Cucumber Sandwiches Read online

  Copyright & Information

  Cucumber Sandwiches

  First published in 1969

  Copyright: John Stewart Literary Management Ltd. 1969-2012

  All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form, or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise), without the prior permission of the publisher. Any person who does any unauthorised act in relation to this publication may be liable to criminal prosecution and civil claims for damages.

  The right of J.I.M. Stewart to be identified as the author of this work has been asserted.

  This edition published in 2012 by House of Stratus, an imprint of

  Stratus Books Ltd., Lisandra House, Fore Street, Looe,

  Cornwall, PL13 1AD, UK.

  Typeset by House of Stratus.

  A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library and the Library of Congress.

  EAN ISBN Edition

  0755130499 9780755130498 Print

  0755133161 9780755133161 Kindle

  0755133471 9780755133475 Epub

  This is a fictional work and all characters are drawn from the author’s imagination.

  Any resemblance or similarities to persons either living or dead are entirely coincidental.

  www.houseofstratus.com

  About the Author

  John Innes Mackintosh Stewart (who also wrote as Michael Innes) was born in Edinburgh where his father was Director of Education. He attended Edinburgh Academy before going up to Oriel College, Oxford where he was awarded a first class degree in English and won the Matthew Arnold Memorial Prize and was named a Bishop Frazer scholar. After a short interlude travelling with AJP Taylor in Austria, including studying Freudian psychoanalysis for a year, he embarked on an edition of Florio’s translation of Montaigne’s Essays. This subsequently helped him secure a post teaching English at Leeds University.

  In 1932, Stewart married Margaret Hardwick, who practised medicine, and they subsequently had three sons and two daughters. By 1935, he had been awarded the Jury Chair at the University of Adelaide in Australia as Professor of English and had also completed his first detective novel, ‘Death at the President’s Lodging’, published under the pseudonym ‘Michael Innes’. This was an immediate success and part of a long running series centred on ‘Inspector Appleby’, his primary character when writing as ‘Innes’. There were almost fifty titles completed under the ‘Innes’ banner during his career.

  In 1946, he returned to the UK and spent two years at Queen’s University in Belfast, before being appointed Student (Fellow and Tutor) at Christ Church, Oxford. He was later to hold the post of Reader in English Literature of Oxford University and upon his retirement was made an Emeritus Professor. Whilst never wanting to leave his beloved Oxford permanently, he did manage to fit into his busy schedule a visiting Professorship at the University of Washington and was also honoured by other Universities in the UK.

  Stewart wrote many works under his own name, including twenty-one works of fiction (which contained the highly acclaimed quintet entitled ‘A Staircase in Surrey’, centred primarily in Oxford, but with considerable forays elsewhere, especially Italy), several short story collections, and over nine learned works on the likes of Shakespeare, Kipling and Hardy. He was also a contributor to many academic publications, including a major section on modern writers for the Oxford History of English Literature. He died in 1994, the last published work being an autobiography: ‘Myself and Michael Innes’.

  J.I.M. Stewart’s fiction is greatly admired for its wit, plots and literary quality, whilst the non-fiction is acknowledged as being definitive.

  Laon and Cythna

  PART ONE

  1

  Let me begin by recording something which was within my own knowledge at the start. Arthur Holroyd, although an active and, I believe, eminent member of the Parapsychological Society, has never been interested in ghosts. Of course he will always maintain in public that in the insecure state of our knowledge – the near-infancy, as it still is, of psychical research – it is necessary to keep an open mind. But privately he has assured me more than once that he disbelieves in the survival of human personality after bodily death, and in consequence, in the possibility of veridical phantasms of the dead. He admits as a plain fact that people – even groups of people – do occasionally experience apparitions. But these must be explained, he says, without recourse to the notion of disembodied spirits revisiting (as Hamlet has it) ‘the glimpses of the moon’.

