Mr. Justice CROGIE, summing up, began dead against the prisoner.  Reviewing the evidence, he pointed out that plausible hypotheses neatly dove-tailed did not necessarily weaken one another, the fitting so well together of the whole rather making for the truth of the parts.  Besides, the case for the prosecution was as far from being all hypothesis as the case for the defence was from excluding hypotheses.  The key, the letter, the reluctance to produce the letter, the heated interview with Constant, the misstatement about the prisoner’s destination, the flight to Liverpool, the false tale about searching for a “him,” the denunciations of Constant, all these were facts.  On the other hand, there were various lacunae and hypotheses in the case for the defence.  Even conceding the somewhat dubious alibi afforded by the prisoner’s presence at Euston at 5.25 A.M., there was no attempt to account for his movements between that and 7.15 A.M.  It was as possible that he returned to Bow as that he lingered about Euston.  There was nothing in the medical evidence to make his guilt impossible.  Nor was there anything inherently impossible in Constant’s yielding to the sudden temptation of a beautiful girl, nor in a working girl deeming herself deserted, temporarily succumbing to the fascinations of a gentleman and regretting it bitterly afterwards.  What had become of the girl was a mystery.  Hers might have been one of those nameless corpses which the tide swirls up on slimy river banks.  The jury must remember, too, that the relation might not have actually passed into dishonour, it might have been just grave enough to smite the girl’s conscience, and to induce her to behave as she had done.  It was enough that her letter should have excited the jealousy of the prisoner.  There was one other point which he would like to impress on the jury, and which the counsel for the prosecution had not sufficiently insisted upon.  This was that the prisoner’s guiltiness was the only plausible solution that had ever been advanced of the Bow Mystery.  The medical evidence agreed that Mr. Constant did not die by his own hand.  Some one must therefore have murdered him.  The number of people who could have had any possible reason or opportunity to murder him was extremely small.  The prisoner had both reason and opportunity.  By what logicians called the method of exclusion, suspicion would attach to him on even slight evidence.  The actual evidence was strong and plausible, and now that Mr. Wimp’s ingenious theory had enabled them to understand how the door could have been apparently locked and bolted from within, the last difficulty and the last argument for suicide had been removed.  The prisoner’s guilt was as clear as circumstantial evidence could make it.  If they let him go free, the Bow Mystery might henceforward be placed among the archives of unavenged assassinations.  Having thus well-nigh hung the prisoner, the judge wound up by insisting on the high probability of the story for the defence, though that, too, was dependent in important details upon the prisoner’s mere private statements to his counsel.  The jury, being by this time sufficiently muddled by his impartiality, were dismissed, with the exhortation to allow due weight to every fact and probability in determining their righteous verdict.