☕ The mystery begins with an anonymous letter that Masters received, bearing the message that "There will be ten teacups at number 4, Berwick Terrace, W.8, on Wednesday, July 31st, at 5 p.m. Precisely. The presence of the Metropolitan Police is respectfully requested." Masters' immediate action is to consult Sir Henry Merrivale (or HM, as people usually call him), because the letter reminded Masters of another similar letter the Scotland Yard had received two years previously, which ended on an unsolved locked-room murder mystery. The police had then found ten teacups (empty) laid on the table near the body. This time, though, Masters is more prepared; he instructed his men to watch the house (number 4, Berwick Terrace, which was an empty house on-sale), and Sergeant Pollard to get the key from the agent, and hide himself inside. Despite of these precautions, Vance Keating was dead after having been shot twice, and ten teacups were found near his body, although the police never saw any other person entering the house.
☕ The most interesting part of a locked-room mystery is always the technicality of the murder. How was it performed while there's no one possibly inside the room? But here, the police were also struck by the similarity of it with the previous ten teacups mystery. Were the two connected, or even committed by the same murderer? One thing that they could connect was that both the houses were belonged to the same person. And this man, along with his wife, are the victim's friends. They are the suspects, along with three other friends. What puzzled HM and Masters at the early stages, was why had the murderer not brought the ten teacups with him when he left the place? Were they meant to be a symbol, perhaps? Was there even a ten-teacups-secret society perhaps? What ensued from these, were a combination of theories, interviews, and some actions in the end - the theories (presented by HM) are rather the dominant part compared to the rest.
☕ All in all, this was a solid intricate and impossible locked-room murder mystery. The one which, when you passed one solution, and then the second one, you would forget the previous one. I could remember the murderer, all right. Though I have expected Dickson Carr had given the murderer's more "stage" to elaborate on their motive, rather than reading HM's long-stretch of denouement - a dry explanation that made you a bit sleepy. And my problem with these impossible locked-room mysteries is the technicality. I couldn't possibly know, for instance, whether if you pointed a particular type of gun to a particular angle, it would produce a shot at a certain point, could I? No, it is much simpler to follow the technicality of how human psychology works than these weapons and what not. Nonetheless, this had been a quite entertaining one, though the solution was not what I have expected.
Rating: ⭐⭐⭐⭐
Read for:
Cloak and Dagger Reading Challenge 2026
