Dickensians! discussion

Here is the thread for our second "Dickensians!" Summer Read, which is of the short story Hunted Down: By Charles Dickens - Illustrated by Charles Dickens.

This read is from August 8th - 14th, and will be hosted by Judy :)

Please allow Judy to comment first, everyone! Thanks :)

I hope everyone enjoys this short Dickens story – I really loved rereading it. The story is broken up into five short chapters, and originally appeared in three very short weekly magazine instalments.

This is a summary of the main points in the story. I will put it under spoiler tags, as Sara did with the previous story, just in case anyone visits the thread before reading it.

(view spoiler)[ I
In a brief introduction, the narrator, Mr Sampson, introduces himself as the retired manager of a life insurance office.

He discusses whether you can tell someone’s character from their face, and says he has come to believe his first impression is always right.

II
Sampson starts to narrate the story from his days in life insurance.

Carrying on from the idea of reading character from the face, he tells how he has a glass partition between his own office and the outer office. This means he can see people without hearing them, and derive an initial impression from their faces alone.

He tells how he first sees Julius Slinkton when he comes into the office, and immediately takes an instinctive dislike to him. After Slinkton has departed, Sampson asks his clerk, Mr Adams, about him, and learns that he is probably reading for orders as a clergyman.

A fortnight later, Sampson runs into Slinkton at a social gathering at a friend’s home. Slinkton explains that he was enquiring about a life insurance policy on behalf of a friend, and it is quite likely nothing will ever come of it.

Slinkton asks about the health of a colleague of Sampson’s, a young actuary, Mr Meltham, who has had a breakdown and is now incapable of work.

Sampson confirms that Meltham is grieving for the death of a young girl he was in love with. Slinkton expresses his sympathy and Sampson at first suspects this is not genuine, but Slinkton then explains that he has also suffered a loss, of one of his two nieces, who died aged 23. Her sister is also “far from strong.” Sampson becomes angry with himself for being so suspicious of Slinkton.

III
Slinkton makes repeated visits to the life insurance office. The company receives a proposal from Slinkton’s friend, Mr Beckwith, for a £2,000 policy (this was then a large sum, roughly equivalent to about £250,000 today.)

Slinkton says that Beckwith is based in the office opposite him at the Middle Temple. He gives a reference saying he is not a drinker and lives a healthy lifestyle. A satisfactory reference is also received from Beckwith’s family, and the policy is taken out.

There is a cryptic mention of Sampson receiving another, unnamed, visitor at his own house, but no details of this visitor are given.

IV
Sampson sees nothing more of Slinkton for “six or seven months”, until he travels to Scarborough, a seaside resort in Yorkshire. He meets Slinkton on the beach, accompanied by a very pale young lady in mourning, Margaret Niner, who is introduced as his surviving niece.

It is revealed that Margaret has a “shadow”, an invalid old gentleman who she sees wherever she goes. His hand-carriage appears (a vehicle pulled by a man rather than a horse), and they see an old man inside it, pulled by another man who is slightly lame.

The old man turns out to be an acquaintance of Sampson. While Slinkton is bathing, Margaret praises him to Sampson for his care of her sister, and tells how she thinks she will soon die herself. Sampson quietly warns her that she is in great danger and urges her to come over with him to the carriage. She is helped inside it and heads off at surprising speed.

When Slinkton returns, Sampson tells him that Margaret felt a chill in the air and has gone home. He also says that he himself is going back to London.

It is clear from several comments in this chapter that Sampson is now convinced that Slinkton is a villain.

V
Sampson goes for breakfast at The Temple and goes to the chambers of Mr Beckwith. The rooms are dirty and faded, and he is lying on the sofa, “with all the appearances of the worst kind of drunkard”. Beckwith explains how Slinkton has kept urging him on to drink more liquor.

However, Beckwith then throws brandy in Slinkton’s face. He reveals that he set a trap for Slinkton by taking the rooms opposite him, pretending to be a drunkard, and that he knows Slinkton has been trying to kill him through brandy and poison, so he can claim the life insurance money.

Beckwith says he knew that Slinkton had already killed one innocent girl and was trying to kill another, and, while disguised as a drunkard, he has found evidence against him, including a diary where Slinkton wrote down everything he had done.

Beckwith says he gave the diary to Sampson, who travelled to Scarborough as a result, and the two of them and Sampson’s trusty servant saved Margaret between them.

