by June Thomson
The effect of this dramatic display, conducted in complete silence, varied from person to person. Lestrade, who knew about their recovery, gave a satisfied smile as if he alone were responsible for their safe return while Gimble, on being confronted once again by the evidence of his guilt, groaned aloud and sank lower into his chair. Signor Graziani was not as jubilant as I had expected. With a cry of astonishment rather than delight, he leaned forward to inspect them more closely. For my own part, my bewilderment was only compounded for the cameo depicting Giovanni de’ Medici still bore the red stone in the centre of its frame.
What purpose, therefore, was the other single stone meant to serve?
‘You have found them!’ Signor Graziani was crying out. ‘I cannot believe it!’
Holmes chose to ignore these exclamations. Turning to Gimble and handing him the jeweller’s eyeglass, he remarked, ‘As you are the expert, I should be much obliged if you would examine the two stones and tell me which of them is the substitute. And, I warn you, do not try to trick me. I should not wish you to add deception to your other crimes.’
‘There is no need for that,’ Gimble replied, waving aside the eyeglass. ‘I know without needing to examine them which is which. The single stone is the substitute. I cut it myself yesterday when the cameos were brought to me.’
‘By the Armstrongs?’ Lestrade put in.
‘Yes; I cannot deny it,’ Gimble replied, his upper lip once more lifting into that snarl of impotent defiance.
‘And therefore,’ Holmes remarked, once more taking charge of the interview, ‘we may assume that the stone set in the cameo frame is the original? Take care for we can have it examined by an expert jeweller.’
‘That, too, is true,’ Gimble admitted after a moment’s hesitation.
Holmes, who seemed not entirely satisfied with this answer, pressed on with his questioning.
‘It is a ruby, is it not?’
‘I do not know …’ Gimble began in a trembling voice.
‘Oh, I believe you do, Mr Gimble. Moreover, you know exactly what precious stone it is. Come, sir. Confess the truth. It is the jewel known as the Medici ruby, is it not?’
‘The Medici ruby!’ Signor Graziani broke in. ‘That is absurd, Mr Holmes! It is nothing more valuable than a garnet as all the written records attest.’
‘So I understand,’ Holmes replied nonchalantly. ‘Earlier today I spent several hours in the British Museum’s Reading Room researching the subject of the Vatican treasures. As you quite rightly state, the jewel is thought to be only a garnet. As for the Medici ruby, it disappeared after Lorenzo’s death in 1492 when his eldest son Pietro took over his father’s role as virtual ruler of Florence. But he lacked Lorenzo’s courage and, when the French invaded Italy,* he tried to buy them off by offering them several fortresses as well as the cities of Pisa and Leghorn. As a result of this treachery, Pietro and the rest of the Medici family were banished from Florence and the mob was allowed to loot their palace. It was then that the Medici ruby vanished along with other priceless possessions. However, we know that Giovanni, who later became Pope Leo X, was in the city at that time because he managed to rescue some valuable manuscripts from the pillage. I suggest he may also have saved other heirlooms, including the Medici ruby. Later, when the Medicis were allowed to return from exile, I believe Giovanni had the stone recut so that it could not be identified and had it set into the frame of his cameo, claiming it was nothing more precious than a garnet. On his death in 1521, it passed into the Vatican’s possession along with the other cameos.’
‘An interesting history lesson, Mr Holmes,’ Signor Graziani observed with a smile. ‘But what are you trying to prove?’
‘I agree,’ Lestrade put in. ‘Where is all this talk of Popes and Medicis leading to? The Armstrongs have admitted stealing the valise and Gimble has confessed to receiving the cameos knowing they were stolen. As far as I am concerned, the case is over and done with. Nothing remains to be done except to charge all three of them and see them brought to trial.’
‘No, it is not quite over yet,’ Holmes corrected him. ‘There is one other person who is as guilty as the others.’
‘I suppose you are speaking of Billy Hobson?’ Lestrade replied. ‘Well, you could be right, Mr Holmes. He must have known Gimble was dealing in stolen property. If I can prove that, he could be charged as an accessory.’
‘The person I am referring to is not Billy Hobson.’
‘Then who is it, in heaven’s name?’
