Mexico weekly ledger., 1890-05-29
ing at the bottom Of the murder Is clear

"Who ever heard-why-hold hard
l say, didn't I?-why, bless my souli but
I did tell you, didn't Ir'
"You are particularly lucid and in
telligent this morning, not to say ejacu-
latory."
"But l say, didn't l ever tell you?"
"1n the course of our somewhat ex-
tended and frequent intimacy you have
told me many things and left untold
many others, I suppose. But which
particular piece Of information you are
referring to in your usual perspicuous
manner, ! am unable to ascertain with
out a little more light"
"Oh, stow that gibingl you are never
so u~ninteresting as when you think you
are sarcastic. But / say, didn't I ever
tell you what the Shadow reported to
me about an old man Preston and
Parker"
"Never, my royal youth"
Tom, who was too seriously intent
over the discovery of the paper to fall
into the vein of Holbrook, told with
brevity the scene in the old house in
Varick street.
The recital 500 won Holbrook's close
attention.
off you had told me this" he said at
its conclusion, 1--WE would have been
well along in the quest without the aid
of this document"
81 cannot for the life of me tell how !
came to neglect it, but you see, on my
side ] never knew, for you never told
me, that the name of Mrs. Templeton's
father was Carroll Preston"
However, we have the connecting
link now, and the question as to who is
the person is narrowed to a very few"
"True. It must be either Messing, the
woman Simpson, or Preston"
"Or Parker"
"Ah, by George, he comes into the
game, too, doesn't he?"
"Yes, by reason of his connection and
conspiracy with Preston"
"Holbrook," said Tom, after a mo-
ment's thought, 81 do not believe that
either Preston or Parker are in this part
Of the job"
"Why-equally so with the Others"
'Listen to me a moment. In this pa
per, Pierson is at pains to state that Par
ker had 10 knowledge of his previous
life-that he eve knew that he bore
another name previous to that of Pier
son."
Eyes, / remember; l see what your
line of reasoning will be-"
"Well. Now he did know about the
Fountain and Simpson marriages. In
my interview with him he was only dis,
turbed when l talked of Fountain. He
was lawyer enough to know that if there
was no prior marriage, the Fountain
ceremony, whether mock o. not, would
be binding if the supposed Fountain
could be identified with the dead Pier.
son. Hence his disturbance at my
knowledge of the matter-a knowledge
which at that time I did not have, but
most recklessly assumed to have"
"Well, but you forget Preston. the
drunkard."
"No, / don't. This paper is dated 1874
ten years ago, and in it is distinctly stated
that old Preston, the drunkard, turned
up fve years previously. The old sot
you will remember, wanted to argue
with Parker that he certainly was
brother, because for fifteen years Piersor
had paid him money, and you must give
full weight to the answer of Parker, thai
it made little difference whether money
was paid him because he was a brother
or whether it was because he possessed
secret which induced old Pierson to give
hush money-he was brother enough fol
their purposes. Now this argues thai
Parker was not fully acquainted with
this relation, and that he really enter
tanned doubts of the verify Of the
brothership between the two-that the
relation, if not the acquaintanceship, be
tween Preston and Parker had spruns
up since Persons death"
81 see, I see. Yes, your reasoning il
close"
"Now," continued Tom, whatever
else we may think of Parker, it won't d.
to take him for a fool And fool b,
would have been to open up this prop
ertyship question, by his own motion
right on the heels Of the murder, if h,
had been guilty of it, or implicated in it
The fact that he and his client woult
have been benefited by it would hay,
been too patent, and If he knew the rela
ton Templeton bore to the property, b
had every reason to believe others woull
know it; and with a guilty conscienc,
would think that that fact would be tn,
first to be pitched on"
81 am disposed to believe with you
Tom"
"You will, the more you turn over il
your mind that scene in Varick stree
and my conversation with Parker. II
send for tho Shadow, and together wei
go over the conversation again, and III
write down both for you to study at you
leisure. It is quite as important to get
those out Of the case who did not do it
as to get those in who possibly coulG
have done it."
''That is shrewdly put, Tom," replied
Holbrook. 'sBut you do not forget Park
er's call on mel?
"No, / do not. That call, In my judg
aaens, was to find If possible whether o
not Pierson had been engaged in mocl
matrimonial scrapes prior to the Foun
tain episode, and of which he had n
knowledge. Now, take fast hold of thi
fact: Fountain could only be a disturb
ing claimant in the event of there hav
ing been no previous marriage. If Parke
had known of the marriage Of Carol
Preston, the issue Of which was Mrs
Templeton, he would not have been a
all disturbed by my precipitation of tn
Fountain name. He was visibly dis
turbed when l falsely assumed to know
what ! didn't then know, that Pierso
had once passed as Fountain. AS fo
the driveling old idiot of a brother, he !
too far gone in rum to have ever cor
ceived or executed the murder"
II think you have made out a cast
Tom. At all events, if the other lines G
inquiry fail, We have the precious pal
to fall back on"
"Now, if you agree with me, as 20
seem TO, then it follows that there ar
only two left-the Simpson woman an
Wessing."
"Well, then, let's consider these tive
About Simpson we know no more tina
1 k1sr H..