What do you think?
Rate this book
Dr. Priestley #5
Tragedy at the Unicorn
Dr. Priestley investigates the murder of a guest at the Unicorn Inn. Six guests were in the hotel, five were amateur yachtsmen and the sixth guest was a doctor. In the morning the doctor was found dead, and each one of the yachtsmen had, in one way or another, a reason to commit the crime.
308 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1928
62 people are currently reading
52 people want to read
About the author
John Rhode
138 books31 followersAKA Miles Burton, Cecil Waye, Cecil J.C. Street, I.O., F.O.O..
Cecil John Charles Street, MC, OBE, (1884 - January 1965), known as CJC Street and John Street, began his military career as an artillery officer in the British army. During the course of World War I, he became a propagandist for MI7, in which role he held the rank of Major. After the armistice, he alternated between Dublin and London during the Irish War of Independence as Information Officer for Dublin Castle, working closely with Lionel Curtis. He later earned his living as a prolific writer of detective novels.
He produced two long series of novels; one under the name of John Rhode featuring the forensic scientist Dr Priestley, and another under the name of Miles Burton featuring the investigator Desmond Merrion. Under the name Cecil Waye, Street produced four novels: The Figure of Eight; The End of the Chase; The Prime Minister's Pencil; and Murder at Monk's Barn. The Dr. Priestley novels were among the first after Sherlock Holmes to feature scientific detection of crime, such as analysing the mud on a suspect's shoes. Desmond Merrion is an amateur detective who works with Scotland Yard's Inspector Arnold.
Critic and author Julian Symons places this author as a prominent member of the "Humdrum" school of detective fiction. "Most of them came late to writing fiction, and few had much talent for it. They had some skill in constructing puzzles, nothing more, and ironically they fulfilled much better than S. S. Van Dine his dictum that the detective story properly belonged in the category of riddles or crossword puzzles. Most of the Humdrums were British, and among the best known of them were Major John Street.
-Wikipedia
Cecil John Charles Street, MC, OBE, (1884 - January 1965), known as CJC Street and John Street, began his military career as an artillery officer in the British army. During the course of World War I, he became a propagandist for MI7, in which role he held the rank of Major. After the armistice, he alternated between Dublin and London during the Irish War of Independence as Information Officer for Dublin Castle, working closely with Lionel Curtis. He later earned his living as a prolific writer of detective novels.
He produced two long series of novels; one under the name of John Rhode featuring the forensic scientist Dr Priestley, and another under the name of Miles Burton featuring the investigator Desmond Merrion. Under the name Cecil Waye, Street produced four novels: The Figure of Eight; The End of the Chase; The Prime Minister's Pencil; and Murder at Monk's Barn. The Dr. Priestley novels were among the first after Sherlock Holmes to feature scientific detection of crime, such as analysing the mud on a suspect's shoes. Desmond Merrion is an amateur detective who works with Scotland Yard's Inspector Arnold.
Critic and author Julian Symons places this author as a prominent member of the "Humdrum" school of detective fiction. "Most of them came late to writing fiction, and few had much talent for it. They had some skill in constructing puzzles, nothing more, and ironically they fulfilled much better than S. S. Van Dine his dictum that the detective story properly belonged in the category of riddles or crossword puzzles. Most of the Humdrums were British, and among the best known of them were Major John Street.
-Wikipedia
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews
November 24, 2019
The titular tragedy involves the murder of the perfectly odious Dr. Grinling at the Unicorn Hotel in the coastal city of Clayport. The Unicorn is owned by Mrs. Burgess and the guests are tended to by her two daughters, Phyllis and Joan. Of the guests who spent the fateful weekend in Clayport, Dr. Grinling and his valet Ferguson were the only ones who weren't there for the end of the yachting season. The yachting group includes Grinling's nephew Richard Gateman (who is in love with Phyllis); the group's first mate (and our narrator) Mr. Attercliffe; Percy Hunter, a serious young man in love with Joan; Mr. Mortimer, a fellow boatsman; and Bob Weldon, the skipper of the yachting crew.
