WAS SHERLOCK HOLMES A CRIMINAL? BY A Roy Mukherjee PART 5

Lastly, we come to Prof. Moriarty, the arch-enemy of Sherlock Holmes. In the entire narration of the adventures of Sherlock Holmes, Moriarty was mentioned in only three of them, “Valley of Fear”, “The Final Problem” and “Empty House”. If we carefully go through the above three stories, we come to the conclusion that the “Valley of Fear” was a case earlier to “Final Problem” and “Empty House”. It was in the story of the Birlstone tragedy (Valley of Fear) where Prof. Moriarty was introduced for the first time. In Holmes’ own words, Moriarty “was a man of good birth and excellent education, endowed by nature with phenomenal mathematical faculty”. He had a most brilliant career as a mathematical genius. But, according to Holmes, behind the façade of this genius of a man was hidden a most dubious criminal, who was the king-pin of the British underworld. (Valley of Fear). In this story we find that Holmes got a coded message from one Mr. Porlock, who worked for Moriarty and informed Holmes of some danger at Birlstone House. It was later learnt from the Scotland Yard detective that Mr. Douglas of Birlstone Manor House was horribly murdered that morning. We find that Holmes immediately on getting the news started a vocal campaign against Moriarty and tried to impress upon the police detective that Moriarty was connected with the crime. In the process, he disclosed so many information concerning Moriarty, such as, his legal income, the twenty banking accounts he maintained, that the bulk of his fortune was kept in foreign countries and about his illegal activities, income and wealth. It may please be noted at this stage that there was nothing against Prof. Moriarty in police records till then. On enquiry, he confessed that Porlock, who sent him the coded message, was a nom-de-plume and was not known to him. But Holmes used to pay him money for information through the Camberwell Post Office. In fact, before “Valley of Fear”, we do not come across Moriarty or even thereafter, excepting in the “Final Problem”. Sherlock Holmes also did not or could not prove any relation or connection between Prof. Moriarty and any crime, directly or indirectly or in any manner whatsoever. And as it has already been stated, there was nothing against Prof. Moriarty in police records also. The question which obviously comes to the fore is that when there was no case against Moriarty or about his involvement in any crime, why should Holmes collect such detailed information about him ? No case was referred to him either by any of his clients or the police. Why should he implant a mole or an informer in his house ? That Porlock was Holmes’ mole is beyond doubt. Otherwise, he could not send a coded message understandable to both of them. How could Holmes know that Porlock, the person who sent him the coded message, was a nom-de-plume ? The person who kept track of such meticulous details about Moriarty, would not know his informer, is simply unacceptable. He could easily be traced through the Camberwell Post Office. Moreover, Holmes was paying him money for information. How this entire transaction of sending information, nature of information etc. and payment against those could be done without a prior understanding and arrangement between them ? The vital question, however, is that why a private detective should collect information about another citizen when no case was referred to him involving that person? The way Holmes tried to impress the police detective was rather peculiar and vindictive. When the story ends, no connection of Moriarty with the events narrated was found or established. Nor did Holmes could or did establish any connection of the murder to Moriarty. The facts of the case did not even require an investigation in that direction. Why then, Moriarty was so forcefully and out of context, brought up by Holmes even before the murder took place and before the investigation was started at all ? The answer to this question can be traced in the “Final Probem”. It must be remembered that there was nothing against Prof. Moriarty in any records including Police records. ( .. to be continued)