Murder on the Thames (A Jules Poiret Mystery Book 11) Read online

  There are few people, even among the most rational thinkers, who have not occasionally been seduced to believe in the supernatural by coincidences, which seemed so incredible that the human mind was not able to accept them as mere coincidences. The choice to accept an event as supernatural over mere coincidence, which in its essence is a purely scientific idea, would send detective Jules Poiret into a rage. This happened in regard to the case, which Captain Haven brought to the attention of the master detective, one Sunday.

  The extraordinary details made public by the newspapers in regard to the murder of Catherine Tennant in London was found to form the primary branch of a series of scarcely intelligible coincidences, whose concluding branch was recognized by all readers in the late murders committed by Jack the Ripper in Whitechapel.

  On solving the tragedy involved in the death of Miss Hutt, a rich sixty year old spinster, who had been murdered by her gardener, the detective dismissed the affair at once from his attention and returned to his old habit of extravagant self-indulgence. Prone at all times to abstraction, Captain Haven, a machine parts salesman at the time, who had just come back from a fruitless journey to Buenos Aires, readily fell in with his mood and spending most of his time at Poiret’s luxurious apartment in Devonshire Street, they gave the future to the winds and slumbered tranquilly in the present, weaving the dull world around them into dreams.

  But these dreams were brutally interrupted. It may readily be supposed that the part played by Poiret in solving Miss Hutt’s murder had not failed to impress London’s ever active solicitors. Among them, the name of Poiret had grown into a household word. The simple manner of his reasoning by which he had solved the mystery never having been explained even to the judge or to any other individual than Haven, it was not surprising that the affair was seen as nothing less than miraculous and the detective’s analytical abilities acquired for him the credit of a clairvoyant. His vanity led him to disabuse every inquirer of such thoughts, but his irritable disposition forbade all further exertion of energy on a subject whose interest to himself had long ceased. It thus happened that he found himself the center of attention of the practitioners of law and the cases were not few in which attempt was made to engage his services. One of the most remarkable instances was that of the murder of a young woman named Catherine Tennant.

  Timothy Smith, a solicitor known to Haven since they both attended Eton together asked Haven to intercede with his friend, the famous detective for Smith’s client, a Mr. Swanson whose fiancée had been horribly murdered. Haven, who had not read any newspapers, since he had arrived back in England, bought The Sunday Times and read the story of the poor woman, who had been so infamously murdered in Whitechapel.

  Catherine was the only daughter of Mrs. Simone Tennant. The father had abandoned them during the child’s infancy and from that period until within eighteen months before her murder, mother and daughter had lived together in a boarding house in Osborn Street in Whitechapel. Life went on as expected until the latter became twenty years old, when her beauty attracted the notice of a publican, who occupied one of the buildings in Berner Street and whose customers were chiefly among the working class living in the neighborhood. Mr. Aron Simkins, who had a terrible lisp, was not unaware of the advantages to be derived from the attendance of the saucy Catherine in his pub and his offer of a position in his establishment was accepted eagerly by the young woman, although with somewhat more hesitation by Mrs. Tennant.

  The hopes of the publican soon came true. His pub became notorious through the charms of the cheeky young woman. After the death of her mother, to relieve herself from the curiosity of the neighborhood busybodies, she soon ended her engagement at the pub and sought the shelter of the boarding house in Osborn Street.

  It was about five months after her return to Osborn Street that her friends were alarmed by her sudden disappearance. Two days went by and nothing was heard of her. On the third her corpse was found floating in the Thames, at a point not far distant from the crowded and impoverished neighborhood of Whitechapel.

  It was at once evident that murder had been committed. The unfortunate woman’s throat had been cut. The youth and beauty of the victim and above all, her previous notoriety, allowed the yellow press to produce intense excitement in the minds of the sensitive inhabitants of London by invoking the simmering memories of previous murders committed by Jack the Ripper. This idea was propagated by the newspapers after they received several letters, claiming to have been written by Jack the Ripper himself, threatening that he had only just begun. For several weeks even the most enervating political subjects of conversation were forgotten. The chief superintendent of Scotland Yard was ordered by the government to give it his full attention and the might of the whole London police were brought to bear to find the culprit.

  When the body was found, it was thought that the murderer would not be able to elude the police for long, as a manhunt was immediately set on foot. It was not until after a week that it was deemed necessary by the police to offer a reward and even then this reward was limited to five hundred shilling. Meanwhile the investigation proceeded vigorously, if not always intelligently and numerous individuals were examined to no purpose, but that was to be expected in the absence of any clues.

  At the end of the tenth day it was thought advisable to double the sum of the reward, but even then the second week went by without leading to any discoveries. The anger, which existed under the surface in Whitechapel came to a boiling point and erupted into several serious riots. This led to the chief superintendent of Scotland Yard to take it on himself to offer the sum of twenty thousand shilling “for the conviction of the murderer,” or, if more than one should prove to have been implicated, “for the conviction of anyone of the murderers.” He also promised a full pardon to any accomplice, who would come forward and testify against his confederate. The reward itself was extraordinary considering the humble background of the young woman and the great frequency in large cities of such atrocities as the one described.

