Another Solution of “The Lion’s Mane”

By Hirayama Yuichi and Mizuochi Masako

At one of the meetings of “The Red Circle of Niigata”, on July 9th 1989, we discussed many aspects of “The Lion’s Mane”, one of the stories that causes so many arguments. At this meeting we had been reexamining all the adventures of The Casebook of Sherlock Holmes, and we had an animated discussion about this story on that day.

It is believed that this is one of the records which the Master himself wrote. There are some arguments about the author, but Dr. Narita will explain this in detail. There are also so many other questionable issues in “The Lion’s Mane.”

Of all the questions, the most knotty problem was why Holmes did not recognize the fact that the body of Fitzroy McPherson was wet from sea water. According to Holmes’s statement, “I was slow at the outset -- culpably slow. Had the body been found in the water I could hardly have missed it. It was the towel which misled me. The poor fellow had never thought to dry himself, and so I in turn was led to believe that he had never been in the water. Why, then, should the attack of any water creature suggest itself to me? That was where I went astray. Well, well, Inspector, I often ventured to chaff you gentlemen of the police force, but Cyanea capillata very nearly avenged Scotland Yard.”

If “the poor fellow had never thought to dry himself,” he must have been wet. The eminent Sherlockian Nathan Bengis wrote in his article “Sherlock Stays After School,” “You should have known from the very first that McPherson had been in the water, and could not have been out of it by more than a very few minutes. How? By the very simplest of deductions. McPherson’s body must still have been wet when you examined it. The lining of this Burberry overcoat must have been moist, as would also his hair. His canvas shoes, unlaced because he had not had time in his mortal agony. That you should have failed to notice all this water, merely from the dryness of his towel should have passed belief.”

If McPherson was attacked by Cyanea capillata, he must have been in a “considerable lagoon.” At least, his back should have been in water to be attacked with the feelers of Cyanea capillata.

However his towel was “folded and dry.” If he got into water and did not use his towel, his body must have been wet with sea water.

Bengis considered that the Master overlooked this point. It is, however, too elementary to miss for Sherlock Holmes. We cannot accept such behavior in the Master’s investigations. Even if he did make a mistake, there must have been some trick we do not understand.

If McPherson’s body was wet, it is unlikely that Holmes did not recognize this fact. There is only one solution. Holmes was right when he told us, “The poor fellow had never thought to dry himself, and so I in turn was led to believe that he had never been in the water.”

When Ian Murdoch was attacked by Cyanea capillata, “his clothes (were) in wild disorder.” Stackhurst “threw some clothes about him” when he found Murdoch in an “infernal agony.” Murdoch could not put on his clothes by himself nor walk to the school. He said, when he was attacked, that “it had taken all his fortitude to reach the bank.” His heart was not as weak as that of McPherson, but McPherson could put on “his Burberry overcoat, his trousers, and an unlaced pair of canvas shoes.” It is doubtful that a man who is “obviously dying” could dress himself even if he was a Victorian gentleman. Holmes thought that “he had suddenly huddled on his clothes again - they were all disheveled and unfastened.” It must have been difficult for a man with great pain to put on trousers.

According to Holmes’ statement, it is clear that McPherson was taking off his clothes when he was attacked by Cyanea capillata. He took off his Burberry overcoat and shirts, and sat down on his heels to unlace his canvas shoes. Cyanea capillata made an attack on his bare back,. He was taken aback, and threw it away into the lagoon. He stood up with his overcoat to protect his back from the next attack. He ran away from his enemy at seaside to his school.

There is one problem with this theory. Cyanea capillata cannot fly.

We found a unique opinion in The Annotated Sherlock Holmes which solves that contradiction. Hedgpeth wrote in an annotation, “The possibility never seemed to have occurred to Holmes that this disarming young man . . . had secured a Cyanea in some manner and placed it in the tide pool with diabolical malice aforethought . . .beyond all doubt this dark, brooding, ‘ferocious tempered’ young man, disappointed in love and capable of throwing innocent dogs through windows, had conceived a most ingenious crime and to allay suspicion had caressed his own monstrous pet.”

We agree with Hedgpeth that Ian Murdoch was the criminal. We also believe that he developed the murder plan, and another man committed it. Hedgpeth thought Murdoch placed Cyanea capillata in the tide pool with diabolical malice aforethought. There is a problem with this crime. If Cyanea capillata did not attack McPherson, what would Murdoch have done? Would he continue “some algebraic demonstration before breakfast” every day until it attacked McPherson? If McPherson found and killed Cyanea capillata before he swam, did Murdoch intend to put another one in the pool? This is a crime of possibility. Murdoch might be safe from the hands of law, but he needed so much luck.