Lestrade sounded both angry and incredulous, as if suspecting Holmes of trying deliberately to confuse him.
‘Signor Graziani, of course,’ Holmes said calmly.
Signor Graziani immediately jumped to his feet, his face dark with fury.
‘This is an outrage, Mr Holmes!’ he exclaimed, his voice trembling with rage. ‘How dare you accuse me of stealing the Vatican cameos! I have done everything in my power to ensure their safe return.’
‘I do not doubt that for a moment, Signor Graziani. It was never your intention to allow such treasures, which you yourself described as exquisite, to pass out of the Vatican’s possession. Besides, they are too well known to be sold on. The plan, of course, was to offer to sell them back for a considerable sum of money, a ransom which I am sure the Vatican authorities would have agreed to pay and which would have been shared out between the four of you. That part of the crime was perfectly straightforward.
‘But there was another aspect to the theft which was more complex and devious. It concerned the so-called garnet which was set into the frame of the Giovanni cameo. You knew about the Medici ruby, Signor Graziani. As an expert in Renaissance jewellery, you could not have remained ignorant of it. I suggest that when the curator of the Vatican collection asked you to examine the cameos prior to your taking them to London, you realised the gem was not a garnet as was generally believed but was, in fact, a ruby – quite possibly the Medici ruby. Both stones are red although a garnet is of a darker colour. However, anyone who is not an expert could easily mistake the one for the other as I believe happened in this case. And even if it were not the Medici ruby, it is still an extremely valuable precious stone which, with a little judicious recutting and resetting, in a ring, say, or a brooch, would fetch a handsome price on the market, money which you and Gimble would divide between you.’
‘In your eagerness to expound your theory, you have forgotten to ask yourself one important question, Mr Holmes,’ Signor Graziani said, smiling contemptuously.
‘And what is that?’
‘How I became acquainted with Mr Gimble. Until you can prove that, your accusation is based on nothing more than speculation. I suggest you put it once more to the test by again asking Gimble if he has ever seen me before.’
As he spoke, he turned towards the elderly dealer, directing this last remark straight at him.
Before Gimble could answer, Holmes interjected, ‘He may not have met you, Signor Graziani, but he has certainly been in correspondence with you. Why else would he be in possession of this?’
Reaching once more into his pocket, Holmes drew out a small oblong of white pasteboard which he laid face down on Lestrade’s desk before turning it over, with the air of a whist player producing the ace of trumps, to reveal the other side. As Lestrade and I crowded close to look at it, I saw it was a business card bearing Signor Graziani’s name and address as well as a few words in Italian which I took to mean ‘Dealer in Precious Stones’.
At the sight of it, Signor Graziani gave a great cry of mingled horror and rage.
‘You old fool!’ he screamed at Gimble. ‘I told you to get rid of it!’
In his fury, he seemed about to rush at Gimble and strike him but when Holmes stepped forward, he sank down on to his chair, a broken man, and covered his face with his hands.
‘That is proof enough for me,’ Lestrade remarked, picking up the card and casting a glance of deep disfavour at Signor Graziani who was rocking to and fro in an excess of des
pair.
Motioning with his head, the Inspector indicated to the constable to take both men away.
When the door had closed behind them, Lestrade turned to my old friend.
‘As a matter of evidence, Mr Holmes, where did you find Signor Graziani’s card?’
‘It was inside Gimble’s safe,’ Holmes replied. ‘No doubt he thought it would be secure there. But I had already begun to suspect Signor Graziani’s part in the crime even before I discovered the card.’
‘How was that?’ Lestrade asked. ‘For I must confess it had not crossed my mind he was guilty.’
‘Several factors,’ my old friend replied. ‘When Signor Graziani called on me for help in recovering the cameos, one part of his account immediately struck me as suspicious. It was his statement that the valise had been stolen outside the British Museum. Although the crime was undoubtedly the work of the Armstrongs, I was a little puzzled as to why they were operating in that area when their usual haunts are railway stations or hotel foyers.’
‘They may have just been passing the museum, not intending to commit an offence, and simply took advantage of the situation,’ Lestrade pointed out.
