body, like the pictures of the Goddess Laverna,—or, at best, all
head and shoulders, like a codfish. But he is a good creature after all. I
like him especially for one master stroke of cant, by which he has
attained his reputation for ingenuity. I mean the way he has '<i>de nier
ce qui est, et d'expliquer ce qui n'est pas.</i>'" (*)</p>
<p>(*) Rousseau—Nouvelle Heloise.</p>
<p><SPAN name="link2H_4_0010" id="link2H_4_0010"></SPAN></p>
<div style="height: 4em;">
<br/> <br/> <br/> <br/></div>
<h2> THE MYSTERY OF MARIE ROGET.(*1) </h2>
<h3> A SEQUEL TO "THE MURDERS IN THE RUE MORGUE." </h3>
<p>Es giebt eine Reihe idealischer Begebenheiten, die der Wirklichkeit<br/>
parallel lauft. Selten fallen sie zusammen. Menschen und zufalle<br/>
modifieiren gewohulich die idealische Begebenheit, so dass sie<br/>
unvollkommen erscheint, und ihre Folgen gleichfalls unvollkommen<br/>
sind. So bei der Reformation; statt des Protestantismus kam das<br/>
Lutherthum hervor.<br/>
<br/>
There are ideal series of events which run parallel with the real<br/>
ones. They rarely coincide. Men and circumstances generally modify<br/>
the ideal train of events, so that it seems imperfect, and its<br/>
consequences are equally imperfect. Thus with the Reformation;<br/>
instead of Protestantism came Lutheranism.<br/>
<br/>
—Novalis. (*2) Moral Ansichten.<br/></p>
<p>THERE are few persons, even among the calmest thinkers, who have not
occasionally been startled into a vague yet thrilling half-credence in the
supernatural, by coincidences of so seemingly marvellous a character that,
as mere coincidences, the intellect has been unable to receive them. Such
sentiments—for the half-credences of which I speak have never the
full force of thought—such sentiments are seldom thoroughly stifled
unless by reference to the doctrine of chance, or, as it is technically
termed, the Calculus of Probabilities. Now this Calculus is, in its
essence, purely mathematical; and thus we have the anomaly of the most
rigidly exact in science applied to the shadow and spirituality of the
most intangible in speculation.</p>
<p>The extraordinary details which I am now called upon to make public, will
be found to form, as regards sequence of time, the primary branch of a
series of scarcely intelligible coincidences, whose secondary or
concluding branch will be recognized by all readers in the late murder of
Mary Cecila Rogers, at New York.</p>
<p>When, in an article entitled "The Murders in the Rue Morgue," I
endeavored, about a year ago, to depict some very remarkable features in
the mental character of my friend, the Chevalier C. Auguste Dupin, it did
not occur to me that I should ever resume the subject. This depicting of
character constituted my design; and this design was thoroughly fulfilled
in the wild train of circumstances brought to instance Dupin's
idiosyncrasy. I might have adduced other examples, but I should have
proven no more. Late events, however, in their surprising development,
have startled me into some farther details, which will carry with them the
air of extorted confession. Hearing what I have lately heard, it would be
indeed strange should I remain silent in regard to what I both heard and
saw so long ago.</p>
<p>Upon the winding up of the tragedy involved in the deaths of Madame
L'Espanaye and her daughter, the Chevalier dismissed the affair at once
from his attention, and relapsed into his old habits of moody reverie.
Prone, at all times, to abstraction, I readily fell in with his humor;
and, continuing to occupy our chambers in the Faubourg Saint Germain, we
gave the Future to the winds, and slumbered tranquilly in the Present,
weaving the dull world around us into dreams.</p>
<p>But these dreams were not altogether uninterrupted. It may readily be
supposed that the part played by my friend, in the drama at the Rue
Morgue, had not failed of its impression upon the fancies of the Parisian
police. With its emissaries, the name of Dupin had grown into a household
word. The simple character of those inductions by which he had
disentangled the mystery never having been explained even to the Prefect,
or to any other individual than myself, of course it is not surprising
that the affair was regarded as little less than miraculous, or that the
Chevalier's analytical abilities acquired for him the credit of intuition.
His frankness would have led him to disabuse every inquirer of such
prejudice; but his indolent humor forbade all farther agitation of a topic
whose interest to himself had long ceased. It thus happened that he found
himself the cynosure of the political eyes; and the cases were not few in
which attempt was made to engage his services at the Prefecture. One of
the most remarkable instances was that of the murder of a young girl named
Marie Rog�t.</p>
<p>This event occurred about two years after the atrocity in the Rue Morgue.
Marie, whose Christian and family name will at once arrest attention from
their resemblance to those of the unfortunate "cigargirl," was the only
daughter of the widow Estelle Rog�t. The father had died during the
child's infancy, and from the period of his death, until within eighteen
months before the assassination which forms the subject of our narrative,
the mother and daughter had dwelt together in the Rue Pav�e Saint
Andr�e; (*3) Madame there keeping a pension, assisted by Marie.
Affairs went on thus until the latter had attained her twenty-second year,
when her great beauty attracted the notice of a perfumer, who occupied one
of the shops in the basement of the Palais Royal, and whose custom lay
chiefly among the desperate adventurers infesting that neighborhood.
Monsieur Le Blanc (*4) was not unaware of the advantages to be derived
from the attendance of the fair Marie in his perfumery; and his liberal
proposals were accepted eagerly by the girl, although with somewhat more
of hesitation by Madame.</p>
<p>The anticipations of the shopkeeper were realized, and his rooms soon
became notorious through the charms of the sprightly grisette. She had
been in his employ about a year, when her admirers were thrown info
confusion by her sudden disappearance from the shop. Monsieur Le Blanc was
unable to account for her absence, and Madame Rog�t was distracted
with anxiety and terror. The public papers immediately took up the theme,
and the police were upon the point of making serious investigations, when,
one fine morning, after the lapse of a week, Marie, in good health, but
with a somewhat saddened air, made her re-appearance at her usual counter
in the perfumery. All inquiry, except that of a private character, was of
course immediately hushed. Monsieur Le Blanc professed total ignorance, as
before. Marie, with Madame, replied to all questions, that the last week
had been spent at the house of a relation in the country. Thus the affair
died away, and was generally forgotten; for the girl, ostensibly to
relieve herself from the impertinence of curiosity, soon bade a final
adieu to the perfumer, and sought the shelter of her mother's residence in
the Rue Pav�e Saint Andr�e.</p>
<p>It was about five months after this return home, that her friends were
alarmed by her sudden disappearance for the second time. Three days
elapsed, and nothing was heard of her. On the fourth her corpse was found
floating in the Seine, * near the shore which is opposite the Quartier of
the Rue Saint Andree, and at a point not very far distant from the
secluded neighborhood of the Barri�re du Roule. (*6)</p>
<p>The atrocity of this murder, (for it was at once evident that murder had
been committed,) the youth and beauty of the victim, and, above all, her
previous notoriety, conspired to produce intense excitement in the minds
of the sensitive Parisians. I can call to mind no similar occurrence
producing so general and so intense an effect. For several weeks, in the
discussion of this one absorbing theme, even the momentous political
topics of the day were forgotten. The Prefect made unusual exertions; and
the powers of the whole Parisian police were, of course, tasked to the
utmost extent.</p>
<p>Upon the first discovery of the corpse, it was not supposed that the
murderer would be able to elude, for more than a very brief period, the
inquisition which was immediately set on foot. It was not until the
expiration of a week that it was deemed necessary to offer a reward; and
even then this reward was limited to a thousand francs. In the mean time
the investigation proceeded with vigor, if not always with judgment, and
numerous individuals were examined to no purpose; while, owing to the
continual absence of all clue to the mystery, the popular excitement
greatly increased. At the end of the tenth day it was thought advisable to
double the sum originally proposed; and, at length, the second week having
elapsed without leading to any discoveries, and the prejudice which always
exists in Paris against the Police having given vent to itself in several
serious �meutes, the Prefect took it upon himself to offer the sum
of twenty thousand francs "for the conviction of the assassin," or, if
more than one should prove to have been implicated, "for the conviction of
any one of the assassins." In the proclamation setting forth this reward,
a full pardon was promised to any accomplice who should come forward in
evidence against his fellow; and to the whole was appended, wherever it
appeared, the private placard of a committee of citizens, offering ten
thousand francs, in addition to the amount proposed by the Prefecture. The
entire reward thus stood at no less than thirty thousand francs, which
will be regarded as an extraordinary sum when we consider the humble
condition of the girl, and the great frequency, in large cities, of such
atrocities as the one described.</p>
<p>No one doubted now that the mystery of this murder would be immediately
brought to light. But although, in one or two instances, arrests were made
which promised elucidation, yet nothing was elicited which could implicate
the parties suspected; and they were discharged forthwith. Strange as it
may appear, the third week from the discovery of the body had passed, and
passed without any light being thrown upon the subject, before even a
rumor of the events which had so agitated the public mind, reached the
ears of Dupin and myself. Engaged in researches which absorbed our whole
attention, it had been nearly a month since either of us had gone abroad,
or received a visitor, or more than glanced at the leading political
articles in one of the daily papers. The first intelligence of the murder
was brought us by G ——, in person. He called upon us early in
the afternoon of the thirteenth of July, 18—, and remained with us
until late in the night. He had been piqued by the failure of all his
endeavors to ferret out the assassins. His reputation—so he said
with a peculiarly Parisian air—was at stake. Even his honor was
concerned. The eyes of the public were upon him; and there was really no
sacrifice which he would not be willing to make for the development of the
mystery. He concluded a somewhat droll speech with a compliment upon what
he was pleased to term the tact of Dupin, and made him a direct, and
certainly a liberal proposition, the precise nature of which I do not feel
myself at liberty to disclose, but which has no bearing upon the proper
subject of my narrative.</p>
<p>The compliment my friend rebutted as best he could, but the proposition he
accepted at once, although its advantages were altogether provisional.
This point being settled, the Prefect broke forth at once into
explanations of his own views, interspersing them with long comments upon
the evidence; of which latter we were not yet in possession. He discoursed
much, and beyond doubt, learnedly; while I hazarded an occasional
suggestion as the night wore drowsily away. Dupin, sitting steadily in his
accustomed arm-chair, was the embodiment of respectful attention. He wore
spectacles, during the whole interview; and an occasional signal glance
beneath their green glasses, sufficed to convince me that he slept not the
less soundly, because silently, throughout the seven or eight
leaden-footed hours which immediately preceded the departure of the
Prefect.</p>
<p>In the morning, I procured, at the Prefecture, a full report of all the
evidence elicited, and, at the various newspaper offices, a copy of every
paper in which, from first to last, had been published any decisive
information in regard to this sad affair. Freed from all that was
positively disproved, this mass of information stood thus:</p>
<p>Marie Rog�t left the residence of her mother, in the Rue Pav�e
St. Andr�e, about nine o'clock in the morning of Sunday June the
twenty-second, 18—. In going out, she gave notice to a Monsieur
Jacques St. Eustache, (*7) and to him only, of her intent intention to
spend the day with an aunt who resided in the Rue des Dr�mes. The
Rue des Dr�mes is a short and narrow but populous thoroughfare, not
far from the banks of the river, and at a distance of some two miles, in
the most direct course possible, from the pension of Madame Rog�t.
St. Eustache was the accepted suitor of Marie, and lodged, as well as took
his meals, at the pension. He was to have gone for his betrothed at dusk,
and to have escorted her home. In the afternoon, however, it came on to
rain heavily; and, supposing that she would remain all night at her
aunt's, (as she had done under similar circumstances before,) he did not
think it necessary to keep his promise. As night drew on, Madame Rog�t
(who was an infirm old lady, seventy years of age,) was heard to express a
fear "that she should never see Marie again;" but this observation
attracted little attention at the time.</p>
<p>On Monday, it was ascertained that the girl had not been to the Rue des Dr�mes;
and when the day elapsed without tidings of her, a tardy search was
instituted at several points in the city, and its environs. It was not,
however until the fourth day from the period of disappearance that any
thing satisfactory was ascertained respecting her. On this day,
(Wednesday, the twenty-fifth of June,) a Monsieur Beauvais, (*8) who, with
a friend, had been making inquiries for Marie near the Barri�re du
Roule, on the shore of the Seine which is opposite the Rue Pav�e
St. Andr�e, was informed that a corpse had just been towed ashore
by some fishermen, who had found it floating in the river. Upon seeing the
body, Beauvais, after some hesitation, identified it as that of the
perfumery-girl. His friend recognized it more promptly.</p>
<p>The face was suffused with dark blood, some of which issued from the
mouth. No foam was seen, as in the case of the merely drowned. There was
no discoloration in the cellular tissue. About the throat were bruises and
impressions of fingers. The arms were bent over on the chest and were
rigid. The right hand was clenched; the left partially open. On the left
wrist were two circular excoriations, apparently the effect of ropes, or
of a rope in more than one volution. A part of the right wrist, also, was
much chafed, as well as the back throughout its extent, but more
especially at the shoulder-blades. In bringing the body to the shore the
fishermen had attached to it a rope; but none of the excoriations had been
effected by this. The flesh of the neck was much swollen. There were no
cuts apparent, or bruises which appeared the effect of blows. A piece of
lace was found tied so tightly around the neck as to be hidden from sight;
it was completely buried in the flesh, and was fasted by a knot which lay
just under the left ear. This alone would have sufficed to produce death.
The medical testimony spoke confidently of the virtuous character of the
deceased. She had been subjected, it said, to brutal violence. The corpse
was in such condition when found, that there could have been no difficulty
in its recognition by friends.</p>
<p>The dress was much torn and otherwise disordered. In the outer garment, a
slip, about a foot wide, had been torn upward from the bottom hem to the
waist, but not torn off. It was wound three times around the waist, and
secured by a sort of hitch in the back. The dress immediately beneath the
frock was of fine muslin; and from this a slip eighteen inches wide had
been torn entirely out—torn very evenly and with great care. It was
found around her neck, fitting loosely, and secured with a hard knot. Over
this muslin slip and the slip of lace, the strings of a bonnet were
attached; the bonnet being appended. The knot by which the strings of the
bonnet were fastened, was not a lady's, but a slip or sailor's knot.</p>
<p>After the recognition of the corpse, it was not, as usual, taken to the
Morgue, (this formality being superfluous,) but hastily interred not far
from the spot at which it was brought ashore. Through the exertions of
Beauvais, the matter was industriously hushed up, as far as possible; and
several days had elapsed before any public emotion resulted. A weekly
paper, (*9) however, at length took up the theme; the corpse was
disinterred, and a re-examination instituted; but nothing was elicited
beyond what has been already noted. The clothes, however, were now
submitted to the mother and friends of the deceased, and fully identified
as those worn by the girl upon leaving home.</p>
<p>Meantime, the excitement increased hourly. Several individuals were
arrested and discharged. St. Eustache fell especially under suspicion; and
he failed, at first, to give an intelligible account of his whereabouts
during the Sunday on which Marie left home. Subsequently, however, he
submitted to Monsieur G——, affidavits, accounting
satisfactorily for every hour of the day in question. As time passed and
no discovery ensued, a thousand contradictory rumors were circulated, and
journalists busied themselves in suggestions. Among these, the one which
attracted the most notice, was the idea that Marie Rog�t still
lived—that the corpse found in the Seine was that of some other
unfortunate. It will be proper that I submit to the reader some passages
which embody the suggestion alluded to. These passages are literal
translations from L'Etoile, (*10) a paper conducted, in general, with much
ability.</p>
<p>"Mademoiselle Rog�t left her mother's house on Sunday morning, June
the twenty-second, 18—, with the ostensible purpose of going to see
her aunt, or some other connexion, in the Rue des Dr�mes. From that
hour, nobody is proved to have seen her. There is no trace or tidings of
her at all.... There has no person, whatever, come forward, so far, who
saw her at all, on that day, after she left her mother's door.... Now,
though we have no evidence that Marie Rog�t was in the land of the
living after nine o'clock on Sunday, June the twenty-second, we have proof
that, up to that hour, she was alive. On Wednesday noon, at twelve, a
female body was discovered afloat on the shore of the Barri�re de
Roule. This was, even if we presume that Marie Rog�t was thrown
into the river within three hours after she left her mother's house, only
three days from the time she left her home—three days to an hour.
But it is folly to suppose that the murder, if murder was committed on her
body, could have been consummated soon enough to have enabled her
murderers to throw the body into the river before midnight. Those who are
guilty of such horrid crimes, choose darkness rather the light.... Thus we
see that if the body found in the river was that of Marie Rog�t, it
could only have been in the water two and a half days, or three at the
outside. All experience has shown that drowned bodies, or bodies thrown
into the water immediately after death by violence, require from six to
ten days for decomposition to take place to bring them to the top of the
water. Even where a cannon is fired over a corpse, and it rises before at
least five or six days' immersion, it sinks again, if let alone. Now, we
ask, what was there in this cave to cause a departure from the ordinary
course of nature?... If the body had been kept in its mangled state on
shore until Tuesday night, some trace would be found on shore of the
murderers. It is a doubtful point, also, whether the body would be so soon
afloat, even were it thrown in after having been dead two days. And,
furthermore, it is exceedingly improbable that any villains who had
committed such a murder as is here supposed, would have thrown the body in
without weight to sink it, when such a precaution could have so easily
been taken."</p>
<p>The editor here proceeds to argue that the body must have been in the
water "not three days merely, but, at least, five times three days,"
because it was so far decomposed that Beauvais had great difficulty in
recognizing it. This latter point, however, was fully disproved. I
continue the translation:</p>
<p>"What, then, are the facts on which M. Beauvais says that he has no doubt
the body was that of Marie Rog�t? He ripped up the gown sleeve, and
says he found marks which satisfied him of the identity. The public
generally supposed those marks to have consisted of some description of
scars. He rubbed the arm and found hair upon it—something as
indefinite, we think, as can readily be imagined—as little
conclusive as finding an arm in the sleeve. M. Beauvais did not return
that night, but sent word to Madame Rog�t, at seven o'clock, on
Wednesday evening, that an investigation was still in progress respecting
her daughter. If we allow that Madame Rog�t, from her age and
grief, could not go over, (which is allowing a great deal,) there
certainly must have been some one who would have thought it worth while to
go over and attend the investigation, if they thought the body was that of
Marie. Nobody went over. There was nothing said or heard about the matter
in the Rue Pav�e St. Andr�e, that reached even the occupants
of the same building. M. St. Eustache, the lover and intended husband of
Marie, who boarded in her mother's house, deposes that he did not hear of
the discovery of the body of his intended until the next morning, when M.
