Everand Logo

Welcome to Everand!

  • Discover millions of ebooks, audiobooks, and so much more with a free trial

    Only $11.99/month after trial. Cancel anytime.

    Strong Poison
    Strong Poison
    Strong Poison
    Ebook355 pages5 hours

    Strong Poison

    By Simon Winchester

    4/5

    ()

    Read preview

    About this ebook

    Harriet Vane may face the hangman for the murder of her fiancé—and only Lord Peter Wimsey can save her—in this “model detective story” (The New York Times).

    Lord Peter Wimsey comes to the trial of Harriet Vane for a glimpse at one of the most engaging murder cases London has seen in years. Unfortunately for the detective, the crime’s details are distractingly salacious, and there is little doubt that the woman will be found guilty. A slightly popular mystery novelist, she stands accused of poisoning her fiancé, a literary author and well-known advocate of free love. Over the course of a few weeks, she bought strychnine, prussic acid, and arsenic, and when her lover died the police found enough poison in his veins to kill a horse. But as Lord Peter watches Harriet in the dock, he begins to doubt her guilt—and to fall in love.
     
    As Harriet awaits the hangman, Lord Peter races to prove her innocence, hoping that for the first time in his life, love will triumph over death.
     
    Strong Poison is the sixth book in the Lord Peter Wimsey Mysteries, but you may enjoy the series by reading the books in any order.
     
    This ebook features an illustrated biography of Dorothy L. Sayers including rare images from the Marion E. Wade Center at Wheaton College.
    LanguageEnglish
    PublisherOpen Road Media
    Release dateJul 31, 2012
    ISBN9781453258897
    Strong Poison
    Author

    Simon Winchester

    Simon Winchester is the acclaimed author of many books, including The Professor and the Madman, The Men Who United the States, The Map That Changed the World, The Man Who Loved China, A Crack in the Edge of the World, and Krakatoa, all of which were New York Times bestsellers and appeared on numerous best and notable lists. In 2006, Winchester was made an officer of the Order of the British Empire (OBE) by Her Majesty the Queen. He resides in western Massachusetts.

    Read more from Simon Winchester

    Related to Strong Poison

    Titles in the series (22)

    View More
    View More

    Related ebooks

    Mystery, Thriller & Crime Fiction For You

    View More
    View More

    Related podcast episodes

    Related articles

    • Article

      The Mystery Of Christie

      Dec 4, 2020

      The Mystery Of Christie
      4 min read

    • Article

      Murder mystery

      Jan 26, 2023

      Murder mystery
      4 min read

    • Article

      Gory Stories

      Jun 5, 2022

      Gory Stories
      4 min read

    • Article

      The Mississippi Truth

      Feb 2, 2022

      YOU’D think I might be embarrassed to write about truthfulness. And, if not embarrassed, I’d at least feel a little shameful. The truth is, where I come from, the clean-as-a-bone truth is never appreciated as much as a good story that provides an ext

      4 min read

    • Article

      Ten Thrillers Based on Real-Life Events

      Mar 17, 2021

      These books works of entertainment, yes, but honorable, thought-provoking, and deeply compelling. The post Ten Thrillers Based on Real-Life Events appeared first on The Millions.

      6 min read

    • Article

      ‘Each Envelope Was A Treasure’: How I Became Le Carré’s Friend And Reader

      Oct 8, 2022

      I’d seen the man on several occasions, seated in a corner of my local pub. I was clueless as to who he was. Then, in the aftermath of the Iraq war, I went to the Wells Tavern [in Hampstead] with a journalist, who knew the white-haired, conservatively

      3 min read

    • Article

      Elizabeth of York: The Last White Rose

      May 4, 2022

      Headline £20 In February 1485, Elizabeth of York, daughter of Edward IV, wrote a letter to the Duke of Norfolk. Elizabeth had, along with her brothers and her mother, been dispossessed and dishonoured by her uncle, Richard. He had declared his brothe

      3 min read

    • Article

      In The Name Of White Divinity

      Aug 5, 2009

      It recently occurred to me that in order to really understand the Civil War, and the people living in that era, I would need some familiarity with the Bible. I know as much about the Bible as I know about opera, car engines, and construction. But I c

