logo

43 pages 1 hour read

Agatha Christie

Murder on the Orient Express

Fiction | Novel | Adult | Published in 1934

A modern alternative to SparkNotes and CliffsNotes, SuperSummary offers high-quality Study Guides with detailed chapter summaries and analysis of major themes, characters, and more.

Part 2, Chapters 1-15Chapter Summaries & Analyses

Part 2: “The Evidence”

Part 2, Chapter 1 Summary: “The Evidence of the Wagon Lit Conductor”

Part 2 includes a bird’s-eye sketch of the Orient Express train with all the cabins and a diagram of who was sleeping in which cabin on the night of the murder.

Poirot—accompanied by Bouc and Dr. Constantine—interviews the Frenchman Pierre Michel, the Wagon Lit conductor. Pierre gives an account of his whereabouts the evening that Mr. Ratchett (Cassetti) was killed. He reports checking in on Mr. Ratchett (Cassetti), which Poirot himself overheard. Pierre also reports seeing MacQueen and Colonel Arbuthnot talking in MacQueen’s compartment when he walked by. Pierre was summoned by the Princess Dragomiroff, who asked him to fetch her maid, Hildegarde Schmidt. Pierre then spent the remainder of the night sitting in his seat in the corridor, where Poirot saw him. Like Poirot, Pierre saw the person in the red silk kimono in the corridor. However, Pierre denies hearing the strange thump that Poirot heard outside his door.

Part 2, Chapter 2 Summary: “The Evidence of the Secretary”

Poirot, Bouc, and Dr. Constantine speak to MacQueen again. MacQueen says he was in his compartment speaking to Colonel Arbuthnot regarding politics in India and Prohibition in the United States. He says he noticed a conductor pass by at one point, as well as a woman in a red silk kimono, but he says he didn’t look closely enough to see her face and didn’t see her return down the hallway at any point. Poirot asks MacQueen if he and Mr. Ratchett (Cassetti) always traveled second class. MacQueen says that they normally traveled second class if it was possible, and that MacQueen went into the compartments before Mr. Ratchett (Cassetti) and kept his employer’s bags in his compartment. Poirot thanks MacQueen for his time.

Part 2, Chapter 3 Summary: “The Evidence of the Valet”

Poirot, with Bouc and Dr. Constantine, interviews Mr. Ratchett (Cassetti)’s valet, Edward Henry Masterman. Asked if he liked Mr. Ratchett (Cassetti), Masterman replies, “Shall we put it that I don’t care very much for Americans” (92). Masterman claims to not have known Mr. Ratchett’s true identity, although he admits being familiar with the Armstrong case. Edward recounts his night for Poirot and says he is sharing a compartment with “the Italian” (Antonio Foscarelli). He tells Poirot that Foscarelli went to bed around 10:30pm. Edward says that he lay awake until 4:00am due to a toothache. He denies having heard anything strange in the night. Poirot asks if Edward smokes a pipe to see if the pipe cleaner in Mr. Ratchett (Cassetti)’s compartment may be his. Edward says that he doesn’t.

Part 2, Chapter 4 Summary: “The Evidence of the American Lady”

Poirot, Bouc, and Dr. Constantine interview the American woman, Mrs. Hubbard, next. Mrs. Hubbard believes that the murderer entered her compartment through the connecting door from Mr. Ratchett (Cassetti)’s compartment in the night, and then slipped out through her compartment after she fell asleep. To prove her point, she presents Poirot with a button she found in her compartment—a metal button from a conductor’s uniform. Earlier that night, Mrs. Hubbard asked Greta Ohlsson, the Swedish woman, to check that the connecting door was bolted. Mrs. Hubbard says that Greta Ohlsson stopped by her compartment for an Aspirin before bed. Laughing, Mrs. Hubbard says that Ohlsson confused Mr. Ratchett (Cassetti)’s door for Mrs. Hubbard’s door and the Swedish woman was upset by her mistake. Mrs. Hubbard says that Ohlsson was flustered, saying that Mr. Ratchett (Cassetti) laughed at her intrusion.

Mrs. Hubbard further reveals that she heard a woman’s voice coming from Mr. Ratchett (Cassetti)’s room later in the night after Poirot asks her the color of her dressing gown. She says her dressing gown is purple silk, and that she was embarrassed to hear the woman in the next room so late at night. Before Mrs. Hubbard leaves, Poirot asks if the handkerchief with the “H” from Mr. Ratchett (Cassetti)’s compartment belongs to her. She says it isn’t hers, as her handkerchiefs are marked with all of her initials, not just with the “H.”