Lastly, Beckwith reveals that he is in fact Mr Meltham, who was in love with Margaret’s sister, and was determined to hunt down and trap Slinkton.

Slinkton then poisons himself and drops dead.

Meltham dies the following spring and is buried alongside the young woman he loved, leaving all he has to Margaret. Margaret lives to marry Sampson’s nephew and to be a happy wife and mother. (hide spoiler)]

Here are some thoughts on the story and a bit of background information – for now I will put nearly all of this under spoiler tags. As with the summary, please only read this after reading the story!

This short story by Dickens was written in 1859, in between A Tale of Two Cities and Great Expectations, and is said to be somewhat in the style of his friend Wilkie Collins, with its strong element of mystery.

(view spoiler)[The story is told in the first person, like Dickens’s next novel, Great Expectations. I do enjoy Dickens writing in this way – he did it in several short stories and it is interesting to see him adopting the personality of different narrators.

A difference here, though, is that the narrator is unreliable, hiding much of his knowledge from the reader until it is revealed later. I think all his first-person narrators in the novels may do this at times, but not as much as Sampson does. We never really get to know Sampson, who doesn’t even have a first name.

Julius Slinkton is like a compressed version of a classic Dickens villain – his hypocrisy reminds me of several other clergymen in his novels. His name is wonderfully descriptive, immediately giving a feeling of him “slinking” around and being deceptive and hypocritical.

A long article on the Victorian Web site points out that Margaret is never fully realised as a character. To be fair though, I don’t think Dickens has much space here to make Margaret individual – we just glimpse her in one scene.

For me the story's stand-out sequence is the description of Beckwith’s apparent drunkenness – this is extremely vivid and totally convincing, so it’s hard to believe that it is put on.

Background information

It’s thought that the famous poisoners Thomas Wainewright and Dr William Palmer of Rugeley were inspirations for the character of Slinkton.

The Victorian Web article says that Dickens had met Wainewright just before his arrest and trial, and was also fascinated by the case of Palmer, “a respectable professional man and scientist who murdered his own family for the life-insurance money.”

The Oxford Reader's Companion to Dickens also mentions that Dickens had seen Wainewright in Newgate, and says: "Dickens knew Henry Porter Smith (1797-1880), the insurance agent who investigated the suspicious death of Helen Abercromby (with whom he was rumoured to have been in love), whose life had been insured by Wainewright."

Dickens was paid by a very large sum by the New York Ledger for this story, £1,000 – I know it’s hard to calculate money then versus now, but an online calculator estimates this at £126,000.

Forster comments on the story in The Life of Charles Dickens: "Its subject has been taken from the life of a notorious criminal . . ., and its principal claim to notice was the price paid for it. For a story not longer than half of one of the numbers of Chuzzlewit or Copperfield , he had received a thousand pounds.”

Here is a link to the very long Victorian Web article I’ve mentioned, by Philip V Allingham – it’s an interesting read but – WARNING: It contains a spoiler for Martin Chuzzlewit and also mentions villains in Edwin Drood, Little Dorrit, The Woman in White and The Moonstone (I’m not sure if the Collins mentions are really spoilers as it is so long since I’ve read those books.)
http://www.victorianweb.org/authors/d... (hide spoiler)]

If anyone wants to see the original illustrations for Hunted Down, this is a link to the original publication in The New York Ledger in 1859, with some small woodcuts dropped into the text - you can see them if you download the pages. It doesn't say who drew these and I don't think they are great illustrations to be honest, but interesting to see.

https://digitalcollections.nypl.org/c...

Yay, looking forward to picking this up tomorrow!

The copy of Hunted Down on Gutenberg has a couple of good illustrations. https://www.gutenberg.org/files/807/8...

I've found just 4 illustrations, all dating from a bit later, 1898 and 1910. Shall I post any or all of them, Judy? (I'll wait a few days if so.)

Oh we crossposted! Sorry. Those Tadiana linked to are the two dating from 1898, and are by the artist Maurice Greiffenhagen.

Thank you Jean and Tadiana! Please do post the ones from 1910 when we get into the discussion, Jean. I found a couple so they may be the same ones, but I'm never sure how to post them!