  Although the police made one or two arrests, yet nothing could be found which could implicate the suspects and they were discharged or convicted of other crimes. It was only in the fourth week after the discovery of the body that the event, which had so agitated the public, reached the ears of Poiret. Engaged in his leisure pursuits, which absorbed his whole attention, it had been nearly a month since he had more than glanced at the articles in one of the daily papers.

  The first information of the murder was brought to him by the solicitor in person. He called on Poiret and Haven early in the afternoon and remained with them for three hours. He had been angered by the failure of all his endeavors to ferret out the murderer. His reputation, so he said was brought in doubt. The eyes of his client, Mr. Frank Swanson, the murdered woman’s fiancé were on him and there was no sacrifice, which he was not willing to make to solve the mystery. He concluded his introduction by giving Poiret several compliments in regard to being the one who was able to solve the murder of poor Miss Hutt, which Poiret promptly accepted without making any attempt at rebutting them.

  The solicitor began at first to explain his own views, interspersing them with long comments on the meagre harvest of evidence, which the police was able to collect. Now and then Captain Haven hazarded an occasional suggestion as the night wore away. Poiret, sitting in his arm-chair in front of the fire, seemed the embodiment of respectful attention. Haven, who was sitting next to Timothy Smith could see that Poiret, during most of the whole conversation was sleeping soundly, because silent as he was throughout the three hours of Smith’s visit, he had wearied himself du
ring dinner, which lasted for five hours, eating enough food to feed a Napoleonic army. After Smith found out that the great detective was sound asleep and had not heard anything he had said, he left angrily, promising never to bother him again with one of his cases.

  Trying to remedy the detective’s shameful performance Captain Haven took it upon himself to wet the detective’s appetite for solving the mystery by taking the newspaper in his hands and reading out loud, “Catherine Tennant left the boarding house in Osborn Street at about nine o’clock in the morning. In going out, she gave notice to Mr. Frank Swanson and to him only of her intention to spend the day with an aunt, who resides in Saint Mark Street. Saint Mark Street is a short and narrow but populous thoroughfare, at close distance from the shore of the river and at a distance of one mile, in the most direct course possible, from the boarding house. Mr. Swanson was the suitor of Catherine and lodged as well as took his meals at the boarding house. He was supposed to have gone for his fiancée at dusk and to have accompanied her home. In the afternoon, however, it came on to rain heavily and thinking that she would remain all night at her aunt’s house as she had done before, he did not think it necessary to do as he had promised.

  The next day, it became clear that the young woman had not been to Saint Mark Street and when the day went by without word of her, a haphazard search was organized at several points in Whitechapel. It was however not until the third day after her disappearance that anything satisfactory was discovered. On this day Mr. Webster, also living at the boarding house, who with a friend had been looking for the young woman, was informed that a corpse had just been towed ashore by some students, who had found it floating in the river. On seeing the body, Webster immediately thought of the young woman, who had disappeared without trace only a few days before.

  The face looked darker than the rest of her body. On her throat were cuts and impressions of fingers. Her arms were bent over on her chest. They were rigid. The right hand was clenched. The left was partially open. Her left wrist showed abrasions, apparently caused by a rope, which was not longer present. A part of her right wrist was chafed, as well as her back, but more so at the shoulder-blades. In bringing the body to the shore the students had attached a rope to it. The neck was swollen. There were several cuts apparent, indicating a knife was used and there were no wounds, which could only have been the effect of blows to the body. The medical report spoke of the brutal violence she had been subjected to.

  The dress was torn and otherwise disturbed. In the outer garment, a slip about a foot wide had been torn upward from the bottom to the waist, but not torn off. It was wound two times around the waist and secured by a knot in the back. The dress immediately beneath the frock was of fine muslin and from this a slip sixteen inches wide had been torn entirely out. It had been torn very evenly and with great care. It was found around her neck, fitting loosely and secured with a knot. Over this muslin slip, the strings of a bonnet were attached. The bonnet was still attached to the strings. The knot by which the strings of the bonnet were fastened, was not one a lady would normally use, but a man.

  The police doctor’s examination took place after the corpse was taken to the morgue. The clothes were submitted to friends of the deceased and fully identified as those worn by the young woman.”

  Frank Swanson fell immediately under suspicion and he failed at first to give a clear account of his whereabouts during the day on which Catherine had left the house. Later, after taking in the advice of his solicitor, Mr. Timothy Smith, he submitted a written statement, accounting for every hour of the day in question. As time passed and no one seemed to be able to find the murderer, a thousand contradictory stories were circulated, most of them invented and pedaled by journalists. Among these, the one which attracted the most attention was the idea that Catherine Tennant was murdered by Jack the Ripper and that more women would soon be under attack.

  Haven said, “They probably kept her captive, until the day she was found, when they brutally murdered her and threw her body in the Thames.”

  The detective had been listening silently, intermittently drinking from his glass of brandy. He said angrily, “How do you know? What investigations have you undertaken to come to this conclusion?”

