deposited it in a place of perfect safety--such as, with or without
lenses, the extensive grounds of the manor-house would certainly have
afforded--his more reasonable _rôle_ would have been that of
unconscious _nonchalance_, rather than of agonised interest. But, in
fact, he supposed the owner of the stone to be himself seeking a secure
hiding-place for it, and is resolved at all costs on knowing the
secret. And again in the vaults beneath the house Sir Jocelin reports
that Ul-Jabal "holds the lantern near the ground, with his head bent
down": can anything be better descriptive of the attitude of _search_?
Yet each is so sure that the other possesses the gem, that neither is
able to suspect that both are seekers.

'But, after all, there is far better evidence of the non-possession of
the stone by the Persian than all this--and that is the murder of the
baronet, for I can almost promise you that our messenger will return in
a few minutes. Now, it seems to me that Ul-Jabal was not really
murderous, averse rather to murder; thus the baronet is often in his
power, swoons in his arms, lies under the influence of narcotics in
semi-sleep while the Persian is in his room, and yet no injury is done
him. Still, when the clear necessity to murder--the clear means of
gaining the stone--presents itself to Ul-Jabal, he does not hesitate a
moment--indeed, he has already made elaborate preparations for that
very necessity. And when was it that this necessity presented itself?
It was when the baronet put the false stone in the pocket of a loose
gown for the purpose of confronting the Persian with it. But what kind
of pocket? I think you will agree with me, that male garments,
admitting of the designation "gown," have usually only outer
pockets--large, square pockets, simply sewed on to the outside of the
robe. But a stone of that size _must_ have made such a pocket bulge
outwards. Ul-Jabal must have noticed it. Never before has he been