Will do :)

Judy, somewhere in my PMs I have a step-by-step set of instructions on how to insert images in GR comments and reviews, that I wrote up to share with a couple of people. Let me know if you'd like me to dig that out and send it to you. It's pretty easy once you get the hang of it, but initially it can be mystifying. :)

Thank you very much Tadiana, I think I'll be OK though as Jean has kindly found me some picture-posting instructions.

I have also now found one other illustration, not sure when this one is from - I thought it was from first British publication in Dickens's journal All the Year Round but editing to say I now don't think so. Anyway, I will hold off posting that one for now.

When reading the description of Slinkton, with the part dead center, I kept thinking of an adult version of Alfalfa:

Planning to read this today. I'm curious to learn how Dickens tackled the mystery genre.

Hope you enjoy it, Piyangie. I think Dickens does a great job in the mystery genre here. :)

Sara wrote: "When reading the description of Slinkton, with the part dead center, I kept thinking of an adult version of Alfalfa:

"
The parting looks perfect, but I'm sure it looks much better on a child than on Slinkton!

Dickens must have been thinking about hair when he wrote this story. He mentions Slinkton's middle part in his hair multiple times. The other major character, Sampson, has a name like Samson, the Hebrew king who retained his strength as long as he never cut his hair.

I love how Dickens has fun naming his characters. We thinking of a slithery, slimy snake of a man when we see the name Slinkton. The reader thinks of someone strong when they encounter the name Sampson.

Great summary and background information, Judy!

Connie wrote: "Dickens must have been thinking about hair when he wrote this story. He mentions Slinkton's middle part in his hair multiple times. The other major character, Sampson, has a name like Samson, the Hebrew king who retained his strength as long as he never cut his hair...."

Oh, good catch, Connie! I had made the connection with Samson but didn't altogether see the relevance, but the hair connection makes a lot of sense. As well as being strong, Sampson is someone who is determined to fight.

I also think the straight parting in Slinkton's hair goes with the way he is trying to present himself in one particular way and ensure people approach him straight along that path, instead of looking at him from another angle. Sampson keeps commenting on this, with lines like "Keep off the grass!"

Very good recap, comments and background, Judy.

I agree that we never get to truly know Sampson, what we see is what he wants us to know only. It is a tried and true method with first-hand narrator to hide their true aims; sometimes it is because they are deceived themselves, but in this case it's really because he is building a mystery... he knows he'll be read, doesn't feel like a diary though so maybe he's writing to warn this colleagues of the way they can be taken in?

It is hard to fake drunkenness for a non actor so Beckwith feels a little unbelievable (or he went to a good school with a great acting teacher, not sure they showed how to play drunk at this time, but who knows), but we have to think that Slinkton is so convinced at this time that even if Beckwith did a thing out of character Slinkton wouldn't realize.

At that time a lot was put of physiognomy as a way to determined character and that's what Sampson bases is first impression on, we know now that it's junk science (with phrenology), but it is true that some people are easily read by their attitude. I like the parting of Slinkton hair that says concentrate on what I want you to see not the rest.

Finally, I am with Connie with how great names are chosen by Dickens. Slinkton is very evocative, I hadn't thought of the Sampson/Samson link but that makes a lot of sense too .

I agree with Connie and France-Andrée, I’ve found on several occasions with Dickens, that the name sometimes truly fits the character. Actually a few other authors of the same time period, so I’m starting to pay attention to names more. It’s fun to see if there is some hidden meaning.

I thought the descriptions of Slinkton’s hair were quite comical, even laugh out loud funny at times. But after knowing that Sampson knew about him, it almost changes the feel, and it wasn’t fun he was making, but recognition of Slinkton’s character.

I felt a total change in atmosphere in the story from the beginning to the end. We suspect there might be something off with Slinkton, but we’re not quire sure what. And then we’re guided up to the rooms, and then everything changes. We’re let into the secrets, and it’s now a very morose and dark scene.

A couple highlights I had from the story were “A hair or two will show where a lion is hidden. A very little key will open a very heavy door.” I thought they were just great lines at the time but feel their weight upon finishing the story.

I’ve only read the story once, but now want to go back, knowing that Sampson knows and see how it plays out differently for me.

I really enjoyed this, though it was a dark story in the end, it was very compelling. Thanks for choosing it! I look forward to more comments from everyone else.

