What do you think?
Rate this book
Dr. Thorndyke Mysteries #17
As a Thief in the Night.
Harold Monkhouse is usually such an uncomplaining patient so when his brother Amos calls in one night, what he doesn't expect is to see him at Death's door. Suspicions aroused, he demands an urgent second opinion. And when Harold is later found dead, Amos is left in no doubt that foul play is afoot.
What ensues is a roller coaster ride into crime fiction at its best as the truth of the fateful night eludes even the best of detective minds.
What ensues is a roller coaster ride into crime fiction at its best as the truth of the fateful night eludes even the best of detective minds.
ebook
First published January 1, 1928
26 people are currently reading
108 people want to read
About the author
R. Austin Freeman
598 books87 followersRichard Freeman was born in Soho, London on 11 April 1862, the son of Ann Maria (nee Dunn) and Richard Freeman, a tailor. He was originally named Richard, and later added the Austin to his name.
He became a medical trainee at Middlesex Hospital Medical College, and was accepted as a member of the Royal College of Surgeons.
He married Annie Elizabeth Edwards in 1887; they had two sons. After a few weeks of married life, the couple found themselves in Accra on the Gold Coast, where he was assistant surgeon. His time in Africa produced plenty of hard work, very little money and ill health, so much so that after seven years he was invalided out of the service in 1891. He wrote his first book, 'Travels and Life in Ashanti and Jaman', which was published in 1898. It was critically acclaimed but made very little money.
On his return to England he set up an eye/ear/nose/throat practice, but in due course his health forced him to give up medicine, although he did have occasional temporary posts, and in World War I he was in the ambulance corps.
He became a writer of detective stories, mostly featuring the medico-legal forensic investigator Dr Thorndyke. The first of the books in the series was 'The Red Thumb Mark' (1907). His first published crime novel was 'The Adventures of Romney Pringle' (1902) and was a collaborative effort published under the pseudonym Clifford Ashdown. Within a few years he was devoting his time to full-time writing.
With the publication of 'The Singing Bone' (1912) he invented the inverted detective story (a crime fiction in which the commission of the crime is described at the beginning, usually including the identity of the perpetrator, with the story then describing the detective's attempt to solve the mystery). Thereafter he used some of his early experiences as a colonial surgeon in his novels.
A large proportion of the Dr Thorndyke stories involve genuine, but often quite arcane, points of scientific knowledge, from areas such as tropical medicine, metallurgy and toxicology.
He died in Gravesend on 28 September 1943.
He became a medical trainee at Middlesex Hospital Medical College, and was accepted as a member of the Royal College of Surgeons.
He married Annie Elizabeth Edwards in 1887; they had two sons. After a few weeks of married life, the couple found themselves in Accra on the Gold Coast, where he was assistant surgeon. His time in Africa produced plenty of hard work, very little money and ill health, so much so that after seven years he was invalided out of the service in 1891. He wrote his first book, 'Travels and Life in Ashanti and Jaman', which was published in 1898. It was critically acclaimed but made very little money.
On his return to England he set up an eye/ear/nose/throat practice, but in due course his health forced him to give up medicine, although he did have occasional temporary posts, and in World War I he was in the ambulance corps.
He became a writer of detective stories, mostly featuring the medico-legal forensic investigator Dr Thorndyke. The first of the books in the series was 'The Red Thumb Mark' (1907). His first published crime novel was 'The Adventures of Romney Pringle' (1902) and was a collaborative effort published under the pseudonym Clifford Ashdown. Within a few years he was devoting his time to full-time writing.
With the publication of 'The Singing Bone' (1912) he invented the inverted detective story (a crime fiction in which the commission of the crime is described at the beginning, usually including the identity of the perpetrator, with the story then describing the detective's attempt to solve the mystery). Thereafter he used some of his early experiences as a colonial surgeon in his novels.
A large proportion of the Dr Thorndyke stories involve genuine, but often quite arcane, points of scientific knowledge, from areas such as tropical medicine, metallurgy and toxicology.
