I hope I am not the only one who initially confused this book with the Clifford Witting novel of the same name (which Galileo Publishing have also re-published). The author’s full name was Maitland Cecil Melville Wills (1891-1966). Over a 27-year period (1934-1961) Wills published 26 novels and some of the titles certainly sound intriguing such as Defeat of a Detective, It Pays to Die and Author in Distress.
Synopsis
‘It is slowly and insidiously that evil comes to the cathedral city of Storminster. Old scandals are awakened: there are hints of corruption and worse; the vicar is warned lest he meddle. But meddle he does, for the Reverend Selwyn Seddicombe, unassuming though he may be, is not one to be deterred by threats while a poison pen wreaks havoc amongst his parishioners; still less so when the poison increases in virulence and an unfortunate victim takes her own life. And this is only the beginning-murder follows suicide, the police are called in, and a citizen, well liked and respected finds himself on trial for his life. What is the truth behind these tragic happenings? Who among the citizens of this once quiet old town, could be the author of these outrages? It is Selwyn Seddicombe who, in his own original way, finds the answer to these questions and in doing so keeps the reader fascinated to the end.’
Overall Thoughts
I have read quite a few poison pen mysteries, such as The Moving Finger (1943) by Agatha Christie, Fear Stalks the Village (1932) by Ethel Lina White, Exit Laughing (1954) by Stuart Palmer and Henrietta Clandon’s Good by Stealth (1936). And in some cases (not these ones) there can be anticipation for a slower and more bloodless mystery, which in less experienced hands can be written with a lack of plot direction or impetus. However, I am pleased to say that Midsummer Murder does not fulfil these fears. Things start small, but in a pleasing and sprightly way. The first chapter sees the poison pen writer post a missive under the cover of darkness and we see the consequences of it the following morning when a woman opens it. Unusually it is not about herself, but concerns her husband, and a woman’s name is mentioned. The secret being referred to was an incident at university, culminating in a woman’s suicide. Yet this is not known to the wife, who tries to test him on the name indirectly and for the time being the husband does not come clean. I like how the chapter concludes with the following line: ‘And so the first hint of restraint came between them. The initial success of the virus distilled by an unknown poison pen. There were to be others.’ Poison pen mysteries are not about explosive beginnings and nor should they act as quickly as cyanide. A good poison pen mystery works incrementally. The tension builds as the reader wonders when the first letter recipient will crack and when the letter writer will achieve their first kill. The swiftness of the prose in this opening reflects the efficiency of the poison pen writer.
The narrative then switches to the local bishop and his wife, Mathew and Mabel de Poynton. These two are evidence of Wills’ strong characterisation skills, which are not spared when it comes to more minor characters. It was this, combined with the social and physical setting which made this a really enjoyable book to spend time with. It was a fictional world which I wanted to immerse myself in and unlike a book I read earlier in May, I didn’t feel like I was being pushed into this. The narrative captures the voice of a cathedral city and the social rules it is governed by, with households having their “at home lists” and the exclusion this caused for those who didn’t make the cut. It is interesting seeing the characters respond differently to this, with some wanting to make social occasions more open. Given the types of characters and the cathedral background, the setting did put me in mind of something like Anthony Trollope’s Chronicles of Barsetshire series. So, it was hard for me to remember that Wills’ novel was written in the 1950s, as it felt like a book set much earlier in time, pre-WW2.
The next poison pen letter we are privy to, with its hints of committee corruption, is something of a damp squib, lacking any devastating effects and the division caused by the first letter is soon patched up. The story comments on this: ‘So was the first dose of poison neutralised. But what of the others?’ I liked how this mystery reflects the hit and miss nature of poison pens letters. I think it makes the moment when the poison pen writer finally does draw blood, have all the more impact. Whilst this is all happening the Reverend Sneddicombe weaves his way in and out of the early bit of the story and he becomes ever keener to expose the poison pen letter writer.
Interestingly, the reverend gets a sleuthing compatriot part way through the tale, a local journalist called John Archer, although he is more self-interested in using the case for the profit of his newspaper. John is patronising towards the reverend, thinking to himself at one point that: ‘Little Sneddicombe was all right, of course; a good little chap who did no one any harm; but it was a laugh to think of him as a sleuth.’ Famous last words! As the G. K. Chesterton Father Brown stories show us, it is unwise to underestimate ecclesiastical sleuths… Amateur sleuthing is not for the faint hearted in this mystery, as not only is it bad for your health, but it also means having to do things you don’t want to do, such as awkward conversations.
I enjoyed the rhythm of the story as the author is good at causing sharp changes for good dramatic effect. Things might seem sedate and calm, but the plot goes from a distraught heiress being advised by the reverend to the police responding to a tip off; a gunshot has been fired in public park summer house at night. A body is discovered along with an incriminated prime suspect, who we learn was lured there by a poison pen letter. On the one hand the trial which follows, raises the stacks for the reverend to solve the case. However, on the other hand, the trial takes the reverend off the page, and I did feel like most of the information mentioned was a repetition of facts already known to us.
The solution to this mystery is good, with an interesting reversal, but how the reader and the reverend reach this conclusion is a bit ropey at times. There were perhaps insufficient dots to join it all up and there is one thing the reverend disapproves, which the police should have spotted in the first place. Moreover, the reverend’s attitude to death threats is a bit blasé and I did think that the police might have taken his ideas more seriously sooner, if he had thought to mention them. Nevertheless, I still really enjoyed this book, and it is a shame it was not part of a series, as it is a fictional world I would have liked to return to.
Rating: 4.5/5
Source: Review Copy (Galileo Publishing)
See also: The Puzzle Doctor has also reviewed this title here.