Page:The Master of Mysteries (1912).djvu/436

 whether I ought to explain everything to Van Asten or not."

"Why, I should think he ought to know," said Valeska.

"Why, then, you haven't solved the mystery of the lady's errand?" he asked.

"I confess I haven't."

"Well, then, I'll tell you. It's so ingenious and simple that you'd probably never get it alone. The fact is, that she went down there to erase the date on the will. This she did, and then wrote in the same date,—July 1, 1908. I saw it immediately I cast my eyes on the document. When I saw the broken bottle at the foot of the air-shaft, I suspected that she had thrown away some damaging evidence. When I noticed that spot on the blotter where the ink had been bleached, I was sure of it. The only question, then, was whether Van Asten himself hadn't taken the paper home to tamper with it. But, as the date was right, of course, he couldn't have."

"What was her, or rather Drellmont's, reason for putting in the same date, then?"

"Why, so that when the will was probated they could call attention to the erasure and subsequent rewriting. That would cast suspicion on the whole document and no doubt the first will would be accepted as legal."

"Oh, it was simple, wasn't it? But you didn't tell Van Asten?"

"No, not yet. I want him to offer the will for probate as it is. You see, it is undoubtedly genuine; but if it had been tampered with, he'd never be willing to handle it. I got that from my study of his character.