The Great Pearl Mystery.

Oamaru Mail, Volume XVII, Issue 5203, 9 February 1892, Page 4

The Great Pearl Mystery.

(Pall Mall Gazette.) The best sensational novel of the present publishing season is that which began to appear in serial form yesterday (loth December) in the Queen s Bench Division, before Mr Justice Denman. We understand that it is likely to run at least to seven or eight dally instalments, and if the denouement is as good as the opening, "The Great Pearl Mystery is likely to have an immense success, it was only the other day that we were discussing, apropos of the case of Pinnock v. Chapman and Hall, "the pcrils of realism." These, if the verdict m that case is to be taken as typical, are really very considerable. The demand in just now is all for realism ; but- if the novelist who caters to it from real lite is to be mulched in damages, the prospects of this branch of the literary business are not pleasant. The case which began yesterday before Mr Justice Dennitin suggests a way out of tlie_ difficulty. It is, said one of the solicitors engaged, " the most extraordinary case on record. There is plenty of " society ton about it, an element without which no sensational story is complete ; for the manners of some of the characters are decidedly free and easy, and one at least of them used to have debts. That there is also plenty of millinery will be clear from the followins passage:— "I have spent hours at AVhittingham and Humphreys', and think my clothes will be perfect. My wedding-gown is oyster-wliite satin, made with a broad sash round my waist, chiffon sleeves and fichu, and train of poult de soie, with orange blossoms in velvet showered over it. My opera cloak, though, is a dream — don't laugh, darling—white thick silk, made after an old picture, lined with deep yellow cloth trimmed with yellow velvet ; the shape of it is perfect. My tea gown is vieux rose crape, but the way they are made is the thing. I have never seen such perfect things." We do not notice at present any of those "studies" of furniture and bric-a-brac in which so many modern writers indulge ; but, as there is an escritoire which seems likely to play an important part in the story, we shall doubtless come to that later on. As for "the weird" and "the mysterious.' Sir Charles Russell, who ought to know, declared the story yesterday to be positively "fraught with mystery." The "Great Pearl Mystery" is in fact equipped at every point for its run as a serial; and herein lies perhaps tlie_ way of avoiding the perils, while enjoying the pleasures, of realism. Who knows that, "the novel of the future" may not simply be the law report, and that readers will not take their realism straight from legal facts instead of second-hand in literary fiction ? However, that may be, Mrs Henry Woods story of " Sophie Chalk" ifc ? ot ? ) in tlie "Johnny Ludlow" series, is tame by comparison with the present case ; and the puzzle of Mrs Hargreaves' pearls may rival even the mvstery of Wilkie Collin's '' Moonstone." In order to enable the reader to follow to-day's and subsequent instalments of this legal serial it may be well briefly to explain the situation as opened by Sir Charles Russell yesterday. The dramatis personcc are—first, Major Hargreaves and Mrs Hargreaves (the defendants). The latter is the owner of the pearls, the removal of which from Torquay to London, by theft or otherwise, is the pivot of the story. Next we have Mr Engelhart, a friend of Mrs Hargreaves; Messrs Spink, the jewellers, who bought the pearls ; and Miss Elliott (now Mrs Osborne), who alleges that she was accused of having stolen them, and brings the present action for slander to clear her character. The principal facts and dates, as stated by Sir Charles Russell, are as follow On the 4th February Major Hargreaves went abroad. That is the last date 011 which he or Mrs Hargreaves saw the jewels. On the 9th February Miss Elliott went to stay with Mrs Hargreaves at Torquay. She had her photograph taken. She was shown the escritoire where the pearls were kept. On the 18th of February she left. On the 19th February a person described "as a lady" —the identity of whom is the mystery of the story—sold Mrs Hargreaves' pearls to Messrs Spink, the jewellers in Grace-church-street, and received a crossed cheque for L 550 for them. On the 20th February Mrs Hargreaves announced the discovery of the loss of the jewels. On the 2ord February a lady—identity again unknown —went to Glyn's bank with the crossed cheque for L 550. The bank did not cash it, and she accordingly returned to Messrs Spink, who substituted an uncrossed cheque, which she thereupon cashed. Mrs Hargreaves advertised her loss, and ultimately brought a successful action against Messrs Spink for recovery of the pearls. On the 9th March Mr Engleliart, who had been acting for Mrs Hargreaves in the matter, reported that" the lady had been identified at Spink's from a photograph of Miss Elliott. Miss Elliott, confronted with this fact, insisted on going to seethe jewellers herself. She did, and Mr Spink "thought" she was "the lady." This, of course, Miss Elliott denied and denies. She intends, Sir Charles Russell explains, to account for all her movements both on j the 19th February and on the 23rd February. Who then, was " the lady " 1 "In a case," said Sir Charles, "which was so surrounded with mystery, it was difficult to foresee what or might not be material. It appeared that Mrs Hargreaves took a fancy to some part of Miss Elliott's dress, and also to a hat she wore, and that was left behind at Torquay when Miss Elliott left." Whether anything will come of the dress or the hat or the "photograph, we cannot say. The introduction of small details upon which the story may or may not ultimately turn is essential in sensational novels. But impatient novel readers often spoil the fun by looking at the end. The great beauty of novels in the law court is that this is impossible.