赖盖特之谜15（在线收听）

“Before going into this, I would draw your attention to the fact that, if Alec  Cunningham's narrative was correct, and if the assailant, after shooting William  Kirwan, had instantly fled, then it obviously could not be he who tore the paper  from the dead man's hand. But if it was not he, it must have been Alec  Cunningham himself, for by the time that the old man had descended several  servants were upon the scene. The point is a simple one, but the Inspector had  overlooked it because he had started with the supposition that these county  magnates had had nothing to do with the matter. Now, I make a point of never  having any prejudices, and of following docilely wherever fact may lead me, and  so, in the very first stage of the investigation, I found myself looking a  little askance at the part which had been played by Mr. Alec Cunningham.

“And now I made a very careful examination of the corner of paper which the  Inspector had submitted to us. It was at once clear to me that it formed part of  a very remarkable document. Here it is. Do you not now observed something very  suggestive about it?”

“It has a very irregular look,” said the Colonel.

“My dear sir,” cried Holmes, “there cannot be the least doubt in the world  that it has been written by two persons doing alternate words. When I draw your  attention to the strong t's of ‘at’ and ‘to’, and ask you to compare them  with the weak ones of ‘quarter’ and ‘twelve,’ you will instantly recognize  the fact. A very brief analysis of these four words would enable you to say with  the utmost confidence that the ‘learn’ and the ‘maybe’ are written in the  stronger hand, and the ‘what’ in the weaker.”

“By Jove, it's as clear as day!” cried the Colonel. “Why on earth should two  men write a letter in such a fashion?”

“Obviously the business was a bad one, and one of the men who distrusted the  other was determined that, whatever was done, each should have an equal hand in  it. Now, of the two men, it is clear that the one who wrote the ‘at’ and ‘to ’ was the ringleader.”

“How do you get at that?”

“We might deduce it from the mere character of the one hand as compared with  the other. But we have more assured reasons than that for supposing it. If you  examine this scrap with attention you will come to the conclusion that the man  with the stronger hand wrote all his words first, leaving blanks for the other  to fill up. These blanks were not always sufficient, and you can see that the  second man had a squeeze to fit his ‘quarter’ in between the ‘at’ and the ‘ to,’ showing that the latter were already written. The man who wrote all his  words first is undoubtedly the man who planned the affair.”

“Excellent!” cried Mr. Acton.

“在讨论这个问题以前，我想提请你们注意，如果亚历克-坎宁安讲的那一套是真的，如果 凶手在打死威廉-柯万之后马上就逃跑了，那么，凶手显然不能从死者手中撕去那张纸。可 是如果不是凶手撕的，那就一定是亚历克-坎宁安本人，因为在那个老人下楼以前，几个仆 人已经在现场了。这一点是很简单的，可是警官却忽略了。因为他一开始，就推测这些乡绅 们与本案无关。那时，我决心不持任何偏见，而按照事实给我指引的方向走。因此，一开始 调查，我便以怀疑的眼光注视着亚历克-坎宁安先生扮演的角色。

“我非常仔细地检查了警官一交一给我们的那张纸角。我立即清楚地看出，这是一张非常值 得注意的东西。这就是那张条子。现在你们没有看出某些很能说明问题的地方吗？”

“字体看起来很不规则。”上校说道。

“我亲一爱一的先生，”福尔摩斯大声说道，“毫无疑问，它是由两个人一交一替着写出来 的。我只要请你们注意‘ａｔ’和‘ｔｏ’字中那两个苍劲有力的‘ｔ’字，再请你们把它 跟‘ｑｕａｒｔｅｒ’和‘ｔｗｅｌｖｅ’中那两个软弱无力的‘ｔ’字对比一下，你们马 上就可以看出事情的真相。从这四个字的简单分析上，你们就可以满有把握地说，那‘ｌｅ ａｒｎ’和‘ｍａｙｂｅ’是出自笔锋苍劲有力的人的手笔，而那‘ｗｈａｔ’是那笔锋软 弱无力的人写的。”

“天哪，这真是一清二楚的！”上校喊道，“那两人究竟为什么要用这样一种方式来写这封 信呢？”

“这事显然是一种犯罪行为，其中的一个人不相信另外一个人，于是他决定，不管干什么两 个人都得一起动手。很清楚，这两个人中，那个写‘ａｔ’和‘ｔｏ’的人是主谋。”

“那你根据什么说的呢？”

“我们可以从对比两个人的笔迹中推断出来。不过我们有更有力的理由。如果你注意检查一 下这张纸，你就会得出一个结论：那个笔锋苍劲有力的人首先把他所要写的字全部写完，留 下许多空白，叫另一个人去填写。而这些空白并不是都很富余的，你可以看出，第二个人在 ‘ａｔ’和‘ｔｏ’之间填写‘ｑｕａｒｔｅｒ’一词时，写得非常挤，说明‘ａｔ’和‘ ｔｏ’那两个字是先写好的了。那个把他所要写的字首先写完的人，毫无疑问，就是策划这 一案件的人。”

“太妙了！”阿克顿先生大声说道。