excepting in one respect. It has a single abnormal feature. And for that
abnormality there is nothing to account.

"Jeffrey Blackmore made a will. It was a well-drawn will and it
apparently gave full effect to his intentions. Then he revoked that will
and made another. No change had occurred in his circumstances or in his
intentions. The provisions of the new will were believed by him to be
identical with those of the old one. The new will differed from the old
one only in having a defect in the drafting from which the first will
was free, and of which he must have been unaware. Now why did he revoke
the first will and replace it with another which he believed to be
identical in its provisions? There is no answer to that question. It is
an abnormal feature in the case. There must be some explanation of that
abnormality and it is my business to discover it. But the facts in my
possession yield no such explanation. Therefore it is my purpose to
search for new facts which may give me a starting-point for an
investigation."

This exposition of Thorndyke's proposed conduct of the case, reasonable
as it was, did not impress me as very convincing. I found myself coming
back to Marchmont's position, that there was really nothing in dispute.
But other matters claimed our attention at the moment, and it was not
until after dinner that my colleague reverted to the subject.

"How should you like to take a turn round to New Inn this evening?" he
asked.

"I should have thought," said I, "that it would be better to go by
daylight. Those old chambers are not usually very well illuminated."