He died in Gravesend on 28 September 1943.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 29 of 29 reviews
January 29, 2018
Completely Absorbing Mystery
The story is told in the first person by Rupert Mayfield, a lawyer, who is a family friend of Barbara and Harold Monkhouse. Harold’s health has been poorly for at least twenty years, and he has been attended by the same doctor for that period, Dr Dimsdale. Living in the house with the Monkhouses are Harold’s informally adopted daughter, Madelaine Norris; his secretary, Anthony Wallingford; Mabel Withers, the maid; Anne Baker, the cook; and Doris Brown, the kitchen maid. Mayfield is visiting one day while Mrs Monkhouse is away and while he is there, Harold’s brother, Amos Monkhouse, a clergyman, comes to visit. He is horrified at the state his brother is in and goes with Mayfield to see Dr Dimsdale and to tell him he is going to ask for another opinion. This is done, and after the second doctor’s consultation, nothing more is heard, but a few days later Harold Monkhouse is dead. Arrangements are made and on the day of the funeral, a policeman brings summonses for everyone in the house, plus Mayfield and Amos Monkhouse, to attend a coroner’s inquest. At the same time he informs them there is going to be a post-mortem.
At the inquest the bombshell is dropped that Harold was murdered, and now the police have to find the guilty person. Mayfield, at his own expense, retains Thorndyke as an investigator, for he refuses to think that anyone in the house would have murdered Harold, and thinks that there could be an outside agent involved. The police are struggling as every clue ends in a dead-end, and meanwhile, everyone connected with the house is under a cloud. Until the guilty person is found, the innocent suffer.
As usual there are examples of Freeman’s sardonic humour throughout the book, and his very astute observations on the human condition. The cast of characters is well-rounded, apart from the minor players, Thorndyke is his usual enigmatic self, and Polton is still happy in his laboratory. This murder-mystery is written in Freeman’s usual well-structured way, using his impressive vocabulary to its fullest, and it appears to have been edited after digitisation as I found only two or three errors.
This is a remarkable mystery and it takes Thornkyke all of his considerable ability and ingenuity to unravel. The solution involves a great deal of scientific and chemical analysis and a good bit of hypothesising before that. It is a story that has been told with a great deal of feeling, much more so than other Thorndyke mysteries I have read so far, and the author shows the full, terrible, enduring consequences that murder can have. The tone of this story is deeper and darker than the much more light-hearted “The Mystery of Angelina Frood” that I read before this one, and it is well-worth reading. This book was written in 1928 and moves more slowly than modern mysteries and is wordier, but I have no problems at all recommending it, and it merits all five stars.
The story is told in the first person by Rupert Mayfield, a lawyer, who is a family friend of Barbara and Harold Monkhouse. Harold’s health has been poorly for at least twenty years, and he has been attended by the same doctor for that period, Dr Dimsdale. Living in the house with the Monkhouses are Harold’s informally adopted daughter, Madelaine Norris; his secretary, Anthony Wallingford; Mabel Withers, the maid; Anne Baker, the cook; and Doris Brown, the kitchen maid. Mayfield is visiting one day while Mrs Monkhouse is away and while he is there, Harold’s brother, Amos Monkhouse, a clergyman, comes to visit. He is horrified at the state his brother is in and goes with Mayfield to see Dr Dimsdale and to tell him he is going to ask for another opinion. This is done, and after the second doctor’s consultation, nothing more is heard, but a few days later Harold Monkhouse is dead. Arrangements are made and on the day of the funeral, a policeman brings summonses for everyone in the house, plus Mayfield and Amos Monkhouse, to attend a coroner’s inquest. At the same time he informs them there is going to be a post-mortem.
At the inquest the bombshell is dropped that Harold was murdered, and now the police have to find the guilty person. Mayfield, at his own expense, retains Thorndyke as an investigator, for he refuses to think that anyone in the house would have murdered Harold, and thinks that there could be an outside agent involved. The police are struggling as every clue ends in a dead-end, and meanwhile, everyone connected with the house is under a cloud. Until the guilty person is found, the innocent suffer.