Grinling's appearance at the inn is a surprise--and not a pleasant one it seems. After an evening of high-spirited entertainment, unattended by Grinling and his man, the doctor is found dead behind his locked bedroom door. At first glance it looks to be a suicide or accidental death from a heroin overdose. Dr. Murchison (called in to examine the dead body) is not surprised that the doctor was dosing himself with heroin for sleeplessness. "A doctor might very well prescribe for himself heroin injections for sleeplessness. He would have no difficulty getting the stuff, and he would know it would do him no harm unless he took an overdose." (!) However, the postmortem reveals that Grinling didn't die from heroin after all--but from "an over injection of morphia, which as you probably know, is a far more dangerous drug." [So, yeah, in the 1920s it's no big deal to take a dose of heroin to go nighty-night--but stay away from that morphine.]
Neither his nephew Richard nor Dr. Priestely once he's called into the case believe that the doctor took morphia by mistake or committed suicide. In fact, Richard admits that he had an unpleasant interview with his uncle regarding money. You see, Dr. Grinling had a life interest in an inheritance from his father (Richard's grandfather) and Richard would inherit the principle once Grinling was gone. Not only would the doctor not loan Richard any money based on his prospects--but he declared his intention to live as long as possible to keep his nephew from the money as long as possible.
But Richard isn't the only one in the inn that night with a motive to hustle Grinling into the grave. Pretty much everyone except our narrator Attercliffe had reason to wish the doctor dead--even the ladies of the house. Dr. Priestley will have to sort through the motives as well as determine how the killer got into the locked bedroom before his work will be done.
My thoughts:
There seems to be no thought of fingerprints. I realize it's early days in police forensics, but the Scotland Yard Fingerprint Bureau was established in 1901. When Superintendent Collison arrives on the scene, he handles the syringe and the glass vial with no precautions at all. In fact, beyond sending those things to be analyzed by the doctor, he doesn't seem terribly interested in looking over the scene of the crime for clues at all. His method is chatting up all the suspects and making them think he's not the sharpest tool in the drawer. He soon proves them wrong and, even though he does need Dr. Priestley's help, he winds up being a very capable detective indeed.
The early part of the story is quite good. Rhode builds up the various motives in a very convincing manner in an effort to spread the wealth in the suspicion department. To be quite honest, I spotted the culprit quite early despite the publisher's blurb on an early edition proclaiming "The reader who detects the murderer is to be congratulated on possessing no ordinary astuteness." The only thing I couldn't quite figure out was how the murderer managed to get in the room considering certain obstacles. The second half of the book presents some difficulties as the investigators seem to get distracted from the murder inquiry by the injection (no pun intended--well, maybe a little bit intended) of a drug-smuggling sub-plot.
The best part of the book is the humor. The underlying humor in Collison's interactions with the suspects. The reader realizes how astute the detective is and it's humorous to watch the reactions to his methods. There is also a good deal of humor in the interactions and byplay between the yachting group. All good fun. ★★★ and a half stars. [rounded to four here]
First posted on my blog My Reader's Block. Please request permission before reposting portions of this review. Thanks.
Grinling's appearance at the inn is a surprise--and not a pleasant one it seems. After an evening of high-spirited entertainment, unattended by Grinling and his man, the doctor is found dead behind his locked bedroom door. At first glance it looks to be a suicide or accidental death from a heroin overdose. Dr. Murchison (called in to examine the dead body) is not surprised that the doctor was dosing himself with heroin for sleeplessness. "A doctor might very well prescribe for himself heroin injections for sleeplessness. He would have no difficulty getting the stuff, and he would know it would do him no harm unless he took an overdose." (!) However, the postmortem reveals that Grinling didn't die from heroin after all--but from "an over injection of morphia, which as you probably know, is a far more dangerous drug." [So, yeah, in the 1920s it's no big deal to take a dose of heroin to go nighty-night--but stay away from that morphine.]