Part 2, Chapter 5 Summary: “The Evidence of the Swedish Lady”

Poirot, Bouc, and Dr. Constantine interview Greta Ohlsson. Greta confirms Mrs. Hubbard’s account: She checked that the connecting door between Mrs. Hubbard’s and Mr. Ratchett (Cassetti)’s room was bolted. She confirms that it was. Greta reveals she is sharing a compartment with Mary Debenham. Poirot asks about both women’s dressing gowns; neither has a red silk kimono. Asked if she knows about the Armstrong kidnapping case, Greta says no.

Part 2, Chapter 6 Summary: “The Evidence of the Russian Princess”

Poirot, Bouc, and Dr. Constantine call the train’s conductors into the restaurant car; none of them has lost a button from their uniform. This suggests that someone else was masquerading as a conductor.

Next, Poirot interviews Princess Dragomiroff. On the night of the murder, she says she went to bed right after dinner. When she couldn’t sleep, she rang the conductor (Pierre Michel) and asked him to get her maid, the German Hildegarde Schmidt—thereby confirming Pierre’s account. When Poirot asks Princess Dragomiroff if she knew the Armstrongs, she reveals that Colonel Armstrong’s wife, Sonia Armstrong, was her goddaughter. Princess Dragomiroff also knew Sonia’s mother, the actress Linda Arden. Poirot asks if Linda is alive, and Princess Dragomiroff says that she is, but lives in secluded retirement. Poirot asks Princess Dragomiroff about Linda’s second daughter (Sonia’s sister and Daisy’s aunt); Princess Dragomiroff says that she doesn’t remember the girl’s name but believes she married an Englishman.

Poirot tells the Princess that Mr. Ratchett was actually Cassetti, to which she responds, “In my view, then, this murder is an entirely admirable happening!” (119). Before Poirot dismisses her, he asks Princess Dragomiroff about the color of her dressing gown, and she replies that it is black satin.

Part 2, Chapter 7 Summary: “The Evidence of Count and Countess Andrenyi”

Poirot interviews Count Andrenyi by himself. He denies knowing the Armstrongs personally but is familiar with Daisy’s case. The Count says that he and his wife slept through the night, and that his wife took a sleeping draught before bed. The Count insists that his wife cannot help Poirot and should not be interviewed, but Poirot coaxes the man to retrieve his wife. While waiting, he notices a grease stain on the Countess’s passport. The Countess confirms that she took a sleeping draught before bed, that her husband smokes only cigarettes and cigars, and that her dressing gown is yellow. Poirot sums them up as “Two people who saw nothing and heard nothing” (126).

Part 2, Chapter 8 Summary: “The Evidence of Colonel Arbuthnot”

Poirot interviews Colonel Arbuthnot. The Colonel confirms the accounts of MacQueen and the conductor, Pierre Michel, saying that on the night of the murder, he was in MacQueen’s cabin talking until about 1:45 in the morning. Poirot asks the Colonel’s opinion of Mary Debenham, the only other English passenger, and suggests her involvement in the crime. The Colonel rejects Mary’s involvement and says that she had never seen Mr. Ratchett (Cassetti) before meeting on the train. He also says he remembers a woman passing the compartment as he spoke with MacQueen—he remembers her scent. However, the Colonel is eager to affirm Mary’s innocence, as “His first natural distaste for being questioned by ‘foreigners’ had evaporated” (134).

When Poirot informs the Colonel—who claims to have no intimate connection to the Armstrongs, although he knew of them—that Mr. Ratchett was actually Cassetti, the Colonel replies that he thinks Cassetti deserved his death. The following exchange between Poirot and the Colonel ensues:

‘In fact, Colonel Arbuthnot, you prefer law-and-order to private vengeance?’
‘Well, you can’t go about having blood feuds and stabbing each other like Corsicans or the Mafia. […] Say what you like, trial by jury is a sound system’ (134).

After Colonel Arbuthnot leaves, Poirot discusses what’s been learned with Bouc and Dr. Constantine. They note that the Colonel smokes a pipe, whereas the other men interviewed thus far smoke cigarettes. Since there was a pipe cleaner in Mr. Ratchett (Cassetti)’s compartment, this points to the Colonel. However, Poirot rules him out based on psychology: “One must respect the psychology. The crime has a signature, and it is certainly not the signature of Colonel Arbuthnot” (136).

Part 2, Chapter 9 Summary: “The Evidence of Mr. Hardman”

Poirot interviews Cyrus B. Hardman, who reveals that he is a private detective from New York, hired by Mr. Ratchett (Cassetti) to protect his safety. Hardman reveals that Mr. Ratchett (Cassetti) was particularly afraid of an enemy described as “A small man, dark, with a womanish kind of voice” (141). Nobody on the train matches this description, and this figure will prove to be a red herring meant to throw Poirot off. When Poirot reveals Mr. Ratchett’s true identity, Hardman appears to be shocked.