Beauvais came into his chamber and told him of it. For an item of news
like this, it strikes us it was very coolly received."</p>
<p>In this way the journal endeavored to create the impression of an apathy
on the part of the relatives of Marie, inconsistent with the supposition
that these relatives believed the corpse to be hers. Its insinuations
amount to this:—that Marie, with the connivance of her friends, had
absented herself from the city for reasons involving a charge against her
chastity; and that these friends, upon the discovery of a corpse in the
Seine, somewhat resembling that of the girl, had availed themselves of the
opportunity to impress the public with the belief of her death. But
L'Etoile was again over-hasty. It was distinctly proved that no apathy,
such as was imagined, existed; that the old lady was exceedingly feeble,
and so agitated as to be unable to attend to any duty, that St. Eustache,
so far from receiving the news coolly, was distracted with grief, and bore
himself so frantically, that M. Beauvais prevailed upon a friend and
relative to take charge of him, and prevent his attending the examination
at the disinterment. Moreover, although it was stated by L'Etoile, that
the corpse was re-interred at the public expense—that an
advantageous offer of private sculpture was absolutely declined by the
family—and that no member of the family attended the ceremonial:—although,
I say, all this was asserted by L'Etoile in furtherance of the impression
it designed to convey—yet all this was satisfactorily disproved. In
a subsequent number of the paper, an attempt was made to throw suspicion
upon Beauvais himself. The editor says:</p>
<p>"Now, then, a change comes over the matter. We are told that on one
occasion, while a Madame B—— was at Madame Rog�t's
house, M. Beauvais, who was going out, told her that a gendarme was
expected there, and she, Madame B., must not say anything to the gendarme
until he returned, but let the matter be for him.... In the present
posture of affairs, M. Beauvais appears to have the whole matter locked up
in his head. A single step cannot be taken without M. Beauvais; for, go
which way you will, you run against him.... For some reason, he determined
that nobody shall have any thing to do with the proceedings but himself,
and he has elbowed the male relatives out of the way, according to their
representations, in a very singular manner. He seems to have been very
much averse to permitting the relatives to see the body."</p>
<p>By the following fact, some color was given to the suspicion thus thrown
upon Beauvais. A visitor at his office, a few days prior to the girl's
disappearance, and during the absence of its occupant, had observed a rose
in the key-hole of the door, and the name "Marie" inscribed upon a slate
which hung near at hand.</p>
<p>The general impression, so far as we were enabled to glean it from the
newspapers, seemed to be, that Marie had been the victim of a gang of
desperadoes—that by these she had been borne across the river,
maltreated and murdered. Le Commerciel, (*11) however, a print of
extensive influence, was earnest in combating this popular idea. I quote a
passage or two from its columns:</p>
<p>"We are persuaded that pursuit has hitherto been on a false scent, so far
as it has been directed to the Barri�re du Roule. It is impossible
that a person so well known to thousands as this young woman was, should
have passed three blocks without some one having seen her; and any one who
saw her would have remembered it, for she interested all who knew her. It
was when the streets were full of people, when she went out.... It is
impossible that she could have gone to the Barri�re du Roule, or to
the Rue des Dr�mes, without being recognized by a dozen persons;
yet no one has come forward who saw her outside of her mother's door, and
there is no evidence, except the testimony concerning her expressed
intentions, that she did go out at all. Her gown was torn, bound round
her, and tied; and by that the body was carried as a bundle. If the murder
had been committed at the Barri�re du Roule, there would have been
no necessity for any such arrangement. The fact that the body was found
floating near the Barri�re, is no proof as to where it was thrown
into the water..... A piece of one of the unfortunate girl's petticoats,
two feet long and one foot wide, was torn out and tied under her chin
around the back of her head, probably to prevent screams. This was done by
fellows who had no pocket-handkerchief."</p>
<p>A day or two before the Prefect called upon us, however, some important
information reached the police, which seemed to overthrow, at least, the
chief portion of Le Commerciel's argument. Two small boys, sons of a
Madame Deluc, while roaming among the woods near the Barri�re du
Roule, chanced to penetrate a close thicket, within which were three or
four large stones, forming a kind of seat, with a back and footstool. On
the upper stone lay a white petticoat; on the second a silk scarf. A
parasol, gloves, and a pocket-handkerchief were also here found. The
handkerchief bore the name "Marie Rog�t." Fragments of dress were
discovered on the brambles around. The earth was trampled, the bushes were
broken, and there was every evidence of a struggle. Between the thicket
and the river, the fences were found taken down, and the ground bore
evidence of some heavy burthen having been dragged along it.</p>
<p>A weekly paper, Le Soleil,(*12) had the following comments upon this
discovery—comments which merely echoed the sentiment of the whole
Parisian press:</p>
<p>"The things had all evidently been there at least three or four weeks;
they were all mildewed down hard with the action of the rain and stuck
together from mildew. The grass had grown around and over some of them.
The silk on the parasol was strong, but the threads of it were run
together within. The upper part, where it had been doubled and folded, was
all mildewed and rotten, and tore on its being opened..... The pieces of
her frock torn out by the bushes were about three inches wide and six
inches long. One part was the hem of the frock, and it had been mended;
the other piece was part of the skirt, not the hem. They looked like
strips torn off, and were on the thorn bush, about a foot from the
ground..... There can be no doubt, therefore, that the spot of this
appalling outrage has been discovered."</p>
<p>Consequent upon this discovery, new evidence appeared. Madame Deluc
testified that she keeps a roadside inn not far from the bank of the
river, opposite the Barri�re du Roule. The neighborhood is secluded—particularly
so. It is the usual Sunday resort of blackguards from the city, who cross
the river in boats. About three o'clock, in the afternoon of the Sunday in
question, a young girl arrived at the inn, accompanied by a young man of
dark complexion. The two remained here for some time. On their departure,
they took the road to some thick woods in the vicinity. Madame Deluc's
attention was called to the dress worn by the girl, on account of its
resemblance to one worn by a deceased relative. A scarf was particularly
noticed. Soon after the departure of the couple, a gang of miscreants made
their appearance, behaved boisterously, ate and drank without making
payment, followed in the route of the young man and girl, returned to the
inn about dusk, and re-crossed the river as if in great haste.</p>
<p>It was soon after dark, upon this same evening, that Madame Deluc, as well
as her eldest son, heard the screams of a female in the vicinity of the
inn. The screams were violent but brief. Madame D. recognized not only the
scarf which was found in the thicket, but the dress which was discovered
upon the corpse. An omnibus driver, Valence, (*13) now also testified that
he saw Marie Rog�t cross a ferry on the Seine, on the Sunday in
question, in company with a young man of dark complexion. He, Valence,
knew Marie, and could not be mistaken in her identity. The articles found
in the thicket were fully identified by the relatives of Marie.</p>
<p>The items of evidence and information thus collected by myself, from the
newspapers, at the suggestion of Dupin, embraced only one more point—but
this was a point of seemingly vast consequence. It appears that,
immediately after the discovery of the clothes as above described, the
lifeless, or nearly lifeless body of St. Eustache, Marie's betrothed, was
found in the vicinity of what all now supposed the scene of the outrage. A
phial labelled "laudanum," and emptied, was found near him. His breath
gave evidence of the poison. He died without speaking. Upon his person was
found a letter, briefly stating his love for Marie, with his design of
self-destruction.</p>
<p>"I need scarcely tell you," said Dupin, as he finished the perusal of my
notes, "that this is a far more intricate case than that of the Rue
Morgue; from which it differs in one important respect. This is an
ordinary, although an atrocious instance of crime. There is nothing
peculiarly outr� about it. You will observe that, for this reason,
the mystery has been considered easy, when, for this reason, it should
have been considered difficult, of solution. Thus; at first, it was
thought unnecessary to offer a reward. The myrmidons of G——
were able at once to comprehend how and why such an atrocity might have
been committed. They could picture to their imaginations a mode—many
modes—and a motive—many motives; and because it was not
impossible that either of these numerous modes and motives could have been
the actual one, they have taken it for granted that one of them must. But
the case with which these variable fancies were entertained, and the very
plausibility which each assumed, should have been understood as indicative
rather of the difficulties than of the facilities which must attend
elucidation. I have before observed that it is by prominences above the
plane of the ordinary, that reason feels her way, if at all, in her search
for the true, and that the proper question in cases such as this, is not
so much 'what has occurred?' as 'what has occurred that has never occurred
before?' In the investigations at the house of Madame L'Espanaye, (*14)
the agents of G—— were discouraged and confounded by that very
unusualness which, to a properly regulated intellect, would have afforded
the surest omen of success; while this same intellect might have been
plunged in despair at the ordinary character of all that met the eye in
the case of the perfumery-girl, and yet told of nothing but easy triumph
to the functionaries of the Prefecture.</p>
<p>"In the case of Madame L'Espanaye and her daughter there was, even at the
beginning of our investigation, no doubt that murder had been committed.
The idea of suicide was excluded at once. Here, too, we are freed, at the
commencement, from all supposition of self-murder. The body found at the
Barri�re du Roule, was found under such circumstances as to leave
us no room for embarrassment upon this important point. But it has been
suggested that the corpse discovered, is not that of the Marie Rog�t
for the conviction of whose assassin, or assassins, the reward is offered,
and respecting whom, solely, our agreement has been arranged with the
Prefect. We both know this gentleman well. It will not do to trust him too
far. If, dating our inquiries from the body found, and thence tracing a
murderer, we yet discover this body to be that of some other individual
than Marie; or, if starting from the living Marie, we find her, yet find
her unassassinated—in either case we lose our labor; since it is
Monsieur G—— with whom we have to deal. For our own purpose,
therefore, if not for the purpose of justice, it is indispensable that our
first step should be the determination of the identity of the corpse with
the Marie Rog�t who is missing.</p>
<p>"With the public the arguments of L'Etoile have had weight; and that the
journal itself is convinced of their importance would appear from the
manner in which it commences one of its essays upon the subject—'Several
of the morning papers of the day,' it says, 'speak of the <i>conclusive</i>
article in Monday's Etoile.' To me, this article appears conclusive of
little beyond the zeal of its inditer. We should bear in mind that, in
general, it is the object of our newspapers rather to create a sensation—to
make a point—than to further the cause of truth. The latter end is
only pursued when it seems coincident with the former. The print which
merely falls in with ordinary opinion (however well founded this opinion
may be) earns for itself no credit with the mob. The mass of the people
regard as profound only him who suggests <i>pungent contradictions</i> of
the general idea. In ratiocination, not less than in literature, it is the
epigram which is the most immediately and the most universally
appreciated. In both, it is of the lowest order of merit.</p>
<p>"What I mean to say is, that it is the mingled epigram and melodrame of
the idea, that Marie Rog�t still lives, rather than any true
plausibility in this idea, which have suggested it to L'Etoile, and
secured it a favorable reception with the public. Let us examine the heads
of this journal's argument; endeavoring to avoid the incoherence with
which it is originally set forth.</p>
<p>"The first aim of the writer is to show, from the brevity of the interval
between Marie's disappearance and the finding of the floating corpse, that
this corpse cannot be that of Marie. The reduction of this interval to its
smallest possible dimension, becomes thus, at once, an object with the
reasoner. In the rash pursuit of this object, he rushes into mere
assumption at the outset. 'It is folly to suppose,' he says, 'that the
murder, if murder was committed on her body, could have been consummated
soon enough to have enabled her murderers to throw the body into the river
before midnight.' We demand at once, and very naturally, why? Why is it
folly to suppose that the murder was committed <i>within five minutes</i>
after the girl's quitting her mother's house? Why is it folly to suppose
that the murder was committed at any given period of the day? There have
been assassinations at all hours. But, had the murder taken place at any
moment between nine o'clock in the morning of Sunday, and a quarter before
midnight, there would still have been time enough 'to throw the body into
the river before midnight.' This assumption, then, amounts precisely to
this—that the murder was not committed on Sunday at all—and,
if we allow L'Etoile to assume this, we may permit it any liberties
whatever. The paragraph beginning 'It is folly to suppose that the murder,
etc.,' however it appears as printed in L'Etoile, may be imagined to have
existed actually thus in the brain of its inditer—'It is folly to
suppose that the murder, if murder was committed on the body, could have
been committed soon enough to have enabled her murderers to throw the body
into the river before midnight; it is folly, we say, to suppose all this,
and to suppose at the same time, (as we are resolved to suppose,) that the
body was not thrown in until after midnight'—a sentence sufficiently
inconsequential in itself, but not so utterly preposterous as the one
printed.</p>
<p>"Were it my purpose," continued Dupin, "merely to <i>make out a case</i>
against this passage of L'Etoile's argument, I might safely leave it where
it is. It is not, however, with L'Etoile that we have to do, but with the
truth. The sentence in question has but one meaning, as it stands; and
this meaning I have fairly stated: but it is material that we go behind
the mere words, for an idea which these words have obviously intended, and
failed to convey. It was the design of the journalist to say that, at
whatever period of the day or night of Sunday this murder was committed,
it was improbable that the assassins would have ventured to bear the
corpse to the river before midnight. And herein lies, really, the
assumption of which I complain. It is assumed that the murder was
committed at such a position, and under such circumstances, that the
bearing it to the river became necessary. Now, the assassination might
have taken place upon the river's brink, or on the river itself; and,
thus, the throwing the corpse in the water might have been resorted to, at
any period of the day or night, as the most obvious and most immediate
mode of disposal. You will understand that I suggest nothing here as
probable, or as c�incident with my own opinion. My design, so far,
has no reference to the facts of the case. I wish merely to caution you
against the whole tone of L'Etoile's suggestion, by calling your attention
to its ex parte character at the outset.</p>
<p>"Having prescribed thus a limit to suit its own preconceived notions;
having assumed that, if this were the body of Marie, it could have been in
the water but a very brief time; the journal goes on to say:</p>
<p>'All experience has shown that drowned bodies, or bodies thrown into the
water immediately after death by violence, require from six to ten days
for sufficient decomposition to take place to bring them to the top of the
water. Even when a cannon is fired over a corpse, and it rises before at
least five or six days' immersion, it sinks again if let alone.'</p>
<p>"These assertions have been tacitly received by every paper in Paris, with
the exception of Le Moniteur. (*15) This latter print endeavors to combat
that portion of the paragraph which has reference to 'drowned bodies'
only, by citing some five or six instances in which the bodies of
individuals known to be drowned were found floating after the lapse of
less time than is insisted upon by L'Etoile. But there is something
excessively unphilosophical in the attempt on the part of Le Moniteur, to
rebut the general assertion of L'Etoile, by a citation of particular
instances militating against that assertion. Had it been possible to
adduce fifty instead of five examples of bodies found floating at the end
of two or three days, these fifty examples could still have been properly
regarded only as exceptions to L'Etoile's rule, until such time as the
rule itself should be confuted. Admitting the rule, (and this Le Moniteur
does not deny, insisting merely upon its exceptions,) the argument of
L'Etoile is suffered to remain in full force; for this argument does not
pretend to involve more than a question of the probability of the body
having risen to the surface in less than three days; and this probability
will be in favor of L'Etoile's position until the instances so childishly
adduced shall be sufficient in number to establish an antagonistical rule.</p>
<p>"You will see at once that all argument upon this head should be urged, if
at all, against the rule itself; and for this end we must examine the
rationale of the rule. Now the human body, in general, is neither much
lighter nor much heavier than the water of the Seine; that is to say, the
specific gravity of the human body, in its natural condition, is about
equal to the bulk of fresh water which it displaces. The bodies of fat and
fleshy persons, with small bones, and of women generally, are lighter than
those of the lean and large-boned, and of men; and the specific gravity of
the water of a river is somewhat influenced by the presence of the tide
from sea. But, leaving this tide out of question, it may be said that very
few human bodies will sink at all, even in fresh water, of their own
accord. Almost any one, falling into a river, will be enabled to float, if
he suffer the specific gravity of the water fairly to be adduced in
comparison with his own—that is to say, if he suffer his whole
person to be immersed, with as little exception as possible. The proper
position for one who cannot swim, is the upright position of the walker on
land, with the head thrown fully back, and immersed; the mouth and
nostrils alone remaining above the surface. Thus circumstanced, we shall
find that we float without difficulty and without exertion. It is evident,
however, that the gravities of the body, and of the bulk of water
displaced, are very nicely balanced, and that a trifle will cause either
to preponderate. An arm, for instance, uplifted from the water, and thus
deprived of its support, is an additional weight sufficient to immerse the
whole head, while the accidental aid of the smallest piece of timber will
enable us to elevate the head so as to look about. Now, in the struggles
of one unused to swimming, the arms are invariably thrown upwards, while
an attempt is made to keep the head in its usual perpendicular position.
The result is the immersion of the mouth and nostrils, and the inception,
during efforts to breathe while beneath the surface, of water into the
lungs. Much is also received into the stomach, and the whole body becomes
heavier by the difference between the weight of the air originally
distending these cavities, and that of the fluid which now fills them.
