Article #221-1 | Gutenberg Articles

Excerpt

Excerpt from The Return of Sherlock Holmes, by Arthur Conan Doyle

“Yes; I will wile away the morning at Godolphin Street with our friends
of the regular establishment. With Eduardo Lucas lies the solution of
our problem, though I must admit that I have not an inkling as to what
form it may take. It is a capital mistake to theorize in advance of
the facts. Do you stay on guard, my good Watson, and receive any fresh
visitors. I'll join you at lunch if I am able.”

All that day and the next and the next Holmes was in a mood which his
friends would call taciturn, and others morose. He ran out and ran in,
smoked incessantly, played snatches on his violin, sank into reveries,
devoured sandwiches at irregular hours, and hardly answered the casual
questions which I put to him. It was evident to me that things were not
going well with him or his quest. He would say nothing of the case, and
it was from the papers that I learned the particulars of the inquest,
and the arrest with the subsequent release of John Mitton, the valet of
the deceased. The coroner's jury brought in the obvious “Wilful Murder,”
but the parties remained as unknown as ever. No motive was suggested.
The room was full of articles of value, but none had been taken. The
dead man's papers had not been tampered with. They were carefully
examined, and showed that he was a keen student of international
politics, an indefatigable gossip, a remarkable linguist, and an
untiring letter-writer. He had been on intimate terms with the leading
politicians of several countries. But nothing sensational was discovered
among the documents which filled his drawers. As to his relations with
women, they appeared to have been promiscuous but superficial. He had
many acquaintances among them, but few friends, and no one whom he
loved. His habits were regular, his conduct inoffensive. His death was
an absolute mystery, and likely to remain so.

As to the arrest of John Mitton, the valet, it was a counsel of despair
as an alternative to absolute inaction. But no case could be sustained
against him. He had visited friends in Hammersmith that night. The ALIBI
was complete. It is true that he started home at an hour which should
have brought him to Westminster before the time when the crime was
discovered, but his own explanation that he had walked part of the way
seemed probable enough in view of the fineness of the night. He had
actually arrived at twelve o'clock, and appeared to be overwhelmed
by the unexpected tragedy. He had always been on good terms with his
master. Several of the dead man's possessions--notably a small case of
razors--had been found in the valet's boxes, but he explained that they
had been presents from the deceased, and the housekeeper was able to
corroborate the story. Mitton had been in Lucas's employment for three
years. It was noticeable that Lucas did not take Mitton on the Continent
with him. Sometimes he visited Paris for three months on end, but Mitton
was left in charge of the Godolphin Street house. As to the housekeeper,
she had heard nothing on the night of the crime. If her master had a
visitor he had himself admitted him.

Explanation

**Detailed Explanation of the Excerpt from The Return of Sherlock Holmes by Arthur Conan Doyle**

This passage is from "The Adventure of the Second Stain" (1904), one of the short stories in The Return of Sherlock Holmes. The story revolves around the mysterious murder of Eduardo Lucas, a man deeply involved in international politics, whose death baffles both Scotland Yard and Holmes. The excerpt captures Holmes’ investigative process, his frustration, and the perplexing nature of the case, while also providing key details about the victim and the failed suspect, John Mitton.