  Shortly before the perplexing events I have undertaken to relate, Holroyd had become interested in a subject very remote from demonology. This was psycho-kinesis, or PK, a term which will perhaps bear a passing comment. A conjuror affects to possess this power when he makes mystic passes before a cabinet with the result that a lady vanishes from its interior and reappears in an alternative receptacle at the other side of the stage. A hysterical girl, it may be said, actually achieves psycho-kinesis if she generates that kind of ‘poltergeist’ phenomena in which vases tumble off mantelpieces and sundry petty levitations take place. And a similar force may be declared operative when, in a séance with a physical medium, a tambourine or parasol is hurtled across a room.

  Except in the case of the conjuror, who is doing no more than play a clever trick on us, it is difficult to arrive at any well-founded view of such happenings. Holroyd’s interest was in the possibility of controlled experiment. Has the human mind any detectable power to influence the movement of material objects at a distance?

  It certainly believes it has. As my friend pointed out in a paper contributed to his Society’s Proceedings some years ago, when a football has been powerfully impelled towards the mouth of the goal at a populously attended match, the spectators to a man strenuously will its passing either over or under the bar accordingly as their partisanship dictates. On bowling-greens and putting-greens, similarly, players may frequently be observed contorting their bodies under the stress of frantically willing a psycho-kinetic effect. Would nature, it may be asked, have developed so powerfully in us this particular mechanism of the mind while at the same time decreeing that it should have no biological value whatever? Or is there in man a power, whether vestigial or rudimentary, a full exercise of which might very notably conduce to his survival – deflecting, for example, the arrow as it flies? As a step towards answering such large questions, Holroyd had devised a small machine.

  It is very difficult to be certain that one is succeeding in making physical events behave in a random manner – a fact well known to, though not much publicised by, those charged with constructing and operating the ‘electronic brains’ and the like used in the conduct of state lotteries. Holroyd believed he had succeeded, having simply perfected something already in use in other laboratories: to wit, a contrivance for tossing three dice on a table. Actually it did a little more than that, since it was capable of picking them up again and continuing the process indefinitely. The agent in the experiment would sit watching the machine through a glass partition, and would over a substantial period of time, endeavour to dictate some specific course of behaviour to the dice: that they should produce, for example, what Holroyd (who is a Classical scholar) calls an Aphrodite, meaning three sixes, or a dog, meaning three aces. It is a very boring sort of experiment, one would suppose, particularly as it has to be conducted for weeks on end before enough data can be accumulated to make valid statistical analysis possible.

  I mention all this because it is important to get clear the kind of thing that Holroyd had come to think of as modern psychical research. He is not a fanciful or imaginative man, but he is a pertinacious one. It certainly needed pertinaci
ty to persevere with O’Rourke.

  How my friend came upon O’Rourke I do not know, nor does it matter, since the man is without significance for my substantive narrative. He was an unemployed Irish labourer, and it appears that he was accustomed to earning occasional free drinks by some sort of card-guessing exhibition in pubs. Something, I have forgotten what, about the technique of this suggested to Holroyd that O’Rourke might be a suitable man to address his mind (if the expression be appropriate) to those tumbling dice. So he hired O’Rourke, and O’Rourke spent long hours concentrating, or professing to concentrate, upon the task entrusted to him. So far as his personal habits went, he was not an ideal collaborator. Holroyd has described him to me as drunken and smelly. He was also resourcefully profane, and when he chose to feel some particular recalcitrance in the dice he would curse them through his glass window in the most appalling manner. The first run of results, however, was declared by Holroyd’s mathematical colleagues to be encouraging, and the experiment went on.

  Unfortunately, O’Rourke’s success presently appeared to be of the flash-in-the-pan kind with which psychical researchers are only too familiar. His results fell off, and soon the laws of probability alone seemed to be at play upon those falling tesserae. Perhaps fearful that he was going to lose his comfortable if incomprehensible employment, O’Rourke made prodigious efforts to reassert himself. The veins stood out on his temples, Holroyd asserted, and his objurgations became so vehement that it was feared lest the delicate mechanism of the dice-casting machine might be affected. In vain. O’Rourke did not cease from mental strife against the brute insentience of matter. His efforts were now wholly unrewarded.

