slowly up Powlett Street, while the cab drove back to town. Here all
clue ends, but there can be no doubt in the minds of our readers as to
the identity of the man in the light coat who got out of Royston's cab
on the St. Kilda Road, with the one who entered the other cab and
alighted therefrom at Powlett Street. There could have been no
struggle, as had any taken place the cabman, Royston, surely would have
heard the noise. The supposition is, therefore, that the deceased was
too drunk to make any resistance, and that the other, watching his
opportunity, placed the handkerchief saturated with chloroform over the
mouth of his victim. Then after perhaps a few ineffectual struggles the
latter would succumb to the effects of his inhalation. The man in the
light coat, judging from his conduct before getting into the cab,
appears to have known the deceased, though the circumstance of
his walking away on recognition, and returning again, shows that his
attitude towards the deceased was not altogether a friendly one.

"The difficulty is where to start from in the search after the author
of what appears to be a deliberate murder, as the deceased seems to be
unknown, and his presumed murderer has escaped. But it is impossible
that the body can remain long without being identified by someone, as
though Melbourne is a large city, yet it is neither Paris nor London,
where a man can disappear in a crowd and never be heard of again. The
first thing to be done is to establish the identity of the deceased,
and then, no doubt, a clue will be obtained leading to the detection of
the man in the light coat who appears to have been the perpetrator of
the crime. It is of the utmost importance that the mystery in which the
crime is shrouded should be cleared up, not only in the interests of
justice, but also in those of the public--taking place as it did in a
public conveyance, and in the public street. To think that the author
of such a crime is at present at large, walking in our midst, and