Context & Summary of the Excerpt

Holmes’ Initial Approach
- Holmes begins by declaring his intention to investigate at Godolphin Street (Lucas’ residence) while instructing Watson to remain behind in case new visitors arrive.
- He emphasizes his methodical approach: "It is a capital mistake to theorize in advance of the facts." This is a core principle of Holmes’ detective philosophy—he avoids premature conclusions, relying instead on observation and deduction.
- His mention of "our friends of the regular establishment" likely refers to Scotland Yard detectives, with whom Holmes often collaborates (or competes).
Holmes’ Moody Behavior
- Over the next few days, Holmes is taciturn (silent) and morose (gloomy), exhibiting classic signs of frustration when a case resists solution.
- His erratic behavior—smoking incessantly, playing violin snatches, ignoring meals, and sinking into deep thought—suggests mental preoccupation. This is a recurring trait in Holmes when he is stumped by a case.
- Watson, as the narrator, observes these changes but remains uninformed about the case, learning details only from newspapers—a common dynamic in their relationship.
The Murder of Eduardo Lucas
- The inquest (legal investigation into the cause of death) rules Lucas’ death a "wilful murder", but the killer remains unknown.
- Key mysteries:
  - No motive: Nothing was stolen; Lucas’ papers were untouched.
  - No signs of struggle or forced entry—Lucas likely knew his killer.
  - Lucas’ background:
    - A student of international politics, gossip, linguist, and prolific letter-writer.
    - Connected to high-ranking politicians across Europe.
    - His personal life was superficial—many acquaintances, but no deep relationships.
  - The lack of a clear motive or suspect makes the case exceptionally baffling.
The False Lead: John Mitton, the Valet
- The police, desperate for a suspect, arrest Mitton, but the case against him collapses:
  - Alibi: He was visiting friends in Hammersmith and arrived home at midnight, which aligns with the estimated time of death.
  - Explanation for delayed return: He walked partway, which was plausible given the fine weather.
  - Suspicious but explainable items: A razor case was found in his possession, but the housekeeper confirmed it was a gift from Lucas.
  - Odd detail: Lucas never took Mitton abroad, leaving him in charge of the house during long trips (e.g., three months in Paris). This could imply distrust, but nothing concrete links Mitton to the murder.
The Housekeeper’s Testimony
- She heard nothing unusual on the night of the murder.
- If Lucas had a visitor, he admitted them himself, suggesting the killer was someone he knew and trusted.

Key Themes in the Excerpt

The Limits of Logic & the Frustration of Unsolved Mysteries
- Holmes, usually unerring in his deductions, is stumped, highlighting that even genius has blind spots.
- The case defies conventional motives (robbery, revenge, passion), making it a puzzle without clear pieces.
The Elusiveness of Truth
- The coroner’s jury declares it murder, but no suspect is viable.
- The press and police grasp at straws (e.g., arresting Mitton), but justice remains out of reach.
- This reflects real-world investigative challenges, where appearances deceive and truth is hidden.
The Danger of Assumptions
- Holmes’ warning ("theorize in advance of the facts") is ironic—despite his method, the case resists solution.
- The police assume Mitton is guilty due to circumstantial evidence, but their prejudice leads nowhere.
The Role of International Intrigue
- Lucas’ political connections and multilingual correspondence hint at espionage or state secrets.
- The lack of stolen documents suggests the murder may be politically motivated rather than personal.

Literary Devices & Stylistic Choices

Foreshadowing & Suspense
- Holmes’ moodiness and erratic behavior create tension—the reader senses the case is unusually difficult.
- The lack of progress contrasts with Holmes’ usual swift resolutions, making the eventual solution (when it comes) more satisfying.
Dramatic Irony
- Watson (and the reader) learns details from newspapers, while Holmes withholds information, creating a knowledge gap.
- The reader suspects Mitton at first, only to realize (as Holmes does) that he is innocent.
Characterization Through Behavior
- Holmes’ smoking, violin-playing, and irregular eating are tells of his mental state—Conan Doyle uses physical actions to convey psychology.
- Watson’s passive observation reinforces his role as the everyman narrator, grounding Holmes’ genius in a relatable perspective.
Red Herrings & Misdirection
- Mitton’s razor case and his exclusion from Lucas’ trips seem suspicious, but turn out to be false leads.
- The housekeeper’s testimony (hearing nothing) deepens the mystery—was the killer silent and professional?
Realism in Detective Work
- Unlike many neatly resolved mysteries, this case drags on, showing that real investigations are messy.
- The police’s desperation (arresting Mitton without strong evidence) mirrors real-world investigative pressures.

Significance of the Excerpt

Holmes’ Human Side
- While Holmes is often portrayed as infallible, this passage shows his frustration and vulnerability, making him more human.
The Nature of the Mystery
- The lack of motive or clear suspect makes this one of the most intriguing cases in the Holmes canon.
- It subverts expectations—readers anticipate a brilliant revelation, but Holmes himself is initially baffled.
Political & Espionage Undertones
- Lucas’ international connections and political writings suggest the murder may be tied to state secrets, a theme that resonates with real-world espionage (e.g., the Dreyfus Affair, which Conan Doyle followed).
The Role of Watson as Narrator
- Watson’s limited perspective forces the reader to piece together clues, mirroring the detective process.
- His reliance on newspapers highlights how public perception can differ from private investigation.

