In
my previous post, I reviewed a humorously written detective novel
with an academic background, R.T. Campbell's Unholy
Dying
(1945), in which the comedic detective and avid reader of locked
room mysteries, Professor John Stubbs, is confronted with "the
exact opposite of the closed box mystery"
– a poisoning in an unlocked room to which two-thousand people had
free access. So, for today, I have found a locked room novel about a
poisoning inside "a
veritable fortress."
Maurice C. Johnson is an
extremely obscure mystery writer, of whom very little is known,
except that he wrote at least two detective novels, Damning
Trifles (1932) and It Takes a Thief (1932). Both were
published by Alfred A. Knopf, New York.
Back in 2013, Damning
Trifles emerged from obscurity when John Harrington quoted a
blurb from The Sun, 1932, in Keeler News #82 of the
Harry Stephen Keeler
Society. According to the blurb, Keeler was the author of Damning
Trifles, but none of "the Keeler experts who have read the
book agree." Unfortunately, the link to the news letter is as
dead as a door nail, but this mistake from '32 caught the attention
of Keeler's biggest champions
today, Ramble
House, who reprinted the book regardless in 2014 – which caught
my eye for a very different reason. Everything about the (surface)
plot struck me as an impossible crime story by one of my favorite
alternative mystery writers, John
Russell Fearn.
Damning Trifles
centers on an important invention (Account
Settled, 1949) and the scene of the seemingly impossible
murder is a photographic laboratory (Vision
Sinister, 1954). Interestingly, Johnson has one of his
characters say how he can't "disprove one atom of this evidence"
and later utters the phrase "every atom of evidence." I
remember more than one of Fearn's characters throwing up their hands
and saying they hadn't "an atom of proof."
Now, don't get me wrong
here. I'm not saying Johnson could have been a twenty-four-year-old
Fearn and Damning Trifles represents his first, tentative
steps as a mystery novelist. Johnson was an American, while Fearn was
English, but it's fascinating to see how closely (plot-wise) their
work appears to align.
The protagonist of
Damning Trifles is a newspaper reporter, Robert "Bob"
Rollins, who "pulled off two big murders beats" for the
Chicago Leader and the opening has him lecturing a colleague
on the impossibility of a successfully premeditated murder –
because a planned murder always "presupposes a motive."
When you have the motive, in combination with those damning trifles
(i.e. clues), you have your man. Rollins gets another opportunity to
put his theories into practice when a murderer strikes very close to
home.
Rollins is engaged to Nora Stevens and his future father-in-law, Alexander Stevens, has developed a brand new color-process for photography, which is guaranteed to make millions, but Stevens wants to give his invention to the world – intending to publish the formula in a scientific magazine. This valuable formula is safely locked away, in an office safe, in his fortified laboratory. A place with walls of solid brick and two windows, glazed with frosted glass, with heavy iron bars cemented deep into the stone. The door and transom are of three-inch oak and a massive lock, "such as is rarely seen outside of a stronghold containing treasure," was mortised into that three-inch of oak and can only be opened with a special key. A unique, corrugated key of which there are no duplicates. So not even a bed-bug could enter the laboratory unless he either had the key or sledges and dynamite.
After a brief
disappearance, Alexander Stevens is found behind the solidly locked
door of his hermetically sealed photographic laboratory, sprawled
across his desk, with the unique key on the middle of the desk. A
whiskey-glass with frosted crystals at the bottom is standing next to
it and a note is found under the body saying, "I bid the world
good-by." Detective Jim O'Connell quickly comes to the
conclusion that Stevens has taken his own life, but Rollins refuses
to believe he committed suicide. And, since he has been given a
one-week notice from his newspaper, he has the freedom to devote his
time to proving the police wrong.
Rollins is joined by a
long-time friend, Bill Hackett, who's the police department's
photographic expert and analytical chemist, but he also received a
one-week notice for illegally supplying Rollins with a print of a
crime-scene photograph – decided to play legman to his armchair
detective. Or, as Hackett described it, Rollins scarcely left
Stevens' laboratory to search for clues or evidence. And barely
performed any physical labor "except for lifting the telephone
off the hook" and "hanging it up again." Hackett is
not entirely wrong. Rollins has to get physical, but this mainly has
to do with the never-ending attempts that are made on his life.
Damning Trifles
has a record "eleven attempts at murder," not all on
Rollins, of which some had very creative methods. An attempt to
poison Rollins with cyanide could have worked, if it had succeeded,
as a locked room murder.
Yes, for the most part,
Rollins functions purely as an armchair detective and draws up lists
with facts and questions, which he draws conclusions from, but
sometimes its more guesswork than actual deductions. Such as "deducing" where a hypothetical letter could be found. This was
an educated guess, at best, but makes for some fun, purely amateur,
detective work. My favorite scene of this is when Rollins performed
the locked room-trick in the photographic laboratory for a
blindfolded Hackett and the sounds he heard around him beautifully
doubled as clues to the trick the murderer used.
The solution to the
puzzle of the hermetically sealed laboratory was not bad at all and
pretty satisfying, not too easy or overly complex, which was easy to
visualize, but a drawing was still included – showing how the
murderer found the proverbial "Judas
Window," or "Unguarded
Path," giving access to the room. Granted, there was an aspect
of the room that was not revealed until the solution was revealed and
variations on this specific trick has been used before and since
Damning Trifles was published. Most notably the more modern
interpretations that can be found in the Detective
Conan and Kindaichi
series, but, on a whole, this version of the trick was handled pretty
well and liked the positioning of the impossible problem. I liked it
and can recommend it to my fellow locked room readers on that account
alone.
As you probably noticed,
I haven't even touched on the close-knit circle of suspects. The
reason for this is that there are, at a pinch, only two viable
suspects and assumed this was a how-was-it-done, along the lines of
Victor MacClure's Death
Behind the Door (1933), but then it appeared as if Johnson
was going to pull an unknown "X" out of thin air. Only to come
out with a nice little surprise twist. Once again, like with the
locked room-trick, not all of the relevant information was fairly
shared with the reader. Somehow, that didn't really bother me here. I
suppose it was the idea of reading a locked room mystery that feels
like it could have been written by Fearn. This is why so many fans of
John
Dickson Carr love Hake
Talbot.
So, my opinion of Damning
Trifles is a little colored, but that has not blinded me to the
obvious flaws of the plot. Such as the spotty, incomplete clueing.
You should not expect a classic impossible crime novel going in, but
something more along the alternative lines of the more
unconventional, often amusing and even clever, locked room mysteries
such as Stacey Bishop's Death
in the Dark (1930), Joseph B. Carr's The
Man With Bated Breath (1934) and W. Shepard Pleasants' The
Stingaree Murders (1934) – which means that it will not be
to everyone's taste. However, I still very much enjoyed my time with
it and really liked the impossible crime.
How's the for a coincidence: I learned of this book on RH's roster -- and, more importantly, its being an impossible crime -- only today, the same day you've linked to this review from your post about Bruce Elliott's You'll Die Laughing.
ReplyDeleteNo idea how I missed this first time around, but the serendipity of it all makes me want to attempt a comment on your blog once more...maybe this one won't go missing...
Every now and then, these blogs go through coincidence-laden periods of synchronization. You probably have read the recent comments on your review of Lee Sheldon's Impossible Bliss. What are the odds two people at roughly the same time have the same unpublished novel on their mind that only a handful are actively aware of or care about? It happens.
DeleteDamning Trifles certainly is an interesting locked room mystery, but very much belongs in that category referred to as alternative classics. So look forward to see what you make of Damning Trifles, because this review went down like a lead balloon.