Chapter: 15. The Crown Of Diamonds
Comprehension Answer Key
A. Answer these questions.
Describe the initial state of the Crown of Diamonds when Mr. Holder first received it. When Mr. Holder first received it, the Crown of Diamonds was a beautiful and valuable piece of jewellery made up of thirty-nine huge diamonds, described as “one of England’s most precious possessions,” and it was intact. What was Arthur Holder’s relationship with Mary, and how did it influence his actions on the night of the theft? Arthur Holder was deeply in love with Mary. This love influenced his actions by making him want to protect her; he fought Burnwell to retrieve the crown she had given away, and later, his pride and love for her prevented him from revealing her involvement to his father, even when he was wrongly accused. Why did Mr. Holder initially refuse Arthur’s plea for five minutes alone before his arrest? Mr. Holder refused Arthur’s plea for five minutes alone because he was furious and convinced that Arthur had stolen the diamonds. He likely saw it as an attempt by Arthur to escape or hide further evidence, rather than believing it would help them both. How did Holmes know that the sound Mr. Holder heard was not Arthur closing his bedroom door? Holmes knew this because he reasoned that if Arthur had intended to steal the crown, he would have done so silently and stealthily, making it “unlikely that he would have made any sound” like closing a door loudly enough to wake his father. What was the immediate consequence of Mary’s disappearance for Mr. Holder, as perceived by Holmes? As perceived by Holmes, the immediate consequence of Mary’s disappearance was that Mr. Holder’s “troubles might be at an end.” Holmes meant that with Mary (and Burnwell) gone, the true culprits were out of the picture, and the path was clear to resolve the case and clear Arthur’s name. Explain the significance of the “bare feet” clue in Holmes’s investigation. The “bare feet” clue was significant because it helped Holmes differentiate Arthur’s footprints from the shoeprints of another person (Sir George Burnwell) in the snow. It confirmed Arthur had indeed been outside at some point, supporting Holmes’s theory that Arthur had gone out to retrieve the crown, rather than being the stealthy thief. B. Answer these questions with reference to the context.
“It is a good thing she has gone away. I think your troubles might be at an end, sir.”
a. Who said this?
* Sherlock Holmes said this.
b. To whom was this said?
* This was said to Mr. Alexander Holder.
c. What “troubles” was the speaker referring to, and how would her departure end them?
* The speaker was referring to the trouble of the stolen diamonds, the false accusation against Arthur, and the dishonor threatening Mr. Holder and England. Mary’s departure with Burnwell meant the actual culprits were no longer a direct presence in Holder’s life, simplifying the resolution of the case and allowing Holmes to retrieve the diamonds and clear Arthur’s name. “You only owe one thing—an apology to your son.”
a. Who said this, and to whom?
* Sherlock Holmes said this to Mr. Alexander Holder.
b. What was the context of this statement?
* This statement was made after Holmes had successfully retrieved the missing diamonds and fully explained the true events of the theft, revealing Arthur’s innocence and heroic actions. Mr. Holder was profusely thanking Holmes and expressing a great debt.
c. Why did the speaker believe this was the only debt owed?
* The speaker believed this was the only debt owed because Mr. Holder had unjustly accused and arrested his innocent son, causing him immense distress and public humiliation. Holmes implies that restoring Arthur’s honor and making amends for his father’s mistaken judgment was far more important than any monetary or other debt to Holmes himself. C. Think and answer.
Imagine you are Arthur. Write a short paragraph explaining why you didn’t tell your father the truth about what happened that night, considering your feelings for Mary and your pride. (Student’s imaginative response) “How could I have told him? To speak the truth meant exposing Mary, the woman I love. She’s family, and I couldn’t bear to see her face the same shame and arrest I was. My father was already so angry, and my pride wouldn’t let me beg or explain while he was calling me ‘evil.’ I thought I could handle it, maybe even find the missing piece myself. It was a foolish decision, but protecting Mary felt like the only choice I had, even if it meant being misunderstood and branded a thief.” If you were Dr. Watson, what questions might you have wanted to ask Holmes when he returned disguised as a beggar, and how do you think Holmes might have responded? (Student’s imaginative response) Watson might have asked: “Holmes, where on earth have you been? And why the beggar’s clothes?” Holmes might have responded: “My dear Watson, sometimes the simplest disguises are the most effective. One cannot gather certain intelligence from the drawing-room; one must descend to the level of the common man, and sometimes, the discarded possessions of villains reveal more than their carefully constructed lies.” Watson might then ask: “Did you find what you were looking for?” Holmes: “Indeed, Watson. A crucial piece of the puzzle, literally from the ground up.” The Crown of Diamonds was described as “one of England’s most precious possessions.” Discuss the impact the theft (if it had remained unsolved and public) could have had on England’s reputation and Mr. Holder’s career. (Student’s imaginative response) If the theft of the Crown of Diamonds had remained unsolved and become public knowledge, the impact would have been severe. For England, it would have been a significant blow to national pride and security, raising questions about the government’s ability to protect its most valuable assets. It could have been seen as a national embarrassment. For Mr. Holder, his career would likely have been ruined. As the head of a bank and the temporary custodian of such a priceless national treasure, the loss on his watch, especially under suspicious circumstances involving his own family, would have destroyed his reputation for trustworthiness and competence. His bank, Holder and Stevenson, would have faced immense public scrutiny and likely lost clients and standing in the financial world. He would have been seen as having failed in a critical responsibility, leading to financial ruin and social ostracism. 
Answer key