As usual there are examples of Freeman’s sardonic humour throughout the book, and his very astute observations on the human condition. The cast of characters is well-rounded, apart from the minor players, Thorndyke is his usual enigmatic self, and Polton is still happy in his laboratory. This murder-mystery is written in Freeman’s usual well-structured way, using his impressive vocabulary to its fullest, and it appears to have been edited after digitisation as I found only two or three errors.
This is a remarkable mystery and it takes Thornkyke all of his considerable ability and ingenuity to unravel. The solution involves a great deal of scientific and chemical analysis and a good bit of hypothesising before that. It is a story that has been told with a great deal of feeling, much more so than other Thorndyke mysteries I have read so far, and the author shows the full, terrible, enduring consequences that murder can have. The tone of this story is deeper and darker than the much more light-hearted “The Mystery of Angelina Frood” that I read before this one, and it is well-worth reading. This book was written in 1928 and moves more slowly than modern mysteries and is wordier, but I have no problems at all recommending it, and it merits all five stars.
September 16, 2025
I agree with most of the other reviewers that this book is a bit different from other Thorndyke stories and that parts of it are rather long-winded. However, it has that attention to detail for which R.A.F. is famous and which I really like. It was easy to figure out who the murderer was by the multitude of clues but how was Thorndyke going to prove it?
It would be interesting to know if all the scientific data on arsenic poisoning were accurate. I like to think that this was the case.
I enjoyed it but I'm not quite sure why it was titled "As A Thief In The Night"
It would be interesting to know if all the scientific data on arsenic poisoning were accurate. I like to think that this was the case.
I enjoyed it but I'm not quite sure why it was titled "As A Thief In The Night"
July 7, 2025
Another enjoyable Dr. Thorndyke mystery although I have some doubts about the scientific forensic investigative procedures employed. Despite these concerns, this was an enjoyable read and fully illustrated Freeman's grasp of the importance of microscopic crime scene evidence. Considering the mystery was first published in 1928, I have to give it 4 stars.
July 10, 2023
‘Looking back now on the body of evidence that has gradually accumulated, I am astonished at the way in which the apparently forgotten past has given up its secrets, one after another, until it has carried its revelation from surmise to probability and from probability at last to incontestable proof.’
Thus Dr John Thorndyke begins his exposition of the solution to the murder of Harold Monkhouse at the end of a case in which the conflicting and contradictory evidence creates an outstanding puzzle.
Here we have a classic restricted circle poisoning, related by junior barrister and family friend, Rupert Mayfield, whose alternating naivety, insight and romanticism add much to the narrative. The small cast allows for a good deal of character development and some telling descriptive passages, particularly one of a midnight exhumation.
The plot is such that it is difficult to say much without spoiling the surprises . Thorndyke does not feature prominently but this cleverly allows the suspects to take centre stage.
Were I to compile a list of my favourites in the series, this would be near the top.
Very recommendable.
4.25 stars.
Thus Dr John Thorndyke begins his exposition of the solution to the murder of Harold Monkhouse at the end of a case in which the conflicting and contradictory evidence creates an outstanding puzzle.
Here we have a classic restricted circle poisoning, related by junior barrister and family friend, Rupert Mayfield, whose alternating naivety, insight and romanticism add much to the narrative. The small cast allows for a good deal of character development and some telling descriptive passages, particularly one of a midnight exhumation.
The plot is such that it is difficult to say much without spoiling the surprises . Thorndyke does not feature prominently but this cleverly allows the suspects to take centre stage.
Were I to compile a list of my favourites in the series, this would be near the top.
Very recommendable.
4.25 stars.
May 14, 2011
The last several Dr. Thorndyke mysteries I've read haven't been very satisfying, so this one was a nice surprise. It was a proper mystery with a nice collection of suspects, although I did suspect the murderer almost at the very beginning of the book (I hardly ever do that, so maybe it was too obvious?).
