“No but I observe the second half of the return ticket in the palm of your left glove. You must have started early, and yet you had a good drive in a dog-cart. (Page 152 Murder Mysteries, The Speckled Band)
The return ticket in Helen’s hand when she first arrived and the marks on her hand are a few things he noticed with a small glimpse. Holmes’ predictions are correct and he explains every mystery. What Holmes was doing was extremely dangerous but he was willing to do it, and he wasn’t being paid either, so that truly shows his determination. He had a broad mind and he did not limit his suspicions to a specific person or thing. To go to the point of suspecting a snake is really keeping a broad mind, and his extreme knowledge of why the doctor used the snake was even better, he explained (Page 181 Murder Mysteries, The Speckled Band)
“The idea of using a form of poison which could not possibly be discovered by any chemical test was just a one as would occur to a clever and ruthless man who had an Eastern training.”
He was successful in finding out the murderer (Dr. Roylott). Alternatively the investigation carried out in ‘Lamb to the Slaughter’ was a very unprofessional one. At one period of time a detective at the murder scene Sergeant Jack Noonan drinks whisky (alcoholic drink) during duty time, which is not allowed. The detectives end up eating the evidence, the leg of lamb and not discovering the criminal unlike, ‘The Speckled Band’ where the criminal is discovered and reaps the fruit of his crime.
In both stories the criminals were very intelligent. In the case of ‘The Speckled Band’ the criminal was a qualified doctor, similarly in ‘Lamb to the Slaughter’ Mrs. Mary Maloney was a wife of a detective and knew the situation she was in and the consequences. She managed to fool the detectives with her phoney act. Mr. Maloney was he first victim whereas in ‘The Speckled Band’ Roylott had murdered people before like the butler in India. Dr. Roylott’s crime was very well planned by him having a dummy bell ring and the bed bolted to the floor, so that he snake could crawl down the dummy bell ring and attack its victim. Julia Stoner’s (Dr. Roylott’s Stepdaughter and victim) murder was pre-meditated by Dr. Roylott unlike the murder in ‘Lamb to the Slaughter’, which was a moment of confusion and distress from Mrs. Maloney who was confused and distressed and acted on impulse.
Mrs. Maloney was on top of things and had everything well planned by creating an alibi .She was using her intellect and her phoney acting to make the detectives believe that she was in utmost distress. Unlike Mrs. Maloney, Dr. Roylott was showing his aggression and roughness to try to scare Sherlock Holmes off his back, which didn’t work but simply stimulated Holmes’ desire to solve the case. He was very observant and suspicious towards his stepdaughter’s (Helen) movements like following her when she visited Holmes.
In both stories the victims were defenceless and unaware of the danger they were in, they were also related to the murderer and lived in the same house. In “The Speckled Band” Julia heard whistling noises at night, which was the snake. The murder was pre-meditated and well planed by a number of things; firstly, the dummy bell ring; secondly, the bed bolted to the floor, thirdly the ventilation was leading to the other room; Significantly the main one was the possession of the actual snake and the training of it by the milk. He used Freud and Patulous theory where the snake killed by instinct.
Julia was terrified, her face was blanched with terror, her hands groping for help and her whole figure was swaying to and fro like a drunken person. She fell to the floor with immense pain but still told her sister, about the speckled band. She said chocking on her words, (Page 159 Murder Mysteries, The Speckled Band)
“Oh, my God! Helen! It was the band! The Speckled Band!”
In Julia’s case there was a witness and there were clues, so Sherlock Holmes wasn’t left in complete darkness. On the other hand Patrick Maloney fell simultaneously after the blow leaving the injury on his head the only evidence. He did a shocking crime towards his wife, which was reluctantly sentenced him to death. Unlike Patrick Maloney, Julia had done nothing wrong unless one could call marrying a crime, and died only because of the selfishness of Dr. Roylott.
The themes of both stories were different. In ‘The Speckled Band’ the murder was pre-meditated, well planned by Dr. Roylott having the bed bolted to the floor, the dummy bell ring, the tamed snake and the ventilation, which was coming from the other room. Sherlock Holmes narrated how Dr. Roylott masterminded the murder. Roylott released his well-tamed snake through the ventilator, which was directly over the bed to go and bite the victim. The poisonous snake (the Swamp Adder) will kill its victim instantly. (Page 181/182, Murder Mysteries, The Speckled Band)
It would be a sharp-eyed coroner indeed who could distinguish the two little dark punchers, which would show where the poison fangs had done their work. Then I thought of the whistle.
In ‘Lamb to the Slaughter’ the murder was after Mary Maloney received some shocking news from her husband and ended up killing him out of confusion and immense rage. Could Mary have suspected anything out of the ordinary concerning her husband? Did she plan his murder?
The murder in ‘The Speckled Band’ took place in a mansion in Stoke Moran. The murder was well planed and masterminded. There were iron bars on the window of each room, which provided security from anyone outside. It was an old building, which was passed on by ancestors. There were gipsies living nearby, some of them might have been unreliable and added to the mysterious atmosphere. There was a very eerie setting.
In ‘Lamb to the Slaughter’ it was a normal, average household. Unlike ‘The Speckled Band’ it was a small house or presumably a flat. In both stories the victim was living in the same house as the murderer.
In ‘The Speckled Band’ Dr. Roylott came from an aristocratic background, but in recent family history, four successive heirs were of a dissolute and wasteful disposition, and the family ruin was eventually completed by a gambler. Grimsby Roylott was also a professional doctor.
The Maloney family were of middle class and the husband was a police officer.
The writing of ‘The Speckled Band’ is in very complex and detailed sentences in comparison to ‘Lamb to the Slaughter’, which is simple and easy to read. Dr. Watson who is the co-inspector in ‘The Speckled Band’ narrates the story, whereas in ‘Lamb to the Slaughter’, the story is mostly narrated by the first person but occasionally Mary Maloney (the murderer and the wife of the victim) narrates some parts.
The sentence in ‘The Speckled Band’ is in the older fashion of writing. On the other hand ‘Lamb to the Slaughter’ is written in modern term and straightforward to read.
I would recommend ‘The Speckled Band’ as an original and classical detective story because of the details and mysteries throughout the story. It consists of all the requirements of an outstanding detective and mystery story. Every incident was full of suspense and excitement so much so that I was forced to turn page, after page. The plot is simply irresistible and I believe it will seize the attention of any reader.
‘Lamb to the Slaughter’ is also a brilliant mystery story, but I wouldn’t recommend it for someone who is looking for a nerve racking detective story. It is easy and enjoyable to read. It consists mysteries, a good plot with a touch of humour at the end.