Neither his nephew Richard nor Dr. Priestely once he's called into the case believe that the doctor took morphia by mistake or committed suicide. In fact, Richard admits that he had an unpleasant interview with his uncle regarding money. You see, Dr. Grinling had a life interest in an inheritance from his father (Richard's grandfather) and Richard would inherit the principle once Grinling was gone. Not only would the doctor not loan Richard any money based on his prospects--but he declared his intention to live as long as possible to keep his nephew from the money as long as possible.
But Richard isn't the only one in the inn that night with a motive to hustle Grinling into the grave. Pretty much everyone except our narrator Attercliffe had reason to wish the doctor dead--even the ladies of the house. Dr. Priestley will have to sort through the motives as well as determine how the killer got into the locked bedroom before his work will be done.
My thoughts:
There seems to be no thought of fingerprints. I realize it's early days in police forensics, but the Scotland Yard Fingerprint Bureau was established in 1901. When Superintendent Collison arrives on the scene, he handles the syringe and the glass vial with no precautions at all. In fact, beyond sending those things to be analyzed by the doctor, he doesn't seem terribly interested in looking over the scene of the crime for clues at all. His method is chatting up all the suspects and making them think he's not the sharpest tool in the drawer. He soon proves them wrong and, even though he does need Dr. Priestley's help, he winds up being a very capable detective indeed.
The early part of the story is quite good. Rhode builds up the various motives in a very convincing manner in an effort to spread the wealth in the suspicion department. To be quite honest, I spotted the culprit quite early despite the publisher's blurb on an early edition proclaiming "The reader who detects the murderer is to be congratulated on possessing no ordinary astuteness." The only thing I couldn't quite figure out was how the murderer managed to get in the room considering certain obstacles. The second half of the book presents some difficulties as the investigators seem to get distracted from the murder inquiry by the injection (no pun intended--well, maybe a little bit intended) of a drug-smuggling sub-plot.
The best part of the book is the humor. The underlying humor in Collison's interactions with the suspects. The reader realizes how astute the detective is and it's humorous to watch the reactions to his methods. There is also a good deal of humor in the interactions and byplay between the yachting group. All good fun. ★★★ and a half stars. [rounded to four here]
First posted on my blog My Reader's Block. Please request permission before reposting portions of this review. Thanks.
August 6, 2025
On the cover of this book is written- "the best detective story of 1928". Yah-1928. This is one of those wonderful stories from the golden age of British crime novels that has been brought back to life. I enjoyed the straightforward manner of sleuthing, with no unnecessary red herring to detract from the story. John Rhodes uses this formula to spin an excellent example of this style throughout this novel. If you want to take a trip back to old-school detecting, don't miss this one.
April 9, 2021
C+:
One of Rhode's weaker efforts. The culprit is pretty guessable early into the novel and then there's a sizeable smuggling subplot which feels like a major distraction that fails to enlighten on the central mystery. Disappointing.
One of Rhode's weaker efforts. The culprit is pretty guessable early into the novel and then there's a sizeable smuggling subplot which feels like a major distraction that fails to enlighten on the central mystery. Disappointing.
May 29, 2024
A jolly good mystery! Heartwarming & light, with enough twists and turns to keep me entertained. I’d describe as part mystery, part adventure novel. I like that the main character is not the detective himself (Dr. Priestly); a nice homage to Watson and Holmes. Will see how the others from this series hold up. Highly recommend for Golden Age of Detection fans.
May 3, 2024
One of John's best
About half way through, it became obvious who were the guilty parties. Most of the conclusion was also not a surprise. Still, an enjoyable read.
About half way through, it became obvious who were the guilty parties. Most of the conclusion was also not a surprise. Still, an enjoyable read.
December 5, 2024
Ho hum. Lots of needless bland character interaction
May 3, 2024
Enjoyable.
August 18, 2024
The writing was nicely done with enjoyable characters. The mystery can be easily solved since this is an older book and the methods used, once new and startling, have been employed numerous times in the ensuing years, thus making the mystery less to the modern reader. Still, the detective is interesting enough that I shall probably read more.
Displaying 1 - 8 of 8 reviews