September 9, 2022
Free download available at FadedPage
August 29, 2019
While I always enjoy Dr. Thorndyke, the culprit in this entry in the series seemed quite obvious to me almost immediately. I found the narrator of this book, Rupert Mayfield, almost unbelievably obtuse, though of course he had emotional attachments which interfered with his ability to think clearly...
February 27, 2024
Clever. A very interesting arsenic poisoning that was told really well!
January 11, 2017
This is not one of my favorites of his. Generally I like Freeman's books for their turn of the century detective and forensic methods but this book focuses on a very narrow aspect of it - arsenic poisoning. It was interesting read about the ways Dr. Thorndyke tried to prove that someone had been poisoned but overall the story just fell a little flat. The characters aren't particularly interesting or developed much. Amos Monkhouse may start things but he's hardly mentioned in the later chapters. This is not one of Freeman's best efforts and yet is the only one that I can think of that doesn't end happily and tidily which makes it feel more realistic (in so far as any of these types of books feels realistic!)
There's Rupert Mayfield, the narrator - a decent, loyal, friendly, barrister; Dr. Thorndyke, the investigator - a quiet, unstoppable, extraordinarily intelligent, yet sympathetic crusader for truth; Superintendent Miller, the detective - a tall, unflinching, if unimaginative, punisher of the wrong doer; Polton, the assistant of Dr Thorndyke - a small, unassuming, man with a gift for mechanical engineering and a face with more wrinkles than a pug's testicles; Harold Monkhouse, the victim - an uncomplaing, bookish, independently wealthy, elderly man who winds up dead after a long illness; Barbara Monkhouse, the victim's wife and Rupert's oldest friend - a collected, resolute, largely handsome, strong and politically active woman who wasn't the greatest wife in many ways; Anthony Wallingford, the secretary - an impulsive, erratic, and imbalanced man who ran errands for the victim and everyone else, but especially cares for Barbara; Madeline Norris, the family friend - a petite, delicate, shy, retiring, subtly intelligent teacher of cookery who is distantly related to the victim and treated as a daughter; Amos Monkhouse, the brother - a peppery, sturdy looking, impatient clergyman who starts the ball rolling when he visits his brother and finds him dangerously ill and Barbara away "amusing herself with her platform fooleries."; Dr. Dimsdale, the doctor - a suave but fairly characterless family doctor who has been treating the victim for 20 years; Stella Keene, the childhood sweetheart - a good natured, affectionate, quick witted, brave, talented and beautiful young girl, step sister to Barbara and adopted sister/sweetheart of Rupert who was only 18 when she died.
There's Rupert Mayfield, the narrator - a decent, loyal, friendly, barrister; Dr. Thorndyke, the investigator - a quiet, unstoppable, extraordinarily intelligent, yet sympathetic crusader for truth; Superintendent Miller, the detective - a tall, unflinching, if unimaginative, punisher of the wrong doer; Polton, the assistant of Dr Thorndyke - a small, unassuming, man with a gift for mechanical engineering and a face with more wrinkles than a pug's testicles; Harold Monkhouse, the victim - an uncomplaing, bookish, independently wealthy, elderly man who winds up dead after a long illness; Barbara Monkhouse, the victim's wife and Rupert's oldest friend - a collected, resolute, largely handsome, strong and politically active woman who wasn't the greatest wife in many ways; Anthony Wallingford, the secretary - an impulsive, erratic, and imbalanced man who ran errands for the victim and everyone else, but especially cares for Barbara; Madeline Norris, the family friend - a petite, delicate, shy, retiring, subtly intelligent teacher of cookery who is distantly related to the victim and treated as a daughter; Amos Monkhouse, the brother - a peppery, sturdy looking, impatient clergyman who starts the ball rolling when he visits his brother and finds him dangerously ill and Barbara away "amusing herself with her platform fooleries."; Dr. Dimsdale, the doctor - a suave but fairly characterless family doctor who has been treating the victim for 20 years; Stella Keene, the childhood sweetheart - a good natured, affectionate, quick witted, brave, talented and beautiful young girl, step sister to Barbara and adopted sister/sweetheart of Rupert who was only 18 when she died.
