part iii hercule poirot sits back and thinks

1 which of them?

m. bouc. and dr. constantine were talking together when poirot entered the dining-car. m. bouc was looking depressed.

“le voilà,” said the latter when he saw poirot. then he added, as his friend sat down, “if you solve this case, mon cher, i shall indeed believe in miracles!”

“it worries you, this case?”

“naturally it worries me. i cannot make head or tail of it.”

“i agree,” said the doctor. he looked at poirot with interest. “to be frank,” he said, “i cannot see what you are going to do next.”

“no!” said poirot thoughtfully.

he took out his cigarette case and lit one of his tiny cigarettes. his eyes were dreamy.

“that, to me, is the interest of this case,” he said. “we are cut off from all the normal routes of procedure. are these people whose evidence we have taken speaking the truth, or lying? we have no means of finding out—except such means as we can devise ourselves. it is an exercise, this, of the brain.”

“that is all very fine,” said m. bouc. “but what have you to go upon?”

“i told you just now. we have the evidence of the passengers and the evidence of our own eyes.”

“pretty evidence—that of the passengers! it told us just nothing at all.”

poirot shook his head.

“i do not agree, my friend. the evidence of the passengers gave us several points of interest.”

“indeed,” said m. bouc sceptically. “i did not observe it.”

“that is because you did not listen.”

“well, tell me, what did i miss?”

“i will just take one instance—the first evidence we heard, that of the young macqueen. he uttered, to my mind, one very significant phrase.”

“about the letters?”

“no, not about the letters. as far as i can remember, his words were: ‘we travelled about. mr. ratchett wanted to see the world. he was hampered by knowing no languages. i acted more as a courier than a secretary.’ ”

he looked from the doctor’s face to that of m. bouc.

“what? you still do not see? that is inexcusable—for you had a second chance again just now when he said, ‘you’re likely to be out of luck if you don’t speak anything but good american.’ ”

“you mean—?” m. bouc still looked puzzled.

“ah, it is that you want it given to you in words of one syllable. well, here it is! m. ratchett spoke no french. yet, when the conductor came in answer to his bell last night, it was a voice speaking in french that told him that it was a mistake and that he was not wanted. it was, moreover, a perfectly idiomatic phrase that was used, not one that a man knowing only a few words of french would have selected. ‘ce n’est rien je me suis trompé.’ ”

“it is true,” cried constantine excitedly. “we should have seen that! i remember your laying stress on the words when you repeated them to us. now i understand your reluctance to rely upon the evidence of the dented watch. already, at twenty-three minutes to one, ratchett was dead—”

“and it was his murderer speaking!” finished m. bouc impressively.

poirot raised a deprecating hand.

“let us not go too fast. and do not let us assume more than we actually know. it is safe, i think, to say that at that time—twenty-three minutes to one—some other person was in ratchett’s compartment, and that that person either was french or could speak the french language fluently.”

“you are very cautious, mon vieux—”

“one should advance only a step at a time. we have no actual evidence that ratchett was dead at that time.”

“there is the cry that awakened you.”

“yes, that is true.”

“in one way,” said m. bouc thoughtfully, “this discovery does not affect things very much. you heard someone moving about next door. that someone was not ratchett, but the other man. doubtless he is washing blood from his hands, clearing up after the crime, burning the incriminating letter. then he waits till all is still, and, when he thinks it is safe and the coast is clear, he locks and chains ratchett’s door on the inside, unlocks the communicating door through into mrs. hubbard’s compartment and slips out that way. in fact, it is exactly as we thought, with the difference that ratchett was killed about half an hour earlier and the watch put on to a quarter past one to create an alibi.”

“not such a famous alibi,” said poirot. “the hands of the watch pointed to 1.15—the exact time when the intruder actually left the scene of the crime.”

“true,” said m. bouc, a little confused. “what then does the watch convey to you?”

“if the hands were altered—i say if—then the time at which they were set must have a significance. the natural reaction would be to suspect anyone who had a reliable alibi for the time indicated—in this case, 1.15.”

“yes, yes,” said the doctor. “that reasoning is good.”

“we must also pay a little attention to the time the intruder entered the compartment. when had he an opportunity of doing so? unless we are to assume the complicity of the real conductor, there was only one time when he could have done so—during the time the train stopped at vincovci. after the train left vincovci the conductor was sitting facing the corridor, and whereas any one of the passengers would pay little attention to a wagon lit attendant, the one person who would notice an impostor is the real conductor. but during the halt at vincovci the conductor is out on the platform. the coast is clear.”

