4% is what History House says. And Garonne's source seems to back it up - 1.3 million out of 32.5 million is also 4%. It does seems at first glance low but I suppose 4% is still a significant percentage of the population.
...the curious actions of Janet Tregellis That she apparently did nothing, you mean? ^^ Well, I suppose as the head gamekeeper's daughter she wouldn't have been living in the house - indeed if she had, Brunton would have asked her to help, instead of risking asking Rachel Howells. But it is odd that she doesn't appear in the story after Brunton goes missing. You'd think that Holmes might want to speak to her.
Nonetheless, it is possible that the reason no one found Brunton's scarf was that either girl told a search party there was nothing in that cellar... Surely Rachel Howells would have been too ill to tell a search party there was nothing in the cellar? And it's possible that Janet Tregellis had nothing to do with the search for Brunton - even if she was desperate to help, Musgrave may have felt it wasn't appropriate. His household servants should deal with it.
...and his treasure hunting with Rachel would certainly make Janet feel she'd been ditched in her turn. But surely Janet wouldn't have known that Brunton had been treasure hunting with Rachel. Holmes only works that out later. All she would have known is that Brunton had abruptly vanished. Though perhaps he had told her he'd been dismissed, and she thought he'd gone without saying goodbye.
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2016-05-29 07:40 pm (UTC)...the curious actions of Janet Tregellis That she apparently did nothing, you mean? ^^ Well, I suppose as the head gamekeeper's daughter she wouldn't have been living in the house - indeed if she had, Brunton would have asked her to help, instead of risking asking Rachel Howells. But it is odd that she doesn't appear in the story after Brunton goes missing. You'd think that Holmes might want to speak to her.
Nonetheless, it is possible that the reason no one found Brunton's scarf was that either girl told a search party there was nothing in that cellar... Surely Rachel Howells would have been too ill to tell a search party there was nothing in the cellar? And it's possible that Janet Tregellis had nothing to do with the search for Brunton - even if she was desperate to help, Musgrave may have felt it wasn't appropriate. His household servants should deal with it.
...and his treasure hunting with Rachel would certainly make Janet feel she'd been ditched in her turn. But surely Janet wouldn't have known that Brunton had been treasure hunting with Rachel. Holmes only works that out later. All she would have known is that Brunton had abruptly vanished. Though perhaps he had told her he'd been dismissed, and she thought he'd gone without saying goodbye.