  Haven was taken aback.

  Poiret continued, more calmly, “What is known is that no person has seen her between the time she left the house and the day when she was found in the river. It is unknown when she was so horrible murdered.”

  Captain Haven nodded in agreement.

  “Those who are guilty of such horrid crimes, they normally choose darkness rather than the light to dispose of their victims.”

  Haven added, “That is true. I have noticed that too.”

  Poiret gave him an amused look and pulled the rope hanging next to the fireplace. His manservant Beauchant seemed to understand what his master was in need of and brought in a tray with bonbons. After putting his gold rimmed glasses on Poiret carefully selected one and put it on a napkin. Beauchant then offered Haven the tray. Trying to please his friend, Haven also took some time to make his selection, though he had no idea what the difference was between one bonbon and the other.

  After the dutiful manservant had left the room, Haven continued reading the newspaper to Poiret.

  “Mr. Webster, who lives in the same boarding house as the unfortunate young woman, had no doubt the body was that of Catherine Tennant after he ripped up her gown sleeve and under some hairs he found the marks on her arm, which proved to him that it was Catherine. Mr. Webster did not send word to Mr. Swanson, her fiancé about the discovery. What’s more, that night he did not return to the boarding house at all. Mr. Swanson, the intended husband of Catherine, declared to the police that he did not hear of the discovery of the body of his fiancée until the next morning, when Mr. Webster came to his room and told him of it. Mr. Swanson, far from receiving the news coolly, was distracted with grief and behaved so frantically, that Mr. Webster prevailed on a friend to take charge of him.”

  In another article in the newspaper, an attempt was made to throw suspicion on Webster himself.

  Haven read, “We are told that on one occasion, while a neighbor was at the boarding house, Mr. Webster, who was going out, told her that a policeman was expected at the house and demanded that she kept her mouth about his presence there that day until he returned.

  Mr. Webster appears to have taken charge of the matter. Not a single step could be taken without finding Mr. Webster in the way. For some reason, he has determined that nobody should have anything to do with the proceedings but himself and he even elbowed the male relatives of the young lady out of the way, according to their representations. He seems to have been averse to permitting the relatives to see the body themselves.”

  Some color was given to the suspicions thrown on Webster. The police was told by a visitor to his office, Mr. Webster is a life insurance salesman, that a few days prior to the young woman’s disappearance, Mr. Webster was absent, he had observed a red rose on his desk. Attached to it was a small piece of cardboard with the name “Catherine” inscribed on it.

  Haven read another article, which said, “It is impossible that a person so well known in the neighborhood as this young woman was, should have walked through three streets without someone having seen her and anyone who saw her would have remembered her, because she interested all who knew her. The streets were full of people, when she went out. It is impossible that she could have gone to Saint Mark Street, where her aunt lives, without being recognized by a dozen people, yet no one has come forward who saw her leave her house. There is no evidence, except for the testimony of her fiancé concerning her intention to go out that day that she actually did go out that day.”

  A day or two before Timothy Smith called on Poiret and Haven some important information reached the police. Two small boys, sons of a Mrs. Gifford, while roaming among the shrubs on the shore of the river, by chance found a heavy wooden chair. On the back of the chair lay a white pett
icoat. On the seat lay a shawl with embroidered flowers. A parasol, gloves and a handkerchief were also found there. The handkerchief showed the name “Catherine Tennant.” Fragments of dress were discovered on the bushes. The earth was trampled and there was evidence of a struggle. Between the chair and the river, the fences had been taken down and the ground showed indications of some heavy burden having been dragged along it.

  The things had all evidently been there at least three or four weeks. The grass had grown around the items and over some of them. The silk on the parasol was strong, but the upper part, where it had been doubled and folded, was all wet and rotten and tore on being opened. There could be no doubt, therefore, that the spot of the appalling outrage had been discovered.

  Haven continued, “Consequently, new evidence has appeared. Mrs. Gifford testified that she rents out boats to tourists, who wish to row up and down the river Thames, like the students, who had found the young woman in the river. About three o’clock on the day Catherine disappeared, a young woman arrived at the shop, accompanied by a young man with dark hair. Mrs. Gifford’s attention was called to the dress worn by the young woman, because it resembled one worn by a niece of hers. She particularly noticed the scarf she was wearing.”

  Poiret interrupted Haven by saying, “Queries, skilfully directed to Madame Gifford, they will not fail to elicit from her information on this particular point, which she herself may not even be aware of possessing.”

  Haven nodded. “Soon after the departure of the couple, a boisterous group of students made their appearance. They behaved rowdy, bough food and beer and left in the direction the young couple had taken. At dusk they made their way past the shop as if in great haste.

  It was after dark on the same evening that Mrs. Gifford, as well as her eldest son, heard the screams of a female in the vicinity of the shop. The screams were violent but brief. A homemaker, Mrs. Levende, has also testified that she saw Catherine Tennant walking along the Thames on the day in question in the company of a young man with dark hair. Mrs. Levende knew Catherine and could not be mistaken in her identity. The articles found in the bushes were fully identified by the relatives of Catherine.”