      3 min read

    • Article

      Laugh? You Had To Be There

      Feb 29, 2024

      THE TROUBLE WITH lawyers’ jokes, said the wag, is that lawyers don’t find them funny, and no one else thinks they are jokes. Now, this is not entirely the fault of lawyers, who have to contend with modern public life, which is as humourless as it is

      3 min read

    • Article

      Books

      Feb 19, 2021

      At a local newspaper in South East London in 1957, journalist Jean Swinney receives a curious letter written to the editor. Gretchen Tilbury – abeautiful, well-to-do woman – claims her 10-year-old daughter is the product of a virgin birth. Gretchen h

      5 min read

    • Article

      Freedom Tales

      Sep 1, 2022

      In 1825, Lydia Maria Francis was only 23 years old, but she had already written two novels that had made her a literary celebrity. She was fiercely proud of her country’s new history and bright promise, and her protagonists exhibited all the virtues

      11 min read

    • Article

      The Man Who Became Uncle Tom

      Sep 8, 2023

      The Man Who Became Uncle Tom
      22 min read

    • Article

      Fiction on Trial

      Sep 5, 2023

      Fiction on Trial
      10 min read

    • Article

      The 31 GREATEST BOOKS FOR MEN

      May 1, 2019

      Meet Rob. He’s the manager of a London record shop in which he and his sad friends make top-five lists, talk about mix tapes and obsess over albums by dead blues musicians. Then Rob decides to get in touch with five of his ex-girlfriends to find out

      8 min read

    Related categories

    Reviews for Strong Poison

    4/5

    74 ratings64 reviews

    What did you think?

    Tap to rate

    Review must be at least 10 words

    • 4/5
      It was strange for me to feel Lord Peter really was behaving stupidly this read. I first read these as a teenager and no one seemed more sophisticated and clever than LP. Then in my 30s the classism grated. This read, the precipitous declaration of intent and its persistence seemed off. Of course it is still a very clever, rather fun read, but I don't think it is the best of the Lord Peter books.
    • 5/5
      STRONG POISON (1930) by Dorthy L. Sayers. A very strong book in the series, STRONG POISON shows why Lord Peter was and is such a fan favorite. Herein a young woman is accused of poisoning her former lover. The case looks hopeless of course but Lord Peter Wimsey must step in and prove she had nothing to do with the crime. After all, after one glance Lord Peter knows that Harriet Vane is the woman he will marry. It just wouldn’t do to have her face the gallows before he can get her to agree to the proposition.This is a witty, light-hearted book, the dialog brilliant and frothy, the charm of both Wimsey and Vane sparkles whenever the two are on the same page, and while the mystery is not a deep one, remember, it is just a sideline to the real show of the romance that blossoms.This is the sixth book in the series and, to do justice to them all, you should read them in order. What ever you do, do not skip ahead of this one or I promise you will be disappointed in yourself.
    • 4/5
      This is the book that introduces Harriet Vane as Peter Wimsey's love interest. Vane is a mystery novelist, not conventionally pretty but very smart, who at the start of the book is on trial for the murder of her ex-lover by poison, exactly as described in one of her novels. Wimsey improbably falls in love with her just watching her in the courtroom and proposes marriage almost immediately, despite Vane's scandalous behavior of having lived with her lover before marriage.The case against Vane appears air-tight, yet Wimsey is determined to free her, and he enlists the help of Miss Clemson, a courage and savvy spinster and part of Wimsey's "cattery," a sort of secretarial pool that serves as his amateur detective agency. It's all fun stuff, with tea and bake shops and mediums and rich old ladies with hidden wills. I enjoyed it immensely, although I figured out the murder method easily, and you will, too.
    • 4/5
      This is the book where Peter meets Harriet. As a mystery, it's more of a "how did he do it?" than "who did it?" because there is only one possible suspect. But getting there is lots of fun. Sayers is a talented writer, and there are scenes that are laugh out loud funny, as well as nerve-wrackingly tense. The characters are wonderful. Peter Wimsey is always a delight, and Miss Murcheson, Bunter, and his other assistants are well-drawn and real. Harriet herself is wonderful. She is prickly, angry, and not at all soft-spoken. She is not in the least interested in Peter, and says so. Fun all around.
    • 3/5
      There was really only one suspect, one person it could possibly be, and those kinds of mysteries are a total bore. Probably shouldn't give it three stars, but I liked Harriet Vane. She's worth one star, but I'm not sure I liked her enough to read another Wimsey novel. This is the second one I've tried, and at least I finished this one.
    • 5/5
      This Lord Peter Wimsey mystery narrates the beginning of Lord Peter's relationship with Harriet Vane when Peter falls in love with Harriet as she is on trial for her lover's murder. Like all the rest of Sayers that I have read so far, it is not only a well-constructed and amusing mystery, but raises some deeper thought questions, in this case, whether a romantic relationship can grow in a healthy way under the circumstances of Peter having saved Harriet's life and the ongoing social stigma of her having lived with her lover in an era when that is unacceptable. A great read.
    • 4/5
      A favourite Wimsey.
    • 5/5
      Strong Poison is the fifth of Dorothy L. Sayers' full-length murder-mystery novels featuring aristocratic amateur detective Lord Peter Wimsey. This is the novel in which he meets the love of his life, Harriet Vane, under adverse circumstances - she is being tried for the murder of her lover.