‘Quite so,’ Holmes agreed. ‘Had that been the only suspicious element in the case, I would, like you, have dismissed it as merely an opportunist crime. However, there were two other factors to consider. Firstly, it was on Signor Graziani’s advice that the cameos were chosen for the exhibition, as he himself admitted. Secondly, when I asked him to describe them, he seemed strangely reluctant to give me any information about the frames. Indeed, I had to question him directly. Even then he was dismissive, insisting that two of the frames were not very valuable, being just plain gold, while the third, the one of Giovanni de’ Medici, though possessing some artistic merit, was set with stones of no great value either.
‘What he omitted to mention, and I discovered for myself when I went to the Reading Room of the British Museum and studied the subject of the Vatican collection, was the fact that the frame of the Giovanni cameo was the work of Andrea del Verrocchio, the Renaissance artist and goldsmith,* and a rare example of his genius. For this reason alone, the cameo was considered priceless although, as Signor Graziani himself stated, the stones set in it were described as being merely seed pearls and a garnet.
‘But why had Signor Graziani failed to speak of this connection with Verrocchio? As an expert in Renaissance jewellery, he must have known of it. With this question in mind, I read further into the history of the Medici family and discovered those facts I have already mentioned concerning the disappearance of the Medici ruby.
‘It was then my suspicions began to crystallise. If Signor Graziani had been so reticent about the real importance and value of the Giovanni frame, was there something else about it he was trying to conceal from me? As neither the gold nor the seed pearls had any great intrinsic value in themselves, I was therefore left with the garnet. It then struck me that this so-called garnet could, in fact, be the Medici ruby.
‘Once I had come to that conclusion, my suspicions regarding the Armstrongs’ presence outside the British Museum had a logical explanation. They were there as part of a conspiracy, set up here in London by Gimble, who had hired the Armstrongs to commit the theft, but organised by Signor Graziani in Rome. The plan was to steal the cameos, remove the ruby and replace it with a garnet before selling them back to the Vatican. As stealing the cameos from the hotel would have been difficult, it was decided the theft would have to take place when Signor Graziani took them to the British Museum.
‘As for Signor Graziani’s acquaintance with Gimble, I suggest Graziani heard of him when he was in London, attending one of the sales at Sotheby’s or Christie’s. Although the jewellery trade is international, it is limited to a comparatively few specialists, some of whom, like Gimble, are prepared to deal with stolen gems. Having acquired Gimble’s name and address, Graziani wrote to him, enclosing his card. The conspiracy was then set up between them.
‘I suggest, Lestrade, that when you question the four of them, you put my theory to them. I am convinced that they will admit its truth.’
In the event, Holmes’ speculations were proved correct. When the trial came to court, all of them pleaded guilty not only to the charges of theft and the receipt of stolen property but also to conspiracy to rob. They were sentenced to varying terms of imprisonment, the Armstrongs receiving the shortest as their part in the plot was of less importance while Signor Graziani, who had organised the conspiracy, received five years. Gimble, however, was given the longest term for, as Holmes had predicted, when Lestrade searched his safe, he found other pieces of stolen jewellery, including the Countess of Cleveland’s pearl earrings and the Honourable Mrs Ponsonby Foulke’s emerald necklace.
Because of the guilty pleas, neither Holmes nor I was required to give evidence at the trial and therefore the part he had played in the investigation was not widely publicised, as he himself preferred. In consequence, Lestrade gained all the credit for its successful outcome.
But he was accorded a personal letter of thanks from His Holiness the Pope which, at the time of my writing this account, he still has in his possession.*
As my readers will be aware, not long after the conclusion of this case, Holmes became associated with the Baskerville inquiry, in which I played a not insignificant role.†
For this reason, it was not until much later that I had the leisure to look out my notes on the Vatican cameo inquiry and to expand them into this full-length narrative. By that time, however, interest in the case, accounts of which had been widely reported in the press, had died down and, rather than bring it again to public notice and perhaps cause the Vatican further embarrassment, I have decided not to publish this chronicle* but to deposit it among my other private papers at my bank, Cox and Co. of Charing Cross.
* The Baskerville inquiry has been assigned to various years between 1886 and 1900. However, from the internal evidence, the year 1889 seems the most likely. In his account of the case, Dr John H. Watson reports Mr Sherlock Holmes as saying that, although he was aware at the time of newspaper articles reporting the death of Sir Charles Baskerville, he was ‘so exceedingly preoccupied’ with the affair of the Vatican cameos that he paid little attention to them. Dr John F. Watson.
