![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
alafaye posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
sherlock60This week we are reading The Adventure of the Blue Carbuncle. It carries the themes of cowardice and lack of forethought.
We open on the second morning of Christmas. Watson is making his work rounds and stops in briefly to visit Holmes to give him holiday greetings. Of course though Holmes has been drawn into a new interesting case though it doesn't appear to be one from first glance. Peterson the commissionaire had stopped what appeared to be a robbery -- a man walking home before Christmas with a goose. He was stopped by robbers and when all saw Peterson, all ran. Peterson was left with a goose and a hat; when no one came forward to claim either, Holmes kept the hat and Peterson kept the goose as it would be difficult to trace the owner with such a common name, Henry Baker.
On this morning however, Watson's visit is interrupted by Peterson who has discovered that inside his goose was the Blue Carbuncle, a rare gem that had been stolen recently from a hotel guest. Holmes places an inquiry to the papers to find the first owner of the goose -- Henry Baker. The man appears and it is clear that he had no idea about the gem, having no interest in the insides of the goose. He does however give the name of the man who supplied the goose. Holmes and Watson follow the lead to the public inn whose owner supplies another link in the chain.
This link is for a man who sells the geese from those who grow them. He takes badly to Holmes' inquiries about the goose because someone has already been asking about them. They get a name, but before they can go and trace this link, a man asks the seller about the geese. Ryder, the head attendant from the hotel from where the gem was stolen.
The maid to the gem's owner had told Ryder about the gem and together they conspired to not only steal it, but blame an innocent man for the theft. Ryder had gone to his sister's -- the home where the geese were raised -- and fed the gem to one of the geese to conceal it until he could sell it for money. Unfortunately the geese he thought unique was one of two and when he opened the goose later -- as he had been promised one for Christmas -- he had the wrong goose.
Holmes does not turn Ryder in because he is assured by the man's character that he won't appear to testify in court. We are even given the impression that likely the man might leave the city altogether.
A short case, but an interesting one. A long chain of people who appear to be any of the involved except for the unknown one who shouldn't have been part of the chain in the first place. A man whose character may not recover from being falsely accused (the case may fall apart, but who's to say that suspicious will not always follow him?). And a few hotel employees who decide to use their job for their own advantage. (I wonder if Ryder was ever confronted after by the maid?)
Thoughts?
We open on the second morning of Christmas. Watson is making his work rounds and stops in briefly to visit Holmes to give him holiday greetings. Of course though Holmes has been drawn into a new interesting case though it doesn't appear to be one from first glance. Peterson the commissionaire had stopped what appeared to be a robbery -- a man walking home before Christmas with a goose. He was stopped by robbers and when all saw Peterson, all ran. Peterson was left with a goose and a hat; when no one came forward to claim either, Holmes kept the hat and Peterson kept the goose as it would be difficult to trace the owner with such a common name, Henry Baker.
On this morning however, Watson's visit is interrupted by Peterson who has discovered that inside his goose was the Blue Carbuncle, a rare gem that had been stolen recently from a hotel guest. Holmes places an inquiry to the papers to find the first owner of the goose -- Henry Baker. The man appears and it is clear that he had no idea about the gem, having no interest in the insides of the goose. He does however give the name of the man who supplied the goose. Holmes and Watson follow the lead to the public inn whose owner supplies another link in the chain.
This link is for a man who sells the geese from those who grow them. He takes badly to Holmes' inquiries about the goose because someone has already been asking about them. They get a name, but before they can go and trace this link, a man asks the seller about the geese. Ryder, the head attendant from the hotel from where the gem was stolen.
The maid to the gem's owner had told Ryder about the gem and together they conspired to not only steal it, but blame an innocent man for the theft. Ryder had gone to his sister's -- the home where the geese were raised -- and fed the gem to one of the geese to conceal it until he could sell it for money. Unfortunately the geese he thought unique was one of two and when he opened the goose later -- as he had been promised one for Christmas -- he had the wrong goose.
Holmes does not turn Ryder in because he is assured by the man's character that he won't appear to testify in court. We are even given the impression that likely the man might leave the city altogether.
A short case, but an interesting one. A long chain of people who appear to be any of the involved except for the unknown one who shouldn't have been part of the chain in the first place. A man whose character may not recover from being falsely accused (the case may fall apart, but who's to say that suspicious will not always follow him?). And a few hotel employees who decide to use their job for their own advantage. (I wonder if Ryder was ever confronted after by the maid?)
Thoughts?