November 5, 2009
I felt there was one major downfall to this book and that was the characters. I never felt as a reader able to get to know them well enough, because the death investigation was from the outset and that was ultimately the only thing the story was about, so any getting to know people going about their daily lives was skipped.
I thought the author was accurate in portraying human reactions to certain events which made the writing all the more realistic, however I wasn’t sure it was a good thing having the main man as a lawyer, because it was necessary for the exposure of theory to the reader that he ask questions, but to me it irritated that he seemed at times very slow on the uptake of what was being suggested by the detective when surely if I the reader can pick up on it quickly, a lawyer should be able to! I guess he was supposed to be unable to suspect people he knew and had feelings for, but it didn’t work in my opinion.
It would have been a better book if there had been more viable and developed sub-plots, because I was able to guess the murderer almost from the beginning, along with the motive, I could also identify the way of murder a little further into the story and one of the main methods of conviction. However, despite knowing what may seem like everything, I didn’t dislike As a Thief in the Night as one is never absolutely sure whether one is right until the very end, plus there are always small details and detective work you don’t expect brought to light at the end, thought sensing one already knows can bring on a certain feeling of frustration to get through the build up to the revelation quickly.
Another bonus to reading this book was that I learnt a few things of which I have an interest, so I definitely didn’t feel it was a waste of time and would probably read another by the same author.
I thought the author was accurate in portraying human reactions to certain events which made the writing all the more realistic, however I wasn’t sure it was a good thing having the main man as a lawyer, because it was necessary for the exposure of theory to the reader that he ask questions, but to me it irritated that he seemed at times very slow on the uptake of what was being suggested by the detective when surely if I the reader can pick up on it quickly, a lawyer should be able to! I guess he was supposed to be unable to suspect people he knew and had feelings for, but it didn’t work in my opinion.
It would have been a better book if there had been more viable and developed sub-plots, because I was able to guess the murderer almost from the beginning, along with the motive, I could also identify the way of murder a little further into the story and one of the main methods of conviction. However, despite knowing what may seem like everything, I didn’t dislike As a Thief in the Night as one is never absolutely sure whether one is right until the very end, plus there are always small details and detective work you don’t expect brought to light at the end, thought sensing one already knows can bring on a certain feeling of frustration to get through the build up to the revelation quickly.
Another bonus to reading this book was that I learnt a few things of which I have an interest, so I definitely didn’t feel it was a waste of time and would probably read another by the same author.
April 19, 2017
3.5 stars
A nice change of pace with a new narrator who wasn't directly following the events of the case. With Jervis going around with Thorndyke, you know a little more as the case progresses, so it was nice to have a character involved with all the suspects and witnessing things that incriminated them all but was unable to follow the progress Thorndyke was making. I noticed more starkly this time too, in the summary Thorndyke gives at the end to say how he arrived at his conclusion, that little things he picked up on get mentioned in the book by one or two word descriptions, and going back you can pick up on the clues here and there and would probably be better able to guess who the real culprit is if you paid more attention to those little hints. But since it is a novel, there are certain things Freeman can't put in or the mystery wouldn't be a mystery, but having a narrator less directly involved with the investigation prevents that aspect from being prominent enough to be annoying.
A nice change of pace with a new narrator who wasn't directly following the events of the case. With Jervis going around with Thorndyke, you know a little more as the case progresses, so it was nice to have a character involved with all the suspects and witnessing things that incriminated them all but was unable to follow the progress Thorndyke was making. I noticed more starkly this time too, in the summary Thorndyke gives at the end to say how he arrived at his conclusion, that little things he picked up on get mentioned in the book by one or two word descriptions, and going back you can pick up on the clues here and there and would probably be better able to guess who the real culprit is if you paid more attention to those little hints. But since it is a novel, there are certain things Freeman can't put in or the mystery wouldn't be a mystery, but having a narrator less directly involved with the investigation prevents that aspect from being prominent enough to be annoying.
