Contents ( 79)
- Contents
- Foreword
- Chapter 1
- The Letter
- Chapter 2
- Not from Captain Hastings’ Personal Narrative
- Chapter 3
- Andover
- Chapter 4
- Mrs Ascher
- Chapter 5
- Mary Drower
- Chapter 6
- The Scene of the Crime
- Chapter 7
- Mr Partridge and Mr Riddell
- Chapter 8
- The Second Letter
- Chapter 9
- The Bexhill-on-Sea Murder
- Chapter 10
- The Barnards
- Chapter 11
- Megan Barnard
- Chapter 12
- Donald Fraser
- Chapter 13
- A Conference
- Chapter 14
- The Third Letter
- Chapter 15
- Sir Carmichael Clarke
- Chapter 16
- Not from Captain Hastings’ Personal Narrative
- Chapter 17
- Marking Time
- Chapter 18
- Poirot Makes a Speech
- Chapter 19
- By Way of Sweden
- Chapter 20
- Lady Clarke
- Chapter 21
- Description of a Murderer
- Chapter 22
- Not from Captain Hastings’ Personal Narrative
- Chapter 23
- September 11th. Doncaster
- Chapter 24
- Not from Captain Hastings’ Personal Narrative
- Chapter 25
- Not from Captain Hastings’ Personal Narrative
- Chapter 26
- Not from Captain Hastings’ Personal Narrative
- Chapter 27
- The Doncaster Murder
- Chapter 28
- Not from Captain Hastings’ Personal Narrative
- Chapter 29
- At Scotland Yard
- Chapter 30
- Not from Captain Hastings’ Personal Narrative
- Chapter 31
- Hercule Poirot Asks Questions
- Chapter 32
- And Catch a Fox
- Chapter 33
- Alexander Bonaparte Cust
- Chapter 34
- Poirot Explains
- Chapter 35
- Finale
- E-Book Extras
- The Poirots
- Charles Osborne on The ABC Murders
- About Agatha Christie
- The Agatha Christie Collection
- www.agathachristie.com
Which was usually followed by a half-column of imbecilities.
M. Poirot Takes Grave View of Situation.
M. Poirot on the Eve of Success.
Captain Hastings, the great friend of M. Poirot, told our Special Representative…
‘Poirot,’ I would cry. ‘Pray believe me. I never said anything of the kind.’
My friend would reply kindly:
‘I know, Hastings—I know. The spoken word and the written—there is an astonishing gulf between them. There is a way of turning sentences that completely reverses the original meaning.’
‘I wouldn’t like you to think I’d said—’
‘But do not worry yourself. All this is of no importance. These imbecilities, even, may help.’
‘How?’
‘Eh bien,’ said Poirot grimly. ‘If our madman reads what I am supposed to have said to the Daily Blague today, he will lose all respect for me as an opponent!’
I am, perhaps, giving the impression that nothing practical was being done in the way of investigations. On the contrary, Scotland Yard and the local police of the various counties were indefatigable in following up the smallest clues.
Hotels, people who kept lodgings, boarding-houses—all those within a wide radius of the crimes were questioned minutely.
Hundreds of stories from imaginative people who had ‘seen a man looking very queer and rolling his eyes’, or ‘noticed a man with a sinister face slinking along’, were sifted to the last detail. No information, even of the vaguest character, was neglected. Trains, buses, trams, railway porters, conductors, bookstalls, stationers—there was an indefatigable round of questions and verifications.
At least a score of people were detained and questioned until they could satisfy the police as to their movements on the night in question.
The net result was not entirely a blank. Certain statements were borne in mind and noted down as of possible value, but without further evidence they led nowhere.
If Crome and his colleagues were indefatigable, Poirot seemed to me strangely supine. We argued now and again.
‘But what is it that you would have me do, my friend? The routine inquiries, the police make them better than I do. Always—always you want me to run about like the dog.’
‘Instead of which you sit at home like—like—’
‘A sensible man! My force, Hastings, is in my brain, not in my feet! All the time, whilst I seem to you idle, I am reflecting.’
‘Reflecting?’ I cried. ‘Is this a time for reflection?’
‘Yes, a thousand times yes.’
‘But what can you possibly gain by reflection? You know the facts of the three cases by heart.’
‘It is not the facts I reflect upon—but the mind of the murderer.’
‘The mind of a madman!’
‘Precisely. And therefore not to be arrived at in a minute. When I know what the murderer is like, I shall be able to find out who he is. And all the time I learn more. After the Andover crime, what did we know about the murderer? Next to nothing at all. After the Bexhill crime? A little more. After the Churston murder? More still. I begin to see—not what you would like to see—the outlines of a face and form but the outlines of a mind. A mind that moves and works in certain definite directions. After the next crime—’