I marked that same quote, Brenda, and felt it was pivotal to the story...and right in keeping with the "hair" theme. I did find the idea of the hair part as a road on which Slinkton meant to keep everyone's attention wonderful humor.

I certainly knew something was afoot with Slinkton (the name alone would tell you) and felt there was some significance in his reference to Meltham, but I did not connect Meltham and Beckwith. I also wondered why the niece was so willing to take the advice of a stranger until it was explained afterward, so I would have to say Dickens did a great job with this story. After all, the test of a good detective novel is whether the clues are all there, as they should be, and whether you can figure out the secrets before they are revealed.

Love the background information you provided Judy, the summary, and the link to the article.

Sara wrote : the test of a good detective novel is whether the clues are all there, as they should be, and whether you can figure out the secrets before they are revealed.

I did go back and read it again, and ALL the clues were there. I missed most of them, or paid them no attention. Even though I knew something was going to happen. I agree Sara, this was well laid out.

France-Andrée wrote: "It is hard to fake drunkenness for a non actor so Beckwith feels a little unbelievable (or he went to a good school with a great acting teacher, not sure they showed how to play drunk at this time, but who knows), but we have to think that Slinkton is so convinced at this time that even if Beckwith did a thing out of character Slinkton wouldn't realize...."

Great point, France-Andrée - the whole description of Beckwith's drunkenness (probably the best sequence in the whole story I think) is so convincing that it comes as a shock to find out it is being faked.

I think Dickens really enters into the plight of the drunken man when describing the scene, with his physical appearance and squalid surroundings, thinking of the reality of addiction and of Slinkton's cruelty in driving his "friend" towards his death.

France-Andrée wrote: "At that time a lot was put of physiognomy as a way to determined character and that's what Sampson bases is first impression on, we know now that it's junk science (with phrenology), but it is true that some people are easily read by their attitude. I like the parting of Slinkton hair that says concentrate on what I want you to see not the rest...."

Another great comment, thank you! I had been thinking of Sampson somehow reading people's character by their expressions, but I can see it does tie into the 19th-century belief in physiognomy and phrenology, as you say.

I've just been trying to find a good web page about the history of physiognomy - this is an interesting article about the basis of this pseudo-science. I'm still looking for something about how Victorian authors used it...

https://blogs.getty.edu/iris/physiogn...

Brenda wrote: "I agree with Connie and France-Andrée, I’ve found on several occasions with Dickens, that the name sometimes truly fits the character. Actually a few other authors of the same time period, so I’m s..."

I definitely agree that Dickens comes up with names that really fit the characters, as you say, Brenda - sometimes it's hard to pick up on the significance immediately.

Thank you for picking out those great lines: “A hair or two will show where a lion is hidden. A very little key will open a very heavy door.” They really bring out how Sampson picks up on details to expose the hidden crime.

Sara wrote: "I also wondered why the niece was so willing to take the advice of a stranger until it was explained afterward..."

I must admit I am still a bit puzzled by this - I find it a bit strange that she has just been speaking about her guardian's devotion to her, and is yet prepared to believe he is endangering her a moment later. I think as you suggest the fact that the warning doesn't actually come from a stranger, but someone she knows, makes it more believable, but she still seems to be persuaded rather fast!

Also, Sara, loved your description of how the hair parting works "I did find the idea of the hair part as a road on which Slinkton meant to keep everyone's attention wonderful humor."

I followed all the interesting comments on Mr. Slinkton. When he was first introduced, I sensed some villainy. It was in the way he was described, as a sort of a sly man. I didn't grasp the significance of his parting hair till later; first I thought it was merely intended as satire.

Altogether, it wasn't wholly a plausible plot. I felt the sudden flight of Margaret at the insistence of Mr. Sampson rather unrealistic given her devotion to Slinkton. Unless she had some suspicion of a foul-play, her conduct is unaccountable. Also, Slinkton's cool acceptance of Margaret's going home alone and her ultimate disappearance had a similar effect. Then the ending was a little disappointing. I didn't particularly enjoy the melodramatic touch.

This was certainly an interesting enough mystery, but I somehow feel it is not his genre. It doesn't suit his style. This is of course my personal opinion. I think Wilkie Collins surpasses him there.

Piyangie wrote: " I felt the sudden flight of Margaret at the insistence of Mr. Sampson rather unrealistic given her devotion to Slinkton. Unless she had some suspicion of a foul-play, her conduct is unaccountable...."