Part 2, Chapter 10 Summary: “The Evidence of the Italian”

Poirot interviews the Italian, Antonio Foscarelli. Foscarelli is sharing a compartment with Masterman and confirms Masterman’s story. Foscarelli confirms that the Englishman—who he describes as “the miserable John Bull”—had a toothache (147). After Foscarelli leaves, Bouc, Poirot, and Dr. Constantine discuss Foscarelli’s statement. Bouc suspects the Italian because he says, “Italians use the knife! And they are great liars! I do not like Italians” (148). However, Poirot notes that a stabbing is more likely to occur in a heated quarrel, but that this crime is different: “It is a far-sighted, long-headed crime. It is no—how shall I express it?—a Latin crime. It is a crime that shows traces of a cool, resourceful, deliberate brain—I think an Anglo-Saxon brain” (149).

Part 2, Chapter 11 Summary: “The Evidence of Miss Debenham”

Poirot interviews Mary Debenham. She claims she never saw Mr. Ratchett (Cassetti) until the previous day on the train. Poirot notes that she is very “Anglo-Saxon” in her response because she shows no emotion at the mention of the murder. Mary already knows Mr. Ratchett’s real identity thanks to Mrs. Hubbard, who has told the whole train that he was really Cassetti. Mary says she doesn’t have a red silk dressing gown. Mary herself saw the woman in the red silk dressing gown, describing the individual as “Tallish and slim” and noting that the kimono was embroidered with dragons (154).

Part 2, Chapter 12 Summary: “The Evidence of the German Lady’s Maid”

Poirot, Bouc, and Dr. Constantine discuss Mary’s interview. Poirot reveals that he was trying to find a flaw in Mary’s cool self-possession because he suspects her. Dr. Constantine argues, “She is cold. She has not emotions. She would not stab a man. She would sue him in the law courts” (156). At this point, Poirot reveals the conversation he heard between Mary and Colonel Arbuthnot in Aleppo: “Not now. Not now. When it’s all over. When it’s behind us—then—” (11).

Next, Poirot interviews Hildegarde Schmidt, Princess Dragomiroff’s maid. Hildegarde confirms Princess Dragomiroff’s story: The conductor Pierre Michel came to get Hildegarde, upon Princess Dragomiroff’s request, because Princess Dragomiroff couldn’t sleep. Hildegarde gave Princess Dragomiroff a massage so she could sleep, then returned to her compartment and went to sleep herself. Hildegarde says she did not see the woman in the red kimono. However, she did see a conductor coming out of a compartment, but it was not the same one who woke her up to attend to the Princess. Poirot murmurs to Bouc and asks Hildegarde if the handkerchief is hers. She responds that it’s not hers, but it is a lady’s handkerchief and very expensive.

All three of the train’s conductors enter the room, and Hildegard says that none of them is the conductor she saw. She clarifies: “The one I saw was small and dark. He had a little moustache. His voice when he said Pardon was weak like a woman’s” (162). This description matches with Hardman’s description of Mr. Ratchett (Cassetti)’s feared enemy, corroborating the false clue and creating a more powerful red herring to lead Poirot astray.

Part 2, Chapter 13 Summary: “Summary of the Passengers’ Evidence”

Poirot, Bouc, and Dr. Constantine discuss the evidence gathered from the passengers thus far. Poirot surmises, “What to my mind is so interesting in this case is that we have none of the facilities afforded to the police. We cannot investigate the bona fides of any of these people. We have to rely solely on deduction” (166).

Poirot notes that four witnesses corroborate the story of the strange conductor, directly or indirectly, described as the “small dark man with a womanish voice dressed in Wagon Lit uniform” (167). Hildegarde Schmidt saw the “womanish voice” masquerader specifically. Meanwhile, Colonel Arbuthnot and MacQueen testify to seeing a conductor pass MacQueen’s compartment—however, at this time, Pierre was in his seat, suggesting that the conductor MacQueen and Colonel Arbuthnot saw was the “womanish voice” masquerader. There is also the question of the conductor’s button found in Mrs. Hubbard’s room.

Poirot questions whether this strange conductor really exists. He proposes that the conductor with the womanish voice may in fact be a woman. Later, it will become clear that there was no masquerading conductor. The button and subsequent clues (like a conductor’s uniform found tucked into Hildegarde Schmidt’s luggage) are all false clues.

Poirot says they must search all the passengers’ luggage. He suspects they will find the scarlet kimono in a man’s suitcase, and the conductor’s uniform in a woman’s. Before they begin the search, Mrs. Hubbard bursts in, saying that she’s found a bloody knife in one of her bags. She faints.

Part 2, Chapter 14 Summary: “The Evidence of the Weapon”

Dr. Constantine examines the knife and confirms that it’s the murder weapon. This supports Mrs. Hubbard’s theory that the murderer entered her compartment from Mr. Ratchett (Cassetti)’s through the connecting door. He ditched the knife in her room—and, it seems, lost a button from his fake conductor’s uniform in the process. It seems that Greta may have made a mistake when confirming if the connecting door was properly bolted.

