Eric Ambler - Judgment on Deltchev

She spoke as glibly as a journalist quoting without acknowledgment from an article he has just written. I was not sure whether she was talking for concealment or whether I was being offered an elaborately wrapped hint. Was there perhaps an ugly truth to be known about patriot Deltchev?

‘Your husband has meant a great deal to his people,’ I said carefully.

‘Yes, yes, he has.’ She had carried her tea over to her chair. Now she sat down facing me. ‘They will not give him up easily, no matter what lies are told about him. A cigarette, Herr Foster?’

‘Thank you. I’m sure you are right. Have you heard about today’s court proceedings, madame?’

‘Yes, I have heard about them.’

I lit the cigarette she had given me. ‘Do you consider that the evidence was false in itself or that it was false only in relation to your husband?’

‘Some of his witnesses may be truthful, but their testimonies compose a lie.’

‘May I put a hypothetical question? Supposing that the evidence were all true, that your husband had in fact been involved in this plot, would you have known about it, madame? Would he have confided in you?’

She did not answer immediately. Then: ‘He always confided in me. I should have known.’

‘It would be a dangerous secret to confide to anyone.’

‘If it had existed; yes, very dangerous.’

‘For comparison’s sake, madame, can you tell me if your husband confided in you his intention to make that radio speech about the elections before he made it?’

She sat quite still for several moments, staring out through the window at the bare hills. I almost wondered if she had heard what I had said. She had heard, I knew, and understood too, but her air of preoccupation was very nearly convincing. Then, with a slight puzzled shake of the head as if to banish other thoughts and face the immediate reality, she turned her gentle, intelligent eyes toward me.

‘I am very sorry, Herr Foster,’ she said with a faint, confused smile, ‘I am afraid I was not paying attention. I had other thoughts.’ She put her hand to her forehead as if she had a headache. ‘It was inexcusable.’

It was not badly done; I have known actresses make a worse job of it; but if I wanted to parody a particular style of drawing-room comedy I would have that speech, and the performance that goes with it, well in mind. She must have seen it in dozens of bad plays. Probably she was expecting from me one of the two conventional reactions to it; the guilty (‘Forgive me, you’re tired’) or the aggrieved (‘I’m a busy man and my time is valuable’). However, I felt neither guilty nor aggrieved. I did feel intensely curious.

I repeated the question.

Her lips twitched with annoyance. ‘Herr Foster, what is the point of this question? Please be honest with me.’

‘Certainly. You deny that there is a word of real truth in the evidence put before the court today. I wish to know what value I may put upon that denial. Is it based on knowledge or an emotional conviction? You must see that that is important.’

‘What I see, Herr Foster,’ she said coldly, ‘is that this trial is beginning to have the effect intended by the Propaganda Ministry.’

I felt myself flush with anger. By the light of the setting sun she did not see that, but I did not reply and after a moment she began to apologize. I must forgive her; she was tired and overwrought; she had not slept for many nights; she was distracted with worry. I listened carefully. What she was saying was all quite reasonable and genuine, but it was also a protective screen. Something had happened to her since our first meeting; some inner certainty had gone. Before, she had been facing with calm courage the prospect of her husband’s conviction and death. Perhaps that courage had rested upon a belief in his innocence which no longer went unquestioned. Perhaps the unworthy doubts of which she now accused me were merely the projections of her own misgivings.

I tried a different way.

‘In the theatre,’ I said, ‘a little fact will sustain a lot of illusion. As Petlarov says, “the lie rests most securely on a pinpoint of truth.” Brankovitch is not a fool. He knows that although he can impose any nonsense he likes upon the people of his own country, abroad it will not be so easy. With that trumped-up case he cannot hope to deceive the outside world. But what he can do is to confuse it by mixing with his lies a little truth. This plot against Vukashin. Why is it there? To prove that your husband is a member of the Brotherhood? Nonsense! Better evidence could be invented. Besides, even a stable government will regard an assassination plot as bad propaganda and try to conceal it if they can. No, this evidence is there because it is specially valuable. It is valuable because it is true. And those in court today recognized that it is true. It was not much — a few statements confirming a small set of facts — but it was true, and already in their minds this truth has grown and obscured the great mass of falsehood that surrounds it. You say, madame, that there may be truthful witnesses but that they compose a lie. But how much of a lie? Where does the truth end and the lie begin? You cannot defeat the Prosecution’s case with blank denials. It is not as simple as that. You have to give the whole truth, and that is what I want.’

There was a long silence. She looked stonily out of the window, and when she spoke she did not turn her head.

‘Herr Foster, there is not a court of law in the civilized world that would accept the case against my husband. I have been well advised of that.’

‘No civilized court of law is going to be asked to accept it,’ I retorted. ‘If the truth is not told, the final judgment will be delivered here. A few persons may doubt and speculate, but they must all come to the same conclusion.’

‘What conclusion?’

‘That there must have been something in the accusations against Deltchev, that the conspiracy evidence was never seriously disputed, that if he wasn’t the criminal they tried to make him out, he was something very nearly as bad — a fool. Forgive me, madame, but what you do not seem to realize is that any protest against your husband’s trial is a political act. No foreign office and no responsible newspaper is going to make that protest unless it is absolutely certain that he is innocent. They must know the truth.’

‘It isn’t true. The case against him is a lie. What else can I say?’

‘To what extent did your husband confide in you?’

‘What does it matter? If I tell you that he always confided in me you will say that this particular matter might have been too dangerous to confide. If I say that he did not confide it, it is no different.’

‘If he were in any way involved in this conspiracy would you have known?’

‘Yes. He was not involved.’

‘Did you know that he was going to make that election broadcast before he made it?’

‘Yes, I did.’

‘Did you know why he was going to make it?’

‘Yes.’

‘Why was it?’

She shook her head hopelessly. I knew she was lying.

‘Was it because at one time, long ago, your husband had been a member of the Officer Corps Brotherhood?’

For a moment she was quite still. Then, slowly, she raised her head and stared at me. ‘Is that a serious question, Herr Foster?’ she asked coolly.

I knew suddenly that it was not a serious question, but part of a fantasy in a locked room. I began to mumble, ‘It was a faint possibility, madame.’ She still stared at me. ‘It could have been a youthful indiscretion, a mistake …’ I petered out.

She smiled in a twisted sort of way. ‘Yordan does not make that kind of indiscretion. He is always an intelligent man. Are there any other questions, Herr Foster?’ she added.