The Case of the Negligent Nymph

Chapter 14

“THE PEREMPTORY CHALLENGE IS WITH THE DEFENDANT,” Judge Garey said.

Perry Mason, on his feet, bowed urbanely. “We are thoroughly satisfied with this jury, Your Honor.”

Judge Garey glanced at the prosecutor.

Claud Gloster, district attorney, made a gesture, a sweeping inclusive gesture of approval. “Swear the jury.”

Judge Garey said, “The clerk will swear the jury.”

The jury of seven men and five women arose, held up their right hands and were sworn to try the issues well and faithfully in the case of the People of the State of California on the one hand and Dorothy Fenner on the other.

Claud Gloster, as prosecutor, made a very brief opening statement in which he stated merely that he expected to prove the defendant, Dorothy Fenner, with malice aforethought, had murdered George S. Alder at his house at the beach on a place known as Alder Island that death had been caused by gunshot that the bullet had penetrated the neck, severed a main artery, and shattered the spine. The victim had dropped in his tracks.

The victim had been expecting the defendant to call on him. He had locked up the dog which had been his in. separable companion for the past few months so that the defendant could come to the house without fear of the dog. The defendant had killed him with one shot from a .38 caliber revolver, fled out of the back door to the beach where she had left a canoe or some small boat, had rowed out to her own yacht, tied the boat to the yacht, changed her clothes, gone to the landing pier, and returned to her apartment.

It was a very sketchy opening speech. At the end of it, the prosecutor sat down. Mason waived his opening speech at that time and the district attorney called his first witness.

The autopsy surgeon testified with a bristling of technical language to the fact of death and the cause of death.

Claud Gloster, a careful, logical, dangerous courtroom antagonist, was careful to ask just the right questions to bring out the points he wanted and then stop.

“Do you,” he asked, turning to Mason courteously, “wish to cross-examine the witness, Mr. Mason?”

“Just a question,” Mason said.

“Go right ahead.”

“Thank you. Doctor, when you examined the body, you determined the cause of death?”

“Yes, sir.”

“You have mentioned that the wound was caused by a .38 caliber bullet?” ·

“Yes, sir.”

“That bullet was recovered then?”

“No, sir, the bullet was not recovered.”

“How, then, do you know the caliber?”

“From the size of the wound in part, in part by deduction from the fact that the gun which fired the fatal bullet was lying under the body.”

“If you didn’t find the fatal bullet, how do you know this gun which was found under the body was the weapon which fired the fatal bullet?”

“Because it had been recently discharged, because there was no other place where the bullet could have gone, and because the gun was a .38 caliber.”

“I see. You know the fatal bullet was a .38 caliber because the gun was found beneath the body, and you know this weapon was the weapon used because it’s a .38 caliber. Is that right?”

“It makes it sound absurd when you express it that way.”

“Then express your deductions in some way so they won’t sound absurd.”

“There was the size of the wound.”

“Don’t you know a bullet always makes a smaller entrance wound than the caliber of the bullet?”

“How can it make an entrance wound that is smaller than its diameter?”

“Due to the elasticity of the skin.”

“Well, this was a .38 caliber. I’m certain of it.”

“But that part of your testimony about the gun being the fatal gun is pine deduction?”

“It’s a matter of expert opinion.”

“An expert opinion based on pure deduction, Doctor?”

“Well—yes, if you want to put it that way.”

“That’s all,” Mason said.

A surveyor was sworn and maps of the premises were introduced. Then a police officer who testified that he was called to the scene of the crime because of a telephone call from a neighbor who had in turn been alarmed by the screams of one of the servants who had been to a movie and returned to find George Alder lying dead on the floor of the study. The officer described the premises as he had found them, stated that from the time he entered the premises he remained on duty, that he instructed others to telephone the sheriff and notify the coroner. The witness waited on the premises until the coroner arrived. He was present when photographs were taken and he identified a long series of photographs showing the body of the dead man-and the condition of the premises at that time.

“Cross-examine,” Gloster said, quite casually.

“Now, the dog was shut up in an adjoining room?” Mason asked.

“It wasn’t an adjoining room, it was sort of a—well, a closet with a ventilator in it and a window up near the top. The window was so high that the dog couldn’t reach it”

“Who let the dog out?”

“Well, after reinforcements came, we—we all sort of let him out together.”

“And what happened?”

