e been doing his best to save the lives of both. In that
case, had the inquest been on both, the verdict must have been one that
would ascribe Justifiable Homicide to him and Manslaughter to Ibbetson.
For surely if the police-sergeant had been the survivor, and the other
man's body had been found to be that of some inoffensive citizen,
Ibbetson would have been tried for manslaughter. In the end a verdict
was agreed upon of Death by Drowning, which everybody knew as soon as it
was certain that Life was extinct.

Somewhat later Ibbetson was supposed to have taken him for a returned
convict, whose name was variously given, but who had been advertised for
as Thornton, one of his aliases; and in consequence of this discovery
the vigilance of the Police for the apprehension of the missing man,
under this name, was increased and the reward doubled. And this, in
spite of a universal inference that he was dead, and that his body was
flavouring whitebait below bridge. This did not interfere with a belief
on the part of the crew of the patrolling boat--known to Michael--owing
to a popular chant of boys of his own age--as "two blackbeetles and one
water-rat," that his corpse would float up one day near the place of his
disappearance. But their eyes looked for it in vain; and though the
companion with whom he was discussing the burglary to be executed at
Barn Elms was caught _in flagrante delicto_ and sent to Portland Island,
nothing was heard of him or known of his whereabouts.

Michael ended his stay with his great-aunt shortly afterwards, returning
home with a budget of legends founded on his waterside experience. As he
had a reputation for audacious falsehood without foundation, it is no
matter of surprise that the whole story of the water-rat's death and the
inquest were looked upon as exaggerations too outrageous for belief even
by the most credulous. Probably his version of the incidents, owing to
its rich substratum of the marvellous yet true, was much more accurate
than was usual with him when the marvellous depended on his ingenuity to
provide it. It was, however, roundly discredited in his own circle, and
nothing in it could have evoked recognition in Sapps Court even if the
name of the convict had reached the ears that knew it. For it was not
only wrongly reported but was still further distorted by Michael for
purposes of astonishment.

CHAPTER X

OF THE EARLDOM OF ANCESTER, AND ITS EARL'S COUNTESS'S OPINIO