I felt this too, but then wondered if she is persuaded because she is told that Meltham is in the hand carriage and has urged her to flee - since she knows of his devotion to her sister? We could possibly do with a bit more explanation of this, though.

Also, Slinkton's cool acceptance of Margaret's going home alone and her ultimate disappearance had a similar effect.

Great point - I hadn't thought about this but it does seem odd that he isn't more worried by her going off. Perhaps he thinks it means his gradual poisoning is having its intended effect on her health?

It made a marked difference to me when we discovered that it was Meltham in the carriage and realized she would have been told by someone she knows and trusts that her sister was poisoned and that she is being poisoned as well. There would be proof that there was insurance involved, as Meltham would have copies of the policies etc. I think we are meant to understand that he is explaining all this to her as he is taking her away. And, he could have shown her the evidence of poisoning he has gathered once she has come with him.

Like so many murderers, Slinkton thinks he is so clever that no one would ever catch on to him. He isn't overly concerned about her leaving because he believes Sampson's story that she has returned to her rooms ill. He cannot conceive of anyone outsmarting him.

I agree with you Sara. I think the fact that she knew Meltham would have made her trust him more. And very likely he had evidence that he had obtained from Slinkton's rooms.

I thoroughly enjoyed this story, but then mystery is my favorite genre. I like the way Dickens hints right from the beginning that Slinkton is not a good person even though there is no logical reason for believing it. Physiognomy has been shown to be false, but I believe that sometimes we get a feeling about someone when we first meet them that later proves to be true, even though there is no logical evidence of it to begin with. I have had this happen. Of course, I have also formed incorrect first impressions about people. I guess the best thing to do is to pay attention to your initial impression, but keep an open mind. Sampson was certainly wise to pay attention to his first impression.

I agree with Sara that Slinkton thinks he cannot be outsmarted. We see this when Sampson first confronts him in Beckwith's rooms. He tells Sampson that there is no way Sampson will win against him. Even with evidence of his treachery in front of him, he thinks he has everything tied up so that nothing can be proven.

About Margaret’s quick turn around, we get a conversation with Sampson to let us know how much she trusts her uncle, but we can’t trust Sampson and she doesn’t know him so she might be not telling him the whole truth of what she thinks. So her believing that she’s been poisoned that easily might be really what she thought to begin with and that’s why she disappears with Meltham.

I also agree about Slinkton. I think his ego got the best of him. He stupidly left all of his papers, etc in easy reach of Beckwith. He thought because he wanted Beckwith to be so drunk all the time and incoherent that it would just be that way. Beckwith would have to be constantly in a stupor drunk to not have any periods of lucid thoughts. Perhaps this is also how Beckwith got away with his act. And Sampson got away with getting the niece away from him.

I also missed about the old man being Meltham. Thanks for clearing that up. It explains a lot !

As promised, here are two illustrations to Hunted Down: By Charles Dickens - Illustrated by one of Charles Dickens's regular illustrators, Harry Furniss. We've seen some of his illustrations for David Copperfield already, and I'll slot a few in for Little Dorrit when we come to it too.

"On Scarborough Beach" - Harry Furniss 1910

"You terrify me, sir, by these questions!"

"To save you, young lady, to save you! For God's sake, collect your strength and collect your firmness!"

Slinkton's Surprise" - Harry Furniss 1910

"Boil the brandy, Julius Cæsar! Come! Do your usual office. Boil the brandy!"

He became so fierce in his gesticulations with the saucepan, that I expected to see him lay open Slinkton's head with it. I therefore put out my hand to check him. He reeled back to the sofa, and sat there panting, shaking, and red-eyed, in his rags of dressing-gown, looking at us both."

Lovely illustrations! Thank you, Jean.

Thank you for those, Jean, two great illustrations. I really like the one on Scarborough beach with the hand-carriage in the background.

Here is another illustration I found of the drunken scene with Beckwith. Sorry, I don't think I can post the image here unless I pay for it from a stock photo site!

I think it's another great illustration anyway - iStock doesn't give any information except mistakenly saying that it is from Master Humphrey's Clock. If you click on the picture you can see a larger version. Can anyone tell from the signature who the artist is? I think it is from a collected edition of Dickens's works.

https://www.istockphoto.com/vector/ch...