The officer said, “We tried to open the door a crack and then as he pushed his head out, slip a rope around his neck.”

“Were you able to do so?”

The officer grinned. “That dog was just like a bullet. We opened that door and the dog came out of there like a shot, jerked the rope out of the hands of the man who was trying to hold him, and went out of there like greased lightning.”

“Where did he go?”

“The last I saw of him, he was crossing the room and tearing down the side stairs, the rope whipping behind him.”

“You ran out after him?”

“Yes, sir.”

“And where was he?”

The witness grinned. “He was gone.”

That sally brought laughter from the courtroom.

“Do you know in which direction the dog went?”

“Well, not from my personal knowledge, no, sir.”

“He wasn’t visible in the yard?”

“No, sir.”

“You do know that he was not in the back yard?”

“He ran around the side of the house, apparently, and tried to get out to the street through the gate. I don’t know this, I can’t swear to it, because by the time I got around to the front of the house the servant who had run out of the front door had the rope and was holding him.”

“Did the dog make any attempt to bite?”

“The dog let this servant hold the rope.”

“That was the same servant who had discovered the body?”

“Yes, sir.”

“And where is that dog now?”

“Oh, Your Honor,” Gloster said, “that’s certainly not proper cross-examination. It’s far outside of the issues.”

“Well, if the witness knows, he may tell,” the judge ruled. “I don’t see that it’s particularly important one way or the other, but I want to give counsel the greatest latitude in cross-examination.”

“But, Your Honor, the question of where the dog is at the present time is certainly carrying an inquiry far afield,” Gloster said courteously. “I think that it is significant that the decedent locked the dog up in this closet so that the visitor whom he was expecting would not be annoyed by the dog. We expect to prove that that was somewhat a routine procedure. Whenever anyone was admitted to the house—any stranger, that is, the dog was either shut up or kept on leash. But where the dog is now, that’s certainly going far outside the issues.”

Mason said with a smile, “Well, if it’s entirely immaterial why not let me know where the dog is?”

“Because there’s no use cluttering up the record with a lot of extraneous matters.”

“Well, just for my own information, tell me where the dog is.”

Gloster shook his head.

Judge Garey began to show signs of quick interest. “I think the defense is entitled to know,” he ruled.

“Your Honor,” Gloster said desperately, “I want to keep the evidence within the issues and I want to keep the issues narrowed down to the question of who killed George S. Alder. If we get to bringing dogs into the case, and where the dogs are, and what the dogs are eating, and how the dogs feel, and whether the dogs are mourning, and … “

“He hasn’t asked anything about the dog’s diet He’s asking where the dog is,” Judge Garey said, “and I think he’s entitled to know. Answer the question, Mr. Witness.”

“I don’t know,” the officer said. “He was, I believe, taken out to some boarding kennel. That’s the last I heard of it”

“Do you know the name of the kennel, Mr. Gloster?” Judge Garey asked, his voice ominous.

“No, Your Honor, I believe the sheriff had charge of the dog.”

“Well, find out and let me know,” Judge Garey said. “I think we’re entitled to know where the dog is. Any further cross-examination, Mr. Mason?”

“This closet that the dog was in,” Mason said. “Did you say the closet had been specially built for the dog?”

“No, sir, I didn’t. I think it had just been a closet that had had a ventilator put in it. You could see the dog had been kept in there at intervals—there was a bed, a pan of water, and the inside of the door was just scratched all to pieces where ihe dog had tried to get out when the minder was committed. He had torn a nail loose in his clawing.”

“You noticed the torn claw?” Mason asked.

“Not the torn claw, but you could see that it had been torn because there were three distinct, although faint streaks of blood on the inside of the door where his paw had scratched along the wood, and a couple of bloody smudges on the closet floor. If you ask me, it was a crime to leave a dog in a room with a paneled door like that. A smooth piece of wood could have been fastened to the inside of the door and then the dog wouldn’t have torn his nails on the panels.”

“But had he scratched on the door before?” Mason asked.

“Well, to be fair to the owner, the scratches were all fresh. I presume that… I’m sorry, I forgot I can’t testify to an opinion.”

“Go right ahead,” Mason told him. Tm not objecting. You seem to have a more expert opinion than the experts.”

