How Holmes Puzzled Out “The Problem at Hazlewood Grange”
Dearest Investigators,
We are pleased to report that The Problem at Hazlewood Grange has been resolved. This case of a conniving ex-lover could’ve left James Cooper answering for someone else’s murder, but your tireless efforts brought the true culprits to light! In case you missed a clue, scroll down for Holmes’ own breakdown of this rather messy break-up.
We’ll be in touch again soon,
The Dear Holmes Team
——
22 November 1896
My Dear Inspector Wilkins,
Please accept my thanks for involving me in this intriguing case. I also extend my gratitude to your constables who provided much valuable evidence. I very much regret that business here in London prevented me from being on the scene in Surrey. I also think that my friend, Watson, will be frustrated to have missed out on a case which, had it been experienced first-hand, would have no doubt graced the pages of The Strand courtesy of his pen.
Upon first learning of the incident at Hazlewood Grange, I was faced with numerous possible suspects. Johnson was certainly a dubious figure, but considering your first letter alone, Mr. Hazlewood’s staff, Mr. James Cooper, and Mr. Hazlewood himself could have all been malefactors in this vile crime. Fortunately, using the information yielded by your interviews and those conducted by Constable Bull, I was able to verify that neither Mr. Hazlewood nor his staff were responsible for the crime. Mr. Hazlewood, Mrs. Nugent, Millie, Mr. Hammond, and both valets, McLelland and Larmour, relayed near identical accounts of the evening prior to the murder, and of the moments following it. Not a single one of these individuals was stained with blood, nor did any of them exhibit any sign of having been involved in a confrontation on that night. Mr. Cooper, likewise, first seemed to be worthy of observation, however, the actual evidence suggesting his involvement was meagre at best. Knowing this, it became but a matter of simple scrutiny before I was able to substantiate what first seemed too obvious: Johnson’s guilt.
To set your mind at rest at once, you have the right man. I am as sure of Johnson’s guilt as if I had seen him do it. What you need now of course isthe explanation and evidence to back the case, as well as the identity of his accomplice. The best way to do this, as far as I can see, is to give you the events in sequence as I have deduced them to have taken place, based on the evidence provided by your correspondence.Johnson hated his former fiancée – that much is clear by now. She was, as her father suspected, nothing more than a source of funds for his lavish mode of living. He has gotten himself into debts far beyond his means. Fear for himself is the driving force here, and as you will soon discover, he was willing to exploit more than one innocent person to save his own skin. I read events as follows.
He arrives at the house long after dark, when he knows the lights will be on and the curtains closed. He is admitted by your butler, Mr. Hammond, and, as is customary, is asked to wait in the hall while Miss Alice is informed of his arrival. When he finds himself briefly alone, Johnson turns the gas valve thus extinguishing the lamps outside. We will come to the reason why presently.
He is shown into the parlour to see Miss Alice. Remember, because the curtains are closed, the servants do not notice that the lamps are now unlit. I can only imagine that Johnson engaged Miss Alice in conversation. I have no doubt that it began amicably for it was all about obtaining time. While this is going on, Johnson’s accomplice enters the grounds, under cover of darkness, and heads for the rear of the house. Johnson has earlier opened the window, perhaps claiming to be too warm.
The accomplice grabs the window frame and this startles Miss Alice who turns to see the source of the noise. At this point Johnson picks up a small throw rug from the floor of the parlour, removes a knife from his pocket and stabs Miss Alice through the rug into her back (hence the bits of fibre in the post-mortem report.) The scream is not hers but that of Johnson’s accomplice who was uninformed of the fact that this would take place. This accounts for Constable Bull hearing the first scream so clearly – both he and the person screaming were outside of the house. He also reported hearing another cry for help that was lower in volume. That cry was from Johnson and was clearly designed to deflect attention from him as a suspect. It was quieter than the scream as Johnson was inside the house.
Johnson then proceeds to strike himself in the face with a vase (which he then shatters) to give the appearance of having had to defend himself. This done, he knocks over the pedestal previously holding the vase to prevent entry to the room. He then goes and wordlessly pleads with his panic-stricken accomplice at the window, to take the knife and rug and flee. Despite the horror at what has occurred, the accomplice does as asked and makes the return journey. As the accomplice approaches the drive, Constable Bull is approaching the house. The accomplice sits down by the garden wall until the constable enters the house. The accomplice then escapes, leaving behind a large impression in the ground. Meanwhile, inside the house, Johnson has to act fast. The swindler knows the missing murder weapon and his accomplice’s footsteps, leading to the window, will all look good for his story, but of course, he was reluctant to trust his accomplice with the necklace.
