
we began the autopsy. I lifted the sheet from Peters' body with noticeable hesitation. I stared at his face
with amazement. All diabolism had been wiped away. It was serene, unlined--the face of a man who had
died peacefully, with no agony either of body or mind. I lifted his hand, it was limp, the whole body
flaccid, the rigor gone.
It was then, I think, that I first felt full conviction I was dealing with an entirely new, or at least unknown,
agency of death, whether microbic or otherwise. As a rule, rigor does not set in for sixteen to twenty-four
hours, depending upon the condition of the patient before death, temperature and a dozen other things.
Normally, it does not disappear for forty-eight to seventy-two hours. Usually a rapid setting-in of the
stiffening means as rapid a disappearance, and vice versa. Diabetics stiffen quicker than others. A sudden
brain injury, like shooting, is even swifter. In this case, the rigor had begun instantaneously with death,
and must have completed its cycle in the astonishingly short time of less than five hours--for the attendant
told me that he had examined the body about ten o'clock and he had thought that stiffening had not yet
set in. As a matter of fact, it had come and gone.
The results of the autopsy can be told in two sentences. There was no ascertainable reason why Peters
should not be alive. And he was dead!
Later, when Hoskins made his reports, both of these utterly conflicting statements continued to be true.
There was no reason why Peters should be dead. Yet dead he was. If the enigmatic lights we had
observed had anything to do with his death, they left no traces. His organs were perfect, all else as it
should have been; he was, indeed, an extraordinarily healthy specimen. Nor had Hoskins been able to
capture any more of the light-carrying corpuscles after I had left him.
That night I framed a short letter describing briefly the symptoms observed in Peters' case, not dwelling
upon the changes in expression but referring cautiously to "unusual grimaces" and a "look of intense fear."
Braile and I had this manifold and mailed to every physician in Greater New York. I personally attended
to a quiet inquiry to the same effect among the hospitals. The letters asked if the physicians had treated
any patients with similar symptoms, and if so to give particulars, names, addresses, occupations and any
characteristic interest under seal, of course, of professional confidence. I flattered myself that my
reputation was such that none of those who received the questionnaires would think the request actuated
either by idle curiosity or slightest unethical motive.
I received in response seven letters and a personal visit from the writer of one of them. Each letter,
except one, gave me in various degrees of medical conservatism, the information I had asked. After
reading them, there was no question that within six months seven persons of oddly dissimilar
characteristics and stations in life had died as had Peters.
Chronologically, the cases were as follows:
May 25: Ruth Bailey, spinster; fifty years old; moderately wealthy; Social Registerite and best of
reputation; charitable and devoted to children. June 20: Patrick McIlraine; bricklayer; wife and two
children. August 1: Anita Green; child of eleven; parents in moderate circumstances and well educated.
August 15: Steve Standish; acrobat; thirty; wife and three children. August 30: John J. Marshall; banker;
sixty interested in child welfare. September 10: Phineas Dimott; thirty-five; trapeze performer; wife and
small child. October 12: Hortense Darnley; about thirty; no occupation.
Their addresses, except two, were widely scattered throughout the city.
Each of the letters noted the sudden onset of rigor mortis and its rapid passing. Each of them gave the
time of death following the initial seizure as approximately five hours. Five of them referred to the
changing expressions which had so troubled me; in the guarded way they did it I read the bewilderment