The witness grinned. “Well, the scratches on the inside of the door were all fresh. I called the attention of the others to that after we’d opened the door and the dog had dashed out. Evidently he’d been well disciplined and accustomed to remaining in the closet but when he heard the shot fired and—well, I presume there’d been a quarrel and—well, anyway, that dog wanted out so bad he’d torn a nail on that rough paneling on the inside of the door. I’m a dog lover and it makes me sore when I see an animal abused.”

“More than one claw torn loose?” Mason asked.

“I’d say just one.”

“And no scratches on the door that weren’t fresh?”

“No, sir. Incidentally, I verified that from the servants, but I presume that wouldn’t be admissible as evidence now.”

“In other words,” Mason said, “you were trying to prove at least to your own satisfaction that there’d been something of a quarrel immediately preceding the shooting. Is that right?”

“Yes, sir.”

“And you did so?”

“Exactly.”

“Then, since we’re dealing in theories, how did the murderer get possession of George Alder’s gun?”

“It must have been lying on the desk … or, perhaps a young woman …”

“Oh, if the Court please,” Claud Gloster protested.

“All this certainly isn’t evidence,” Judge Garey ruled.

“It’s pure speculation. Counsel is asking for it, but it’s not evidence.”

“It’s just like all the rest of the case, Your Honor,” Mason said.

“I think well dispense with discussion, Mr. Mason.”

“Very well, Your Honor.”

“That’s all,” Gloster announced. “Now my next witness will be the sheriff of the county, Leonard C. Keddie.”

Sheriff Keddie, a tall, rawboned, slow-speaking individual, duly sworn, settled himself on the witness stand and gave his name, age, and occupation.

“You were called to the residence of George S. Alder on Alder Island on the night of August third?”

"I was, yes, sir.”

“And what did you find, Sheriff?”

“Well, when I arrived there the others had already been there—they’d been there some little time. I organized the search, and started looking around. We found that a boat was missing from the landing—one of the small boats, and assumed that the murderer might have managed to escape in that. There was a burglar alarm on the wharf, but a person who knew the layout could switch that alarm off from the land side, so that it would be inoperative for about three minutes and then would go on again. I took charge of the phase of the investigation which had for its object the finding of that boat.”

“And did you find it?”

“Yes, sir.”

“Where?”

“Drifting in the bay.”

“Can you point on this map, People’s Exhibit D-twelve, to show approximately where that boat was recovered?”

“Yes, sir, I can. It was right about at this point where I will now make a cross in pencil.”

“Now, were you present when that boat was recovered?”

“Yes, sir.”

“And did you notice anything peculiar about that boat?”

“It had been freshly painted, a certain green color.”

“Did you make any investigation of the yacht, the Kathy-Kay, owned by the defendant in this case?”

“Yes, sir.”

“And did you notice anything significant on that yacht?”

“Yes, sir.”

“What?”

“A place where some green paint had been rubbed against the side of the yacht.”

“And what did you do with that green paint, if anything?”

“I saw that it was removed and taken to a chemical laboratory for a spectroscopic analysis in comparison with the paint on this light boat which we found drifting in the bay, and which we subsequently identified as having been the property of George S. Alder.”

“What else did you do?” Gloster asked.

“Well,” the sheriff drawled, “thinking that someone who’d jumped in that boat in a hurry might have dropped something—just on the off chance I got a waterglass and started looking around the bottom of the bay about where the little skiff had been tied up.”

“And did you find anything?” Gloster asked, glancing triumphantly.

“Yes, sir.” “What?”

“A woman’s purse.”

“And where is that purse now?”

“I have it with me,” the sheriff said.

“Will you produce it, please?”

The sheriff opened a bag and produced a heavy Manila envelope encrusted with red sealing wax and signatures.

“It’s right here, all sealed up in this envelope.”

“Now, did you make an inventory of the contents of this purse?”

“I did, yes, sir.”

“And where are the articles which were contained in the purse?”

“I have them here, sir, in this second envelope.”

The witness produced another sealed envelope.

“Now, those envelopes appear to be sealed and to have various signatures on them?”

“Yes, sir.”

“What are those signatures?”

“I signed my name on the envelope when the purse was sealed inside the envelope. The other officers who were there did likewise.”

“And the contents of the purse?”

“Those were placed in another envelope and these signatures are the signatures of the other witnesses.”

“And your signature is on both envelopes?”

“It is, yes, sir.”

“And are you satisfied that the seals have not been tampered with?”

“Yes, sir.”

“I believe my signature is also on there,” Claud Gloster said, smilingly.