* The Pope at this date was Leo XIII (1810-1903), whose original name was Vincenzo Gioacchino Pecci. He reigned as Pope from 1878 to 1903. Dr John F. Watson.
† The Medicis, an immensely rich and powerful family, ruled Florence and later Tuscany from 1434 to 1737. They made their money as bankers and also as silk and cloth merchants. They married into several European royal families, in particular the French. Four members of the family became Popes: Leo X, Clement VII, Pius IV and Leo XL Dr John F. Watson.
* Lorenzo de’ Medici, known as the Magnificent (1449-1492), was virtual ruler of the republic of Florence. A statesman, scholar and connoisseur of art, he was patron of several Renaissance artists including Botticelli and Michelangelo.
Pietro de’ Medici (1472-1503), known as II Sfortunato, the Unfortunate, was Lorenzo’s eldest son. He was expelled from Florence in 1494 and died in exile in southern Italy, having failed to reinstate himself in Florence.
Giuliano de’ Medici (1479-1516) ruled Florence from 1512 to 1513 after his father’s death. He was a cardinal and, after his brother was made Pope, joined him in Rome.
Giovanni de’ Medici (1475-1521) was Lorenzo’s second son. He later became Pope Leo X. He was the most extravagant of the Renaissance Popes, spending much of the papal wealth. In 1521, he excommunicated Martin Luther. Dr John F. Watson
† J. Neil Gibson, the American millionaire, stayed at this hotel when on a visit to London. It was also where Mr Sherlock Holmes arranged to meet his agent, Martha, after the unmasking of the German spy, Von Bork. Vide: ‘The Problem of Thor Bridge’ and ‘The Adventure of the Final Problem’. Dr John F. Watson.
* ‘A Study in Scarlet,’ the first of Dr Watson’s accounts to be
published, appeared in Beeton’s Christmas annual in 1887. Dr John F. Watson.
† The soda water would have been supplied by a gasogene, an apparatus consisting of two glass globes which produced soda or aerated water by a chemical process. There are several references to it in the canon. Vide: ‘A Scandal in Bohemia’ and ‘The Adventure of the Mazarin Stone’. Dr John F. Watson.
* A ‘drum’ is a slang term for a building, such as a house or shop. Dr John F. Watson.
† One of Mr Sherlock Holmes’ interests was boxing, a sport he took part in while at college. There are several references to his skill as a boxer within the canon. Vide among others: ‘The Five Orange Pips’ and ‘The Sign of Four’. Dr John F. Watson.
* ‘Dukes’ is a slang term for ‘fists’. Dr John F. Watson.
* See footnote to page 53.
* Mr Sherlock Holmes used a straight left blow to knock out Mr Woodley, a ‘slogging ruffian,’ who attacked him during his inquiries into the case involving the solitary cyclist. Dr John F. Watson.
* Mr Sherlock Holmes makes this comment in ‘A Study in Scarlet’. Dr John F. Watson.
* There are several references in the canon to Mr Sherlock Holmes’ love of the dramatic, among them his own admission that he could not resist a dramatic situation. Vide: ‘The Adventure of the Mazarin Stone’. Dr John F. Watson.
* The French under Charles VIII invaded Italy in September 1494. Dr John F. Watson.
* Andrea del Verrocchio (1435-1488) was a goldsmith, sculptor and painter. Leonardo da Vinci was one of his pupils. The Medicis, who were his patrons, appointed him curator of antiquities in their palace in Florence. As well as supplying the family with paintings and sculptures, he also designed costumes and decorated armour for their pageants. Among his works are a terracotta bust of Giuliano de’ Medici and the magnificent bronze and porphyry tomb of Pietro and Giovanni de’ Medici in which Lorenzo and Giuliano were also later buried. Dr John F. Watson.
* In 1895, Mr Sherlock Holmes was asked by the same Pope, Leo XIII, to investigate the sudden death of Cardinal Tosca, a case of which Dr John H. Watson has left no written account. Vide: ‘The Adventure of Black Peter’. Dr John F. Watson.
