and his financial embarrassments had been grossly exaggerated.

His learned friend--Sir Ernest nodded carelessly at Mr. Philips--had
stated that if the prisoner were an innocent man, he would have
come forward at the inquest to explain that it was he, and not Mr.
Inglethorp, who had been the participator in the quarrel. He thought the
facts had been misrepresented. What had actually occurred was this.
The prisoner, returning to the house on Tuesday evening, had been
authoritatively told that there had been a violent quarrel between Mr.
and Mrs. Inglethorp. No suspicion had entered the prisoner's head
that anyone could possibly have mistaken his voice for that of Mr.
Inglethorp. He naturally concluded that his stepmother had had two
quarrels.

The prosecution averred that on Monday, July 16th, the prisoner had
entered the chemist's shop in the village, disguised as Mr. Inglethorp.
The prisoner, on the contrary, was at that time at a lonely spot called
Marston's Spinney, where he had been summoned by an anonymous note,
couched in blackmailing terms, and threatening to reveal certain matters
to his wife unless he complied with its demands. The prisoner had,
accordingly, gone to the appointed spot, and after waiting there vainly
for half an hour had returned home. Unfortunately, he had met with no
one on the way there or back who could vouch for the truth of his story,
but luckily he had kept the note, and it would be produced as evidence.

As for the statement relating to the destruction of the will, the
prisoner had formerly practiced at the Bar, and was perfectly well aware
that the will made in his favour a year before was automatically revoked
by his stepmother's remarriage. He would call evidence to show who did
destroy the will, and it was possible that that might open up quite a
new view of the case.

Finally, he would point out to the jury that there was evidence against
other people besides John Cavendish. He would direct their attention to
the fact that the evidence against Mr. Lawrence Cavendish was quite as
strong, if not stronger than that against his brother.

He would now call the prisoner.

John acquitted himself well in the witness-box. Under Sir Ernest's
skilful handling, he told his tale credibly and well. The anonymous note
received by him was produced, and handed to the jury to examine. The
readiness with which he admitted his financial difficulties, and the
disagreement with his stepmother, lent