“and by our former reasoning, it must be one of the passengers,” said m. bouc. “we come back to where we were. which of them?”

poirot smiled.

“i have made a list,” he said. “if you like to see it, it will perhaps refresh your memory.”

the doctor and m. bouc pored over the list together. it was written out neatly in a methodical manner in the order in which the passengers had been interviewed.

hector macqueen, american subject, berth no. 6, second class.

motive—possibly arising out of association with dead man?

alibi—from midnight to 2 a.m. (midnight to 1.30 vouched for by col. arbuthnot, and 1. 15 to 2 vouched for by conductor.)evidence against him—none.

suspicious circumstances—none.

conductor pierre michel, french subject.

motive—none.

alibi—from midnight to 2 a.m. (seen by h. p. in corridor at same time as voice spoke from ratchett’s compartment at 12.37. from 1 a.m. to 1.16 vouched for by other two conductors.)evidence against him—none.

suspicious circumstances—the wagon lit uniform found is a point in his favor since it seems to have been intended to throw suspicion on him.

edward masterman, english subject, berth no. 4, second class.

motive—possibly arising out of connection with deceased, whose valet he was.

alibi—from midnight to 2 a.m. (vouched for by antonio foscarelli.)evidence against him of suspicious circumstances—none, except that he is the only man of the right height or size to have worn the wagon lit uniform. on the other hand, it is unlikely that he speaks french well.

mrs. hubbard, american subject, berth no. 3, first class.

motive—none.

alibi—from midnight to 2 a.m.—none.

evidence against her or suspicious circumstances—story of man in her compartment is substantiated by the evidence of hardman and that of the woman schmidt.

greta ohlsson, swedish subject, berth no. 10, second class.

motive—none.

alibi—from midnight to 2 a.m. (vouched for by mary debenham.)note: was last to see ratchett alive.

princess dragomiroff, naturalised french subject, berth no. 14, first class.

motive—was intimately acquainted with armstrong family, and godmother to sonia armstrong.

alibi—from midnight to 2 a.m. (vouched for by conductor and maid.)evidence against her or suspicious circumstances—none.

count andrenyi, hungarian subject, diplomatic passport, berth no. 13, first class.

motive—none.

alibi—midnight to 2 a.m. (vouched for by conductor—this does not cover period from 1 to 1.15.)countess andrenyi, as above, berth 12.

motive—none.

alibi—midnight to 2 a.m took trional and slept. (vouched for by husband. trional bottle in her cupboard.)colonel arbuthnot, british subject, berth no. 15, first class.

motive—none.

alibi—midnight to 2 a.m. talked with macqueen till 1.30. went to own compartment and did not leave it. (substantiated by macqueen and conductor.)evidence against him or suspicious circumstances—pipe-cleaner.

cyrus hardman, american subject, berth no. 16.

motive—none known.

alibi—midnight to 2 a.m. did not leave compartment. (substantiated by conductor except for period 1 to 1.15.)evidence against him or suspicious circumstances—none.

antonio foscarelli, american subject (italian by birth), berth no. 5, second class.

motive—none known.

alibi—midnight to 2 a.m. (vouched for by edward masterman.)evidence against him or suspicious circumstances—none, except that weapon used might be said to suit his temperament (vide m. bouc.)mary debenham, british subject, berth no. 11, second class.

motive—none

alibi—midnight to 2 a.m. (vouched for by greta ohlsson.)evidence against him or suspicious circumstances—conversation overheard by h. p., and her refusal to explain it.

hildegarde schmidt, german subject, berth no. 8, second class.

motive—none.

alibi—midnight to 2 a.m. (vouched for by conductor and her mistress.) went to bed. was aroused by conductor at 12.38 approx. and went to mistress.

note:—the evidence of the passengers is supported by the statement of the conductor that no one entered or left mr. ratchett’s compartment from midnight to 1 o’clock (when he himself went into the next coach) and from 1.15 to 2 o’clock.

“that document, you understand,” said poirot, “is a mere précis of the evidence we heard, arranged in that way for convenience.”

with a grimace, m. bouc handed it back. “it is not illuminating,” he said.

“perhaps you may find this more to your taste,” said poirot, with a slight smile as he handed him a second sheet of paper.