Part 2, Chapter 15 Summary: “The Evidence of the Passengers’ Luggage”

Poirot, Bouc, and Dr. Constantine search the passengers’ luggage. While searching Mary Debenham’s luggage, Poirot asks her about the conversation he overheard her having with Colonel Arbuthnot. Mary refuses to explain. The Wagon Lit uniform turns up in the suitcase of Hildegarde Schmidt as Poirot expected it to. The red kimono turns up in Poirot’s suitcase. He responds, “So […] It is like that. A defiance. Very well. I take it up” (197).

Part 2, Chapters 1-15 Analysis

The entire second part of the book is focused on gathering evidence. Poirot does this through hands-on physical sleuthing—for example, by searching the passenger’s luggage—and, more significantly, through interrogation. In each interview, Poirot is accompanied by Bouc and Dr. Constantine, who serve as a presence for allowing Poirot to give voice to his theories and thoughts as he gathers evidence.

These chapters continue to examine the theme of Xenophobic Discrimination in the post-WWI context. Nationalistic attitudes and discriminatory language are evident among the characters. For example, Antonio Foscarelli is more commonly referred to as “the Italian” than by his name. Bouc suspects Foscarelli because of his nationality, stereotyping him thusly: “Italians use the knife! And they are great liars! I do not like Italians” (148). Foscarelli, for his part, expresses dislike of English Masterman,” calling him “the miserable John Bull” (147). Colonel Arbuthnot likewise expresses discrimination more broadly, aimed at anyone who isn’t English, like him.

The theme of The Psychology of Investigation is also emphasized more clearly in Part 2 of the book. Poirot himself explicates the theme directly, saying, “One must respect the psychology. The crime has a signature, and it is certainly not the signature of Colonel Arbuthnot” (136). Poirot shows how to “respect the psychology” in the chapters to come. For example, he disputes Bouc’s suggestion that “the Italian” is the murderer saying, “It is a far-sighted, long-headed crime. It is no—how shall I express it?—a Latin crime. It is a crime that shows traces of a cool, resourceful, deliberate brain—I think an Anglo-Saxon brain” (149). Bouc and Dr. Constantine also try to emulate Poirot’s psychological techniques. When Poirot hints that Mary Debenham may be the murderer, Dr. Constantine counters, “She is cold. She has not emotions. She would not stab a man. She would sue him in the law courts” (156). In both examples, it should be noted that the investigators are relying on assumptions about national character, reinforcing the xenophobic ideas at work in the novel.

The Psychology of Investigation continues to be brought to the forefront due to the locked-room nature of the mystery. Poirot reminds the reader of this again when he says, “What to my mind is so interesting in this case is that we have none of the facilities afforded to the police. We cannot investigate the bona fides of any of these people. We have to rely solely on deduction” (166). Poirot’s statement serves as a reminder to the reader to focus on the characters as clues and not the physical clues of the case.

The second part of the book also introduces the theme of Justice Versus Retribution. This theme is first outlined when Colonel Arbuthnot learns that Mr. Ratchett is Cassetti. He quickly states, “The swine deserved what he got. Though I would have preferred to have seen him properly hanged—or electrocuted, I suppose, over there” (133). As Cassetti was acquitted on a technicality after being on trial for the kidnapping and murder of a small child, the Colonel represents the argument for retribution where the justice system has failed. The Colonel is expressing a preference for a “proper” law-and-order process within the confines of the criminal justice system (a system that includes capital punishment—death). However, in the absence of this “proper” type of justice, the Colonel can still condone retribution that also leads to death. One of the central questions of the novel is whether extralegal justice taken on by individuals is ever warranted, and several times in the novel, characters express to Poirot that they believe it is. This is fitting, as it provides a justification for their murder plot. What may surprise a reader is that, ultimately, Poirot will come to agree with them.

Colonel Arbuthnot, in response to Poirot, a de facto representative for justice, responds with reason after openly condoning retributive acts:

‘In fact, Colonel Arbuthnot, you prefer law-and-order to private vengeance?’
‘Well, you can’t go about having blood feuds and stabbing each other like Corsicans or the Mafia. […] Say what you like, trial by jury is a sound system’ (133).

With his words, Colonel Arbuthnot manages to bring together two themes—the theme of Justice Versus Retribution, and the theme of Xenophobic Discrimination. Ironically, Colonel Arbuthnot will prove himself no “better” than the Corsicans or Mafia he insults here. The Colonel himself will take part in a form of vigilante justice that operates outside the limits of the traditional system of justice he champions.

blurred text
blurred text
blurred text
blurred text