“Yes, sir.”

“I’ll take a look at that, and Til ask that the envelopes be passed to the jurors so that each juror can observe that the seals have not been tampered with.”

“Any objection?” Judge Garey asked Mason.

“None whatever, Your Honor.”

The envelopes were passed around for the inspection of the jury, then the district attorney said, “I now ask that these envelopes be opened and the various articles be received in evidence. The purse as one exhibit, and the envelope containing the contents as another exhibit”

Mason said, “I would like to interpose an objection, Your Honor, and would like the privilege of cross-examining the witness concerning the two exhibits in connection with my objection.”

“Very well.”

Mason faced the sheriff and said, “By using a waterglass, you saw this woman’s purse lying on the bottom of the bay?”

“Yes, sir, aided by the beam of a flashlight.”

“Sand or muddy bottom?”

“Sandy at that point. A white sand. The purse showed up very plainly.”

“Exactly,” Mason said. “And that purse was lying where you could see it with a waterglass while you were lying face down on the little landing wharf?”

“Yes, sir.”

“The purse was then very close to the wharf?”

“Yes, sir.”

“Where anyone could have dropped it while standing on the wharf?”

“Where a woman would most naturally have dropped it in jumping from the wharf to a boat.”

Mason said, “Just answer my question, if you will, please, Sheriff. The purse was lying on the bottom where it could have been dropped by a person standing on the wharf?”

“Well, I suppose so, yes, but in that event a woman would certainly know she had dropped the purse and …”

“Exactly,” Mason interrupted. “I see that you’re quite anxious to make your point, Sheriff, so well concede it. But the fact remains that the purse could quite readily have been dropped by someone standing on the wharf.”

“Well, it could have been, yes.”

“Now, you saw this purse lying on the bottom, and then what did you do?”

“I recovered it”

“How?”

“By going in after it.”

“How deep was the water?”

“Oh, I would say six or seven feet.”

“And who went in after it?”

“One of my deputies.”

“Oh,” Mason said, smiling, “you discovered the purse and then sent one of your deputies in after it.”

“I have a deputy who’s a very good swimmer.”

“And he brought the purse out?”

“Yes.”

“Now, Sheriff, there was nothing about that purse itself that showed you when it had been dropped?”

“Well, when you come right down to it, if you take a look at the…”

Mason interrupted firmly, “Sheriff, I’m going to insist on a categorical answer to my question. There was nothing about that purse which indicated when it had been dropped. I’m speaking now about the purse itself.”

“No, sir.”

“It was simply lying there on the sand.”

“Well, of course, it couldn’t have stayed right there in that position on the sand very long.”

“Why not, Sheriff ?”

“Well, there’s the question of tides and sand drifting in.”

“How long would it have stayed there without having been covered with sand? Remember now, you’re on oath, Sheriff.”

“Well… of course I don’t know.”

“I gathered that you didn’t,” Mason said, smiling. “Now, since you have stated quite frankly there was nothing about the purse which would show when it was dropped, for all you know that purse could have been dropped by anyone, including the defendant, the Saturday night before the murder.”

“You’re talking about the purse now?”

“About the purse,” Mason said.

“Well, if you want to limit it to die purse, I guess so, but when you take the contents …”

“I’m talldng now about the purse,” Mason said.

“Very well, about the purse.”

“There was nothing that would indicate the purse couldn’t have been dropped on Saturday night?”

“Well, I guess not, no, sir.”

“Now, did you know anything about the defendant having been out at that place the Saturday night before the murder?”

“No, sir, not of my own knowledge.”

“Well, do you know anything at all about it?”

“Oh, Your Honor,” Gloster said, “I’m going to object to anything that the sheriff doesn’t know of his own knowledge.”

“That’s quite right,” Mason said. “I thought perhaps you were going to bring the facts out sooner or later and we might as well get them before the Court.”

Gloster said, “The only facts I intend to bring out are the facts indicating that this defendant murdered George Alder. If there are any other facts it’s up to the defense to bring them out.”

Mason gave that matter frowning consideration for a moment, then said, “Very well, if that’s your position IH remain within the technical limitations of evidence and expect you to do the same, sir.”

The sheriff volunteered a statement. “The contents of the purse show when it was dropped,” he said.

“The contents?” Mason asked.

