Investigators,
Though we were too late to save James Sinclair, the mystery of The Death at Woodrush House has been solved. Mrs. Sinclair will surely need some time to grieve and process the latest developments, but thankfully, she'll live without fear of a killer on the loose!
Holmes has also looked over the case files, as always, and written up a summary of his own conclusions. If you fear you might've overlooked some evidence, read on below!
The Dear Holmes Team
——
23 July, 1890
Dear Inspector Oakley,
I have returned to London and am writing both, in response to your most recent note to Watson, and with my thoughts on the matter of James Sinclair’s death. Before offering my insights, I shall respond to your message.
You wrote, saying that you had failed to locate the Tannyhill family, which Martin had involved in his defence. I take pleasure in writing that Watson located them; or, rather, he located the Tannahill family, and confirmed that they are the ones to whom Martin surely referred. Watson’s findings only bolster my own hypothesis. The Tannahills had no idea who Martin was. Mr. Tannahill also stated that he had hired nobody to perform any sort of work recently at their property. On the night of the crime, their butler saw a man wandering outside and kept watch of him. The man kept away and eventually wandered into a nearby field, so Mr. Tannahill assumed it was a “vagrant beggar” and made nothing of it. There was nothing else exceptional about that evening for them, however, and this I know you will find curious, the Tannahills do appear to be familiar with Samuel Woodrush.
Now onto more pressing matters. I spent the last night poring over all the information with which I have been furnished about your case— an odd one, no doubt. There are several plausible theories but only one that, in my opinion, carries any weight. I fear that even with the information above, you may find it difficult to believe, but once I lay the evidence before you... I am certain you will be convinced of its accuracy.
First and foremost, Harold Martin is innocent in this matter. I agree with your earlier assessment, that he is guilty of other crimes, petty thefts I suspect, but not involved in this ordeal of his own volition. His incredulous reaction to seeing the gun suggests that it was not only his, but also, and more importantly, that he was truly surprised to see it. This, I surmise, was because of where and how he initially lost it, though I will address that in due time. His vague manner of speaking to you was a result of his “profession”, and his desire to keep his attempts at thievery unnamed. Especially in light of Tannahill’s account of the “vagrant”, which aligns with Martin’s own description of that evening, I am confident he was not lying to you when explaining his whereabouts on the night of the murder. Otherwise, he would have been very unlikely to reveal his suspicious, though officially innocent, visit to the Tannahill property.
Rather, I wager that Sinclair’s murderer has taken advantage of Martin’s career as a thief to cast doubt on him and make him a viable suspect. By tempting him with the possibility of an easy burglary, the killer was able to put him somewhere, alone, such that no one should have been able to vouch for him. He surmised, correctly, that Martin would not attempt the “work” when he discovered that the family and staff were in the house. And as a result, Mr. Martin was left with an ample period of time that he could not easily account for.
Bearing in mind these details along with your own investigative endeavours, I suspect that you will have already determined who Sinclair’s murderer was. Nevertheless, I shall state it plainly: The man responsible for the death of Mr. James Sinclair is Samuel Woodrush.
He is a proud man, whose obsession with reputation and outward appearance governs his every act. His nephews, alongside his own prejudice, convinced him that a junior solicitor, and son of a rumoured thief, would bring shame to the Woodrush name were he to marry into their family. When all attempts to separate Mr. Sinclair from his granddaughter failed, he turned to extreme measures, acting alone but with the assistance, knowing and unknowing, of his nephews and staff. I shall explain.
Mr. Woodrush has repeatedly referred to the limitations imposed upon him by his rheumatism. I have consulted Watson about this and I do not doubt that his mobility is severely impacted, but his hands are not as affected as his legs. In fact, you informed me that, when you first met him, he was playing a violin to calm himself. As a fellow musician, I can state without a doubt that he would not be capable of such a feat were his hands substantially affected. As his hands are not yet affected, he is more than capable of firing a gun. The difficulty, for him, would have lied in restricting Mr. Sinclair’s movements. His impaired legs meant that if he were to murder Sinclair it would most likely have to occur on his own property, where he has near absolute control over environment and people alike. I will now lay out the events as I deduce them to have occurred.