  But the man might – Holroyd doggedly told his colleagues – simply have struck a bad patch. They must carry on, even if it meant ordering in another firkin of ale (for it was with copious potations of this wholesome liquor that O’Rourke recruited his flagging energies as he laboured at his honourable if humble assignment as a scientist). And this determination was eventually rewarded. O’Rourke’s results transformed themselves from being merely bad to being significantly bad. The dice, after what may be termed a brief honeymoon period, had taken to ignoring him. They were ignoring him still, but now they appeared to be taking orders from some other intelligence instead, and the effect of this was to depress O’Rourke’s score below the mere probability line.

  Whose was this other intelligence, or whence came this new and alien force? It was Holroyd himself who found the answer. In the sense that he had been suspecting, no fresh factor had entered into the affair at all. O’Rourke’s will, and O’Rourke’s will alone, was what had once more defeated blind chance by imposing itself upon those small rolling objects. But it was O’Rourke’s will as that will had been directing the dice not at the time but twenty-four hours later. The dice had been taking their orders neither from O’Rourke present nor from O’Rourke past but from O’Rourke future. It seemed almost necessary to endow them with a precognitive faculty.

  There were those who at once told Holroyd that he had conducted himself into a realm of very great nonsense. I have little doubt that he was inclined to agree with them, since he is (I must emphasise) a most sensible man. But at least the mathematics of the thing could be checked again from start to finish, and perhaps a new series of experiments devised. He must have been all agog to try. Yet when at this moment it so happened that he was asked to go down to Vailes, he agreed at once.

  Nothing could have been more characteristic of the conscientious nature of the man. I have said that he wasn’t interested in ghosts, and that this was because he didn’t believe in survival. Well, it wasn’t a ghost that had turned up at Vailes. Not yet. But it was the prospect of material with a bearing on the problem of an after-life. No doubt the well-known caution of the Parapsychological Society is reflected in its having been Holroyd, more than neutral before such a conception, who was invited to act. It was also relevant that, although a much younger man, he had been an acquaintance of Lord Lucius Senderhill’s.

  Vailes has belonged to the Senderhill family ever since it was built by that family’s founder, one Humphrey Senderhill, in the reign of Henry VIII. It is a Chinese egg of a place. Were one to remove – what would not be difficult – the Gothicising screens of the later eighteenth century, there would be disclosed an imposing early Georgian mansion by Leoni. If this in turn were demolished, a Jacobean house would emerge, and within that again would be found the original Tudor dwelling. Not much of this last, indeed, might stand up long enough for inspection, but the ground-plan would at least reveal that through some four hundred years Senderhills had been moving around much the same not very conveniently planned rooms and corridors. The gardens give a similar impression of the superimpositions of successive phases of taste. What has left most impress is a cunningly contrived largeness of romantic reference. But a little scratching around would reveal the lines of forecourts, terraces, fountains, waters formally confined, and long walks once shadowed by yew hedges and fantasticated topiary towers.

  All this had been good enough for the Senderhills until the mid-nineteenth century, at which time Robert Senderhill, the third Marquess of Melchester, having made a pioneering marriage with an American heiress of the first order, removed himself and his household goods to a seat of his own designing, celebrated as the last edifice of anything like its size to be achieved by a private individual in England. Henceforward no Lord Melchester lived at Vailes. It became the residence, first, of the third Marquess’s second son, Lord Otho Senderhill, and, second, of Lord Lucius Senderhill, who was the third son of the fourth Marquess. It is as well to be precise about such matters, although they smell a little of Debrett.

