Introduction by B. W. Matz

NEVER having attempted to solve the wonderful mystery woven into Dickens' unfinished story, and thereby being innocent of marked prejudices regarding the numerous knotty problems it presents to those who delve deeply into its intricacies, I have no misgivings in complying with the invitation to write a few prefatory words to this, the latest endeavour to unravel the tangled threads of the story's fabric.

I am, however, an enthusiastic student of the problem, content with the fascination derived from following the many by-ways traversed by all those who seek to lead others to a solution. That there have been many such guides a long row of books and pamphlets bear witness. Alluring in themselves, each book in its own different way contributes something to the intellectual exercise which the minute study of the subject offers.

I suppose every reader of Edwin Drood laments bitterly that it comes to so abrupt an end, and few lay it aside without some thought as to how it was to terminate had Dickens lived to finish it. Many devote to the mystery something more than the concession of a passing thought, and some attempt with scholarly instinct to unravel its mysteries for themselves, and evolve theories concerning its probable ending until they are caught by the fever of its subtle spell. And so the readers of the book are divided into two classes: those who are badly attacked by the fever and those who prove to be immune. The former have come to be dubbed "Droodists," and it is for these that scientific efforts to solve the problem, of which Mr. Garden's is one, have their chief interest and attraction. Although the one and true solution may never definitely be discovered, there is no doubt that every fresh study of the book reveals something helpful towards that end, and for that reason has its particular value. In this way, one point, hitherto debatable, has been established with sufficient surety to put it beyond doubt: John Jasper actually murdered his nephew. Mr. Carden starts off from that h3rpothe8is, and I am naturally in complete agreement with him on that point.

The other main question which confronts and baffles all students is that of the Datchery assumption. That Datchery is one of the characters of the book in disguise is generally agreed, and each of those who could possibly have filled that role has in turn been suggested, and the individual cases presented and argued by previous writers. The weeding out process leaves as most likely Helena Landless, Bazzard and Tartar. The strongest claim has been for Helena Landless, whilst Bazzard has ' been a favourite second. Mr. Carden chooses Tartar, and his case for the sailor is much the best that has yet been presented. In arriving at this conclusion he is able also to find an important part for Helena to perform quite in keeping with the peculiar and distinctive traits in her character, traits which Dickens so often insists in revealing, and chiefly for which &e ha& been singled out a& the fitting person to enact the part. Bazzard too, is found work by Mr. Garden suitable to his disposition and far more in keeping with his nature than that of playing at being a detective.

But Mr. Garden's book appeals to me as one of the most important contributions to the subject by virtue of the fact that he has read and studied carefully every word of the manuscript and of the notes which Dickens prepared for his own guidance, and has collated them with the printed book. The result is his discovery of certain erasures and alterations in the manuscript which help him to come to certain conclusions, not possible without this close study and comparison. These include certain passages which Dickens wrote and which were not published, one of which refers to Durdles's yard, and the possibility of Jasper availing himself of it in conjunction with his use of quick-lime in the execution of his deed. He also has been able to locate at Rochester the site of Durdles's yard, which makes his theory regarding the manner of the murder and the attempted concealment of it locally quite possible.

His reading too of the cover design is most ingenious and quite consistent with his theory. The figure kneeling to Rosa on the left hand side he claims to be Neville Landless, for he discovers internal evidence that Neville had a moustache — a real piece of the Sherlock Holmes method.

But perhaps the most important and interesting discovery he has made is the exact date of the story which almost eerily fits the context in every detail, including even the topography of Rochester and the neighbourhood at the time the story was being enacted. This enables him to work out the complete chronology of events to the surmounting of the hitherto arguable point concerning the phrase "at about this time," at the beginning of chapter xviii.

Altogether, Mr. Garden has made a notable contribution to the solution of the ever green and ever baffling puzzle, and although, of course, it is not supposed that everyone will be in agreement with his theories, few will dispute the care and reason he employs in stating his case or his competency to deal with the whole problem.

Mr. Garden is a newcomer in the game as he calls it — a game the greatest danger to which he thinks is lest it should one day end in a complete solution. In the meantime, he enters the centre court, and with his effective strokes, fresh methods and new ideas, is sure to stimulate the other players and attract the onlookers, for throughout he exhibits a sane, good-natured and dignified attitude. For these reasons his performance is worthy of careful study and consideration in conjunction and in comparison with those of the "Older Hands," who have done so much to make the game such a fine and skilful pastime.

Read more on the Archive.org website