This difference is sufficient to cause the body to sink, as a general
rule; but is insufficient in the cases of individuals with small bones and
an abnormal quantity of flaccid or fatty matter. Such individuals float
even after drowning.</p>
<p>"The corpse, being supposed at the bottom of the river, will there remain
until, by some means, its specific gravity again becomes less than that of
the bulk of water which it displaces. This effect is brought about by
decomposition, or otherwise. The result of decomposition is the generation
of gas, distending the cellular tissues and all the cavities, and giving
the puffed appearance which is so horrible. When this distension has so
far progressed that the bulk of the corpse is materially increased without
a corresponding increase of mass or weight, its specific gravity becomes
less than that of the water displaced, and it forthwith makes its
appearance at the surface. But decomposition is modified by innumerable
circumstances—is hastened or retarded by innumerable agencies; for
example, by the heat or cold of the season, by the mineral impregnation or
purity of the water, by its depth or shallowness, by its currency or
stagnation, by the temperament of the body, by its infection or freedom
from disease before death. Thus it is evident that we can assign no
period, with any thing like accuracy, at which the corpse shall rise
through decomposition. Under certain conditions this result would be
brought about within an hour; under others, it might not take place at
all. There are chemical infusions by which the animal frame can be
preserved forever from corruption; the Bi-chloride of Mercury is one. But,
apart from decomposition, there may be, and very usually is, a generation
of gas within the stomach, from the acetous fermentation of vegetable
matter (or within other cavities from other causes) sufficient to induce a
distension which will bring the body to the surface. The effect produced
by the firing of a cannon is that of simple vibration. This may either
loosen the corpse from the soft mud or ooze in which it is imbedded, thus
permitting it to rise when other agencies have already prepared it for so
doing; or it may overcome the tenacity of some putrescent portions of the
cellular tissue; allowing the cavities to distend under the influence of
the gas.</p>
<p>"Having thus before us the whole philosophy of this subject, we can easily
test by it the assertions of L'Etoile. 'All experience shows,' says this
paper, 'that drowned bodies, or bodies thrown into the water immediately
after death by violence, require from six to ten days for sufficient
decomposition to take place to bring them to the top of the water. Even
when a cannon is fired over a corpse, and it rises before at least five or
six days' immersion, it sinks again if let alone.'</p>
<p>"The whole of this paragraph must now appear a tissue of inconsequence and
incoherence. All experience does not show that 'drowned bodies' require
from six to ten days for sufficient decomposition to take place to bring
them to the surface. Both science and experience show that the period of
their rising is, and necessarily must be, indeterminate. If, moreover, a
body has risen to the surface through firing of cannon, it will not 'sink
again if let alone,' until decomposition has so far progressed as to
permit the escape of the generated gas. But I wish to call your attention
to the distinction which is made between 'drowned bodies,' and 'bodies
thrown into the water immediately after death by violence.' Although the
writer admits the distinction, he yet includes them all in the same
category. I have shown how it is that the body of a drowning man becomes
specifically heavier than its bulk of water, and that he would not sink at
all, except for the struggles by which he elevates his arms above the
surface, and his gasps for breath while beneath the surface—gasps
which supply by water the place of the original air in the lungs. But
these struggles and these gasps would not occur in the body 'thrown into
the water immediately after death by violence.' Thus, in the latter
instance, the body, as a general rule, would not sink at all—a fact
of which L'Etoile is evidently ignorant. When decomposition had proceeded
to a very great extent—when the flesh had in a great measure left
the bones—then, indeed, but not till then, should we lose sight of
the corpse.</p>
<p>"And now what are we to make of the argument, that the body found could
not be that of Marie Rog�t, because, three days only having
elapsed, this body was found floating? If drowned, being a woman, she
might never have sunk; or having sunk, might have reappeared in
twenty-four hours, or less. But no one supposes her to have been drowned;
and, dying before being thrown into the river, she might have been found
floating at any period afterwards whatever.</p>
<p>"'But,' says L'Etoile, 'if the body had been kept in its mangled state on
shore until Tuesday night, some trace would be found on shore of the
murderers.' Here it is at first difficult to perceive the intention of the
reasoner. He means to anticipate what he imagines would be an objection to
his theory—viz: that the body was kept on shore two days, suffering
rapid decomposition—more rapid than if immersed in water. He
supposes that, had this been the case, it might have appeared at the
surface on the Wednesday, and thinks that only under such circumstances it
could so have appeared. He is accordingly in haste to show that it was not
kept on shore; for, if so, 'some trace would be found on shore of the
murderers.' I presume you smile at the sequitur. You cannot be made to see
how the mere duration of the corpse on the shore could operate to multiply
traces of the assassins. Nor can I.</p>
<p>"'And furthermore it is exceedingly improbable,' continues our journal,
'that any villains who had committed such a murder as is here supposed,
would have thrown the body in without weight to sink it, when such a
precaution could have so easily been taken.' Observe, here, the laughable
confusion of thought! No one—not even L'Etoile—disputes the
murder committed <i>on the body found</i>. The marks of violence are too
obvious. It is our reasoner's object merely to show that this body is not
Marie's. He wishes to prove that Marie is not assassinated—not that
the corpse was not. Yet his observation proves only the latter point. Here
is a corpse without weight attached. Murderers, casting it in, would not
have failed to attach a weight. Therefore it was not thrown in by
murderers. This is all which is proved, if any thing is. The question of
identity is not even approached, and L'Etoile has been at great pains
merely to gainsay now what it has admitted only a moment before. 'We are
perfectly convinced,' it says, 'that the body found was that of a murdered
female.'</p>
<p>"Nor is this the sole instance, even in this division of his subject,
where our reasoner unwittingly reasons against himself. His evident
object, I have already said, is to reduce, as much as possible, the
interval between Marie's disappearance and the finding of the corpse. Yet
we find him urging the point that no person saw the girl from the moment
of her leaving her mother's house. 'We have no evidence,' he says, 'that
Marie Rog�t was in the land of the living after nine o'clock on
Sunday, June the twenty-second.' As his argument is obviously an ex parte
one, he should, at least, have left this matter out of sight; for had any
one been known to see Marie, say on Monday, or on Tuesday, the interval in
question would have been much reduced, and, by his own ratiocination, the
probability much diminished of the corpse being that of the grisette. It
is, nevertheless, amusing to observe that L'Etoile insists upon its point
in the full belief of its furthering its general argument.</p>
<p>"Reperuse now that portion of this argument which has reference to the
identification of the corpse by Beauvais. In regard to the hair upon the
arm, L'Etoile has been obviously disingenuous. M. Beauvais, not being an
idiot, could never have urged, in identification of the corpse, simply
hair upon its arm. No arm is without hair. The generality of the
expression of L'Etoile is a mere perversion of the witness' phraseology.
He must have spoken of some peculiarity in this hair. It must have been a
peculiarity of color, of quantity, of length, or of situation.</p>
<p>"'Her foot,' says the journal, 'was small—so are thousands of feet.
Her garter is no proof whatever—nor is her shoe—for shoes and
garters are sold in packages. The same may be said of the flowers in her
hat. One thing upon which M. Beauvais strongly insists is, that the clasp
on the garter found, had been set back to take it in. This amounts to
nothing; for most women find it proper to take a pair of garters home and
fit them to the size of the limbs they are to encircle, rather than to try
them in the store where they purchase.' Here it is difficult to suppose
the reasoner in earnest. Had M. Beauvais, in his search for the body of
Marie, discovered a corpse corresponding in general size and appearance to
the missing girl, he would have been warranted (without reference to the
question of habiliment at all) in forming an opinion that his search had
been successful. If, in addition to the point of general size and contour,
he had found upon the arm a peculiar hairy appearance which he had
observed upon the living Marie, his opinion might have been justly
strengthened; and the increase of positiveness might well have been in the
ratio of the peculiarity, or unusualness, of the hairy mark. If, the feet
of Marie being small, those of the corpse were also small, the increase of
probability that the body was that of Marie would not be an increase in a
ratio merely arithmetical, but in one highly geometrical, or accumulative.
Add to all this shoes such as she had been known to wear upon the day of
her disappearance, and, although these shoes may be 'sold in packages,'
you so far augment the probability as to verge upon the certain. What, of
itself, would be no evidence of identity, becomes through its
corroborative position, proof most sure. Give us, then, flowers in the hat
corresponding to those worn by the missing girl, and we seek for nothing
farther. If only one flower, we seek for nothing farther—what then
if two or three, or more? Each successive one is multiple evidence—proof
not <i>added</i> to proof, but multiplied by hundreds or thousands. Let us
now discover, upon the deceased, garters such as the living used, and it
is almost folly to proceed. But these garters are found to be tightened,
by the setting back of a clasp, in just such a manner as her own had been
tightened by Marie, shortly previous to her leaving home. It is now
madness or hypocrisy to doubt. What L'Etoile says in respect to this
abbreviation of the garter's being an usual occurrence, shows nothing
beyond its own pertinacity in error. The elastic nature of the
clasp-garter is self-demonstration of the unusualness of the abbreviation.
What is made to adjust itself, must of necessity require foreign
adjustment but rarely. It must have been by an accident, in its strictest
sense, that these garters of Marie needed the tightening described. They
alone would have amply established her identity. But it is not that the
corpse was found to have the garters of the missing girl, or found to have
her shoes, or her bonnet, or the flowers of her bonnet, or her feet, or a
peculiar mark upon the arm, or her general size and appearance—it is
that the corpse had each, and <i>all collectively</i>. Could it be proved
that the editor of L'Etoile <i>really</i> entertained a doubt, under the
circumstances, there would be no need, in his case, of a commission de
lunatico inquirendo. He has thought it sagacious to echo the small talk of
the lawyers, who, for the most part, content themselves with echoing the
rectangular precepts of the courts. I would here observe that very much of
what is rejected as evidence by a court, is the best of evidence to the
intellect. For the court, guiding itself by the general principles of
evidence—the recognized and <i>booked</i> principles—is averse
from swerving at particular instances. And this steadfast adherence to
principle, with rigorous disregard of the conflicting exception, is a sure
mode of attaining the maximum of attainable truth, in any long sequence of
time. The practice, in mass, is therefore philosophical; but it is not the
less certain that it engenders vast individual error. (*16)</p>
<p>"In respect to the insinuations levelled at Beauvais, you will be willing
to dismiss them in a breath. You have already fathomed the true character
of this good gentleman. He is a busy-body, with much of romance and little
of wit. Any one so constituted will readily so conduct himself, upon
occasion of real excitement, as to render himself liable to suspicion on
the part of the over acute, or the ill-disposed. M. Beauvais (as it
appears from your notes) had some personal interviews with the editor of
L'Etoile, and offended him by venturing an opinion that the corpse,
notwithstanding the theory of the editor, was, in sober fact, that of
Marie. 'He persists,' says the paper, 'in asserting the corpse to be that
of Marie, but cannot give a circumstance, in addition to those which we
have commented upon, to make others believe.' Now, without re-adverting to
the fact that stronger evidence 'to make others believe,' could never have
been adduced, it may be remarked that a man may very well be understood to
believe, in a case of this kind, without the ability to advance a single
reason for the belief of a second party. Nothing is more vague than
impressions of individual identity. Each man recognizes his neighbor, yet
there are few instances in which any one is prepared to give a reason for
his recognition. The editor of L'Etoile had no right to be offended at M.
Beauvais' unreasoning belief.</p>
<p>"The suspicious circumstances which invest him, will be found to tally
much better with my hypothesis of romantic busy-bodyism, than with the
reasoner's suggestion of guilt. Once adopting the more charitable
interpretation, we shall find no difficulty in comprehending the rose in
the key-hole; the 'Marie' upon the slate; the 'elbowing the male relatives
out of the way;' the 'aversion to permitting them to see the body;' the
caution given to Madame B——, that she must hold no
conversation with the gendarme until his return (Beauvais'); and, lastly,
his apparent determination 'that nobody should have anything to do with
the proceedings except himself.' It seems to me unquestionable that
Beauvais was a suitor of Marie's; that she coquetted with him; and that he
was ambitious of being thought to enjoy her fullest intimacy and
confidence. I shall say nothing more upon this point; and, as the evidence
fully rebuts the assertion of L'Etoile, touching the matter of apathy on
the part of the mother and other relatives—an apathy inconsistent
with the supposition of their believing the corpse to be that of the
perfumery-girl—we shall now proceed as if the question of identity
were settled to our perfect satisfaction."</p>
<p>"And what," I here demanded, "do you think of the opinions of Le
Commerciel?"</p>
<p>"That, in spirit, they are far more worthy of attention than any which
have been promulgated upon the subject. The deductions from the premises
are philosophical and acute; but the premises, in two instances, at least,
are founded in imperfect observation. Le Commerciel wishes to intimate
that Marie was seized by some gang of low ruffians not far from her
mother's door. 'It is impossible,' it urges, 'that a person so well known
to thousands as this young woman was, should have passed three blocks
without some one having seen her.' This is the idea of a man long resident
in Paris—a public man—and one whose walks to and fro in the
city, have been mostly limited to the vicinity of the public offices. He
is aware that he seldom passes so far as a dozen blocks from his own
bureau, without being recognized and accosted. And, knowing the extent of
his personal acquaintance with others, and of others with him, he compares
his notoriety with that of the perfumery-girl, finds no great difference
between them, and reaches at once the conclusion that she, in her walks,
would be equally liable to recognition with himself in his. This could
only be the case were her walks of the same unvarying, methodical
character, and within the same species of limited region as are his own.
He passes to and fro, at regular intervals, within a confined periphery,
abounding in individuals who are led to observation of his person through
interest in the kindred nature of his occupation with their own. But the
walks of Marie may, in general, be supposed discursive. In this particular
instance, it will be understood as most probable, that she proceeded upon
a route of more than average diversity from her accustomed ones. The
parallel which we imagine to have existed in the mind of Le Commerciel
would only be sustained in the event of the two individuals' traversing
the whole city. In this case, granting the personal acquaintances to be
equal, the chances would be also equal that an equal number of personal
rencounters would be made. For my own part, I should hold it not only as
possible, but as very far more than probable, that Marie might have
proceeded, at any given period, by any one of the many routes between her
own residence and that of her aunt, without meeting a single individual
whom she knew, or by whom she was known. In viewing this question in its
full and proper light, we must hold steadily in mind the great
disproportion between the personal acquaintances of even the most noted
individual in Paris, and the entire population of Paris itself.</p>
<p>"But whatever force there may still appear to be in the suggestion of Le
Commerciel, will be much diminished when we take into consideration the
hour at which the girl went abroad. 'It was when the streets were full of
people,' says Le Commerciel, 'that she went out.' But not so. It was at
nine o'clock in the morning. Now at nine o'clock of every morning in the
week, <i>with the exception of Sunday</i>, the streets of the city are, it
is true, thronged with people. At nine on Sunday, the populace are chiefly
within doors <i>preparing for church</i>. No observing person can have
failed to notice the peculiarly deserted air of the town, from about eight
until ten on the morning of every Sabbath. Between ten and eleven the
streets are thronged, but not at so early a period as that designated.</p>
<p>"There is another point at which there seems a deficiency of observation
on the part of Le Commerciel. 'A piece,' it says, 'of one of the
unfortunate girl's petticoats, two feet long, and one foot wide, was torn
out and tied under her chin, and around the back of her head, probably to
prevent screams. This was done, by fellows who had no
pocket-handkerchiefs.' Whether this idea is, or is not well founded, we
will endeavor to see hereafter; but by 'fellows who have no
pocket-handkerchiefs' the editor intends the lowest class of ruffians.
These, however, are the very description of people who will always be
found to have handkerchiefs even when destitute of shirts. You must have
had occasion to observe how absolutely indispensable, of late years, to
the thorough blackguard, has become the pocket-handkerchief."</p>
<p>"And what are we to think," I asked, "of the article in Le Soleil?"</p>
<p>"That it is a vast pity its inditer was not born a parrot—in which
case he would have been the most illustrious parrot of his race. He has
merely repeated the individual items of the already published opinion;
collecting them, with a laudable industry, from this paper and from that.
'The things had all evidently been there,' he says,'at least, three or
four weeks, and there can be <i>no doubt</i> that the spot of this
appalling outrage has been discovered.' The facts here re-stated by Le
Soleil, are very far indeed from removing my own doubts upon this subject,
and we will examine them more particularly hereafter in connexion with
another division of the theme.</p>
<p>"At present we must occupy ourselves with other investigations. You cannot
fail to have remarked the extreme laxity of the examination of the corpse.