Firstly, Mr. Sinclair had to be lured to the house when his fiancée was absent. The invitation had to be one that he would not refuse. Now, what subject would be the most important for Mr. Sinclair? His relationship with Miss Woodrush. Mr. Woodrush determined to feign allyship and wrote to him, saying that the Hampson brothers would attempt something else to disrupt the pending marriage. Perhaps Woodrush suggested that he had a plan to neutralise that threat and that he wished for Sinclair to come to dinner to discuss it.
Due to the time of night during which Woodrush hoped to execute his plan, he knew that Sinclair would need somewhere to stay. However, it was vital that he not stay at Woodrush House if the story he planned to later tell was to be convincing. He therefore offered the man accommodations at the Royal Oak Hotel, along with money for payment, surely offering some excuse as to why his own house was not a possibility. The fact that Woodrush did not send the money directly to the hotel suggests that he wanted to obscure his involvement.
We also know, from Miss Sinclair’s account in your second letter to me, that her brother burnt one page of the letter he received and put the other in his pocket. The burnt page was most certainly written by Woodrush and he wanted no evidence of his invitation to exist. Sinclair complied as he had no desire to cross the man and impede his own cause; all the more after previously arousing anger when he reported the Hampsons to the police.
In light of Mr. Sinclair’s unreliable memory, which was also noted by his sister, I surmise that the second page in his pocket— the sheet of hotel paper that was later found on his body— was a means of providing him the hotel address in a way that ensured no link to his visit to Woodrush.
Having accepted Woodrush’s invitation, Sinclair travelled to the hotel on the day of his death, arriving at seven o’clock. He declined dinner as he expected to dine at Woodrush House, and went to his room and changed. He then left the hotel and secured a cab.
Most likely under instructions, he arranged for the driver to drop him at the edge of the property rather than at the door. This was designed so that, if the cabby was found and interviewed, it would look strange to the police that he was not taken up the drive. Sinclair then walked up the drive and rang the bell. Woodrush admitted him and, I posit, invited him into the study for a drink, and to discuss the situation with the Hampson brothers.
At some point during that interview, Woodrush revealed his true intentions. He no doubt railed at Sinclair about his humble background, criminal father, and lack of worthiness. It is possible, even at this stage, that if Sinclair had been convinced to abandon Miss Woodrush, he might have survived the night. But, based on what Sinclair’s sister told us, we can deduce the tone of his response. When he, once again, refused to abandon Miss Woodrush, her grandfather summoned his formidable, and extremely loyal dog, and suggested that Sinclair run for his life. I am convinced that the French windows that faced onto the garden were already open, so that with little time to think clearly, Sinclair would run out through them and into the garden. This is where Woodrush’s diabolical cunning and forward planning came into play.
He knew that Sinclair could not outrun the dog, and what do you do, Inspector, when under pressure and incapable of critical thought? It is human nature, in such dangerous circumstances, to pursue the easiest route to safety. Sinclair knew that he needed to escape the dog. He could not outpace it; the only option was to get off the ground. As he ran down the garden, he saw boxes alongside the oldest yew tree. These were put there deliberately by Woodrush, I remind you, and were approximately one and two feet in height. Sinclair used them, like steps, to climb onto the tree thus avoiding being torn apart by the mastiff.
Still, Samuel Woodrush had no intention of letting his dog Leo harm Mr. Sinclair. That would be tantamount to signing his name to the crime. But Sinclair did not know that. Instead, he had just borne witness to the full extent of Mr. Woodrush’s hatred for him and his family, and now found himself in a tree with the dog circling.
