We cannot suppose him, on the
      night of the fatal Sunday, both innocent himself and incognizant
      of an outrage committed. Yet only under such circumstances is it
      possible to imagine that he would have failed, if alive, in the
      denouncement of the assassins. “And what means are ours, of attaining the truth? We shall find
      these means multiplying and gathering distinctness as we proceed. Let us sift to the bottom this affair of the first elopement. Let
      us know the full history of ‘the officer,’ with his present
      circumstances, and his whereabouts at the precise period of the
      murder. Let us carefully compare with each other the various
      communications sent to the evening paper, in which the object was
      to inculpate a gang. This done, let us compare these
      communications, both as regards style and MS., with those sent to
      the morning paper, at a previous period, and insisting so
      vehemently upon the guilt of Mennais. And, all this done, let us
      again compare these various communications with the known MSS. of
      the officer. Let us endeavor to ascertain, by repeated
      questionings of Madame Deluc and her boys, as well as of the
      omnibus driver, Valence, something more of the personal
      appearance and bearing of the ‘man of dark complexion.’ Queries,
      skilfully directed, will not fail to elicit, from some of these
      parties, information on this particular point (or upon
      others)—information which the parties themselves may not even be
      aware of possessing. And let us now trace the boat picked up by
      the bargeman on the morning of Monday the twenty-third of June,
      and which was removed from the barge-office, without the
      cognizance of the officer in attendance, and without the rudder,
      at some period prior to the discovery of the corpse. With a
      proper caution and perseverance we shall infallibly trace this
      boat; for not only can the bargeman who picked it up identify it,
      but the rudder is at hand. The rudder of a sail-boat would not
      have been abandoned, without inquiry, by one altogether at ease
      in heart. And here let me pause to insinuate a question. There
      was no advertisement of the picking up of this boat. It was
      silently taken to the barge-office, and as silently removed. But
      its owner or employer—how happened he, at so early a period as
      Tuesday morning, to be informed, without the agency of
      advertisement, of the locality of the boat taken up on Monday,
      unless we imagine some connexion with the navy—some personal
      permanent connexion leading to cognizance of its minute in
      interests—its petty local news? “In speaking of the lonely assassin dragging his burden to the
      shore, I have already suggested the probability of his availing
      himself of a boat. Now we are to understand that Marie Rogêt was
      precipitated from a boat. This would naturally have been the
      case. The corpse could not have been trusted to the shallow
      waters of the shore. The peculiar marks on the back and shoulders
      of the victim tell of the bottom ribs of a boat. That the body
      was found without weight is also corroborative of the idea. If
      thrown from the shore a weight would have been attached. We can
      only account for its absence by supposing the murderer to have
      neglected the precaution of supplying himself with it before
      pushing off. In the act of consigning the corpse to the water, he
      would unquestionably have noticed his oversight; but then no
      remedy would have been at hand. Any risk would have been
      preferred to a return to that accursed shore. Having rid himself
      of his ghastly charge, the murderer would have hastened to the
      city. There, at some obscure wharf, he would have leaped on land. But the boat—would he have secured it? He would have been in too
      great haste for such things as securing a boat. Moreover, in
      fastening it to the wharf, he would have felt as if securing
      evidence against himself. His natural thought would have been to
      cast from him, as far as possible, all that had held connection
      with his crime. He would not only have fled from the wharf, but
      he would not have permitted the boat to remain. Assuredly he
      would have cast it adrift. Let us pursue our fancies.—In the
      morning, the wretch is stricken with unutterable horror at
      finding that the boat has been picked up and detained at a
      locality which he is in the daily habit of frequenting —at a
      locality, perhaps, which his duty compels him to frequent. The
      next night, without daring to ask for the rudder, he removes it. Now where is that rudderless boat? Let it be one of our first
      purposes to discover. With the first glimpse we obtain of it, the
      dawn of our success shall begin. This boat shall guide us, with a
      rapidity which will surprise even ourselves, to him who employed
      it in the midnight of the fatal Sabbath. Corroboration will rise
      upon corroboration, and the murderer will be traced.”

      [For reasons which we shall not specify, but which to many
      readers will appear obvious, we have taken the liberty of here
      omitting, from the MSS. placed in our hands, such portion as
      details the following up of the apparently slight clew obtained
      by Dupin. We feel it advisable only to state, in brief, that the
      result desired was brought to pass; and that the Prefect
      fulfilled punctually, although with reluctance, the terms of his
      compact with the Chevalier. Mr. Poe’s article concludes with the
      following words.—Eds. (*23)]

      It will be understood that I speak of coincidences and no more. What I have said above upon this topic must suffice. In my own
      heart there dwells no faith in præter-nature. That Nature and its
      God are two, no man who thinks, will deny. That the latter,
      creating the former, can, at will, control or modify it, is also
      unquestionable. I say “at will;” for the question is of will, and
      not, as the insanity of logic has assumed, of power. It is not
      that the Deity cannot modify his laws, but that we insult him in
      imagining a possible necessity for modification. In their origin
      these laws were fashioned to embrace all contingencies which
      could lie in the Future. With God all is Now. I repeat, then, that I speak of these things only as of
      coincidences. And farther: in what I relate it will be seen that
      between the fate of the unhappy Mary Cecilia Rogers, so far as
      that fate is known, and the fate of one Marie Rogêt up to a
      certain epoch in her history, there has existed a parallel in the
      contemplation of whose wonderful exactitude the reason becomes
      embarrassed. I say all this will be seen.