Connection to the Broader Story (Spoiler-Free)

Without revealing the full resolution, this excerpt sets up:

The unusual nature of the crime (no robbery, no clear enemy).
The international angle, which becomes crucial later.
Holmes’ eventual breakthrough, which comes from an unexpected source—proving that even when he seems stuck, his subconscious is working.

Final Thoughts

This passage is a masterclass in building suspense while humanizing Holmes. It challenges the reader to think like a detective, frustrates expectations, and hints at deeper political intrigue. Conan Doyle’s economical yet vivid prose keeps the mystery engaging, making the eventual solution (when revealed) all the more satisfying.

Would you like a deeper analysis of any specific aspect (e.g., Holmes’ methods, the historical context of espionage, or Watson’s narrative role)?

Questions

Question 1

The passage’s depiction of Holmes’ behavior—his taciturnity, erratic habits, and violation of routine—primarily serves to:

A. underscore the triviality of the case by contrasting it with his usual meticulousness.
B. illustrate Watson’s growing irritation with Holmes’ secretive and unpredictable nature.
C. convey the depth of the mystery’s resistance to solution, even for a mind of Holmes’ caliber.
D. foreshadow Holmes’ impending breakdown under the pressure of an unsolvable crime.
E. critique the limitations of deductive reasoning when applied to crimes lacking physical evidence.

Question 2

The narrator’s observation that Lucas’ “papers had not been tampered with” and that “nothing sensational was discovered among the documents” is most effectively interpreted as:

A. an indictment of Lucas’ superficial engagement with international politics.
B. a deliberate red herring to mislead the reader into dismissing the political angle.
C. proof that the murder was an impulsive act of personal violence rather than premeditated.
D. a paradox that deepens the mystery by eliminating conventional motives while hinting at unseen stakes.
E. Watson’s unconscious bias toward assuming that political documents would inherently contain incriminating secrets.

Question 3

The detail that Lucas “did not take Mitton on the Continent with him” is most plausibly intended to:

A. introduce an ambiguity that neither exonerates nor implicates Mitton, thereby sustaining narrative tension.
B. reveal Lucas’ class-based distrust of servants, a common prejudice among Victorian elites.
C. suggest that Mitton’s alibi is fabricated, as he may have secretly followed Lucas to Paris.
D. imply that Lucas’ continental activities were of a sensitive nature, requiring absolute discretion.
E. highlight the valet’s resentment as a motive for murder, despite the lack of direct evidence.

Question 4

Holmes’ assertion that “it is a capital mistake to theorize in advance of the facts” is rendered ironic in this passage chiefly because:

A. his own frustration stems from an over-reliance on inductive reasoning rather than empirical observation.
B. Watson, the narrator, repeatedly violates this principle by speculating about the case.
C. the police’s arrest of Mitton exemplifies the very error Holmes warns against, yet their approach aligns with his current stagnation.
D. the case’s resistance to solution implies that even Holmes’ method has blind spots when confronted with truly anomalous crimes.
E. the passage itself withholds critical facts from the reader, mirroring the way Holmes withholds information from Watson.

Question 5

The coroner’s jury’s verdict of “Wilful Murder” in the absence of a suspect or motive functions in the passage as:

A. a legal formality that underscores the inadequacy of institutional processes in solving complex crimes.
B. a narrative device to heighten the contrast between official incompetence and Holmes’ eventual triumph.
C. an implicit critique of Victorian judicial systems, which prioritized closure over truth.
D. a thematic reinforcement of the idea that some truths are inherently unknowable, even to a genius like Holmes.
E. a subtle hint that the murder was staged to appear motiveless, thereby pointing to a sophisticated conspirator.

Solutions and Explanations

1) Correct answer: C

Why C is most correct: The passage emphasizes Holmes’ uncharacteristic agitation—his smoking, violin-playing, and irregular eating—are not mere quirks but symptoms of his intellectual stasis. These details collectively signal that the case resists even his extraordinary deductive powers, a rare occurrence in the Holmes canon. The text’s focus on his frustration ("things were not going well with him or his quest") aligns with C’s claim that the mystery defies solution, forcing Holmes into an unproductive mental state. This interpretation accounts for the narrative function of his behavior: to elevate the mystery’s gravity rather than merely characterize Holmes.