Next, as to the manner in which the crime was committed.
On examination of the room (which is only seven feet high), a trap-door
in the ceiling, leading out on to the roof of the house, was discovered
open. The short ladder, used for obtaining access to the trap-door (and
kept under the bed), was found placed at the opening, so as to enable
any person or persons, in the room, to leave it again easily. In the
trap-door itself was found a square aperture cut in the wood, apparently
with some exceedingly sharp instrument, just behind the bolt which
fastened the door on the inner side. In this way, any person from the
outside could have drawn back the bolt, and opened the door, and have
dropped (or have been noiselessly lowered by an accomplice) into the
room--its height, as already observed, being only seven feet. That some
person, or persons, must have got admission in this way, appears evident
from the fact of the aperture being there. As to the manner in which
he (or they) obtained access to the roof of the tavern, it is to be
remarked that the third house, lower down in the street, was empty, and
under repair--that a long ladder was left by the workmen, leading from
the pavement to the top of the house--and that, on returning to their
work, on the morning of the 27th, the men found the plank which they had
tied to the ladder, to prevent anyone from using it in their absence,
removed, and lying on the ground. As to the possibility of ascending
by this ladder, passing over the roofs of the houses, passing back, and
descending again, unobserved--it is discovered, on the evidence of the
night policeman, that he only passes through Shore Lane twice in an
hour, when out on his beat. The testimony of the inhabitants also
declares, that Shore Lane, after midnight, is one of the quietest and
loneliest streets in London. Here again, therefore, it seems fair to
infer that--with ordinary caution, and presence of mind--any man, or
men, might have ascended by the ladder, and might have descended again,
unobserved. Once on the roof of the tavern, it has been proved, by
experiment, that a man might cut through the trap-door, while lying down
on it, and that in such a position, the parapet in front of the house
would conceal him from the view of anyone passing in the street.
Lastly, as to the person, or persons, by whom the crime was committed.
It is known (1) that the Indians had an interest in possessing
themselves of the Diamond. (2) It is at least probable that the man
looking like an Indian, whom Octavius Guy saw at the window of the cab,
speaking to the man dressed like a mechanic, was one of the three
Hindoo conspirators. (3) It is certain that this same man dressed like
a mechanic, was seen keeping Mr. Godfrey Ablewhite in view, all through
the evening of the 26th, and was found in the bedroom (before Mr.
Ablewhite was shown into it) under circumstances which lead to the
suspicion that he was examining the room. (4) A morsel of torn gold
thread was picked up in the bedroom, which persons expert in such
matters, declare to be of Indian manufacture, and to be a species of
gold thread not known in England. (5) On the morning of the 27th, three
men, answering to the description of the three Indians, were observed
in Lower Thames Street, were traced to the Tower Wharf, and were seen to
leave London by the steamer bound for Rotterdam.