[Editorial] Correct printer error

src/epub/text/chapter-17.xhtml

@@ -74,7 +74,7 @@
 			<p>“All of it from the time Boirac left the works. We don’t know whether that American exists at all. As far as I can see, the whole thing may be an invention.”</p>
 			<p>“That is quite true,” admitted the Chief, “but it didn’t seem to me so very important. The crucial point, to my mind, is the hour at which Boirac says he returned home⁠—a few minutes past one. That is confirmed by François and by Suzanne, and I think we may accept their statement. But we have a further rather convincing incident. You may recollect Boirac stated that when he was halfway home from the Gare Quai d’Orsay it began to rain? You very properly tried to check even so small a point by asking François if his master’s coat was wet. He replied that it was. Now, I made inquiries, and I find that night was perfectly fine till almost one o’clock, when a thick, wetting rain began to fall. We know, therefore, quite definitely that Boirac was out until the time he said. Therefore he could not have done the deed before 1:15. Also, we know that he could not have done it after that hour, because the lady was gone, and also the butler and maid were about. Therefore, if Boirac did it at all, it must have been after that night.”</p>
 			<p>“That seems unquestionable, monsieur,” said Lefarge, “and when you add to that the fact that we have, so far at any rate, been quite unable to connect Boirac with the letter or the cask, and that we are practically certain Madame travelled to London, I think he may almost be eliminated from the inquiry. What do you say, Burnley?”</p>
-			<p>“Well, I think it’s a little so soon to eliminate anyone from inquiry. I confess that point of motive struck me as being very strong against Boirac.”</p>
+			<p>“Well, I think it’s a little too soon to eliminate anyone from inquiry. I confess that point of motive struck me as being very strong against Boirac.”</p>
 			<p>“That also, by the way, seems to show the deed was not done by Boirac that night,” the Chief went on. “Your point is that he killed his wife because she had run away with Felix. But if he came home and found her there, she obviously <em>hadn’t</em> run away. Hence the motive, for that night at least, falls to the ground.”</p>
 			<p>The three men laughed, and <abbr>M.</abbr> Chauvet resumed:⁠—</p>
 			<p>“Now, to sum up our present position. We know that <abbr epub:type="z3998:name-title">Mme.</abbr> Boirac was murdered between 11:30 <abbr>p.m.</abbr> on the Saturday of the dinner-party, and the following Monday evening, when the letter purporting to be from Felix and ordering the statue, was written. Obviously only Felix, Boirac, or some third person could be guilty. There is not, so far, a scintilla of evidence of any third person being involved, therefore it almost certainly was one of the other two. Taking Boirac first, we find that under certain circumstances he would have had a motive for the crime, but we have not yet been able to obtain any evidence that these circumstances existed. Apart from this, we can find nothing whatever against him. On the other hand, he has established a strong alibi for the only time during which, so far as we can now see, he could have committed the crime.</p>