To be sure, the question of identity was readily determined, or should
have been; but there were other points to be ascertained. Had the body
been in any respect despoiled? Had the deceased any articles of jewelry
about her person upon leaving home? if so, had she any when found? These
are important questions utterly untouched by the evidence; and there are
others of equal moment, which have met with no attention. We must endeavor
to satisfy ourselves by personal inquiry. The case of St. Eustache must be
re-examined. I have no suspicion of this person; but let us proceed
methodically. We will ascertain beyond a doubt the validity of the
affidavits in regard to his whereabouts on the Sunday. Affidavits of this
character are readily made matter of mystification. Should there be
nothing wrong here, however, we will dismiss St. Eustache from our
investigations. His suicide, however corroborative of suspicion, were
there found to be deceit in the affidavits, is, without such deceit, in no
respect an unaccountable circumstance, or one which need cause us to
deflect from the line of ordinary analysis.</p>
<p>"In that which I now propose, we will discard the interior points of this
tragedy, and concentrate our attention upon its outskirts. Not the least
usual error, in investigations such as this, is the limiting of inquiry to
the immediate, with total disregard of the collateral or circumstantial
events. It is the mal-practice of the courts to confine evidence and
discussion to the bounds of apparent relevancy. Yet experience has shown,
and a true philosophy will always show, that a vast, perhaps the larger
portion of truth, arises from the seemingly irrelevant. It is through the
spirit of this principle, if not precisely through its letter, that modern
science has resolved to calculate upon the unforeseen. But perhaps you do
not comprehend me. The history of human knowledge has so uninterruptedly
shown that to collateral, or incidental, or accidental events we are
indebted for the most numerous and most valuable discoveries, that it has
at length become necessary, in any prospective view of improvement, to
make not only large, but the largest allowances for inventions that shall
arise by chance, and quite out of the range of ordinary expectation. It is
no longer philosophical to base, upon what has been, a vision of what is
to be. Accident is admitted as a portion of the substructure. We make
chance a matter of absolute calculation. We subject the unlooked for and
unimagined, to the mathematical <i>formulae</i> of the schools.</p>
<p>"I repeat that it is no more than fact, that the larger portion of all
truth has sprung from the collateral; and it is but in accordance with the
spirit of the principle involved in this fact, that I would divert
inquiry, in the present case, from the trodden and hitherto unfruitful
ground of the event itself, to the contemporary circumstances which
surround it. While you ascertain the validity of the affidavits, I will
examine the newspapers more generally than you have as yet done. So far,
we have only reconnoitred the field of investigation; but it will be
strange indeed if a comprehensive survey, such as I propose, of the public
prints, will not afford us some minute points which shall establish a
direction for inquiry."</p>
<p>In pursuance of Dupin's suggestion, I made scrupulous examination of the
affair of the affidavits. The result was a firm conviction of their
validity, and of the consequent innocence of St. Eustache. In the mean
time my friend occupied himself, with what seemed to me a minuteness
altogether objectless, in a scrutiny of the various newspaper files. At
the end of a week he placed before me the following extracts:</p>
<p>"About three years and a half ago, a disturbance very similar to the
present, was caused by the disappearance of this same Marie Rog�t,
from the parfumerie of Monsieur Le Blanc, in the Palais Royal. At the end
of a week, however, she re-appeared at her customary comptoir, as well as
ever, with the exception of a slight paleness not altogether usual. It was
given out by Monsieur Le Blanc and her mother, that she had merely been on
a visit to some friend in the country; and the affair was speedily hushed
up. We presume that the present absence is a freak of the same nature, and
that, at the expiration of a week, or perhaps of a month, we shall have
her among us again."—Evening Paper—Monday June 23. (*17)</p>
<p>"An evening journal of yesterday, refers to a former mysterious
disappearance of Mademoiselle Rog�t. It is well known that, during
the week of her absence from Le Blanc's parfumerie, she was in the company
of a young naval officer, much noted for his debaucheries. A quarrel, it
is supposed, providentially led to her return home. We have the name of
the Lothario in question, who is, at present, stationed in Paris, but, for
obvious reasons, forbear to make it public."—Le Mercurie—Tuesday
Morning, June 24. (*18)</p>
<p>"An outrage of the most atrocious character was perpetrated near this city
the day before yesterday. A gentleman, with his wife and daughter,
engaged, about dusk, the services of six young men, who were idly rowing a
boat to and fro near the banks of the Seine, to convey him across the
river. Upon reaching the opposite shore, the three passengers stepped out,
and had proceeded so far as to be beyond the view of the boat, when the
daughter discovered that she had left in it her parasol. She returned for
it, was seized by the gang, carried out into the stream, gagged, brutally
treated, and finally taken to the shore at a point not far from that at
which she had originally entered the boat with her parents. The villains
have escaped for the time, but the police are upon their trail, and some
of them will soon be taken."—Morning Paper—June 25. (*19)</p>
<p>"We have received one or two communications, the object of which is to
fasten the crime of the late atrocity upon Mennais; (*20) but as this
gentleman has been fully exonerated by a loyal inquiry, and as the
arguments of our several correspondents appear to be more zealous than
profound, we do not think it advisable to make them public."—Morning
Paper—June 28. (*21)</p>
<p>"We have received several forcibly written communications, apparently from
various sources, and which go far to render it a matter of certainty that
the unfortunate Marie Rog�t has become a victim of one of the
numerous bands of blackguards which infest the vicinity of the city upon
Sunday. Our own opinion is decidedly in favor of this supposition. We
shall endeavor to make room for some of these arguments hereafter."—Evening
Paper—Tuesday, June 31. (*22)</p>
<p>"On Monday, one of the bargemen connected with the revenue service, saw a
empty boat floating down the Seine. Sails were lying in the bottom of the
boat. The bargeman towed it under the barge office. The next morning it
was taken from thence, without the knowledge of any of the officers. The
rudder is now at the barge office."—Le Diligence—Thursday,
June 26.</p>
<p>Upon reading these various extracts, they not only seemed to me
irrelevant, but I could perceive no mode in which any one of them could be
brought to bear upon the matter in hand. I waited for some explanation
from Dupin.</p>
<p>"It is not my present design," he said, "to dwell upon the first and
second of those extracts. I have copied them chiefly to show you the
extreme remissness of the police, who, as far as I can understand from the
Prefect, have not troubled themselves, in any respect, with an examination
of the naval officer alluded to. Yet it is mere folly to say that between
the first and second disappearance of Marie, there is no <i>supposable</i>
connection. Let us admit the first elopement to have resulted in a quarrel
between the lovers, and the return home of the betrayed. We are now
prepared to view a second elopement (if we know that an elopement has
again taken place) as indicating a renewal of the betrayer's advances,
rather than as the result of new proposals by a second individual—we
are prepared to regard it as a 'making up' of the old amour, rather than
as the commencement of a new one. The chances are ten to one, that he who
had once eloped with Marie, would again propose an elopement, rather than
that she to whom proposals of elopement had been made by one individual,
should have them made to her by another. And here let me call your
attention to the fact, that the time elapsing between the first
ascertained, and the second supposed elopement, is a few months more than
the general period of the cruises of our men-of-war. Had the lover been
interrupted in his first villany by the necessity of departure to sea, and
had he seized the first moment of his return to renew the base designs not
yet altogether accomplished—or not yet altogether accomplished by <i>him?</i>
Of all these things we know nothing.</p>
<p>"You will say, however, that, in the second instance, there was no
elopement as imagined. Certainly not—but are we prepared to say that
there was not the frustrated design? Beyond St. Eustache, and perhaps
Beauvais, we find no recognized, no open, no honorable suitors of Marie.
Of none other is there any thing said. Who, then, is the secret lover, of
whom the relatives (at least most of them) know nothing, but whom Marie
meets upon the morning of Sunday, and who is so deeply in her confidence,
that she hesitates not to remain with him until the shades of the evening
descend, amid the solitary groves of the Barri�re du Roule? Who is
that secret lover, I ask, of whom, at least, most of the relatives know
nothing? And what means the singular prophecy of Madame Rog�t on
the morning of Marie's departure?—'I fear that I shall never see
Marie again.'</p>
<p>"But if we cannot imagine Madame Rog�t privy to the design of
elopement, may we not at least suppose this design entertained by the
girl? Upon quitting home, she gave it to be understood that she was about
to visit her aunt in the Rue des Dr�mes and St. Eustache was
requested to call for her at dark. Now, at first glance, this fact
strongly militates against my suggestion;—but let us reflect. That
she did meet some companion, and proceed with him across the river,
reaching the Barri�re du Roule at so late an hour as three o'clock
in the afternoon, is known. But in consenting so to accompany this
individual, (<i>for whatever purpose—to her mother known or unknown,</i>)
she must have thought of her expressed intention when leaving home, and of
the surprise and suspicion aroused in the bosom of her affianced suitor,
St. Eustache, when, calling for her, at the hour appointed, in the Rue des
Dr�mes, he should find that she had not been there, and when,
moreover, upon returning to the pension with this alarming intelligence,
he should become aware of her continued absence from home. She must have
thought of these things, I say. She must have foreseen the chagrin of St.
Eustache, the suspicion of all. She could not have thought of returning to
brave this suspicion; but the suspicion becomes a point of trivial
importance to her, if we suppose her not intending to return.</p>
<p>"We may imagine her thinking thus—'I am to meet a certain person for
the purpose of elopement, or for certain other purposes known only to
myself. It is necessary that there be no chance of interruption—there
must be sufficient time given us to elude pursuit—I will give it to
be understood that I shall visit and spend the day with my aunt at the Rue
des Dr�mes—I well tell St. Eustache not to call for me until
dark—in this way, my absence from home for the longest possible
period, without causing suspicion or anxiety, will be accounted for, and I
shall gain more time than in any other manner. If I bid St. Eustache call
for me at dark, he will be sure not to call before; but, if I wholly
neglect to bid him call, my time for escape will be diminished, since it
will be expected that I return the earlier, and my absence will the sooner
excite anxiety. Now, if it were my design to return at all—if I had
in contemplation merely a stroll with the individual in question—it
would not be my policy to bid St. Eustache call; for, calling, he will be
sure to ascertain that I have played him false—a fact of which I
might keep him for ever in ignorance, by leaving home without notifying
him of my intention, by returning before dark, and by then stating that I
had been to visit my aunt in the Rue des Dr�mes. But, as it is my
design never to return—or not for some weeks—or not until
certain concealments are effected—the gaining of time is the only
point about which I need give myself any concern.'</p>
<p>"You have observed, in your notes, that the most general opinion in
relation to this sad affair is, and was from the first, that the girl had
been the victim of a gang of blackguards. Now, the popular opinion, under
certain conditions, is not to be disregarded. When arising of itself—when
manifesting itself in a strictly spontaneous manner—we should look
upon it as analogous with that <i>intuition</i> which is the idiosyncrasy
of the individual man of genius. In ninety-nine cases from the hundred I
would abide by its decision. But it is important that we find no palpable
traces of <i>suggestion</i>. The opinion must be rigorously <i>the
public's own</i>; and the distinction is often exceedingly difficult to
perceive and to maintain. In the present instance, it appears to me that
this 'public opinion' in respect to a gang, has been superinduced by the
collateral event which is detailed in the third of my extracts. All Paris
is excited by the discovered corpse of Marie, a girl young, beautiful and
notorious. This corpse is found, bearing marks of violence, and floating
in the river. But it is now made known that, at the very period, or about
the very period, in which it is supposed that the girl was assassinated,
an outrage similar in nature to that endured by the deceased, although
less in extent, was perpetuated, by a gang of young ruffians, upon the
person of a second young female. Is it wonderful that the one known
atrocity should influence the popular judgment in regard to the other
unknown? This judgment awaited direction, and the known outrage seemed so
opportunely to afford it! Marie, too, was found in the river; and upon
this very river was this known outrage committed. The connexion of the two
events had about it so much of the palpable, that the true wonder would
have been a failure of the populace to appreciate and to seize it. But, in
fact, the one atrocity, known to be so committed, is, if any thing,
evidence that the other, committed at a time nearly coincident, was not so
committed. It would have been a miracle indeed, if, while a gang of
ruffians were perpetrating, at a given locality, a most unheard-of wrong,
there should have been another similar gang, in a similar locality, in the
same city, under the same circumstances, with the same means and
appliances, engaged in a wrong of precisely the same aspect, at precisely
the same period of time! Yet in what, if not in this marvellous train of
coincidence, does the accidentally suggested opinion of the populace call
upon us to believe?</p>
<p>"Before proceeding farther, let us consider the supposed scene of the
assassination, in the thicket at the Barri�re du Roule. This
thicket, although dense, was in the close vicinity of a public road.
Within were three or four large stones, forming a kind of seat with a back
and footstool. On the upper stone was discovered a white petticoat; on the
second, a silk scarf. A parasol, gloves, and a pocket-handkerchief, were
also here found. The handkerchief bore the name, 'Marie Rog�t.'
Fragments of dress were seen on the branches around. The earth was
trampled, the bushes were broken, and there was every evidence of a
violent struggle.</p>
<p>"Notwithstanding the acclamation with which the discovery of this thicket
was received by the press, and the unanimity with which it was supposed to
indicate the precise scene of the outrage, it must be admitted that there
was some very good reason for doubt. That it was the scene, I may or I may
not believe—but there was excellent reason for doubt. Had the true
scene been, as Le Commerciel suggested, in the neighborhood of the Rue Pav�e
St. Andr�e, the perpetrators of the crime, supposing them still
resident in Paris, would naturally have been stricken with terror at the
public attention thus acutely directed into the proper channel; and, in
certain classes of minds, there would have arisen, at once, a sense of the
necessity of some exertion to redivert this attention. And thus, the
thicket of the Barri�re du Roule having been already suspected, the
idea of placing the articles where they were found, might have been
naturally entertained. There is no real evidence, although Le Soleil so
supposes, that the articles discovered had been more than a very few days
in the thicket; while there is much circumstantial proof that they could
not have remained there, without attracting attention, during the twenty
days elapsing between the fatal Sunday and the afternoon upon which they
were found by the boys. 'They were all <i>mildewed</i> down hard,' says Le
Soleil, adopting the opinions of its predecessors, 'with the action of the
rain, and stuck together from <i>mildew</i>. The grass had grown around
and over some of them. The silk of the parasol was strong, but the threads
of it were run together within. The upper part, where it had been doubled
and folded, was all <i>mildewed</i> and rotten, and tore on being opened.'
In respect to the grass having 'grown around and over some of them,' it is
obvious that the fact could only have been ascertained from the words, and
thus from the recollections, of two small boys; for these boys removed the
articles and took them home before they had been seen by a third party.
But grass will grow, especially in warm and damp weather, (such as was
that of the period of the murder,) as much as two or three inches in a
single day. A parasol lying upon a newly turfed ground, might, in a single
week, be entirely concealed from sight by the upspringing grass. And
touching that mildew upon which the editor of Le Soleil so pertinaciously
insists, that he employs the word no less than three times in the brief
paragraph just quoted, is he really unaware of the nature of this mildew?
Is he to be told that it is one of the many classes of fungus, of which
the most ordinary feature is its upspringing and decadence within
twenty-four hours?</p>
<p>"Thus we see, at a glance, that what has been most triumphantly adduced in
support of the idea that the articles had been 'for at least three or four
weeks' in the thicket, is most absurdly null as regards any evidence of
that fact. On the other hand, it is exceedingly difficult to believe that
these articles could have remained in the thicket specified, for a longer
period than a single week—for a longer period than from one Sunday
to the next. Those who know any thing of the vicinity of Paris, know the
extreme difficulty of finding seclusion unless at a great distance from
its suburbs. Such a thing as an unexplored, or even an unfrequently
visited recess, amid its woods or groves, is not for a moment to be
imagined. Let any one who, being at heart a lover of nature, is yet
chained by duty to the dust and heat of this great metropolis—let
any such one attempt, even during the weekdays, to slake his thirst for
solitude amid the scenes of natural loveliness which immediately surround
us. At every second step, he will find the growing charm dispelled by the
voice and personal intrusion of some ruffian or party of carousing
blackguards. He will seek privacy amid the densest foliage, all in vain.
Here are the very nooks where the unwashed most abound—here are the
temples most desecrate. With sickness of the heart the wanderer will flee
back to the polluted Paris as to a less odious because less incongruous
sink of pollution. But if the vicinity of the city is so beset during the
working days of the week, how much more so on the Sabbath! It is now
especially that, released from the claims of labor, or deprived of the
customary opportunities of crime, the town blackguard seeks the precincts
of the town, not through love of the rural, which in his heart he
despises, but by way of escape from the restraints and conventionalities
of society. He desires less the fresh air and the green trees, than the
utter license of the country. Here, at the road-side inn, or beneath the
foliage of the woods, he indulges, unchecked by any eye except those of
his boon companions, in all the mad excess of a counterfeit hilarity—the
joint offspring of liberty and of rum. I say nothing more than what must
be obvious to every dispassionate observer, when I repeat that the
circumstance of the articles in question having remained undiscovered, for
a longer period—than from one Sunday to another, in any thicket in
the immediate neighborhood of Paris, is to be looked upon as little less
than miraculous.</p>
<p>"But there are not wanting other grounds for the suspicion that the
articles were placed in the thicket with the view of diverting attention
from the real scene of the outrage. And, first, let me direct your notice
to the date of the discovery of the articles. Collate this with the date
of the fifth extract made by myself from the newspapers. You will find
that the discovery followed, almost immediately, the urgent communications
sent to the evening paper. These communications, although various and
apparently from various sources, tended all to the same point—viz.,
the directing of attention to a gang as the perpetrators of the outrage,
and to the neighborhood of the Barri�re du Roule as its scene. Now
here, of course, the suspicion is not that, in consequence of these
communications, or of the public attention by them directed, the articles
were found by the boys; but the suspicion might and may well have been,
that the articles were not before found by the boys, for the reason that
the articles had not before been in the thicket; having been deposited
there only at so late a period as at the date, or shortly prior to the
date of the communications by the guilty authors of these communications
themselves.</p>
<p>"This thicket was a singular—an exceedingly singular one. It was
unusually dense. Within its naturally walled enclosure were three
extraordinary stones, forming a seat with a back and footstool. And this
thicket, so full of a natural art, was in the immediate vicinity, within a
few rods, of the dwelling of Madame Deluc, whose boys were in the habit of
closely examining the shrubberies about them in search of the bark of the
sassafras. Would it be a rash wager—a wager of one thousand to one—that
a day never passed over the heads of these boys without finding at least
one of them ensconced in the umbrageous hall, and enthroned upon its
natural throne? Those who would hesitate at such a wager, have either
never been boys themselves, or have forgotten the boyish nature. I repeat—it
is exceedingly hard to comprehend how the articles could have remained in
this thicket undiscovered, for a longer period than one or two days; and
that thus there is good ground for suspicion, in spite of the dogmatic
ignorance of Le Soleil, that they were, at a comparatively late date,
deposited where found.</p>
<p>"But there are still other and stronger reasons for believing them so
deposited, than any which I have as yet urged. And, now, let me beg your
notice to the highly artificial arrangement of the articles. On the upper
stone lay a white petticoat; on the second a silk scarf; scattered around,
were a parasol, gloves, and a pocket-handkerchief bearing the name, 'Marie
Rog�t.' Here is just such an arrangement as would naturally be made
by a not over-acute person wishing to dispose the articles naturally. But
it is by no means a really natural arrangement. I should rather have
looked to see the things all lying on the ground and trampled under foot.
In the narrow limits of that bower, it would have been scarcely possible
that the petticoat and scarf should have retained a position upon the
stones, when subjected to the brushing to and fro of many struggling
persons. 'There was evidence,' it is said, 'of a struggle; and the earth
was trampled, the bushes were broken,'—but the petticoat and the
scarf are found deposited as if upon shelves. 'The pieces of the frock
torn out by the bushes were about three inches wide and six inches long.
One part was the hem of the frock and it had been mended. They looked like
strips torn off.' Here, inadvertently, Le Soleil has employed an
exceedingly suspicious phrase. The pieces, as described, do indeed 'look
like strips torn off;' but purposely and by hand. It is one of the rarest
of accidents that a piece is 'torn off,' from any garment such as is now
in question, by the agency of a thorn. From the very nature of such
fabrics, a thorn or nail becoming entangled in them, tears them
rectangularly—divides them into two longitudinal rents, at right
angles with each other, and meeting at an apex where the thorn enters—but
it is scarcely possible to conceive the piece 'torn off.' I never so knew
it, nor did you. To tear a piece off from such fabric, two distinct
forces, in different directions, will be, in almost every case, required.
If there be two edges to the fabric—if, for example, it be a
pocket-handkerchief, and it is desired to tear from it a slip, then, and
then only, will the one force serve the purpose. But in the present case
the question is of a dress, presenting but one edge. To tear a piece from
the interior, where no edge is presented, could only be effected by a
miracle through the agency of thorns, and no one thorn could accomplish
it. But, even where an edge is presented, two thorns will be necessary,
operating, the one in two distinct directions, and the other in one. And
this in the supposition that the edge is unhemmed. If hemmed, the matter
is nearly out of the question. We thus see the numerous and great
obstacles in the way of pieces being 'torn off' through the simple agency
of 'thorns;' yet we are required to believe not only that one piece but
that many have been so torn. 'And one part,' too, 'was the hem of the
frock!' Another piece was 'part of the skirt, not the hem,'—that is
to say, was torn completely out through the agency of thorns, from the
uncaged interior of the dress! These, I say, are things which one may well
be pardoned for disbelieving; yet, taken collectedly, they form, perhaps,
less of reasonable ground for suspicion, than the one startling
circumstance of the articles' having been left in this thicket at all, by
any murderers who had enough precaution to think of removing the corpse.