June 23, 2011
Initially, I randomly guessed one of the characters was the murderer, but then I changed it to the real murderer as I got more into the book. As it was unfolding, some of my suspicions were confirmed and explained. Of course, I wasn't able to guess how they did it. That was rather ingenious. You can't guess at that part. Dr. Thorndyke always can unravel the mystery, no matter how difficult it was, and he didn't disappoint. I was a little impatient with Rupbert Mayfield's anxieties about Dr. Thorndyke solving the case, but I suppose he had reason to worry about what could happen. Barbara Monkhouse's personality rather annoyed me.
May 25, 2014
A bit unbalanced, this one, I found. Characters less credible than usual - what was the point of Madeline? And what happened to Amos, introduced and then totally abandoned? One doesn't read Thorndyke novels for the whodunnit element, but this one was really a bit too obvious. But plenty of Polton, so four stars.
January 24, 2017
Poignant. The beginning drags a bit, I found the hero a bit weak, the mystery is fairly easy to unravel, the details of the denouement pretty obvious early on, and one of the characters is just annoying. That said, I found this to be an unusual and rewarding mystery. Good title, too.
April 22, 2018
An enjoyable mystery with lots of red herring clues and a somewhat annoying narrator, though it's for understandable reasons. As other reviewers mention, the solution to the mystery is fairly obvious but I still enjoyed the story and unraveling.
September 5, 2010
Well-written and suspenseful. I wasn't sure about the guilty party in this one until quite close to the end.
December 28, 2012
The murder plan was too complicated...There are easy ways too.
April 21, 2019
A very well written book. Excellent characters and a plot that moves quickly along.
July 24, 2024
Despite being a relatively late entry in the Dr Thorndyke series, this is one of the half-dozen or so available on Project Gutenberg (at time of review), which is where I picked it up. There isn't a lot of inter-book continuity to worry about with this series, so skipping over a few isn't a problem.
It's told from the point of view of a new character, a lawyer who knows Thorndyke and asks him to investigate the death by poisoning of the husband of his old friend and almost-sister, in order to lift the cloud of suspicion hanging over not only his friend but the whole household. He has a clear conflict of interest, and several times deliberately withholds information from Thorndyke because it points to one or another of his friends, but Thorndyke, with his typical approach of not telling anyone anything while he investigates and seeing through obfuscation, figures it out anyway.
Freeman's dialog is as unnatural as ever: the murdered man's wife, giving evidence in coroner's court, refers to her husband as "deceased" instead of by his name, and the tender moment between her and her friend is rendered in the world's stiffest prose. But compared to the earlier books, this is a more human and humane story, where we feel the emotional impact of the murders more than the cleverness of the intellectual problem. As often with Freeman's books, I did figure out the method of the murder early on, because the author kept dropping big hints about it, though it took me a lot longer to work out the murderer - partly because the detective, Thorndyke, has access to facts not made available to the reader until he explains them at the end. Not everything is fully covered in his explanation; we get the means and the motive, but there are some minor details left unexplained.
Thorndyke shows genuine sympathy and consideration for his friend throughout, which is much more appealing to me than his chaffing, snobbish persona in the early books. The book came out in 1928, more than 20 years after the first book, so it's good to see that the author was growing in range and not just sticking with a successful formula. By that time, Dorothy L. Sayers had published several of her Lord Peter Wimsey mysteries, and I like to think that Freeman was influenced by that sympathetic and considerate detective; I know she read his books (Lord Peter mentions them at one point), and it's likely he read hers too.
It's told from the point of view of a new character, a lawyer who knows Thorndyke and asks him to investigate the death by poisoning of the husband of his old friend and almost-sister, in order to lift the cloud of suspicion hanging over not only his friend but the whole household. He has a clear conflict of interest, and several times deliberately withholds information from Thorndyke because it points to one or another of his friends, but Thorndyke, with his typical approach of not telling anyone anything while he investigates and seeing through obfuscation, figures it out anyway.