“When we looked inside the purse,” the sheriff explained, grinning triumphantly, “we found a clipping which had been cut from the Express on the morning of the third, a clipping which related to a fifty-thousand- dollar jewel burglary, and the complaint of Alder that…”

“Just a moment, Sheriff,” Mason said. “The clipping itself is the best evidence, not your recollection of its contents.”

“Very well. The clipping’s right here.”

Mason hesitated for a moment while he gave the situation swift consideration, then he said, “Now, Your Honor, I am going to object to the introduction of the purse itself on the ground that no proper foundation has been laid as to a question of time, and I am going to object to the contents of the purse being received in evidence on the ground that the contents are incompetent, irrelevant and immaterial, except insofar as those contents may show the ownership of the purse. I am going to object particularly to any newspaper clipping by which the prosecution may seek to prejudice the defendant in the eyes of the jury.”

“Of course, Your Honor,” Gloster pointed out, “if the contents of the purse are material and relevant, and we insist they are, the fact that they may also disclose matters which the defense would like to keep from this jury does not affect their being received in evidence.”

“Let me take a look at the contents of that purse,” Judge Garey said.

The sheriff handed up the envelope.

Judge Garey inserted his hand in the envelope, fumbled through the contents for a moment, then dumped them all on his desk, made a painstaking inventory, and seemed considerably interested in the newspaper clipping.

This clipping was from the Express?” he asked.

“On the morning of the third,” Gloster said.

“Under those circumstances, it would seem to be relevant. Of course, the Court will permit its introduction in evidence solely for the purpose of proving the date at which the purse must have been dropped into the water. It will not be evidence as to anything contained in the clipping itself. That is, any matters set forth in the clipping are not part of the evidence in this case, and the jury will be instructed to limit their consideration to the question of time.”

Mason said, ‘Your Honor, youll recognize that in view of the contents of that clipping it would be absolutely impossible for any human being on the jury to follow the Court’s instructions and limit the consideration they are to give it”

“Well,” Judge Garey said, “the Court gives the instructions. The rest of it is up to the conscience of the jurors.”

Mason said, “If we are going to open the door, I would much prefer to have all of the evidence brought in and treat the entire transaction as part of the res gestae. Let’s have the court record as to what happened in connection with the charge made.”

“I don’t want it handled that way,” Gloster said. “I’ll put on the prosecution’s case and if the defendant wants to put in any justification or any other matters that’s the defendant’s privilege … providing only the evidence is pertinent But the thing he’s asking for now won’t be pertinent. We’re trying a murder case, not a burglary which took place some time previously. All we want is to show by this clipping when the purse was dropped into the water.”

“All right then,” Mason said, “IH stipulate that the testimony will be that the purse contained a clipping which came from a newspaper published on the day of the murder, and with that stipulation the prosecution won’t need to put the clipping into evidence.”

“I don’t want your stipulation,” Gloster said. “I want the jury to judge that clipping.”

“You see, Your Honor,” Mason said. “He wants to have the jurors read the clipping and be prejudiced by the contents. This talk of limiting the purpose for which it is to be introduced is utterly meaningless.”

Judge Garey said, “The question of the date is rather important here, and if this newspaper clipping is from a paper which didn’t appear on the streets till around noon on the third, and the purse was recovered on the evening of the third shortly after the murder had been committed, the Court would seem to have no alternative but to admit this as evidence but limit it purely for the purpose of showing date … unless Counsel wishes to accept your stipulation, and apparently Counsel does not”

Mason said, “Very well, Your Honor. I have two or three additional questions to ask about the purse itself,”

“Go ahead.”

“Now, Sheriff, you have stated that when this purse was recovered it was placed in an envelope and sealed. The contents were placed in another envelope and that envelope was sealed.”

“Yes, sir.”

“And the various parties present wrote their names on the envelopes?”

That’s right.”

“And the envelopes were then sealed?”

“Yes, sir.”

“When was this done?”

“Almost immediately after the purse was recovered.”

“What do you mean by almost immediately?”

“Well, within a very short time.”

“What do you mean by a short time?”

"I can’t express it any better than that”

“As much as an horn?”

“I would say almost immediately, Mr. Mason. I can’t time it in a question of minutes.”

“No,” Mason said, “you would prefer to leave it in terms of generality, wouldn’t you, Sheriff?”

“What do you mean by that?”

“You don’t dare to tie it down to any particular period of time.”