Great illustrations, Judy and Jean. I am also partial to the one on the beach. How I wish God had given me the talent to draw that way!

I'll put this post under spoiler tags just to be on the safe side, as it mentions an incident in the novel Dickens had written just before this story, A Tale of Two Cities.

(view spoiler)[ It struck me that the chapter about Beckwith and Slinkton has a slight similarity with the drinking scenes in A Tale of Two Cities.

These also take place in dingy legal chambers, where Sydney Carton boils up pans full of punch laced with spirits late at night while working with Stryver. Although this is such a brief scene, and Beckwith doesn't even really exist, in this sequence I think he has some of the same poignancy as Carton. Dickens actually has quite a few poignant drunkards in his fiction, with a feeling of what they could have been if not for their addiction. (hide spoiler)]

Some of his illustrators put so much meaningful expression on the faces of the characters, or in their demeanour. I'm not surprised Charles Dickens was so specific (and demanding!) in what he wanted from them! Harry Furniss was a little later, of course, but his were in the same spirit, I feel.

Judy wrote: "Can anyone tell from the signature who the artist is?..."

It looks very like James Mahoney 's style, and signature. His work was similar to Fred Barnard's.

Thanks for using the spoiler tag, Judy!

Edit - it is Fred after all :D

Bionic Jean wrote: "Judy wrote: "Can anyone tell from the signature who the artist is?..."

It looks very like James Mahoney's style, and signature. His work was similar to Fred Barnard's.

Thanks fo..."

Thank you Jean! I hoped you might have an idea who it was. There have certainly been many great illustrations of Dickens's works. Although I really like that illustration, though, I would have to say that Slinkton's hair is not as neat as I would have expected!

Actually I've changed my mind! The more I looked at it the more I thought it was like Fred Barnard ... and of course if you look at the right hand initials, they are unmistakably his curly "F.B." :) Sorry!

Yes, the hair is all wrong! Needs to be slicked down and PARTED.

I agree that there needed to he more explanation for Slinktons neice being so ready to believe she was in danger from him, but I think that could be as France Andre says, she does not know Samson so could be putting on an act, fearing he would rat her out to Slinkton if she voiced her fears. It seams like Slinkton is a control freak in all honesty, as he barely lets her speak when he is around and usually has her arm in his grip in some way, as well as the way he acts with Beckwith, and the way it all ends is of course under his control, despite everything.

Charles Dickens often isolated one visual aspect of a character, particularly their face, and referred to it throughout the story. Sometimes it's an aide-memoire; we remember someone more easily if there is one strange feature, and his readers had to remember for months on end, because of the serialisation of his works. An example would be the wolfish "Carker" and his sharp, bright teeth, in Dombey and Son.

Another is in Little Dorrit, and in this case it's more of a facial movement which affects a feature. But I won't go into details, as this serves his second purpose: to disguise who the character is, so that if the reader works it out, we feel pleased with ourselves and "in the know".

A third reason is what we have here. The decided hair parting is symbolic of Slinkton's dominant personality - he directs people just as his hair is directed: "Keep off the grass!" as several have said. So it indicates his personality. Quite a lot of Charles Dickens's comedic or grotesque roles have one strong feature about them. Nicholas Nickleby, the sadistic headmaster Wackford Squeers had one eye "and the popular prejudice runs in favour of two".

So Slinkton is in good company with Charles Dickens's major memorable characters :)

Bionic Jean wrote: "Actually I've changed my mind! The more I looked at it the more I thought it was like Fred Barnard ... and of course if you look at the right hand initials, they are unmistakably ..."

Thank you Jean! You are correct - after reading your post, I quickly searched for Fred Barnard and Hunted Down, and found the picture in a whole book of illustrations of Dickens on Gutenberg, which I will gratefully download - The Project Gutenberg EBook of Scenes and Characters from the Works of
Charles Dickens, by Charles Dickens

http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/43207

Sorry, I tried to cut and paste the image in - it worked in preview mode but then said "image error" when the post went up. This is a link to the image: https://www.gutenberg.org/files/43207...

While looking up illustrations, I noticed a previous discussion of Hunted Down in another group where people were complaining about Meltham being a master of disguise, since he not only convinced Slinkton he is a drunk but also persuades people he is the elderly man in the carriage!

This hadn't struck me but it is a bit far-fetched, unless he is a trained actor, as France-Andrée said earlier.