You will not have apprehended me rightly, however, if you suppose it my
design to deny this thicket as the scene of the outrage. There might have
been a wrong here, or, more possibly, an accident at Madame Deluc's. But,
in fact, this is a point of minor importance. We are not engaged in an
attempt to discover the scene, but to produce the perpetrators of the
murder. What I have adduced, notwithstanding the minuteness with which I
have adduced it, has been with the view, first, to show the folly of the
positive and headlong assertions of Le Soleil, but secondly and chiefly,
to bring you, by the most natural route, to a further contemplation of the
doubt whether this assassination has, or has not been, the work of a gang.</p>
<p>"We will resume this question by mere allusion to the revolting details of
the surgeon examined at the inquest. It is only necessary to say that his
published inferences, in regard to the number of ruffians, have been
properly ridiculed as unjust and totally baseless, by all the reputable
anatomists of Paris. Not that the matter might not have been as inferred,
but that there was no ground for the inference:—was there not much
for another?</p>
<p>"Let us reflect now upon 'the traces of a struggle;' and let me ask what
these traces have been supposed to demonstrate. A gang. But do they not
rather demonstrate the absence of a gang? What struggle could have taken
place—what struggle so violent and so enduring as to have left its
'traces' in all directions—between a weak and defenceless girl and
the gang of ruffians imagined? The silent grasp of a few rough arms and
all would have been over. The victim must have been absolutely passive at
their will. You will here bear in mind that the arguments urged against
the thicket as the scene, are applicable in chief part, only against it as
the scene of an outrage committed by more than a single individual. If we
imagine but one violator, we can conceive, and thus only conceive, the
struggle of so violent and so obstinate a nature as to have left the
'traces' apparent.</p>
<p>"And again. I have already mentioned the suspicion to be excited by the
fact that the articles in question were suffered to remain at all in the
thicket where discovered. It seems almost impossible that these evidences
of guilt should have been accidentally left where found. There was
sufficient presence of mind (it is supposed) to remove the corpse; and yet
a more positive evidence than the corpse itself (whose features might have
been quickly obliterated by decay,) is allowed to lie conspicuously in the
scene of the outrage—I allude to the handkerchief with the name of
the deceased. If this was accident, it was not the accident of a gang. We
can imagine it only the accident of an individual. Let us see. An
individual has committed the murder. He is alone with the ghost of the
departed. He is appalled by what lies motionless before him. The fury of
his passion is over, and there is abundant room in his heart for the
natural awe of the deed. His is none of that confidence which the presence
of numbers inevitably inspires. He is alone with the dead. He trembles and
is bewildered. Yet there is a necessity for disposing of the corpse. He
bears it to the river, but leaves behind him the other evidences of guilt;
for it is difficult, if not impossible to carry all the burthen at once,
and it will be easy to return for what is left. But in his toilsome
journey to the water his fears redouble within him. The sounds of life
encompass his path. A dozen times he hears or fancies the step of an
observer. Even the very lights from the city bewilder him. Yet, in time
and by long and frequent pauses of deep agony, he reaches the river's
brink, and disposes of his ghastly charge—perhaps through the medium
of a boat. But now what treasure does the world hold—what threat of
vengeance could it hold out—which would have power to urge the
return of that lonely murderer over that toilsome and perilous path, to
the thicket and its blood chilling recollections? He returns not, let the
consequences be what they may. He could not return if he would. His sole
thought is immediate escape. He turns his back forever upon those dreadful
shrubberies and flees as from the wrath to come.</p>
<p>"But how with a gang? Their number would have inspired them with
confidence; if, indeed confidence is ever wanting in the breast of the
arrant blackguard; and of arrant blackguards alone are the supposed gangs
ever constituted. Their number, I say, would have prevented the
bewildering and unreasoning terror which I have imagined to paralyze the
single man. Could we suppose an oversight in one, or two, or three, this
oversight would have been remedied by a fourth. They would have left
nothing behind them; for their number would have enabled them to carry all
at once. There would have been no need of return.</p>
<p>"Consider now the circumstance that in the outer garment of the corpse
when found, 'a slip, about a foot wide had been torn upward from the
bottom hem to the waist wound three times round the waist, and secured by
a sort of hitch in the back.' This was done with the obvious design of
affording a handle by which to carry the body. But would any number of men
have dreamed of resorting to such an expedient? To three or four, the
limbs of the corpse would have afforded not only a sufficient, but the
best possible hold. The device is that of a single individual; and this
brings us to the fact that 'between the thicket and the river, the rails
of the fences were found taken down, and the ground bore evident traces of
some heavy burden having been dragged along it!' But would a number of men
have put themselves to the superfluous trouble of taking down a fence, for
the purpose of dragging through it a corpse which they might have lifted
over any fence in an instant? Would a number of men have so dragged a
corpse at all as to have left evident traces of the dragging?</p>
<p>"And here we must refer to an observation of Le Commerciel; an observation
upon which I have already, in some measure, commented. 'A piece,' says
this journal, 'of one of the unfortunate girl's petticoats was torn out
and tied under her chin, and around the back of her head, probably to
prevent screams. This was done by fellows who had no
pocket-handkerchiefs.'</p>
<p>"I have before suggested that a genuine blackguard is never without a
pocket-handkerchief. But it is not to this fact that I now especially
advert. That it was not through want of a handkerchief for the purpose
imagined by Le Commerciel, that this bandage was employed, is rendered
apparent by the handkerchief left in the thicket; and that the object was
not 'to prevent screams' appears, also, from the bandage having been
employed in preference to what would so much better have answered the
purpose. But the language of the evidence speaks of the strip in question
as 'found around the neck, fitting loosely, and secured with a hard knot.'
These words are sufficiently vague, but differ materially from those of Le
Commerciel. The slip was eighteen inches wide, and therefore, although of
muslin, would form a strong band when folded or rumpled longitudinally.
And thus rumpled it was discovered. My inference is this. The solitary
murderer, having borne the corpse, for some distance, (whether from the
thicket or elsewhere) by means of the bandage hitched around its middle,
found the weight, in this mode of procedure, too much for his strength. He
resolved to drag the burthen—the evidence goes to show that it was
dragged. With this object in view, it became necessary to attach something
like a rope to one of the extremities. It could be best attached about the
neck, where the head would prevent its slipping off. And, now, the
murderer bethought him, unquestionably, of the bandage about the loins. He
would have used this, but for its volution about the corpse, the hitch
which embarrassed it, and the reflection that it had not been 'torn off'
from the garment. It was easier to tear a new slip from the petticoat. He
tore it, made it fast about the neck, and so dragged his victim to the
brink of the river. That this 'bandage,' only attainable with trouble and
delay, and but imperfectly answering its purpose—that this bandage
was employed at all, demonstrates that the necessity for its employment
sprang from circumstances arising at a period when the handkerchief was no
longer attainable—that is to say, arising, as we have imagined,
after quitting the thicket, (if the thicket it was), and on the road
between the thicket and the river.</p>
<p>"But the evidence, you will say, of Madame Deluc, (!) points especially to
the presence of a gang, in the vicinity of the thicket, at or about the
epoch of the murder. This I grant. I doubt if there were not a dozen
gangs, such as described by Madame Deluc, in and about the vicinity of the
Barri�re du Roule at or about the period of this tragedy. But the
gang which has drawn upon itself the pointed animadversion, although the
somewhat tardy and very suspicious evidence of Madame Deluc, is the only
gang which is represented by that honest and scrupulous old lady as having
eaten her cakes and swallowed her brandy, without putting themselves to
the trouble of making her payment. Et hinc ill� ir�?</p>
<p>"But what is the precise evidence of Madame Deluc? 'A gang of miscreants
made their appearance, behaved boisterously, ate and drank without making
payment, followed in the route of the young man and girl, returned to the
inn about dusk, and recrossed the river as if in great haste.'</p>
<p>"Now this 'great haste' very possibly seemed greater haste in the eyes of
Madame Deluc, since she dwelt lingeringly and lamentingly upon her
violated cakes and ale—cakes and ale for which she might still have
entertained a faint hope of compensation. Why, otherwise, since it was
about dusk, should she make a point of the haste? It is no cause for
wonder, surely, that even a gang of blackguards should make haste to get
home, when a wide river is to be crossed in small boats, when storm
impends, and when night approaches.</p>
<p>"I say approaches; for the night had not yet arrived. It was only about
dusk that the indecent haste of these 'miscreants' offended the sober eyes
of Madame Deluc. But we are told that it was upon this very evening that
Madame Deluc, as well as her eldest son, 'heard the screams of a female in
the vicinity of the inn.' And in what words does Madame Deluc designate
the period of the evening at which these screams were heard? 'It was soon
after dark,' she says. But 'soon after dark,' is, at least, dark; and
'about dusk' is as certainly daylight. Thus it is abundantly clear that
the gang quitted the Barri�re du Roule prior to the screams
overheard (?) by Madame Deluc. And although, in all the many reports of
the evidence, the relative expressions in question are distinctly and
invariably employed just as I have employed them in this conversation with
yourself, no notice whatever of the gross discrepancy has, as yet, been
taken by any of the public journals, or by any of the Myrmidons of police.</p>
<p>"I shall add but one to the arguments against a gang; but this one has, to
my own understanding at least, a weight altogether irresistible. Under the
circumstances of large reward offered, and full pardon to any King's
evidence, it is not to be imagined, for a moment, that some member of a
gang of low ruffians, or of any body of men, would not long ago have
betrayed his accomplices. Each one of a gang so placed, is not so much
greedy of reward, or anxious for escape, as fearful of betrayal. He
betrays eagerly and early that he may not himself be betrayed. That the
secret has not been divulged, is the very best of proof that it is, in
fact, a secret. The horrors of this dark deed are known only to one, or
two, living human beings, and to God.</p>
<p>"Let us sum up now the meagre yet certain fruits of our long analysis. We
have attained the idea either of a fatal accident under the roof of Madame
Deluc, or of a murder perpetrated, in the thicket at the Barri�re
du Roule, by a lover, or at least by an intimate and secret associate of
the deceased. This associate is of swarthy complexion. This complexion,
the 'hitch' in the bandage, and the 'sailor's knot,' with which the
bonnet-ribbon is tied, point to a seaman. His companionship with the
deceased, a gay, but not an abject young girl, designates him as above the
grade of the common sailor. Here the well written and urgent
communications to the journals are much in the way of corroboration. The
circumstance of the first elopement, as mentioned by Le Mercurie, tends to
blend the idea of this seaman with that of the 'naval officer' who is
first known to have led the unfortunate into crime.</p>
<p>"And here, most fitly, comes the consideration of the continued absence of
him of the dark complexion. Let me pause to observe that the complexion of
this man is dark and swarthy; it was no common swarthiness which
constituted the sole point of remembrance, both as regards Valence and
Madame Deluc. But why is this man absent? Was he murdered by the gang? If
so, why are there only traces of the assassinated girl? The scene of the
two outrages will naturally be supposed identical. And where is his
corpse? The assassins would most probably have disposed of both in the
same way. But it may be said that this man lives, and is deterred from
making himself known, through dread of being charged with the murder. This
consideration might be supposed to operate upon him now—at this late
period—since it has been given in evidence that he was seen with
Marie—but it would have had no force at the period of the deed. The
first impulse of an innocent man would have been to announce the outrage,
and to aid in identifying the ruffians. This policy would have suggested.
He had been seen with the girl. He had crossed the river with her in an
open ferry-boat. The denouncing of the assassins would have appeared, even
to an idiot, the surest and sole means of relieving himself from
suspicion. We cannot suppose him, on the night of the fatal Sunday, both
innocent himself and incognizant of an outrage committed. Yet only under
such circumstances is it possible to imagine that he would have failed, if
alive, in the denouncement of the assassins.</p>
<p>"And what means are ours, of attaining the truth? We shall find these
means multiplying and gathering distinctness as we proceed. Let us sift to
the bottom this affair of the first elopement. Let us know the full
history of 'the officer,' with his present circumstances, and his
whereabouts at the precise period of the murder. Let us carefully compare
with each other the various communications sent to the evening paper, in
which the object was to inculpate a gang. This done, let us compare these
communications, both as regards style and MS., with those sent to the
morning paper, at a previous period, and insisting so vehemently upon the
guilt of Mennais. And, all this done, let us again compare these various
communications with the known MSS. of the officer. Let us endeavor to
ascertain, by repeated questionings of Madame Deluc and her boys, as well
as of the omnibus driver, Valence, something more of the personal
appearance and bearing of the 'man of dark complexion.' Queries, skilfully
directed, will not fail to elicit, from some of these parties, information
on this particular point (or upon others)—information which the
parties themselves may not even be aware of possessing. And let us now
trace the boat picked up by the bargeman on the morning of Monday the
twenty-third of June, and which was removed from the barge-office, without
the cognizance of the officer in attendance, and without the rudder, at
some period prior to the discovery of the corpse. With a proper caution
and perseverance we shall infallibly trace this boat; for not only can the
bargeman who picked it up identify it, but the rudder is at hand. The
rudder of a sail-boat would not have been abandoned, without inquiry, by
one altogether at ease in heart. And here let me pause to insinuate a
question. There was no advertisement of the picking up of this boat. It
was silently taken to the barge-office, and as silently removed. But its
owner or employer—how happened he, at so early a period as Tuesday
morning, to be informed, without the agency of advertisement, of the
locality of the boat taken up on Monday, unless we imagine some connexion
with the navy—some personal permanent connexion leading to
cognizance of its minute in interests—its petty local news?</p>
<p>"In speaking of the lonely assassin dragging his burden to the shore, I
have already suggested the probability of his availing himself of a boat.
Now we are to understand that Marie Rog�t was precipitated from a
boat. This would naturally have been the case. The corpse could not have
been trusted to the shallow waters of the shore. The peculiar marks on the
back and shoulders of the victim tell of the bottom ribs of a boat. That
the body was found without weight is also corroborative of the idea. If
thrown from the shore a weight would have been attached. We can only
account for its absence by supposing the murderer to have neglected the
precaution of supplying himself with it before pushing off. In the act of
consigning the corpse to the water, he would unquestionably have noticed
his oversight; but then no remedy would have been at hand. Any risk would
have been preferred to a return to that accursed shore. Having rid himself
of his ghastly charge, the murderer would have hastened to the city.
There, at some obscure wharf, he would have leaped on land. But the boat—would
he have secured it? He would have been in too great haste for such things
as securing a boat. Moreover, in fastening it to the wharf, he would have
felt as if securing evidence against himself. His natural thought would
have been to cast from him, as far as possible, all that had held
connection with his crime. He would not only have fled from the wharf, but
he would not have permitted the boat to remain. Assuredly he would have
cast it adrift. Let us pursue our fancies.—In the morning, the
wretch is stricken with unutterable horror at finding that the boat has
been picked up and detained at a locality which he is in the daily habit
of frequenting —at a locality, perhaps, which his duty compels him
to frequent. The next night, without daring to ask for the rudder, he
removes it. Now where is that rudderless boat? Let it be one of our first
purposes to discover. With the first glimpse we obtain of it, the dawn of
our success shall begin. This boat shall guide us, with a rapidity which
will surprise even ourselves, to him who employed it in the midnight of
the fatal Sabbath. Corroboration will rise upon corroboration, and the
murderer will be traced."</p>
<p>[For reasons which we shall not specify, but which to many readers will
appear obvious, we have taken the liberty of here omitting, from the MSS.
