described. At some schools the lecturer on this subject is appointed
apparently for the reason that he lacks the qualifications to lecture on
any other. But with us it was very different: John Thorndyke was not
only an enthusiast, a man of profound learning and great reputation, but
he was an exceptional teacher, lively and fascinating in style and of
endless resources. Every remarkable case that had ever been recorded he
appeared to have at his fingers' ends; every fact--chemical, physical,
biological, or even historical--that could in any way be twisted into a
medico-legal significance, was pressed into his service; and his own
varied and curious experiences seemed as inexhaustible as the widow's
cruse. One of his favourite devices for giving life and interest to a
rather dry subject was that of analysing and commenting upon
contemporary cases as reported in the papers (always, of course, with a
due regard to the legal and social proprieties); and it was in this way
that I first became introduced to the astonishing series of events that
was destined to exercise so great an influence on my own life.

The lecture which had just been concluded had dealt with the rather
unsatisfactory subject of survivorship. Most of the students had left
the theatre, and the remainder had gathered round the lecturer's table
to listen to the informal comments that Dr. Thorndyke was wont to
deliver on these occasions in an easy, conversational manner, leaning
against the edge of the table and apparently addressing his remarks to a
stick of blackboard chalk that he held in his fingers.

"The problem of survivorship," he was saying, in reply to a question put
by one of the students, "ordinarily occurs in cases where the bodies of
the parties are producible, or where, at any rate, the occurrence of
death and its approximate time are actually known. But an analogous
difficulty may arise in a case where the body of one of the parties is