Queen Katherine Parr; The Case of the Mischevious Doll; The Case of the Howling Dog

"Queen Katherine Parr" by Anthony Martienssen was an excellent biography of King Henry VIII's last and most intelligent queen. She used her charm, grace, wits, and common sense to keep this ogre of a man happy in his final years, when he really wanted a nurse more than a wife. Unlike Anne Boleyn, she did not gloat when her enemies were down, and unlike Katherine of Aragon, she was willing to bend her principles to save her life. I've always admired Katherine of Aragon for her willingness to stand up for what was right, no matter how difficult it made her life, but Katherine Parr was able to use such grace and wit that it never seemed like she was giving up her ideals. Very well told story of an exceptional woman.
Two more Perry Masons by Erle Stanley Gardner. "Mischievous Doll" was very complex. Perry really has his hands full when two women who look very much alike both retain his services for different reasons. The first woman, Dorrie, thinks the second one, Minerva, is trying to set her up to take a fall for something Minerva did. Minerva, a wealthy heiress, thinks Dorrie is trying to blackmail her to get some of Minerva's millions. Then one of them turns up dead, and Perry is defending the other. This book had a shocking ending that I didn't see a mile away. But then I never do!
"Howling Dog" was disturbing. This was the first and only Perry Mason book I've read where it seems like his client very well might have been guilty, and he knew it, and pulled some shady strings to get her off the hook. I kept waiting for his brilliant reasoning to show me that his client didn't kill her husband, but he never did. He moved witnesses out of state so the police would never find out about them, he pulled tricks with the prosecution's witnesses, and then, when the prosecution wanted to dismiss the case in light of new evidence, Perry insisted the case go to jury so, as he explained to Della (but I had already figured out) that his client couldn't ever be tried for the crime again. Double jeopardy, you see. Like I said, very disturbing. It was only the fourth one, so maybe Gardner was just testing different ideas to see which ones flew. I think he realized this wasn't the way to go with the Mason books, since all of the other ones I've read have gone to great painstaking lengths to explain away his client's guilt.