placed in our hands, such portion as details the following up of the
apparently slight clew obtained by Dupin. We feel it advisable only to
state, in brief, that the result desired was brought to pass; and that the
Prefect fulfilled punctually, although with reluctance, the terms of his
compact with the Chevalier. Mr. Poe's article concludes with the following
words.—Eds. (*23)]</p>
<p>It will be understood that I speak of coincidences and no more. What I
have said above upon this topic must suffice. In my own heart there dwells
no faith in pr�ter-nature. That Nature and its God are two, no man
who thinks, will deny. That the latter, creating the former, can, at will,
control or modify it, is also unquestionable. I say "at will;" for the
question is of will, and not, as the insanity of logic has assumed, of
power. It is not that the Deity cannot modify his laws, but that we insult
him in imagining a possible necessity for modification. In their origin
these laws were fashioned to embrace all contingencies which could lie in
the Future. With God all is Now.</p>
<p>I repeat, then, that I speak of these things only as of coincidences. And
farther: in what I relate it will be seen that between the fate of the
unhappy Mary Cecilia Rogers, so far as that fate is known, and the fate of
one Marie Rog�t up to a certain epoch in her history, there has
existed a parallel in the contemplation of whose wonderful exactitude the
reason becomes embarrassed. I say all this will be seen. But let it not
for a moment be supposed that, in proceeding with the sad narrative of
Marie from the epoch just mentioned, and in tracing to its d�nouement
the mystery which enshrouded her, it is my covert design to hint at an
extension of the parallel, or even to suggest that the measures adopted in
Paris for the discovery of the assassin of a grisette, or measures founded
in any similar ratiocination, would produce any similar result.</p>
<p>For, in respect to the latter branch of the supposition, it should be
considered that the most trifling variation in the facts of the two cases
might give rise to the most important miscalculations, by diverting
thoroughly the two courses of events; very much as, in arithmetic, an
error which, in its own individuality, may be inappreciable, produces, at
length, by dint of multiplication at all points of the process, a result
enormously at variance with truth. And, in regard to the former branch, we
must not fail to hold in view that the very Calculus of Probabilities to
which I have referred, forbids all idea of the extension of the parallel:—forbids
it with a positiveness strong and decided just in proportion as this
parallel has already been long-drawn and exact. This is one of those
anomalous propositions which, seemingly appealing to thought altogether
apart from the mathematical, is yet one which only the mathematician can
fully entertain. Nothing, for example, is more difficult than to convince
the merely general reader that the fact of sixes having been thrown twice
in succession by a player at dice, is sufficient cause for betting the
largest odds that sixes will not be thrown in the third attempt. A
suggestion to this effect is usually rejected by the intellect at once. It
does not appear that the two throws which have been completed, and which
lie now absolutely in the Past, can have influence upon the throw which
exists only in the Future. The chance for throwing sixes seems to be
precisely as it was at any ordinary time—that is to say, subject
only to the influence of the various other throws which may be made by the
dice. And this is a reflection which appears so exceedingly obvious that
attempts to controvert it are received more frequently with a derisive
smile than with anything like respectful attention. The error here
involved—a gross error redolent of mischief—I cannot pretend
to expose within the limits assigned me at present; and with the
philosophical it needs no exposure. It may be sufficient here to say that
it forms one of an infinite series of mistakes which arise in the path of
Reason through her propensity for seeking truth in detail.</p>
<p><SPAN name="link2H_FOOT2" id="link2H_FOOT2"></SPAN></p>
<div style="height: 4em;">
<br/> <br/> <br/> <br/></div>
<h2> FOOTNOTES—Marie Rog�t </h2>
<p>(*1) Upon the original publication of "Marie Roget," the foot-notes now
appended were considered unnecessary; but the lapse of several years since
the tragedy upon which the tale is based, renders it expedient to give
them, and also to say a few words in explanation of the general design. A
young girl, Mary Cecilia Rogers, was murdered in the vicinity of New York;
and, although her death occasioned an intense and long-enduring
excitement, the mystery attending it had remained unsolved at the period
when the present paper was written and published (November, 1842). Herein,
under pretence of relating the fate of a Parisian grisette, the author has
followed in minute detail, the essential, while merely paralleling the
inessential facts of the real murder of Mary Rogers. Thus all argument
founded upon the fiction is applicable to the truth: and the investigation
of the truth was the object. The "Mystery of Marie Roget" was composed at
a distance from the scene of the atrocity, and with no other means of
investigation than the newspapers afforded. Thus much escaped the writer
of which he could have availed himself had he been upon the spot, and
visited the localities. It may not be improper to record, nevertheless,
that the confessions of two persons, (one of them the Madame Deluc of the
narrative) made, at different periods, long subsequent to the publication,
confirmed, in full, not only the general conclusion, but absolutely all
the chief hypothetical details by which that conclusion was attained.</p>
<p>(*2) The nom de plume of Von Hardenburg.</p>
<p>(*3) Nassau Street.</p>
<p>(*4) Anderson.</p>
<p>(*5) The Hudson.</p>
<p>(*6) Weehawken.</p>
<p>(*7) Payne.</p>
<p>(*8) Crommelin.</p>
<p>(*9) The New York "Mercury."</p>
<p>(*10) The New York "Brother Jonathan," edited by H. Hastings Weld, Esq.</p>
<p>(*11) New York "Journal of Commerce."</p>
<p>(*12) Philadelphia "Saturday Evening Post," edited by C. I. Peterson, Esq.</p>
<p>(*13) Adam</p>
<p>(*14) See "Murders in the Rue Morgue."</p>
<p>(*15) The New York "Commercial Advertiser," edited by Col. Stone.</p>
<p>(*16) "A theory based on the qualities of an object, will prevent its
being unfolded according to its objects; and he who arranges topics in
reference to their causes, will cease to value them according to their
results. Thus the jurisprudence of every nation will show that, when law
becomes a science and a system, it ceases to be justice. The errors into
which a blind devotion to principles of classification has led the common
law, will be seen by observing how often the legislature has been obliged
to come forward to restore the equity its scheme had lost."—Landor.</p>
<p>(*17) New York "Express"</p>
<p>(*18) New York "Herald."</p>
<p>(*19) New York "Courier and Inquirer."</p>
<p>(*20) Mennais was one of the parties originally suspected and arrested,
but discharged through total lack of evidence.</p>
<p>(*21) New York "Courier and Inquirer."</p>
<p>(*22) New York "Evening Post."</p>
<p>(*23) Of the Magazine in which the article was originally published.</p>
<p><SPAN name="link2H_4_0012" id="link2H_4_0012"></SPAN></p>
<div style="height: 4em;">
<br/> <br/> <br/> <br/></div>
<h2> THE BALLOON-HOAX </h2>
<p>[Astounding News by Express, <i>via</i> Norfolk!—The Atlantic<br/>
crossed in Three Days! Signal Triumph of Mr. Monck Mason's Flying<br/>
Machine!—Arrival at Sullivan's Island, near Charlestown, S.C., of<br/>
Mr. Mason, Mr. Robert Holland, Mr. Henson, Mr. Harrison Ainsworth,<br/>
and four others, in the Steering Balloon, "Victoria," after a passage<br/>
of Seventy-five Hours from Land to Land! Full Particulars of the<br/>
Voyage!<br/>
<br/>
The subjoined <i>jeu d'esprit</i> with the preceding heading in<br/>
magnificent capitals, well interspersed with notes of admiration, was<br/>
originally published, as matter of fact, in the "New York Sun," a<br/>
daily newspaper, and therein fully subserved the purpose of creating<br/>
indigestible aliment for the <i>quidnuncs</i> during the few hours<br/>
intervening between a couple of the Charleston mails. The rush for<br/>
the "sole paper which had the news," was something beyond even the<br/>
prodigious; and, in fact, if (as some assert) the "Victoria" <i>did</i><br/>
not absolutely accomplish the voyage recorded, it will be difficult<br/>
to assign a reason why she <i>should</i> not have accomplished it.]<br/></p>
<p>THE great problem is at length solved! The air, as well as the earth and
the ocean, has been subdued by science, and will become a common and
convenient highway for mankind. <i>The Atlantic has been actually crossed
in a Balloon!</i> and this too without difficulty—without any great
apparent danger—with thorough control of the machine—and in
the inconceivably brief period of seventy-five hours from shore to shore!
By the energy of an agent at Charleston, S.C., we are enabled to be the
first to furnish the public with a detailed account of this most
extraordinary voyage, which was performed between Saturday, the 6th
instant, at 11, A.M., and 2, P.M., on Tuesday, the 9th instant, by Sir
Everard Bringhurst; Mr. Osborne, a nephew of Lord Bentinck's; Mr. Monck
Mason and Mr. Robert Holland, the well-known �ronauts; Mr. Harrison
Ainsworth, author of "Jack Sheppard," &c.; and Mr. Henson, the
projector of the late unsuccessful flying machine—with two seamen
from Woolwich—in all, eight persons. The particulars furnished below
may be relied on as authentic and accurate in every respect, as, with a
slight exception, they are copied <i>verbatim</i> from the joint diaries
of Mr. Monck Mason and Mr. Harrison Ainsworth, to whose politeness our
agent is also indebted for much verbal information respecting the balloon
itself, its construction, and other matters of interest. The only
alteration in the MS. received, has been made for the purpose of throwing
the hurried account of our agent, Mr. Forsyth, into a connected and
intelligible form.</p>
<p>"THE BALLOON.</p>
<p>"Two very decided failures, of late—those of Mr. Henson and Sir
George Cayley—had much weakened the public interest in the subject
of aerial navigation. Mr. Henson's scheme (which at first was considered
very feasible even by men of science,) was founded upon the principle of
an inclined plane, started from an eminence by an extrinsic force, applied
and continued by the revolution of impinging vanes, in form and number
resembling the vanes of a windmill. But, in all the experiments made with
models at the Adelaide Gallery, it was found that the operation of these
fans not only did not propel the machine, but actually impeded its flight.
The only propelling force it ever exhibited, was the mere <i>impetus</i>
acquired from the descent of the inclined plane; and this <i>impetus</i>
carried the machine farther when the vanes were at rest, than when they
were in motion—a fact which sufficiently demonstrates their
inutility; and in the absence of the propelling, which was also the <i>sustaining</i>
power, the whole fabric would necessarily descend. This consideration led
Sir George Cayley to think only of adapting a propeller to some machine
having of itself an independent power of support—in a word, to a
balloon; the idea, however, being novel, or original, with Sir George,
only so far as regards the mode of its application to practice. He
exhibited a model of his invention at the Polytechnic Institution. The
propelling principle, or power, was here, also, applied to interrupted
surfaces, or vanes, put in revolution. These vanes were four in number,
but were found entirely ineffectual in moving the balloon, or in aiding
its ascending power. The whole project was thus a complete failure.</p>
<p>"It was at this juncture that Mr. Monck Mason (whose voyage from Dover to
Weilburg in the balloon, "Nassau," occasioned so much excitement in 1837,)
conceived the idea of employing the principle of the Archimedean screw for
the purpose of propulsion through the air—rightly attributing the
failure of Mr. Henson's scheme, and of Sir George Cayley's, to the
interruption of surface in the independent vanes. He made the first public
experiment at Willis's Rooms, but afterward removed his model to the
Adelaide Gallery.</p>
<p>"Like Sir George Cayley's balloon, his own was an ellipsoid. Its length
was thirteen feet six inches—height, six feet eight inches. It
contained about three hundred and twenty cubic feet of gas, which, if pure
hydrogen, would support twenty-one pounds upon its first inflation, before
the gas has time to deteriorate or escape. The weight of the whole machine
and apparatus was seventeen pounds—leaving about four pounds to
spare. Beneath the centre of the balloon, was a frame of light wood, about
nine feet long, and rigged on to the balloon itself with a network in the
customary manner. From this framework was suspended a wicker basket or
car.</p>
<p>"The screw consists of an axis of hollow brass tube, eighteen inches in
length, through which, upon a semi-spiral inclined at fifteen degrees,
pass a series of steel wire radii, two feet long, and thus projecting a
foot on either side. These radii are connected at the outer extremities by
two bands of flattened wire—the whole in this manner forming the
framework of the screw, which is completed by a covering of oiled silk cut
into gores, and tightened so as to present a tolerably uniform surface. At
each end of its axis this screw is supported by pillars of hollow brass
tube descending from the hoop. In the lower ends of these tubes are holes
in which the pivots of the axis revolve. From the end of the axis which is
next the car, proceeds a shaft of steel, connecting the screw with the
pinion of a piece of spring machinery fixed in the car. By the operation
of this spring, the screw is made to revolve with great rapidity,
communicating a progressive motion to the whole. By means of the rudder,
the machine was readily turned in any direction. The spring was of great
power, compared with its dimensions, being capable of raising forty-five
pounds upon a barrel of four inches diameter, after the first turn, and
gradually increasing as it was wound up. It weighed, altogether, eight
pounds six ounces. The rudder was a light frame of cane covered with silk,
shaped somewhat like a battle-door, and was about three feet long, and at
the widest, one foot. Its weight was about two ounces. It could be turned
<i>flat</i>, and directed upwards or downwards, as well as to the right or
left; and thus enabled the �ronaut to transfer the resistance of
the air which in an inclined position it must generate in its passage, to
any side upon which he might desire to act; thus determining the balloon
in the opposite direction.</p>
<p>"This model (which, through want of time, we have necessarily described in
an imperfect manner,) was put in action at the Adelaide Gallery, where it
accomplished a velocity of five miles per hour; although, strange to say,
it excited very little interest in comparison with the previous complex
machine of Mr. Henson—so resolute is the world to despise anything
which carries with it an air of simplicity. To accomplish the great
desideratum of �rial navigation, it was very generally supposed
that some exceedingly complicated application must be made of some
unusually profound principle in dynamics.</p>
<p>"So well satisfied, however, was Mr. Mason of the ultimate success of his
invention, that he determined to construct immediately, if possible, a
balloon of sufficient capacity to test the question by a voyage of some
extent—the original design being to cross the British Channel, as
before, in the Nassau balloon. To carry out his views, he solicited and
obtained the patronage of Sir Everard Bringhurst and Mr. Osborne, two
gentlemen well known for scientific acquirement, and especially for the
interest they have exhibited in the progress of �rostation. The
project, at the desire of Mr. Osborne, was kept a profound secret from the
public—the only persons entrusted with the design being those
actually engaged in the construction of the machine, which was built
(under the superintendence of Mr. Mason, Mr. Holland, Sir Everard
Bringhurst, and Mr. Osborne,) at the seat of the latter gentleman near
Penstruthal, in Wales. Mr. Henson, accompanied by his friend Mr.
Ainsworth, was admitted to a private view of the balloon, on Saturday last—when
the two gentlemen made final arrangements to be included in the adventure.
We are not informed for what reason the two seamen were also included in
the party—but, in the course of a day or two, we shall put our
readers in possession of the minutest particulars respecting this
extraordinary voyage.</p>
<p>"The balloon is composed of silk, varnished with the liquid gum
caoutchouc. It is of vast dimensions, containing more than 40,000 cubic
feet of gas; but as coal gas was employed in place of the more expensive
and inconvenient hydrogen, the supporting power of the machine, when fully
inflated, and immediately after inflation, is not more than about 2500
pounds. The coal gas is not only much less costly, but is easily procured
and managed.</p>
<p>"For its introduction into common use for purposes of aerostation, we are
indebted to Mr. Charles Green. Up to his discovery, the process of
inflation was not only exceedingly expensive, but uncertain. Two, and even
three days, have frequently been wasted in futile attempts to procure a
sufficiency of hydrogen to fill a balloon, from which it had great
tendency to escape, owing to its extreme subtlety, and its affinity for
the surrounding atmosphere. In a balloon sufficiently perfect to retain
its contents of coal-gas unaltered, in quantity or amount, for six months,
an equal quantity of hydrogen could not be maintained in equal purity for
six weeks.</p>
<p>"The supporting power being estimated at 2500 pounds, and the united
weights of the party amounting only to about 1200, there was left a
surplus of 1300, of which again 1200 was exhausted by ballast, arranged in
bags of different sizes, with their respective weights marked upon them—by
cordage, barometers, telescopes, barrels containing provision for a
fortnight, water-casks, cloaks, carpet-bags, and various other
indispensable matters, including a coffee-warmer, contrived for warming
coffee by means of slack-lime, so as to dispense altogether with fire, if
it should be judged prudent to do so. All these articles, with the
exception of the ballast, and a few trifles, were suspended from the hoop
overhead. The car is much smaller and lighter, in proportion, than the one
appended to the model. It is formed of a light wicker, and is wonderfully
strong, for so frail looking a machine. Its rim is about four feet deep.
The rudder is also very much larger, in proportion, than that of the
model; and the screw is considerably smaller. The balloon is furnished
besides with a grapnel, and a guide-rope; which latter is of the most
indispensable importance. A few words, in explanation, will here be
necessary for such of our readers as are not conversant with the details
of aerostation.</p>
<p>"As soon as the balloon quits the earth, it is subjected to the influence
of many circumstances tending to create a difference in its weight;
augmenting or diminishing its ascending power. For example, there may be a
deposition of dew upon the silk, to the extent, even, of several hundred
pounds; ballast has then to be thrown out, or the machine may descend.
This ballast being discarded, and a clear sunshine evaporating the dew,
and at the same time expanding the gas in the silk, the whole will again
rapidly ascend. To check this ascent, the only recourse is, (or rather <i>was</i>,
until Mr. Green's invention of the guide-rope,) the permission of the
escape of gas from the valve; but, in the loss of gas, is a proportionate
general loss of ascending power; so that, in a comparatively brief period,
the best-constructed balloon must necessarily exhaust all its resources,
and come to the earth. This was the great obstacle to voyages of length.</p>
<p>"The guide-rope remedies the difficulty in the simplest manner
conceivable. It is merely a very long rope which is suffered to trail from
the car, and the effect of which is to prevent the balloon from changing
its level in any material degree. If, for example, there should be a
deposition of moisture upon the silk, and the machine begins to descend in
consequence, there will be no necessity for discharging ballast to remedy
the increase of weight, for it is remedied, or counteracted, in an exactly
just proportion, by the deposit on the ground of just so much of the end
of the rope as is necessary. If, on the other hand, any circumstances
should cause undue levity, and consequent ascent, this levity is
immediately counteracted by the additional weight of rope upraised from
the earth. Thus, the balloon can neither ascend or descend, except within
very narrow limits, and its resources, either in gas or ballast, remain
comparatively unimpaired. When passing over an expanse of water, it
becomes necessary to employ small kegs of copper or wood, filled with
liquid ballast of a lighter nature than water. These float, and serve all
the purposes of a mere rope on land. Another most important office of the
guide-rope, is to point out the <i>direction</i> of the balloon. The rope
<i>drags</i>, either on land or sea, while the balloon is free; the
latter, consequently, is always in advance, when any progress whatever is
made: a comparison, therefore, by means of the compass, of the relative
positions of the two objects, will always indicate the <i>course</i>. In
the same way, the angle formed by the rope with the vertical axis of the
machine, indicates the <i>velocity</i>. When there is <i>no</i> angle—in
other words, when the rope hangs perpendicularly, the whole apparatus is
stationary; but the larger the angle, that is to say, the farther the
balloon precedes the end of the rope, the greater the velocity; and the
converse.</p>
<p>"As the original design was to cross the British Channel, and alight as
near Paris as possible, the voyagers had taken the precaution to prepare
themselves with passports directed to all parts of the Continent,
specifying the nature of the expedition, as in the case of the Nassau
voyage, and entitling the adventurers to exemption from the usual
formalities of office: unexpected events, however, rendered these
passports superfluous.</p>
<p>"The inflation was commenced very quietly at daybreak, on Saturday
morning, the 6th instant, in the Court-Yard of Weal-Vor House, Mr.