The man accused, Mr. Martin, told you he had lost his revolver some time ago. This was true and had undoubtedly occurred during one of his attempts to burgle Woodrush House. This is probably why he feigned ignorance as to how he lost it. Mr. Woodrush kept hold of this gun, and a grudge on Martin it seems, and saw it as a way of implicating him in the murder.
Now let us move to the gunshot. Mr. Woodrush has lived with his rheumatism for some time. He knew he could not simply run after Sinclair, but he did not need to as Sinclair dared not climb down from the tree. When Woodrush eventually arrived, he raised the gun to kill Sinclair. It would have been relatively easy to do as the man had little scope for movement and the absence of neighbours would allow Woodrush several shots without drawing any attention.
In that moment of utter horror, Sinclair did something Woodrush likely failed to predict— he leapt from the tree. In doing so, he fractured an ankle and fell to his knees. Woodrush would have then called off the dog and walked after the wounded Sinclair who was doing his best to limp away. Even a wounded Mr. Sinclair could hobble faster than Mr. Woodrush, but the latter aimed at the young man’s back, a large target, and fired. His bullet found its mark and Sinclair fell. Satisfied, Woodrush returned to the house, dropping the revolver somewhere he knew it would be found. When the butler returned later nothing would have seemed amiss.
This was an important point, Inspector. For what murderer leaves his weapon at the site of a crime when it could be recognised and linked to him? Surely, he would take it with him and dispose of it elsewhere. Added to this was the fact that the gun was found just beside the house— that is, closer than the body— thus indicating that the killer had headed in that direction directly after the deed. Who would do that other than a resident of the house? The sound of the shot would have roused the household, thus forcing a stranger to flee in the opposite direction; perhaps towards the rear garden wall. This method of implicating Mr. Martin was plain stupidity on the part of Woodrush. A more sensible thing for him to have done would have been leaving the gun beside the body.
In the morning, Woodrush then asked Harcourt to let the dog out. Harcourt did as ordered and the body was found, Woodrush was eager to identify Mr. Martin’s gun. When pushed for other possible suspects, he offered up his nephews and, while you simultaneously investigated that and Mr. Martin’s whereabouts, it drew attention away from him. He also made sure to state that he was approving of Miss Woodrush’s match to Sinclair, and that he had arranged for his finances to cope with the loss of income that her marriage would cause. Naturally, this was to ensure that he appeared to have no motive to kill.
At this stage, you may be questioning the timing of this crime too. The crime had to be committed during dry weather, when it would be possible for Woodrush to traverse the garden with a stick, without fear of leaving impressions in the ground. In addition to this, it is important to note that Sinclair was killed on a night when Woodrush was alone at the house. Miss Woodrush was in Brighton and the butler had been given the evening off. Only Mr. Woodrush was in the position to manufacture such perfect circumstances for this murder.
I have already informed my associates at Scotland Yard, and they have assured me they will contact your station, but if they have yet to do so, know that Woodrush will be apprehended in the coming days. In spite of this, you may have some more questions to pose for the butler and his nephews.
We know as well, from the Royal Oak Hotel, that Harcourt was a regular visitor. I strongly suspect that on one of his earlier visits, about six weeks ago, he was asked to secure some sheets of hotel notepaper. We can deduce that it was that long ago because the hotel changed its stationery “earlier in June”, and the staff mentioned not seeing Harcourt for six weeks. I doubt he questioned the request at the time but, if threatened with standing as an accessory, perhaps he will confess that his master asked him to obtain it. This is all to say, I believe the butler to have assisted unknowingly.
The same cannot be said for the Hampson brothers. I am not convinced that they were unaware of the scheme. You must apply pressure there most of all. Explain to the pair of them that while their maternal uncle’s reputation is ruined, they can still save their father’s reputation by helping bring their uncle before justice. I might be inclined to suggest (but not promise) that they may even escape action if they cooperate. People so obsessed with appearances will do almost anything to preserve them.
It has been a pleasure to assist you in this matter, Inspector. Be sure to contact me if you require any further assistance.
Yours sincerely,
