A QUESTION OF TRUST (Foot prints without Feet)

About the Author

Victor Canning ( 1911 - 1986) was a prolific British writer of novels and thrillers who flourished in the 1950s, 1960s and 1970s. He was personally reticent, writing no memoirs and giving relatively few newspaper interviews.

1. What does Horace Danby like to collect? 

He would like to collect rare and expensive books.

2. Why does he steal every year? 

He steals every year to add to his book collections as the income from his lock making business is not sufficient.  He stole enough to last for twelve months, and secretly bought the books he loved through an agent.

3. Who is speaking to Horace Danby? 

A pretty young woman dressed in red spoke to him. 

4. Who is the real culprit in the story? 

The real culprit in the story is the woman in the red dress. She is not the owner of the house she herself entered the house to steal.

5. Did you begin to suspect, before the end of the story, that the lady was not the person Horace Danby took her to be? If so, at what point did you realise this, and how? 

A respectful woman would never want to let a thief get away but the lady in the story allowed Horace to get away. The lady behaved very cool since beginning and she also mentioned that she is found of bad people. Her behaviour was a bit suspicious since the beginning of the story. But finally she said not  to worry about the safe getting repaired.  That her  husband won’t be there for a month, and. She would have the safe mended by that time. This statement of hers clearly reveals that the woman is not genuine.

6.What are the subtle ways in which the lady manages to deceive Horace Danby into thinking she is the lady of the house? Why doesn’t Horace suspect that something is wrong? 

The woman appears to be confident and she is well dressed as the lady of the house. Her manner of talking coly and the way she petted the dog and the way she went in front of the fireplace to set her jewellery right all made him think that she belongs to the house. Her cool and casual approach deceived Horace Danby. Moreover Horace Danby does not suspect that something is wrong because he is afraid of getting caught and feels nervous so his mind do not think properly and the way she acts that she is the lady of the house.

7.“Horace Danby was good and respectable — but not completely honest”. Why do you think this description is apt for Horace? Why can’t he be categorised as a typical thief? 

Everyone thought that Horace Danby was a good, honest citizen. He was about fifty years old and unmarried. He made locks and was successful enough at his business to have two helpers. But no one knew about his peculiar habit of stealing. He loved rare, expensive books. So he robbed a safe every year. Each year he planned carefully just what he would do, stole enough to last for twelve months, and secretly bought the books he loved through an agent. Therefore the description is absolutely apt for Horace.

8.Horace Danby was a meticulous planner but still he faltered. Where did he go wrong and why? 

Though Horace planned everything meticulously; he failed because of a over  smart lady. She posed herself to be the owner of the house and convinced him to open the shelf as she had “forgot  the password of the shelf. Horace got trapped in her plot. Even though he was meticulous he was trapped easily by a woman.

9.Do you think Horace Danby was unfairly punished, or that he deserved what he got? 

No, Horace Danby wasn't unfairly punished. Though he had no bad intentions behind stealing, he wasn't aware that he was involved in something that was unlawful. He deserved what he got.  But the last case discussed in this story , Horace Danby's  involvement  is a strange one.  He was guilty of theft and yet not guilty. The lady who got away with the jewels was the real culprit.

10. Do intentions justify actions? Would you, like Horace Danby, do something wrong if you thought your ends justified the means? Do you think that there are situations in which it is excusable to act less than honestly? 

 ”Ends do not justify means”, is a very old and time-tested saying. For their own benefit nobody should harm others. But this world doesn’t function on idealism. There are many examples of people tricking people for quick gains. These acts should be deplored and dealt with severely. Ignorance of law is not an excuse. Every human being should be law abiding citizens circumstances cannot force a person to be dishonest or cheat upon someone for their personal gains.