This is where this man’s forward planning pays dividends. As Mr. Hazlewood’s November 20th letter indicates, Johnson bought the black Labrador, Sam, for Miss Alice. This is why the dog did not become especially aggressive during the assault. It was torn in loyalty. So while the members of the household staff are attempting to effect entry into the room, Johnson plays his master stroke and hides the necklace. Constable Bull’s letter to me noted that the Hazlewood’s Labrador wore a particularly thick collar, yet only something in the nature of a mastiff would need such a collar for control. Your first letter, Inspector Wilkins, also mentioned the dog distinctly bowing its head, collar buried in the carpet, upon your arrival. I deduce, therefore, that the collar is not reinforced. Rather, it is bigger so as to conceal some kind of compartment or pocket.
Johnson places the necklace into this aperture and then waits for the servants to break into the parlour. When they do, the dog – also vexed by its newly weighted collar – is lying next to Miss Alice’s body, and Johnson is on the floor hard at work, playing the part of the injured, grieving former fiancé. He does this to buy time for his accomplice to distance themselves from the house. As soon as he calculates that enough time has passed, he begins to plead his innocence and starts telling the story of the moustached intruder. As Johnson has neither the weapon nor the necklace and they are not found in the house or grounds, this begins to look like a plausible version of events. Later, you find the footprints from the grounds to the window and back again, and mysteriously, they match neither Johnson’s shoes nor those of anybody at Hazlewood Grange. At this point, his story starts to seem not only reasonable but probable, yet there had to be something still unseen, for had the intruder climbed in and stabbed Miss Alice, they would have no doubt left footprints from the window to and from the body.
As the events in the parlour unfold, the accomplice has gone to a prearranged location and placed the rug and knife there. The intention being to dispose of them later, because that person has one more thing to do: Johnson, wearing a rather simple disguise of spectacles and cap, has secured some arsenic for the purpose of poisoning the dog. This has been secreted at the same place where the knife and rug have now been hidden.
Again, Johnson’s understanding of the Hazlewood household pays off. He knows that Mr. Hazlewood hates the dog and will seize the chance to be rid of it, but before this has a chance to occur, the dog flees. To Mr. Hazlewood’s relief and Johnson’s favour, the solicitor is unable to retrieve it, and word of the roaming dog is soon news in the town. The accomplice knows, as do most in Godalming, that Mr. Hazlewood will have no interest in determining where it has gone, and consequently, has little difficulty in arranging to lure it away discreetly.
Johnson’s plan at this point is plain. The dog will be poisoned and left at the “prearranged” location. He will wait for the case to break down, which he expects, with some justification, to be soon. He will then make for the secret location, liberate the necklace from the body of the dog and disappear. His accomplice will soon discover his escape and realise she has been bound to silence, lest she incriminate herself. The heartache and embarrassment will seem, to the passing eye, all the same as grief. This accomplice is, of course, Lucy Lufton the butcher’s daughter.
Lucy was also, I speculate, the true recipient of the engraved silver band Johnson carried, though her opinion of him rapidly started to sour following the Hazlewood incident. Although she ultimately led the poor dog to the hideaway – the builder’s yard near her father’s shop – she finally drew a line once there. Instead of poisoning the dog, she merely removed the necklace from its collar and abandoned it. This was a mistake as the dog’s scratching alerted your local postman, Franklin.
Your course of action is now clear. Proceed to the builder’s outbuildings. With a little effort, you will find the rug and knife; with some luck, Sam as well. If Lucy did indeed leave the necklace behind for Johnson, I expect it will turn up there too. Should it be absent, I suggest you extend your interview with the young Miss Lufton accordingly.
If you find yourself in need of any further assistance, Inspector, do not hesitate to write me again. Please express my condolences to Mr. Hazlewood and his family, and to Mr. Cooper as well. I am grateful to have helped cast a light on this most sensitive matter, and to have helped confirm the innocence of those caught in a web of rumours.
Yours sincerely,
P.S. May I suggest you visit Mr. Cooper and persuade him to act for the prosecution. I am certain you will find him amenable.