biscuits were ½ d. each, and that Clara paid for 8, though she only ate 7!
We will now consider the 13 whose working is wrong, though the answer is right: and, not to measure their demerits too exactly, I will take them in alphabetical order. Anita finds (rightly) that "1 sandwich and 3 biscuits cost 3 d. ," and proceeds "therefore 1 sandwich = 1½ d. , 3 biscuits = 1½ d. , 1 lemonade = 6 d. " Dinah Mite begins like Anita: and thence proves (rightly) that a biscuit costs less than a 1 d. : whence she concludes (wrongly) that it must cost ½ d. F. C. W. is so beautifully resigned to the certainty of a verdict of "guilty," that I have hardly the heart to utter the word, without adding a "recommended to mercy owing to extenuating circumstances." But really, you know, where are the extenuating circumstances? She begins by assuming that lemonade is 4 d. a glass, and sandwiches 3 d. each, (making with the 2 given equations, four conditions to be fulfilled by three miserable unknowns!). And, having (naturally) developed this into a contradiction, she then tries 5 d. and 2 d. with a similar result. (N.B. This process might have been carried on through the whole of the Tertiary Period, without gratifying one single Megatherium.) She then, by a "happy thought," tries half-penny biscuits, and so obtains a consistent result. This may be a good solution, viewing the problem as a conundrum: but it is not scientific. Janet identifies sandwiches with biscuits! "One sandwich + 3 biscuits" she makes equal to "4." Four what ? Mayfair makes the astounding assertion that the equation, s + 3 b