  I see, incidentally, that I have fallen into a small inaccuracy here. The Lord Melchester who deserted Vailes did not in fact take all his lares et penates with him. Being of a modern and forward-looking turn of mind, he left behind him a good deal in the way of worm-eaten furniture and darkened family portraits, together with whole vistas of mouldering volumes in quarto and folio, and even a muniment room which had evidently been no more than hastily run through for documents of surviving legal importance. As a solicitor drawing his clients in the main from the class of society – the ‘landed interest’, as we used to say – which the Senderhills represent, I am bound to deprecate such casual behaviour. It will be found, incidentally, to have some significance for the chronicle to which I have committed myself.

  For that chronicle I have now more or less set my scene – except that a word must be said about Lucius Senderhill himself, since his death must be regarded as my starting-point. Ever since the first flourishing of the original Humphrey Senderhill, the family has been accustomed, generation by generation, to play some part in the public life of the country. It has produced one or two statesmen of major stature, as well as innumerable political figures of virtually no stature at all. It has produced bishops and admirals, generals and judges in regulation fashion. There have been eccentric Senderhills who became artists or writers – including, for example, that Timothy Senderhill who made a bold bid for the laureateship with his Poem on the Late Promotion of Several Eminent Persons in Church and State (of whom a number, as it happened, were Timothy’s uncles and cousins). There have been a few really versatile Senderhills, who have combined the achieving of political eminence with undeniable distinction in one or another purely intellectual field.

  Lucius Senderhill was one of these last. ‘He divided his time,’ his obituarist in The Times informed us, ‘between the political arena and the study’ – with the result that he almost became Prime Minister in 1922, and had already by that date gained a high reputation as a philosopher. Whether anybody now reads Senderhill’s Structure and Growth of the Mind I do not know; perhaps it is at least not quite so forgotten as his kinsman Timothy’s poem. But the book’s title is important. Senderhill took a profound interest in psychology, and in his earliest twenties had written a brilliant review of William James’s The Varieties
of Religious Experience. Moreover he did not hesitate to support those who were at the time pressing ahead into new areas of research and speculation. And this brings me back to my friend Holroyd’s Parapsychological Society. Lord Lucius was one of its founder members.

  The Senderhills are a long-lived family. Or they are so when their natural life-span is permitted them: I shall come later to one who met a most tragic death at an early age. Lucius Senderhill had lived to be eighty-five, by which time his active career was far behind him. All sorts of ‘climates’, as they are now called, had changed during his later years, including that in which this business of psychical research is conducted. There was a period during which it exercised a peculiar appeal in aristocratic circles of the more intellectual kind, and in great houses like Vailes there was much solemn holding of séances purporting to be scientifically controlled, and much ingenious thinking-up of techniques for communicating with the dead. I am inclined to believe that this interest was dropped by the fashionable world when modern methods of mass slaughter produced enormous numbers of socially unassuming persons suddenly and unnaturally bereaved, with a consequent proliferation of spiritualist churches and the like. Since then, psychical research at any intellectually reputable level has tended to professionalise itself. Holroyd’s dice may appear fairly crazy. But a great deal of his sort of thing – statistically oriented enquiries into extra-sensory perception and so on – now falls within the sphere of orthodox experimental psychology.

  As a young man, Holroyd had been perfectly at home in Senderhill’s circle. He is an Anglo-Irishman of the Cromwellian settlement, and has much of the Irishness that these invaders seem to have picked up since that time. His light-blue eyes glitter like a madman’s, so that you are surprised by his academic manner (he has in fact been a Professor of Latin since a very early age) until your impression is abruptly modified by his producing an explosive burst of laughter. This is the more startling in that it is susceptible of easy phonetic analysis. Holroyd appears simply to be saying ‘Ho-ho!’ very loudly, and being so pleased with the result that he repeats it with a deepening resonance several times. The effect of this mere vocalising of a printed symbol of mirth might be conjectured not really to suggest overwhelming hilarity. But it does. The experience of Holroyd’s laughter is disconcerting at first (after ‘Ho-ho!’ you rather expect him to add ‘and a bottle of rum’) but wholly agreeable later. It co-exists mysteriously with his underlying almost chilly intelligence and complete sobriety of judgement.