Osborne's seat, about a mile from Penstruthal, in North Wales; and at 7
minutes past 11, every thing being ready for departure, the balloon was
set free, rising gently but steadily, in a direction nearly South; no use
being made, for the first half hour, of either the screw or the rudder. We
proceed now with the journal, as transcribed by Mr. Forsyth from the joint
MSS. of Mr. Monck Mason, and Mr. Ainsworth. The body of the journal, as
given, is in the hand-writing of Mr. Mason, and a P. S. is appended, each
day, by Mr. Ainsworth, who has in preparation, and will shortly give the
public a more minute, and no doubt, a thrillingly interesting account of
the voyage.</p>
<p>"THE JOURNAL.</p>
<p>"<i>Saturday, April the 6th</i>.—Every preparation likely to
embarrass us, having been made over night, we commenced the inflation this
morning at daybreak; but owing to a thick fog, which encumbered the folds
of the silk and rendered it unmanageable, we did not get through before
nearly eleven o'clock. Cut loose, then, in high spirits, and rose gently
but steadily, with a light breeze at North, which bore us in the direction
of the British Channel. Found the ascending force greater than we had
expected; and as we arose higher and so got clear of the cliffs, and more
in the sun's rays, our ascent became very rapid. I did not wish, however,
to lose gas at so early a period of the adventure, and so concluded to
ascend for the present. We soon ran out our guide-rope; but even when we
had raised it clear of the earth, we still went up very rapidly. The
balloon was unusually steady, and looked beautifully. In about ten minutes
after starting, the barometer indicated an altitude of 15,000 feet. The
weather was remarkably fine, and the view of the subjacent country—a
most romantic one when seen from any point,—was now especially
sublime. The numerous deep gorges presented the appearance of lakes, on
account of the dense vapors with which they were filled, and the pinnacles
and crags to the South East, piled in inextricable confusion, resembling
nothing so much as the giant cities of eastern fable. We were rapidly
approaching the mountains in the South; but our elevation was more than
sufficient to enable us to pass them in safety. In a few minutes we soared
over them in fine style; and Mr. Ainsworth, with the seamen, was surprised
at their apparent want of altitude when viewed from the car, the tendency
of great elevation in a balloon being to reduce inequalities of the
surface below, to nearly a dead level. At half-past eleven still
proceeding nearly South, we obtained our first view of the Bristol
Channel; and, in fifteen minutes afterward, the line of breakers on the
coast appeared immediately beneath us, and we were fairly out at sea. We
now resolved to let off enough gas to bring our guide-rope, with the buoys
affixed, into the water. This was immediately done, and we commenced a
gradual descent. In about twenty minutes our first buoy dipped, and at the
touch of the second soon afterwards, we remained stationary as to
elevation. We were all now anxious to test the efficiency of the rudder
and screw, and we put them both into requisition forthwith, for the
purpose of altering our direction more to the eastward, and in a line for
Paris. By means of the rudder we instantly effected the necessary change
of direction, and our course was brought nearly at right angles to that of
the wind; when we set in motion the spring of the screw, and were rejoiced
to find it propel us readily as desired. Upon this we gave nine hearty
cheers, and dropped in the sea a bottle, enclosing a slip of parchment
with a brief account of the principle of the invention. Hardly, however,
had we done with our rejoicings, when an unforeseen accident occurred
which discouraged us in no little degree. The steel rod connecting the
spring with the propeller was suddenly jerked out of place, at the car
end, (by a swaying of the car through some movement of one of the two
seamen we had taken up,) and in an instant hung dangling out of reach,
from the pivot of the axis of the screw. While we were endeavoring to
regain it, our attention being completely absorbed, we became involved in
a strong current of wind from the East, which bore us, with rapidly
increasing force, towards the Atlantic. We soon found ourselves driving
out to sea at the rate of not less, certainly, than fifty or sixty miles
an hour, so that we came up with Cape Clear, at some forty miles to our
North, before we had secured the rod, and had time to think what we were
about. It was now that Mr. Ainsworth made an extraordinary, but to my
fancy, a by no means unreasonable or chimerical proposition, in which he
was instantly seconded by Mr. Holland—viz.: that we should take
advantage of the strong gale which bore us on, and in place of beating
back to Paris, make an attempt to reach the coast of North America. After
slight reflection I gave a willing assent to this bold proposition, which
(strange to say) met with objection from the two seamen only. As the
stronger party, however, we overruled their fears, and kept resolutely
upon our course. We steered due West; but as the trailing of the buoys
materially impeded our progress, and we had the balloon abundantly at
command, either for ascent or descent, we first threw out fifty pounds of
ballast, and then wound up (by means of a windlass) so much of the rope as
brought it quite clear of the sea. We perceived the effect of this
manoeuvre immediately, in a vastly increased rate of progress; and, as the
gale freshened, we flew with a velocity nearly inconceivable; the
guide-rope flying out behind the car, like a streamer from a vessel. It is
needless to say that a very short time sufficed us to lose sight of the
coast. We passed over innumerable vessels of all kinds, a few of which
were endeavoring to beat up, but the most of them lying to. We occasioned
the greatest excitement on board all—an excitement greatly relished
by ourselves, and especially by our two men, who, now under the influence
of a dram of Geneva, seemed resolved to give all scruple, or fear, to the
wind. Many of the vessels fired signal guns; and in all we were saluted
with loud cheers (which we heard with surprising distinctness) and the
waving of caps and handkerchiefs. We kept on in this manner throughout the
day, with no material incident, and, as the shades of night closed around
us, we made a rough estimate of the distance traversed. It could not have
been less than five hundred miles, and was probably much more. The
propeller was kept in constant operation, and, no doubt, aided our
progress materially. As the sun went down, the gale freshened into an
absolute hurricane, and the ocean beneath was clearly visible on account
of its phosphorescence. The wind was from the East all night, and gave us
the brightest omen of success. We suffered no little from cold, and the
dampness of the atmosphere was most unpleasant; but the ample space in the
car enabled us to lie down, and by means of cloaks and a few blankets, we
did sufficiently well.</p>
<p>"P.S. (by Mr. Ainsworth.) The last nine hours have been unquestionably the
most exciting of my life. I can conceive nothing more sublimating than the
strange peril and novelty of an adventure such as this. May God grant that
we succeed! I ask not success for mere safety to my insignificant person,
but for the sake of human knowledge and—for the vastness of the
triumph. And yet the feat is only so evidently feasible that the sole
wonder is why men have scrupled to attempt it before. One single gale such
as now befriends us—let such a tempest whirl forward a balloon for
four or five days (these gales often last longer) and the voyager will be
easily borne, in that period, from coast to coast. In view of such a gale
the broad Atlantic becomes a mere lake. I am more struck, just now, with
the supreme silence which reigns in the sea beneath us, notwithstanding
its agitation, than with any other phenomenon presenting itself. The
waters give up no voice to the heavens. The immense flaming ocean writhes
and is tortured uncomplainingly. The mountainous surges suggest the idea
of innumerable dumb gigantic fiends struggling in impotent agony. In a
night such as is this to me, a man <i>lives</i>—lives a whole
century of ordinary life—nor would I forego this rapturous delight
for that of a whole century of ordinary existence.</p>
<p>"<i>Sunday, the seventh</i>. [Mr. Mason's MS.] This morning the gale, by
10, had subsided to an eight or nine—knot breeze, (for a vessel at
sea,) and bears us, perhaps, thirty miles per hour, or more. It has
veered, however, very considerably to the north; and now, at sundown, we
are holding our course due west, principally by the screw and rudder,
which answer their purposes to admiration. I regard the project as
thoroughly successful, and the easy navigation of the air in any direction
(not exactly in the teeth of a gale) as no longer problematical. We could
not have made head against the strong wind of yesterday; but, by
ascending, we might have got out of its influence, if requisite. Against a
pretty stiff breeze, I feel convinced, we can make our way with the
propeller. At noon, to-day, ascended to an elevation of nearly 25,000
feet, by discharging ballast. Did this to search for a more direct
current, but found none so favorable as the one we are now in. We have an
abundance of gas to take us across this small pond, even should the voyage
last three weeks. I have not the slightest fear for the result. The
difficulty has been strangely exaggerated and misapprehended. I can choose
my current, and should I find <i>all</i> currents against me, I can make
very tolerable headway with the propeller. We have had no incidents worth
recording. The night promises fair.</p>
<p>P.S. [By Mr. Ainsworth.] I have little to record, except the fact (to me
quite a surprising one) that, at an elevation equal to that of Cotopaxi, I
experienced neither very intense cold, nor headache, nor difficulty of
breathing; neither, I find, did Mr. Mason, nor Mr. Holland, nor Sir
Everard. Mr. Osborne complained of constriction of the chest—but
this soon wore off. We have flown at a great rate during the day, and we
must be more than half way across the Atlantic. We have passed over some
twenty or thirty vessels of various kinds, and all seem to be delightfully
astonished. Crossing the ocean in a balloon is not so difficult a feat
after all. <i>Omne ignotum pro magnifico. Mem:</i> at 25,000 feet
elevation the sky appears nearly black, and the stars are distinctly
visible; while the sea does not seem convex (as one might suppose) but
absolutely and most unequivocally <i>concave</i>.(*1)</p>
<p>"<i>Monday, the 8th</i>. [Mr. Mason's MS.] This morning we had again some
little trouble with the rod of the propeller, which must be entirely
remodelled, for fear of serious accident—I mean the steel rod—not
the vanes. The latter could not be improved. The wind has been blowing
steadily and strongly from the north-east all day and so far fortune seems
bent upon favoring us. Just before day, we were all somewhat alarmed at
some odd noises and concussions in the balloon, accompanied with the
apparent rapid subsidence of the whole machine. These phenomena were
occasioned by the expansion of the gas, through increase of heat in the
atmosphere, and the consequent disruption of the minute particles of ice
with which the network had become encrusted during the night. Threw down
several bottles to the vessels below. Saw one of them picked up by a large
ship—seemingly one of the New York line packets. Endeavored to make
out her name, but could not be sure of it. Mr. Osborne's telescope made it
out something like "Atalanta." It is now 12, at night, and we are still
going nearly west, at a rapid pace. The sea is peculiarly phosphorescent.</p>
<p>"P.S. [By Mr. Ainsworth.] It is now 2, A.M., and nearly calm, as well as I
can judge—but it is very difficult to determine this point, since we
move <i>with</i> the air so completely. I have not slept since quitting
Wheal-Vor, but can stand it no longer, and must take a nap. We cannot be
far from the American coast.</p>
<p>"<i>Tuesday, the</i> 9<i>th</i>. [Mr. Ainsworth's MS.] <i>One, P.M. We are
in full view of the low coast of South Carolina</i>. The great problem is
accomplished. We have crossed the Atlantic—fairly and <i>easily</i>
crossed it in a balloon! God be praised! Who shall say that anything is
impossible hereafter?"</p>
<p>The Journal here ceases. Some particulars of the descent were
communicated, however, by Mr. Ainsworth to Mr. Forsyth. It was nearly dead
calm when the voyagers first came in view of the coast, which was
immediately recognized by both the seamen, and by Mr. Osborne. The latter
gentleman having acquaintances at Fort Moultrie, it was immediately
resolved to descend in its vicinity. The balloon was brought over the
beach (the tide being out and the sand hard, smooth, and admirably adapted
for a descent,) and the grapnel let go, which took firm hold at once. The
inhabitants of the island, and of the fort, thronged out, of course, to
see the balloon; but it was with the greatest difficulty that any one
could be made to credit the actual voyage—<i>the crossing of the
Atlantic</i>. The grapnel caught at 2, P.M., precisely; and thus the whole
voyage was completed in seventy-five hours; or rather less, counting from
shore to shore. No serious accident occurred. No real danger was at any
time apprehended. The balloon was exhausted and secured without trouble;
and when the MS. from which this narrative is compiled was despatched from
Charleston, the party were still at Fort Moultrie. Their farther
intentions were not ascertained; but we can safely promise our readers
some additional information either on Monday or in the course of the next
day, at farthest.</p>
<p>This is unquestionably the most stupendous, the most interesting, and the
most important undertaking, ever accomplished or even attempted by man.
What magnificent events may ensue, it would be useless now to think of
determining.</p>
<p>(*1) <i>Note</i>.—Mr. Ainsworth has not attempted to account for
this phenomenon, which, however, is quite susceptible of explanation. A
line dropped from an elevation of 25,000 feet, perpendicularly to the
surface of the earth (or sea), would form the perpendicular of a
right-angled triangle, of which the base would extend from the right angle
to the horizon, and the hypothenuse from the horizon to the balloon. But
the 25,000 feet of altitude is little or nothing, in comparison with the
extent of the prospect. In other words, the base and hypothenuse of the
supposed triangle would be so long when compared with the perpendicular,
that the two former may be regarded as nearly parallel. In this manner the
horizon of the �ronaut would appear to be <i>on a level</i> with
the car. But, as the point immediately beneath him seems, and is, at a
great distance below him, it seems, of course, also, at a great distance
below the horizon. Hence the impression of <i>concavity</i>; and this
impression must remain, until the elevation shall bear so great a
proportion to the extent of prospect, that the apparent parallelism of the
base and hypothenuse disappears—when the earth's real convexity must
become apparent.</p>
<p><SPAN name="link2H_4_0013" id="link2H_4_0013"></SPAN></p>
<div style="height: 4em;">
<br/> <br/> <br/> <br/></div>
<h2> MS. FOUND IN A BOTTLE </h2>
<p>Qui n'a plus qu'un moment a vivre<br/>
<br/>
N'a plus rien a dissimuler.<br/>
<br/>
—Quinault—Atys.<br/></p>
<p>OF my country and of my family I have little to say. Ill usage and length
of years have driven me from the one, and estranged me from the other.
Hereditary wealth afforded me an education of no common order, and a
contemplative turn of mind enabled me to methodize the stores which early
study very diligently garnered up.—Beyond all things, the study of
the German moralists gave me great delight; not from any ill-advised
admiration of their eloquent madness, but from the ease with which my
habits of rigid thought enabled me to detect their falsities. I have often
been reproached with the aridity of my genius; a deficiency of imagination
has been imputed to me as a crime; and the Pyrrhonism of my opinions has
at all times rendered me notorious. Indeed, a strong relish for physical
philosophy has, I fear, tinctured my mind with a very common error of this
age—I mean the habit of referring occurrences, even the least
susceptible of such reference, to the principles of that science. Upon the
whole, no person could be less liable than myself to be led away from the
severe precincts of truth by the ignes fatui of superstition. I have
thought proper to premise thus much, lest the incredible tale I have to
tell should be considered rather the raving of a crude imagination, than
the positive experience of a mind to which the reveries of fancy have been
a dead letter and a nullity.</p>
<p>After many years spent in foreign travel, I sailed in the year 18— ,
from the port of Batavia, in the rich and populous island of Java, on a
voyage to the Archipelago of the Sunda islands. I went as passenger—having
no other inducement than a kind of nervous restlessness which haunted me
as a fiend.</p>
<p>Our vessel was a beautiful ship of about four hundred tons,
copper-fastened, and built at Bombay of Malabar teak. She was freighted
with cotton-wool and oil, from the Lachadive islands. We had also on board
coir, jaggeree, ghee, cocoa-nuts, and a few cases of opium. The stowage
was clumsily done, and the vessel consequently crank.</p>
<p>We got under way with a mere breath of wind, and for many days stood along
the eastern coast of Java, without any other incident to beguile the
monotony of our course than the occasional meeting with some of the small
grabs of the Archipelago to which we were bound.</p>
<p>One evening, leaning over the taffrail, I observed a very singular,
isolated cloud, to the N.W. It was remarkable, as well for its color, as
from its being the first we had seen since our departure from Batavia. I
watched it attentively until sunset, when it spread all at once to the
eastward and westward, girting in the horizon with a narrow strip of
vapor, and looking like a long line of low beach. My notice was soon
afterwards attracted by the dusky-red appearance of the moon, and the
peculiar character of the sea. The latter was undergoing a rapid change,
and the water seemed more than usually transparent. Although I could
distinctly see the bottom, yet, heaving the lead, I found the ship in
fifteen fathoms. The air now became intolerably hot, and was loaded with
spiral exhalations similar to those arising from heat iron. As night came
on, every breath of wind died away, an more entire calm it is impossible
to conceive. The flame of a candle burned upon the poop without the least
perceptible motion, and a long hair, held between the finger and thumb,
hung without the possibility of detecting a vibration. However, as the
captain said he could perceive no indication of danger, and as we were
drifting in bodily to shore, he ordered the sails to be furled, and the
anchor let go. No watch was set, and the crew, consisting principally of
Malays, stretched themselves deliberately upon deck. I went below—not
without a full presentiment of evil. Indeed, every appearance warranted me
in apprehending a Simoom. I told the captain my fears; but he paid no
attention to what I said, and left me without deigning to give a reply. My
uneasiness, however, prevented me from sleeping, and about midnight I went
upon deck.—As I placed my foot upon the upper step of the
companion-ladder, I was startled by a loud, humming noise, like that
occasioned by the rapid revolution of a mill-wheel, and before I could
ascertain its meaning, I found the ship quivering to its centre. In the
next instant, a wilderness of foam hurled us upon our beam-ends, and,
rushing over us fore and aft, swept the entire decks from stem to stern.</p>
<p>The extreme fury of the blast proved, in a great measure, the salvation of
the ship. Although completely water-logged, yet, as her masts had gone by
the board, she rose, after a minute, heavily from the sea, and, staggering
awhile beneath the immense pressure of the tempest, finally righted.</p>
<p>By what miracle I escaped destruction, it is impossible to say. Stunned by
the shock of the water, I found myself, upon recovery, jammed in between
the stern-post and rudder. With great difficulty I gained my feet, and
looking dizzily around, was, at first, struck with the idea of our being
among breakers; so terrific, beyond the wildest imagination, was the
whirlpool of mountainous and foaming ocean within which we were engulfed.
After a while, I heard the voice of an old Swede, who had shipped with us
at the moment of our leaving port. I hallooed to him with all my strength,
and presently he came reeling aft. We soon discovered that we were the
sole survivors of the accident. All on deck, with the exception of
ourselves, had been swept overboard;—the captain and mates must have
perished as they slept, for the cabins were deluged with water. Without
assistance, we could expect to do little for the security of the ship, and
our exertions were at first paralyzed by the momentary expectation of
going down. Our cable had, of course, parted like pack-thread, at the
first breath of the hurricane, or we should have been instantaneously
overwhelmed. We scudded with frightful velocity before the sea, and the
water made clear breaches over us. The frame-work of our stern was
shattered excessively, and, in almost every respect, we had received
considerable injury; but to our extreme Joy we found the pumps unchoked,
and that we had made no great shifting of our ballast. The main fury of
the blast had already blown over, and we apprehended little danger from
the violence of the wind; but we looked forward to its total cessation
with dismay; well believing, that, in our shattered condition, we should
inevitably perish in the tremendous swell which would ensue. But this very
just apprehension seemed by no means likely to be soon verified. For five
entire days and nights—during which our only subsistence was a small
quantity of jaggeree, procured with great difficulty from the forecastle—the
hulk flew at a rate defying computation, before rapidly succeeding flaws
of wind, which, without equalling the first violence of the Simoom, were
still more terrific than any tempest I had before encountered. Our course
for the first four days was, with trifling variations, S.E. and by S.; and
we must have run down the coast of New Holland.—On the fifth day the
cold became extreme, although the wind had hauled round a point more to
the northward.—The sun arose with a sickly yellow lustre, and
clambered a very few degrees above the horizon—emitting no decisive
light.—There were no clouds apparent, yet the wind was upon the
increase, and blew with a fitful and unsteady fury. About noon, as nearly
as we could guess, our attention was again arrested by the appearance of
the sun. It gave out no light, properly so called, but a dull and sullen
glow without reflection, as if all its rays were polarized. Just before
sinking within the turgid sea, its central fires suddenly went out, as if
hurriedly extinguished by some unaccountable power. It was a dim,
sliver-like rim, alone, as it rushed down the unfathomable ocean.</p>
<p>We waited in vain for the arrival of the sixth day—that day to me
has not arrived—to the Swede, never did arrive. Thenceforward we
were enshrouded in patchy darkness, so that we could not have seen an
object at twenty paces from the ship. Eternal night continued to envelop
us, all unrelieved by the phosphoric sea-brilliancy to which we had been
accustomed in the tropics. We observed too, that, although the tempest
continued to rage with unabated violence, there was no longer to be
discovered the usual appearance of surf, or foam, which had hitherto
attended us. All around were horror, and thick gloom, and a black
sweltering desert of ebony.—Superstitious terror crept by degrees
into the spirit of the old Swede, and my own soul was wrapped up in silent
wonder. We neglected all care of the ship, as worse than useless, and
securing ourselves, as well as possible, to the stump of the mizen-mast,
looked out bitterly into the world of ocean. We had no means of
calculating time, nor could we form any guess of our situation. We were,
however, well aware of having made farther to the southward than any
previous navigators, and felt great amazement at not meeting with the
usual impediments of ice. In the meantime every moment threatened to be
our last—every mountainous billow hurried to overwhelm us. The swell
surpassed anything I had imagined possible, and that we were not instantly
buried is a miracle. My companion spoke of the lightness of our cargo, and
reminded me of the excellent qualities of our ship; but I could not help
feeling the utter hopelessness of hope itself, and prepared myself
gloomily for that death which I thought nothing could defer beyond an
hour, as, with every knot of way the ship made, the swelling of the black
stupendous seas became more dismally appalling. At times we gasped for
breath at an elevation beyond the albatross—at times became dizzy
with the velocity of our descent into some watery hell, where the air grew
stagnant, and no sound disturbed the slumbers of the kraken.</p>
<p>We were at the bottom of one of these abysses, when a quick scream from my
companion broke fearfully upon the night. "See! see!" cried he, shrieking
in my ears, "Almighty God! see! see!" As he spoke, I became aware of a
dull, sullen glare of red light which streamed down the sides of the vast
chasm where we lay, and threw a fitful brilliancy upon our deck. Casting
my eyes upwards, I beheld a spectacle which froze the current of my blood.
