DOGS AND SHERLOCK HOLMES
“It was a giant dog, as large as a calf, tawny tinted, with hanging jowl, black muzzle, and huge projecting bones.”
The Adventure of the Copper Beeches
To those interested in animals, it is gratifying to know that two of the most popular heroes of detective fiction—Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson—both loved dogs. They did not like them in a sickly, sentimental sense, but rather with a genuine, masculine affection. They regarded them as dogs, not as human beings, and emphasized and respected their canine personalities. I am sure every self-respecting dog would want to be so regarded.
Frequent mention of dogs is found in the tales. In point of fact, the grisly, spectral hound portrayed in The Hound of the Baskervilles has become a byword not only among readers of detective fiction but also with people in general. Various kinds of dogs are portrayed: large dogs, small dogs, good ones and bad ones. In one instance, a lovable, curly-haired spaniel is depicted; in another, a plodding bloodhound; and in still another, a fiendish dog.
One Sunday evening, in early September, in the year 1903, Sherlock Holmes summarily sent for Dr. Watson. The friendly doctor, not wishing to disappoint his friend, set out for Baker Street, and entered the old apartment, which for a number of years had also been his home. Holmes waved him to a chair, and after a considerable period of silence remarked that he was seriously considering writing a monograph on the use of dogs in the work of a detective (The Adventure of the Creeping Man).
Dr. Watson did not think much of the idea, and pointed out that this field had been pretty thoroughly explored. Holmes would not agree. He explained that he wished to approach the subject from a somewhat different angle than had previously been done. He argued that a dog reflected a family’s life. If the household were a happy one, the dog would be friendly and frisky; conversely, if the family were gloomy, the dog would appear sad. He insisted further that dangerous and unpleasant dogs are owned by dangerous and unpleasant people.
Holmes bolstered his argument by giving as an illustration the case on which he was presently working. He believed that the changed behavior of a wolfhound toward his master might turn out to be an important clue in solving the mystery. This eventually proved to be true, as will be described later. Although we may congratulate Holmes on his keen analysis, and on his pungent manner of presenting the argument, there surely must be many exceptions which come to the minds of us all. We have witnessed nice people who harbor vicious dogs, and the opposite as well. We will not quibble, but agree for the main part that Holmes was probably right.
Hounds are frequently mentioned. In The Sign of the Four, Watson, describing Holmes in action, writes: “So swift, silent, and furtive were his movements, like those of a trained bloodhound picking out a scent.” Again, in A Study in Scarlet, we see: “As I watched him I was irresistibly reminded of a pure-blooded, well-trained foxhound, as it dashes backward and forward through the covert, whining in its eagerness, until it comes across the lost scent.” In The Red-Haired League, Jones of Scotland Yard, speaking to his colleague Wilson, comments: “Our friend Holmes here is a wonderful man for starting a chase. All he wants is an old dog to help him in the running down.” Other habits of hounds may be found in The Adventure of the Devil’s Foot and The Adventure of the Bruce-Partington Plans. Numerically, hounds are mentioned more frequently in the tales than any other kind of dog, and in several instances hounds actually track down the criminal.
It will be recalled that in The Sign of the Four the dependable old hound Tobey follows a creosote scent. In The Adventure of the Missing Three-Quarter, faithful old Pompey follows a carriage which had had aniseed squirted upon the wheel by Holmes. On this occasion, Holmes remarks to Watson that a draghound would follow aniseed indefinitely. Holmes takes almost a human interest in Pompey. The detective formally introduces the dog to Dr. Watson and speaks highly of the draghound’s tracking ability. However, he did not trust all dogs, for we find him saying to Watson that some dogs bite the hand that feeds them (The Adventure of the Three Gables).
Two especially fiendish dogs are portrayed in the tales: Carlo the mastiff, in The Adventure of the Copper Beeches; and the spectral hound, in The Hound of the Baskervilles. In the former, the despicable Rucastle, the master of Carlo, said: “We feed him once a day, and not too much then, so that he is always as keen as mustard.... God help the trespasser whom he lays his fangs upon!” Miss Violet Hunter, the heroine of the story, saw this beast one night: “It was a giant dog, as large as a calf, tawny tinted, with hanging jowl, black muzzle, and huge projecting bones.” Watson vividly describes the attack Carlo finally made on his master:
There was the huge famished brute, its black muzzle buried in Rucastle’s throat, while he writhed and screamed upon the ground. Running up, I blew its brains out, and it fell over with its keen white teeth still meeting in the creases of his neck.