Freeman's dialog is as unnatural as ever: the murdered man's wife, giving evidence in coroner's court, refers to her husband as "deceased" instead of by his name, and the tender moment between her and her friend is rendered in the world's stiffest prose. But compared to the earlier books, this is a more human and humane story, where we feel the emotional impact of the murders more than the cleverness of the intellectual problem. As often with Freeman's books, I did figure out the method of the murder early on, because the author kept dropping big hints about it, though it took me a lot longer to work out the murderer - partly because the detective, Thorndyke, has access to facts not made available to the reader until he explains them at the end. Not everything is fully covered in his explanation; we get the means and the motive, but there are some minor details left unexplained.
Thorndyke shows genuine sympathy and consideration for his friend throughout, which is much more appealing to me than his chaffing, snobbish persona in the early books. The book came out in 1928, more than 20 years after the first book, so it's good to see that the author was growing in range and not just sticking with a successful formula. By that time, Dorothy L. Sayers had published several of her Lord Peter Wimsey mysteries, and I like to think that Freeman was influenced by that sympathetic and considerate detective; I know she read his books (Lord Peter mentions them at one point), and it's likely he read hers too.
May 21, 2024
This is the second Dr Thorndyke book I've read (the first was a book of short stories) and I'm wondering how it is I'd never come across R. Austin Freeman before. Both books were quite well-written--better than the average run from this period--and I'll be looking for more.
Rupert Mayfair is quite sure no one in the house could have killed Harold Monkhouse. After all, he knows them all. But once he hires Dr Thorndyke to look into the matter, he starts to have second thoughts.
The author does a good job of inserting the clues so you have a chance at solving the matter for yourself. I did, in fact, figure out who, but had to read on to see if I was right, and how the crime was actually committed.
Rupert Mayfair is quite sure no one in the house could have killed Harold Monkhouse. After all, he knows them all. But once he hires Dr Thorndyke to look into the matter, he starts to have second thoughts.
The author does a good job of inserting the clues so you have a chance at solving the matter for yourself. I did, in fact, figure out who, but had to read on to see if I was right, and how the crime was actually committed.
October 6, 2025
A brother’s concern leads to deepening suspicions of nefarious doings. From there a web of clues and motives entangles everyone even remotely interested related to the victim. The narrator is a friend to all the suspects and the detectives. So, as he narrates, we get to see all sides of the tory. Thorndyke catches clews that everyone else just can’t see. Then at the end he finds that final piece that catches the killer. I was completely surprised. It was a truly chilling little story. Very clean though.
February 23, 2021
The Reverend Amos Monkhouse is concerned about his very ill brother Harold. When he dies an inquest is held - it seems he was poisoned. But by whom and how.
Story told from the P.O.V. of lawyer Rupert Mayfield.
An enjoyable mystery
Originally written in 1928
Story told from the P.O.V. of lawyer Rupert Mayfield.
An enjoyable mystery
Originally written in 1928
February 6, 2023
Good read, sad though
Very emotional and one can't help but feel for the protagonist. I thoroughly enjoyed the scientific data by which Dr Thorndyke proves his case. A must read.
Very emotional and one can't help but feel for the protagonist. I thoroughly enjoyed the scientific data by which Dr Thorndyke proves his case. A must read.
August 14, 2024
This is an enjoyable read. There is little action 'packed' into the novel and it moves slowly. However, the plot, character and story twists are quite interesting.
June 28, 2025
Thorndyke solves the poisoning of a man and uncovers a crime from many years before.
August 11, 2025
Very engaging, clever, and I loved the narration. My favourite Thorndyke story so far.
February 28, 2016
Un po' deludente. La parte investigativa (come sempre nei romanzi di Freeman) è appassionante e ben sviluppata ma il lato "umano" dei personaggi è piuttosto trascurato, rendendoli di conseguenza piuttosto piatti . E visto il movente dietro all'omicidio è un peccato imperdonabile.
February 15, 2012
Fantastically clever murder with fascinating scientific explanation - it is amazing that htis book was written in 1926. A brilliant author I want to read more of his books.
Displaying 1 - 29 of 29 reviews