At a terrific height directly above us, and upon the very verge of the
precipitous descent, hovered a gigantic ship of, perhaps, four thousand
tons. Although upreared upon the summit of a wave more than a hundred
times her own altitude, her apparent size exceeded that of any ship of the
line or East Indiaman in existence. Her huge hull was of a deep dingy
black, unrelieved by any of the customary carvings of a ship. A single row
of brass cannon protruded from her open ports, and dashed from their
polished surfaces the fires of innumerable battle-lanterns, which swung to
and fro about her rigging. But what mainly inspired us with horror and
astonishment, was that she bore up under a press of sail in the very teeth
of that supernatural sea, and of that ungovernable hurricane. When we
first discovered her, her bows were alone to be seen, as she rose slowly
from the dim and horrible gulf beyond her. For a moment of intense terror
she paused upon the giddy pinnacle, as if in contemplation of her own
sublimity, then trembled and tottered, and—came down.</p>
<p>At this instant, I know not what sudden self-possession came over my
spirit. Staggering as far aft as I could, I awaited fearlessly the ruin
that was to overwhelm. Our own vessel was at length ceasing from her
struggles, and sinking with her head to the sea. The shock of the
descending mass struck her, consequently, in that portion of her frame
which was already under water, and the inevitable result was to hurl me,
with irresistible violence, upon the rigging of the stranger.</p>
<p>As I fell, the ship hove in stays, and went about; and to the confusion
ensuing I attributed my escape from the notice of the crew. With little
difficulty I made my way unperceived to the main hatchway, which was
partially open, and soon found an opportunity of secreting myself in the
hold. Why I did so I can hardly tell. An indefinite sense of awe, which at
first sight of the navigators of the ship had taken hold of my mind, was
perhaps the principle of my concealment. I was unwilling to trust myself
with a race of people who had offered, to the cursory glance I had taken,
so many points of vague novelty, doubt, and apprehension. I therefore
thought proper to contrive a hiding-place in the hold. This I did by
removing a small portion of the shifting-boards, in such a manner as to
afford me a convenient retreat between the huge timbers of the ship.</p>
<p>I had scarcely completed my work, when a footstep in the hold forced me to
make use of it. A man passed by my place of concealment with a feeble and
unsteady gait. I could not see his face, but had an opportunity of
observing his general appearance. There was about it an evidence of great
age and infirmity. His knees tottered beneath a load of years, and his
entire frame quivered under the burthen. He muttered to himself, in a low
broken tone, some words of a language which I could not understand, and
groped in a corner among a pile of singular-looking instruments, and
decayed charts of navigation. His manner was a wild mixture of the
peevishness of second childhood, and the solemn dignity of a God. He at
length went on deck, and I saw him no more.</p>
<hr />
<p>A feeling, for which I have no name, has taken possession of my soul
—a sensation which will admit of no analysis, to which the lessons
of bygone times are inadequate, and for which I fear futurity itself will
offer me no key. To a mind constituted like my own, the latter
consideration is an evil. I shall never—I know that I shall never—be
satisfied with regard to the nature of my conceptions. Yet it is not
wonderful that these conceptions are indefinite, since they have their
origin in sources so utterly novel. A new sense—a new entity is
added to my soul.</p>
<hr />
<p>It is long since I first trod the deck of this terrible ship, and the rays
of my destiny are, I think, gathering to a focus. Incomprehensible men!
Wrapped up in meditations of a kind which I cannot divine, they pass me by
unnoticed. Concealment is utter folly on my part, for the people will not
see. It was but just now that I passed directly before the eyes of the
mate—it was no long while ago that I ventured into the captain's own
private cabin, and took thence the materials with which I write, and have
written. I shall from time to time continue this Journal. It is true that
I may not find an opportunity of transmitting it to the world, but I will
not fall to make the endeavour. At the last moment I will enclose the MS.
in a bottle, and cast it within the sea.</p>
<hr />
<p>An incident has occurred which has given me new room for meditation. Are
such things the operation of ungoverned Chance? I had ventured upon deck
and thrown myself down, without attracting any notice, among a pile of
ratlin-stuff and old sails in the bottom of the yawl. While musing upon
the singularity of my fate, I unwittingly daubed with a tar-brush the
edges of a neatly-folded studding-sail which lay near me on a barrel. The
studding-sail is now bent upon the ship, and the thoughtless touches of
the brush are spread out into the word DISCOVERY.</p>
<p>I have made many observations lately upon the structure of the vessel.
Although well armed, she is not, I think, a ship of war. Her rigging,
build, and general equipment, all negative a supposition of this kind.
What she is not, I can easily perceive—what she is I fear it is
impossible to say. I know not how it is, but in scrutinizing her strange
model and singular cast of spars, her huge size and overgrown suits of
canvas, her severely simple bow and antiquated stern, there will
occasionally flash across my mind a sensation of familiar things, and
there is always mixed up with such indistinct shadows of recollection, an
unaccountable memory of old foreign chronicles and ages long ago.</p>
<hr />
<p>I have been looking at the timbers of the ship. She is built of a material
to which I am a stranger. There is a peculiar character about the wood
which strikes me as rendering it unfit for the purpose to which it has
been applied. I mean its extreme porousness, considered independently by
the worm-eaten condition which is a consequence of navigation in these
seas, and apart from the rottenness attendant upon age. It will appear
perhaps an observation somewhat over-curious, but this wood would have
every characteristic of Spanish oak, if Spanish oak were distended by any
unnatural means.</p>
<p>In reading the above sentence a curious apothegm of an old weather-beaten
Dutch navigator comes full upon my recollection. "It is as sure," he was
wont to say, when any doubt was entertained of his veracity, "as sure as
there is a sea where the ship itself will grow in bulk like the living
body of the seaman."</p>
<hr />
<p>About an hour ago, I made bold to thrust myself among a group of the crew.
They paid me no manner of attention, and, although I stood in the very
midst of them all, seemed utterly unconscious of my presence. Like the one
I had at first seen in the hold, they all bore about them the marks of a
hoary old age. Their knees trembled with infirmity; their shoulders were
bent double with decrepitude; their shrivelled skins rattled in the wind;
their voices were low, tremulous and broken; their eyes glistened with the
rheum of years; and their gray hairs streamed terribly in the tempest.
Around them, on every part of the deck, lay scattered mathematical
instruments of the most quaint and obsolete construction.</p>
<hr />
<p>I mentioned some time ago the bending of a studding-sail. From that period
the ship, being thrown dead off the wind, has continued her terrific
course due south, with every rag of canvas packed upon her, from her
trucks to her lower studding-sail booms, and rolling every moment her
top-gallant yard-arms into the most appalling hell of water which it can
enter into the mind of a man to imagine. I have just left the deck, where
I find it impossible to maintain a footing, although the crew seem to
experience little inconvenience. It appears to me a miracle of miracles
that our enormous bulk is not swallowed up at once and forever. We are
surely doomed to hover continually upon the brink of Eternity, without
taking a final plunge into the abyss. From billows a thousand times more
stupendous than any I have ever seen, we glide away with the facility of
the arrowy sea-gull; and the colossal waters rear their heads above us
like demons of the deep, but like demons confined to simple threats and
forbidden to destroy. I am led to attribute these frequent escapes to the
only natural cause which can account for such effect.—I must suppose
the ship to be within the influence of some strong current, or impetuous
under-tow.</p>
<hr />
<p>I have seen the captain face to face, and in his own cabin—but, as I
expected, he paid me no attention. Although in his appearance there is, to
a casual observer, nothing which might bespeak him more or less than
man—still a feeling of irrepressible reverence and awe mingled with the
sensation of wonder with which I regarded him. In stature he is nearly my
own height; that is, about five feet eight inches. He is of a well-knit
and compact frame of body, neither robust nor remarkably otherwise. But it
is the singularity of the expression which reigns upon the face—it
is the intense, the wonderful, the thrilling evidence of old age, so
utter, so extreme, which excites within my spirit a sense—a
sentiment ineffable. His forehead, although little wrinkled, seems to bear
upon it the stamp of a myriad of years.—His gray hairs are records
of the past, and his grayer eyes are Sybils of the future. The cabin floor
was thickly strewn with strange, iron-clasped folios, and mouldering
instruments of science, and obsolete long-forgotten charts. His head was
bowed down upon his hands, and he pored, with a fiery unquiet eye, over a
paper which I took to be a commission, and which, at all events, bore the
signature of a monarch. He muttered to himself, as did the first seaman
whom I saw in the hold, some low peevish syllables of a foreign tongue,
and although the speaker was close at my elbow, his voice seemed to reach
my ears from the distance of a mile.</p>
<hr />
<p>The ship and all in it are imbued with the spirit of Eld. The crew glide
to and fro like the ghosts of buried centuries; their eyes have an eager
and uneasy meaning; and when their fingers fall athwart my path in the
wild glare of the battle-lanterns, I feel as I have never felt before,
although I have been all my life a dealer in antiquities, and have imbibed
the shadows of fallen columns at Balbec, and Tadmor, and Persepolis, until
my very soul has become a ruin.</p>
<hr />
<p>When I look around me I feel ashamed of my former apprehensions. If I
trembled at the blast which has hitherto attended us, shall I not stand
aghast at a warring of wind and ocean, to convey any idea of which the
words tornado and simoom are trivial and ineffective? All in the immediate
vicinity of the ship is the blackness of eternal night, and a chaos of
foamless water; but, about a league on either side of us, may be seen,
indistinctly and at intervals, stupendous ramparts of ice, towering away
into the desolate sky, and looking like the walls of the universe.</p>
<hr />
<p>As I imagined, the ship proves to be in a current; if that appellation can
properly be given to a tide which, howling and shrieking by the white ice,
thunders on to the southward with a velocity like the headlong dashing of
a cataract.</p>
<hr />
<p>To conceive the horror of my sensations is, I presume, utterly impossible;
yet a curiosity to penetrate the mysteries of these awful regions,
predominates even over my despair, and will reconcile me to the most
hideous aspect of death. It is evident that we are hurrying onwards to
some exciting knowledge—some never-to-be-imparted secret, whose
attainment is destruction. Perhaps this current leads us to the southern
pole itself. It must be confessed that a supposition apparently so wild
has every probability in its favor.</p>
<hr />
<p>The crew pace the deck with unquiet and tremulous step; but there is upon
their countenances an expression more of the eagerness of hope than of the
apathy of despair.</p>
<p>In the meantime the wind is still in our poop, and, as we carry a crowd of
canvas, the ship is at times lifted bodily from out the sea—Oh,
horror upon horror! the ice opens suddenly to the right, and to the left,
and we are whirling dizzily, in immense concentric circles, round and
round the borders of a gigantic amphitheatre, the summit of whose walls is
lost in the darkness and the distance. But little time will be left me to
ponder upon my destiny—the circles rapidly grow small—we are
plunging madly within the grasp of the whirlpool—and amid a roaring,
and bellowing, and thundering of ocean and of tempest, the ship is
quivering, oh God! and—going down.</p>
<p>NOTE.—The "MS. Found in a Bottle," was originally published in 1831,
and it was not until many years afterwards that I became acquainted with
the maps of Mercator, in which the ocean is represented as rushing, by
four mouths, into the (northern) Polar Gulf, to be absorbed into the
bowels of the earth; the Pole itself being represented by a black rock,
towering to a prodigious height.</p>
<p><SPAN name="link2H_4_0014" id="link2H_4_0014"></SPAN></p>
<div style="height: 4em;">
<br/> <br/> <br/> <br/></div>
<h2> THE OVAL PORTRAIT </h2>
<p>THE chateau into which my valet had ventured to make forcible entrance,
rather than permit me, in my desperately wounded condition, to pass a
night in the open air, was one of those piles of commingled gloom and
grandeur which have so long frowned among the Appennines, not less in fact
than in the fancy of Mrs. Radcliffe. To all appearance it had been
temporarily and very lately abandoned. We established ourselves in one of
the smallest and least sumptuously furnished apartments. It lay in a
remote turret of the building. Its decorations were rich, yet tattered and
antique. Its walls were hung with tapestry and bedecked with manifold and
multiform armorial trophies, together with an unusually great number of
very spirited modern paintings in frames of rich golden arabesque. In
these paintings, which depended from the walls not only in their main
surfaces, but in very many nooks which the bizarre architecture of the
chateau rendered necessary—in these paintings my incipient delirium,
perhaps, had caused me to take deep interest; so that I bade Pedro to
close the heavy shutters of the room—since it was already night—to
light the tongues of a tall candelabrum which stood by the head of my bed—and
to throw open far and wide the fringed curtains of black velvet which
enveloped the bed itself. I wished all this done that I might resign
myself, if not to sleep, at least alternately to the contemplation of
these pictures, and the perusal of a small volume which had been found
upon the pillow, and which purported to criticise and describe them.</p>
<p>Long—long I read—and devoutly, devotedly I gazed. Rapidly and
gloriously the hours flew by and the deep midnight came. The position of
the candelabrum displeased me, and outreaching my hand with difficulty,
rather than disturb my slumbering valet, I placed it so as to throw its
rays more fully upon the book.</p>
<p>But the action produced an effect altogether unanticipated. The rays of
the numerous candles (for there were many) now fell within a niche of the
room which had hitherto been thrown into deep shade by one of the
bed-posts. I thus saw in vivid light a picture all unnoticed before. It
was the portrait of a young girl just ripening into womanhood. I glanced
at the painting hurriedly, and then closed my eyes. Why I did this was not
at first apparent even to my own perception. But while my lids remained
thus shut, I ran over in my mind my reason for so shutting them. It was an
impulsive movement to gain time for thought—to make sure that my
vision had not deceived me—to calm and subdue my fancy for a more
sober and more certain gaze. In a very few moments I again looked fixedly
at the painting.</p>
<p>That I now saw aright I could not and would not doubt; for the first
flashing of the candles upon that canvas had seemed to dissipate the
dreamy stupor which was stealing over my senses, and to startle me at once
into waking life.</p>
<p>The portrait, I have already said, was that of a young girl. It was a mere
head and shoulders, done in what is technically termed a vignette manner;
much in the style of the favorite heads of Sully. The arms, the bosom, and
even the ends of the radiant hair melted imperceptibly into the vague yet
deep shadow which formed the back-ground of the whole. The frame was oval,
richly gilded and filigreed in Moresque. As a thing of art nothing could
be more admirable than the painting itself. But it could have been neither
the execution of the work, nor the immortal beauty of the countenance,
which had so suddenly and so vehemently moved me. Least of all, could it
have been that my fancy, shaken from its half slumber, had mistaken the
head for that of a living person. I saw at once that the peculiarities of
the design, of the vignetting, and of the frame, must have instantly
dispelled such idea—must have prevented even its momentary
entertainment. Thinking earnestly upon these points, I remained, for an
hour perhaps, half sitting, half reclining, with my vision riveted upon
the portrait. At length, satisfied with the true secret of its effect, I
fell back within the bed. I had found the spell of the picture in an
absolute life-likeliness of expression, which, at first startling, finally
confounded, subdued, and appalled me. With deep and reverent awe I
replaced the candelabrum in its former position. The cause of my deep
agitation being thus shut from view, I sought eagerly the volume which
discussed the paintings and their histories. Turning to the number which
designated the oval portrait, I there read the vague and quaint words
which follow:</p>
<p>"She was a maiden of rarest beauty, and not more lovely than full of glee.
And evil was the hour when she saw, and loved, and wedded the painter. He,
passionate, studious, austere, and having already a bride in his Art; she
a maiden of rarest beauty, and not more lovely than full of glee; all
light and smiles, and frolicsome as the young fawn; loving and cherishing
all things; hating only the Art which was her rival; dreading only the
pallet and brushes and other untoward instruments which deprived her of
the countenance of her lover. It was thus a terrible thing for this lady
to hear the painter speak of his desire to portray even his young bride.
But she was humble and obedient, and sat meekly for many weeks in the
dark, high turret-chamber where the light dripped upon the pale canvas
only from overhead. But he, the painter, took glory in his work, which
went on from hour to hour, and from day to day. And he was a passionate,
and wild, and moody man, who became lost in reveries; so that he would not
see that the light which fell so ghastly in that lone turret withered the
health and the spirits of his bride, who pined visibly to all but him. Yet
she smiled on and still on, uncomplainingly, because she saw that the
painter (who had high renown) took a fervid and burning pleasure in his
task, and wrought day and night to depict her who so loved him, yet who
grew daily more dispirited and weak. And in sooth some who beheld the
portrait spoke of its resemblance in low words, as of a mighty marvel, and
a proof not less of the power of the painter than of his deep love for her
whom he depicted so surpassingly well. But at length, as the labor drew
nearer to its conclusion, there were admitted none into the turret; for
the painter had grown wild with the ardor of his work, and turned his eyes
from canvas merely, even to regard the countenance of his wife. And he
would not see that the tints which he spread upon the canvas were drawn
from the cheeks of her who sate beside him. And when many weeks had
passed, and but little remained to do, save one brush upon the mouth and
one tint upon the eye, the spirit of the lady again flickered up as the
flame within the socket of the lamp. And then the brush was given, and
then the tint was placed; and, for one moment, the painter stood entranced
before the work which he had wrought; but in the next, while he yet gazed,
he grew tremulous and very pallid, and aghast, and crying with a loud
voice, 'This is indeed Life itself!' turned suddenly to regard his
beloved:—She was dead!"</p>
<p><br/></p>
<div style="break-after:column;"></div><br />