"Precisely. The conductor without descends. It would be easy for our
man to leave the train unseen; it would be easy to catch a train back
to Paris or anywhere he pleases. And the crime would be put down as an
ordinary train robbery. But for the letter found in Madame's bag, the
Comte would not have been mentioned."
"It was an oversight on his part not to search that bag," declared the
Commissary.
"Without doubt he thought she had destroyed that letter. It was--pardon
me, Monsieur--it was an indiscretion of the first water to keep it."
"And yet," murmured Poirot, "it was an indiscretion the Comte might
have foreseen."
"You mean?"
"I mean we are all agreed on one point, and that is that the Comte de
la Roche knows one subject _à fond_: Women. How was it that, knowing
women as he does, he did not foresee that Madame would have kept that
letter?"
"Yes--yes," said the Examining Magistrate doubtfully, "there is
something in what you say. But at such times, you understand, a man
is not master of himself. He does not reason calmly. _Mon Dieu!_" he
added, with feeling, "if our criminals kept their heads and acted with
intelligence, how should we capture them?"
Poirot smiled to himself.
"It seems to me a clear case," said the other, "but a difficult one
to prove. The Comte is a slippery customer, and unless the maid can
identify him--"
"Which is most unlikely," said Poirot.
"True, true." The Examining Magistrate rubbed his chin. "It is going to
be difficult."
"If he did indeed commit the crime--" began Poirot. M. Caux interrupted.
"If--you say _if_?"
"Yes, Monsieur le Juge, I say _if_."
The other looked at him sharply. "You are right," he said at last, "we
go too fast. It is possible that the Comte may have an alibi. Then we
should look foolish."
"_Ah, ça par exemple_," replied Poirot, "that is of no importance
whatever. Naturally, if he committed the crime he will have an alibi. A
man with the Comte's experience does not neglect to take precautions.
No, I said _if_ for a very different reason."
"And what was that?"