The sheriff flushed and said, That’s not the case, Mr. Mason. I had a great many things on my mind that night, and all I can say is that it was done almost immediately after the purse was recovered. I wasn’t wearing a stop watch.”

Gloster permitted himself an audible chuckle and glanced at the jury to see if they approved. An answering smile or two convinced him he had done right, and had the approval of the jury.

Mason said, “I notice some of these signatures are in pencil and some of them are in ink, Sheriff.”

“That’s right. Mine is in ink. Some of them are in pencil”

“All made at the same time?”

“All made at the same time.”

“Almost immediately after the purse was recovered?”

“Almost immediately after the purse was recovered.”

“Now, then,” Mason said, “can you tell me how these signatures were made?”

“How does anyone make his signature? He writes his name,” the sheriff said irritably.

“Oh, Your Honor,” Gloster said, “this examination is going far afield. Counsel is evidently sparring for time.”

Judge Garey said, “It would seem to me, Mr. Mason, that you have already explored the possibilities of the situation.”

“If Your Honor will bear with me,” Mason said, “I am about to make a point which I think will be of great importance.”

“Very well, go ahead.”

Mason took the envelope, placed the purse in the envelope, then held a sheet of paper over the envelope. “Now, go ahead and sign your name,” he said to the sheriff.

“What’s the idea?”

“I simply want to compare your signatures.”

The sheriff took a fountain pen from his pocket, balanced the envelope on his knee, and started to write his name on the piece of paper, then frowned, pushed the envelope to one side and placed the paper on the judge’s desk.

“No, no,” Mason said. “Hold the paper right over the purse.”

The sheriff wrote his name.

Mason took the paper, said, “Thank you, Sheriff,” produced another sheet of paper which he placed on the judge’s desk, and said, “Now please sign your name once more on this sheet of paper.”

“I don’t see why,” the sheriff growled.

“Simply to compare the signatures,” Mason said.

The sheriff, with poor grace, signed his name and resumed his position on the witness stand.

“Exactly as I thought,” Mason said.

“What is?” the sheriff demanded irritably.

“You can see,” Mason said, “by comparing the signatures, that this signature which you made when the purse was in the envelope is certainly not the same as the signature which is on the envelope.”

“Well, that purse got in the way. You can’t write your name over an object that bulges all over the place.”

“Exactly,” Mason said. “It’s a physical impossibility to sign your name under such circumstances so that the signature compares with a signature such as is on this piece of paper which you made on the judge’s desk.”

“Well, then, why did you have me do it?” the sheriff asked.

“Because,” Mason said triumphantly, pointing to the sheriffs signature on the envelope, “you can see that your signature on the envelope, and the signatures of all these other gentlemen on the envelope are perfect signatures. They couldn’t have been made while the purse was in the envelope. Moreover, Sheriff, IH call your attention to the fact that when the purse was taken out of the water it must have been soaking wet. It couldn’t have been put in this envelope in that condition without soaking the paper in the envelope so that any ink would have run all over the envelope when a fountain pen was placed on it. Now, then, can you explain these perfect signatures to the Coin! and the jury?”

“Well, sure,” the sheriff said. “We couldn’t sign our names with the purse in the envelope. We simply all signed our names on the envelope before we put the purse in. That’s the only way our signatures would have meant anything.”

“Oh, then,” Mason said, “you, and the gentlemen with you, signed an empty envelope. Is that it?”

“I didn’t say that. I said we signed the envelope before the purse was put in it.”

“How long before?”

“Immediately before.”

“What do you mean by immediately? A matter of seconds, a matter of hours, or a matter of days?”

“I told you I didn’t carry a stop watch with me.”

“But the fact remains,” Mason said, “that you did sign an empty envelope.”

The sheriff, half raising himself from the chair, shouted, “I told you we signed it just before the purse was put in it”

“All right,” Mason said. “Much as you dislike to admit it, you all signed an empty envelope. Now, then, how does it happen that when that purse was put in it, if it was dripping wet, the watef didn’t blur the fresh ink on the signatures, and didn’t soak the paper of this envelope so that even after drying the marks of moisture would still remain on the envelope?”

“I… well, as to that…” the sheriff said.

He glanced uncomfortably at Gloster, crossed his legs, uncrossed them, shifted his position, and stroked the angle of his jaw.

“I’m waiting for an answer,” Mason said.

