However Roylott’s past is much darker than Mary Maloney. We find out, “Last week he hurled the local butcher over a parapet into a stream”, this shows his anger can’t be controlled. He met his wife Mrs Stoner in India, since he went there he has been keeping Indian pets, such as a Baboon, Snake and a Wild Cat. He was described as, “A man of immense strength, absolutely uncontrollable in his anger”. When he stormed into Sherlock Holmes’ office in a state of anger he bent a fire poker, “He stepped swiftly forward, seized the poker, and bent it into a curve with his huge brown hands”. His only known friends were the gypsies that he let roam in the acres of land outside the Stoke Moran House. This could cause some suspicion, because why would he want to be friends with gypsies. He may have sealed a deal with them to do something. But this is left untold why they are living in his land around the house.
Mary Maloney’s way of hiding the evidence is far more effective than Roylott’s way of hiding the evidence, although I don’t think the idea she had was premeditated; it was a good idea considering the predicament she was in.
“She carried the meat to the kitchen, placed it upon a pan, turned the oven up high, and shoved it inside”. Mary did that after she had hit Patrick over the head with it. As soon as she put the meat in the oven she began to worry, this is when she began trying to make herself an alibi. She decided to go to the greengrocer’s as fast as she could. “She rehearsed it several times more”, this was when she was rehearsing what to say to “Sam” the greengrocer. When she was at the greengrocers she asked Sam what was best for pudding, he offered her a cheesecake and when receiving it said “Perfect, she said. He loves that”. She is doing this to put on a act to Sam to make him feel that she is giving him what is best for him and generally being a loving wife. When she left the greengrocer, “She put on her brightest smile and said, thank you Sam. Goodnight”. She does all these little things to put on a act to others that everything is fine. She is actually trying to pretend he is still alive even though he is already dead. She does this to make herself feel better and make sure she doesn’t get caught out when the police begin questioning her.
Roylott’s way of concealing evidence is much more thorough, but he still leaves small clues, and for a detective as good as Sherlock Holmes these clues are enough for him to come to a quick conclusion on what’s going on. “Two days ago some repairs were started in the west wing of the building, and my bedroom wall has been pierced”. This was Roylott’s clever way of getting Helen out of her room and into the room that her sister had previously died in. This gets her into the room Roylott wants her in, but there should be no suspicion, as it is just works being carried out on the house. But Helen doesn’t feel safe and seeks assurance in the form of Holmes. Roylott’s covering up of the evidence in some ways is to over elaborate, this is because a trained professional such as Holme’s will be able to pick up these pieces of evidence which have been covered up to well.
In “Lamb To The Slaughter”, the detectives were oblivious to what was happening around them. They took what they knew of Mary already and presumed that she wouldn’t have done it. They did however go to the grocer and ask him what she was acting like, the detective cam back saying, “Acted quite normal…….Very cheerful…….Wanted to give him a good supper….Peas…….Cheesecake……..Impossible that she….” Straight away the police rule out Mary as the murderer. They look through the house looking for a weapon. Using the motive, “Get the weapon, and you’ve go the man”, these detectives were looking for a weapon more than anything, they weren’t sending out search parties trying to catch the man, they are very casual about it. The word man is very important, this is because the police could never see a woman committing this crime of death back in that time. As women would always do their best for their husbands and never betray them, women could be seen to be reliant on their husbands for money. They came to the conclusion a large metal object was used, they suggested “A big spanner”, This shows more male patriarchy, as a spanner is a tool that a man uses, so the detectives have decided that they are looking for a spanner and maybe even a man.
However Sherlock Holmes’ investigating is far more comprehensive, he notices every weird thing in the room that he is assessing. “They seem to have been of most interesting character – dummy bell-ropes and ventilators that do not ventilate”. Holmes has noticed everything and has in his mind what is the motive behind these minor dysfunctions. Also earlier in the story he notices that Helen has come in by horse and cart as he notices the splashes of mud on her coat and glove and her train ticket in her pocket. This shows she is very observant.
If Holmes were investigating Patrick Maloney’s murder the outcome of the story may have been very different. He is much more thorough than the other detectives in the in the story, he would not have taken Mary as a nice woman, he would suspect everyone.
Historical and social issues are very important in the two stories because at different time the punishment for murder may have been death by hanging or being shot. In Victorian times the murderer would have to be found, even if they found the wrong person they
In “Lamb To The Slaughter”, the motive is very strange, Roald Dahl leaves us on a loose end, this is good though as it adds to the enigma in the story. “Listen, he said, I’ve got something to tell you.” This quote along with this one “This is going to be a bit of a shock to you, I’m afraid.” Makes the reader interested into what this shocking thing is. “I hope you won’t blame me too much”, Patrick says, this could mean that Patrick is in trouble, or something close to their family has happened, also we could believe that he is having a affair. But Dahl with never let the secret of what Patrick told Mary out in his narrative.
“Each daughter can claim an income of £250, in case of marriage.” This shows, being the man Roylott is he would do anything for that money, and we can see that all he wants is money, I think the money may calm his anger and make him happier. The money was left from Roylott’s deceased wife who left just under £1,100. The money would make him happier because he could kill off Julie and Helen and have a large amount of money.
*The fact that Mary is a woman, I think plays a huge role in who gets away with the crime, “For this was her sixth month with child”, calm relaxed lady, looking forward to child with her husband, “She knew he didn’t want to speak much until the first drink was finished”, Mary’s acknowledging Patrick and showing her respect for he had been at work and had been working hard. Also her alibi from the Greengrocer backs her up, and also the facts that the policemen knew her as a kind woman, who is harmless and clearly adores Patrick. They seem to put her out of the murder straight away, and decide to go looking for a metal spanner, this shows male patriarchy again as the spanner is used by a man.