In The Hound of the Baskervilles, we find a hound which would frighten the Evil One himself. Evidently, this huge beast was a mongrel: “It was not a pure bloodhound and it was not a pure mastiff; but it appeared to be a combination of the two—gaunt, savage, and as large as a small lioness.” Watson paints this animated picture:
A hound it was, an enormous coal-black hound, but not such a hound as mortal eyes have ever seen. Fire burst from its open mouth, its eyes glowed with a smouldering glare, its muzzle and hackles and dewlap were outlined in flickering flame.
While this hound was worrying the throat of Sir Henry Baskerville, Holmes emptied five barrels of his revolver into the creature’s flank. “With a last howl of agony and a vicious snap in the air, it rolled upon its back, four feet pawing furiously, and then fell limp upon its side.”
Other breeds are not ignored. Holmes, who had considerable professional jealousy, would not admit that Jones of Scotland Yard had the imagination a detective should have, or that he had a keen intellect, but does pay him this fine compliment: “He is as brave as a bulldog....” (The Red-Haired League.) A reference is made to rat terriers in The Adventure of the Crooked Man. Spaniels also are mentioned on at least two occasions. Dr. Mortimer, in the story of The Hound of the Baskervilles, owns a curly-haired spaniel of which he is extremely fond. Unfortunately, this lovable dog comes to grief on the moor. In The Adventure of Shoscombe Old Place, a spaniel plays an important part in solving the mystery. The so-called “Shoscombe spaniels” were famous throughout England, and, according to Holmes, were frequently mentioned at dog shows. He successfully uses one of these, a pet spaniel, to establish the fact that the person in the carriage is not the dog’s mistress. Holmes was satisfied that the spaniel was right, and insisted that dogs do not make mistakes in such cases.
Another instance can be cited where the behavior of a dog helped Sherlock Holmes solve a perplexing problem. In talking to Watson, he laid great stress on the fact that Professor Presbury’s heretofore friendly wolfhound Roy had turned on his master and tried to attack him. This extraordinary episode played an important part in the final solution of the mystery (The Adventure of the Creeping Man). The facts in the case were these: Professor Presbury, a distinguished physiologist, had fallen madly in love with a very young girl, and, in an effort to regain his lost youth, had periodically been taking hypodermic injections of serum obtained from langurs. According to the story, the monkey serum produced apelike qualities in Professor Presbury. Following the injections, the professor would deliberately and maliciously tease his wolfhound until one night the hound slipped his collar and viciously attacked his master. He buried his muzzle in his master’s throat; and if timely aid had not come, Presbury would have been killed. As Holmes remarked to Watson, the hound thought he was attacking the monkey and not the professor.
Since Holmes was a detective, and not a professional biologist, he seldom found it necessary to use dogs for experimental purposes. Once, however, he did not hesitate to try out the effects of a poison drug, curare, on an old dog which was in extremis. It will be recalled that this poison caused instant death (A Study in Scarlet). While not a biological scientist—as we understand the word today—Holmes nevertheless was scientifically minded, and it is certain that had the need arisen to obtain evidence which would have helped mankind he would not have hesitated to experiment on a normal, healthy dog. He was a practical man, in the fullest sense of the word, and had, as Watson said, “... an admirably balanced mind” (A Scandal in Bohemia).
It is true that both Sherlock Holmes and Dr. Watson grieved when Dr. Mortimer’s pet curly-haired spaniel met its fate on the moor, and they both loved Tobey, the faithful old bloodhound who had aided them in The Sign of the Four. However, they did not hesitate to shoot five bullets into the flank of the hound of the Baskervilles when he was at the throat of Sir Henry, or to blow out the brains of Carlo the mastiff when he sank his teeth into the fat neck of the villainous Rucastle. Holmes and Watson were not sentimentalists, but virile, vigorous men of action—the type of men dogs like.
Finally, Dr. Watson pays a tribute to dogs in general in The Adventure of the Lion’s Mane. In this story, after McPherson died from his encounter with the Lion’s Mane (Cyanea capillata), his pet Airedale eventually met a similar fate. According to Sherlock Holmes himself, the terrier did not eat for a week following his master’s death, and finally followed the trail of his dead master. He was found dead on the edge of the same pool where his master had lost his life. It is true that the terrier did not have the opportunity of saving his master’s life—but no doubt he would have, had it been possible. The story portrays vividly the bond of companionship between a man and his dog, for in this instance the dog apparently gave his life searching for his master. Dr. Watson pays tribute to such devotion in the words of Sherlock Holmes: “That the dog should die was after the beautiful, faithful nature of dogs.” This is a tribute that can be endorsed by all, but especially by biologists, who are so deeply indebted to the dog for the aid it has given in the search for means to alleviate the pain and suffering of mankind. I am certain that every biologist who professes to be a Christian gentleman would say “Amen” to Dr. Watson’s beautiful tribute to an animal which would die so that mankind might live.