Minute Mysteries

The solution of criminal mysteries constitutes one of the most absorbing, possibly the most intriguing forms of mental activity existent. It calls for something more than mere cold intelligence and reasoning ability, requiring in addition native perception, intuition, and a natural understanding of human behavior under stress of emotion and passion. Furthermore, some knowledge of pathological or abnormal behaviorism is a requisite.

Mr. Ripley’s excellently thought-out series of mysteries might be said to represent a very adequate cross-section of the problems perennially confronting the law-enforcers and official crime-solvers of the nation. The points of evidence are cleverly assembled and the _nuances_ of incrimination are very subtly shaded.

It would be well for the reader interested in successfully solving these problems to endeavor to think, not as a detective, but as the criminal in the case would think, in order to arrive at a correct solution. I have found that to deal adequately with the criminal after conviction, and while in confinement, it is necessary to understand his personal problems. To accomplish this, one must first think as does the criminal, discover the sequent conclusions upon which he based his anti-social activities, and thereupon make use of these findings to assist him toward rehabilitation.

In this novel challenge to amateur criminologists, who suffer from a dearth of laboratory specimens upon which to experiment, Mr. Ripley offers an excellent opportunity—that of examining and forming conclusions upon the more elemental, vital, and dramatic aspects of various typical criminal situations, without the drawback of fantasy and concocted sordidness, which, for the practical criminologist, takes the glamour and color out of this thing called—Crime.

Chief Inspector Kelley, that grizzled veteran of the Detective Bureau, was talking to his nephew, Jim Barry, who had indicated a desire to enter the uncrowded field of criminology.

‘The average policeman,’ he said, ‘looks upon the lay criminologist in much the same manner as the professional in any field regards the amateur. Generally speaking, that attitude is justified.