McPherson and Maud Bellamy were engaged. They kept it secret because “Fitzroy’s uncle, who is very old and said to be dying, might have disinherited him if he had married against his wish.” Murdoch must have known that because “for a year or more Murdoch has been as near to McPherson as he ever could be to anyone.” He had no time to waste.

We think another man threw Cyanea capillata on McPherson’s back when he sat down on his heels to unlace his canvas shoes. The flying jellyfish hurt him, but not as serious as it would have in the sea. He shook himself free, and it dropped into the tide pool. McPherson took his overcoat, and ran away.

Who was the other man/men? We believe they were Tom Bellamy and his son William. They did not want Maud Bellamy married to McPherson. Tom Bellamy said “I object to my girl picking up with men outside her own station.” Clearly it means McPherson. He “who owns all the boats and bathing-cots at Fulworth”, did not want a poor teacher as his son in law. He was a fisherman. It was easy for him to find a poisonous jellyfish. But as a teacher of Mathematics, Murdoch must have had no knowledge of fish. Tom Bellamy angrily told his daughter “I tell you, Maud, not to mix yourself up in the matter”. His attitude showed he knew about the case.

On the other hand, it seemed Tom Bellamy liked Ian Murdoch. Murdoch visited the Bellamys soon after the case to tell about it. Tom Bellamy said, “This other gentleman of yours let us know the news.” He treated Murdoch as a gentleman, but according to his daughter, he had “prejudice against” McPherson. Maud wanted to marry McPherson, but her father and brother wanted Murdoch as their son/brother in law.

Maud Bellamy might have known their scheme. She said, “Bring them to justice, Mr. Holmes. You have my sympathy and my help, whoever they may be.” And as for her attitude, “[it] seemed to me that she glanced defiantly at her father and brother as she spoke.”

On that morning, Murdoch insisted upon some algebraic demonstration before breakfast, to inhibit anyone going to the tide pool to watch the crime. It also establishes his alibi.

Tom and William brought Cyanea capillata in a bucket near the tide pool, and hid themselves there.

McPherson came there alone. He took off his shirt, and sat down on his heels to unlace his canvas shoes. They threw the jellyfish at McPherson. It hit his back, and fell down into the tide pool. McPherson put on his overcoat and ran away. Tom and William also left quickly.

Holmes and Stackhurst found McPherson and came to the tide pool. Cyanea capillata was already in the pool, and the Bellamys were gone, too. They could find nothing. Murdoch appeared, and Holmes asked him notify the police. Murdoch left for the village to call a policeman. After that, he visited Bellamy’s house to tell of their success. He was promised the marriage to Maud, and a job at the company of her father. It was the reason he answered, “I had intended to do so” when he was told by Stackhurst, “You will kindly make fresh arrangements for your future as speedily as you can,”

However, as Holmes said, “On the morning of the crime he can surely prove an alibi. He had been with his scholars till the last moment, and within a few minutes of McPherson’s appearance he came upon us from behind. Then bear in mind the absolute impossibility that he could single-handed have inflicted this outrage upon a man quite as strong as himself,” Murdoch heard that the police intended to arrest him. He was a prudent criminal. If not for Holmes, he would have been arrested by Inspector Bardle of the Sussex Constabulary. He hurt himself with Cyanea capillata when Stackhurst came to the tide pool. He cried out in order to to be discovered by Stackhurst. He left Cyanea capillata in the pool as evidence of the accidents. It made him look completely innocent.

Although our plot proves Sherlock Holmes’ misdetection, all the evidence but the death of McPherson’s dog supports it. We could not find out why this dog was killed. It might be an accident, but as Hedgpeth wrote, it is unlikely that an Airedale terrier with so much hair could not protect itself from an attack by a jellyfish. It might have been poisoned by the murderer, as he said. But we could not find any reason why Murdoch or the Bellamys did it. We hope further study will answer this question.

Bibliography

1 Bengis, Nathan, Sherlock Stays after School; Illustrious Client’s Second Case-Book New York: Magico Magazine, 1984

2 Baring-Gould, William S., the Annotated Sherlock Holmes New York: Clarkson N. Potter, reprinted in 1978

3 The Red Circle Gazette No.25 Niigata: The Red Circle of Niigata, 1989

4 Doyle, Sir Arthur Conan, The Complete Sherlock Holmes Short Stories London: John Murray, reprinted in 1971

(The Nezire Zanmai vol.2, 1992)