“Well, of course,” the sheriff said, “you couldn’t put a soaking wet purse into a paper envelope. That’s absurd.”

“Well, what did you do?”

“Well, I put the purse in the envelope and sealed it”

“When?”

“Well, within a reasonable time after it had been recovered.”

“Oh,” Mason said, “now it’s a reasonable time. Before it was immediately after. A matter of seconds, I believe you said.”

“Well, I didn’t carry a stop watch.”

“You keep saying that, Sheriff, but the physical appearance of the envelope would indicate that the purse was entirely dry before it was placed in the envelope. Now, suppose you tell us exactly what happened.”

“Well,” the sheriff blurted, “when I recovered the purse I told the fellows that were with me that we’d have to identify it some way, and I told them we could all sign an envelope and I’d seal it. I had these envelopes with me and we signed them, but—well, naturally, I couldn’t put the wet purse in there. I waited until the purse dried.”

“How long?”

“Well, I don’t know. “I don’t know how to answer that question. I was given the responsibility of seeing that purse was put in that signed envelope. I put it there personally. These gentlemen left it to me to do that, and I did it. I accepted that responsibility.”

“After waiting for how long, Sheriff?”

“I simply waited for the purse to dry.”

“So all that the signatures on this envelope mean is that the men who were with you, at your suggestion, signed an empty envelope on the theory that they could in that way identify the purse when it was introduced in evidence, and left it to you to put the purse in the envelope, at a later date.”

“Not at a later date, at a later time.”

“You don’t remember when it was?” Mason asked.

“Not the exact hour, no.”

“Do you remember the exact day?”

The sheriff again shifted his position, said, “I’ve already answered that.”

“And we’ll now consider the envelope containing the contents of the purse,” Mason said. “Apparently there are keys, cards, a compact, a cigarette lighter—and yet the signatures on the envelope are perfect signatures. I presume the same holds true as to the signatures on this envelope.”

“Yes, sir.”

“In other words, the men, at your suggestion, signed the empty envelope and you inserted the contents at a much later date.”

“Not at a much later date, pretty soon afterwards.”

“You yourself have said that the purse and the contents were placed in the different envelopes at the same time, and you have stated that the purse was placed in the envelope after it had been thoroughly dried.”

“Well, the stuff was in my possession all the time. Nothing happened to it,” the sheriff said.

“Where did you leave the purse?”

“In my office.”

“And you didn’t stay in your office till the purse dried?”

“Well, I put it in front of an electric heater so it would dry out more rapidly.”

“And how long did it take to dry out?”

“I tell you I don’t know.”

“But it may have been a day or two later when you put this purse in the envelope.”

“If you’re going to be technical about it, I don’t know.”

“Thank you,” Mason said, smiling. “I’m going to be technical about it.

“And now, Your Honor,” Mason said, turning to Judge Garey, “it appears that the whereabouts of this purse cannot adequately be explained, and that it is quite possible that the clipping could have been inserted among the contents of this envelope at any time during a two-day period while the purse was drying out. The Court will notice that there is no appreciable evidence of salt water on the clipping.”

“The clipping was inside of a little case,” the sheriff said. “Sort of a compact arrangement.”

Judge Garey frowned thoughtfully, said, “I don’t think there has been any attempt to mislead the Court, but it certainly must be apparent to the sheriff that having all of these signatures on this envelope is exceedingly misleading. It now appears the parties signed an empty envelope and then gave it into the custody of the sheriff with the understanding that the evidence would be placed in it The Court is not prepared to rule on the admissibility of the purse at the present time, but will take the matter under advisement

“It is approaching the hour for adjournment, Mr. District Attorney, and … “

“I have just a few more questions of this witness.”

“Very well”

Gloster’s manner had lost its triumphant assurance. He was on the defensive now and unquestionably angry about it

“What else did you do when you went aboard the defendant’s boat that night, Sheriff?”

“I looked the place over.”

“What did you find?”

“I found a skirt that was soaking wet with salt water, and on the front of that skirt at a position where the right knee would be, in case a person wearing the skirt knelt over, I found a spot which still contained a little pinkish color.”

“What did you do with that?”

“I turned that over to a laboratory technician to determine whether or not it was blood.”

“Now, then, Your Honor,” Gloster said, smiling, Tm quite willing to have a recess taken.”

“Very well,” Judge Garey said. “The Court will adjourn until ten o’clock tomorrow morning.”