      Lord Peter is convinced that Harriet is innocent, but unfortunately he is the only person (other than Harriet herself) to think so; indeed, the evidence is overwhelming. But Lord Peter is determined to prove Harriet innocent, and to woo her at the same time.

      Both of this objectives turn out to be rather difficult; the real murderer is diabolically clever, and Harriet herself has been hurt by her appalling lover (a young man whom I consider to be very much better off dead) and by her ordeal. Lord Peter's proposal falls sadly flat: it's only one of many she's had since she was arrested, since notoriety is attractive to some. Her opinion of men, therefore, would require deep-shaft mining equipment to be lower, and her opinion of herself is hardly better.

      I've read this book many times; it's one of my favourites in the series. Not only is Sayers' plotting beautifully, devilishly, clever, but she is an excellent writer of character. Lord Peter comes across as rather dramatic and affected, but as you get to know him, you realise it's mostly a pose to hide his real feelings from the world. After all, if the world is going to laugh at him, he is damn well going to be in control of what they laugh at, and when.

      Harriet, on the other hand, is a clever, middle-class young woman who got involved with a young man who tricked her into becoming his lover - in a society where sex before marriage was still shocking - by declaring that he, an avant garde novelist, didn't believe in marriage. Now she's agreed, and damned herself into the eyes of society thereby, he is ready to reward her sacrifice with marriage. She sees right through his hypocrisy and dumps him, thus beginning the chain of events that ends with her in the dock.

      The pair of them are real, complex people. They've both been hurt in the past; they're both ferociously intelligent (Sayers herself was one of the first female Oxford graduates, and she does the reader the courtesy of assuming they are just as intelligent as she and her characters are) and they're both proud, although of different things. They are clearly drawn to each other, but Harriet can't bring herself to trust anyone, certainly not someone to whom she owes a debt of gratitude. Right from the beginning, though, you know that they are meant for each other - it's a union of minds, not a union of bodies. It's a refreshing change from so many of today's novels where lust takes the place of love, and authors write characters who are physically attracted to each other but seem to pay no attention to each other's personalities.

      Anyone, moreover, who expects that Harriet will fall into Peter's arms at the end of the book is doomed to disappointment: why would she? She has her life back, given to her by Peter, but does that mean that he now has the right to dictate how she will spend it? No, it does not, and Harriet is determined to make sure he - and everyone else - knows that. Poor Peter is going to have to do a lot more digging, and Harriet is going to have to forgive him for being the person to get her out of a humiliating hole - and forgive herself for being fool enough to fall in love with an unworthy man, which got her into the hole in the first place - before she can regain the emotional strength and equilibrium to make a new start.

      Harriet and Peter are real; they are hurt, and they occasionally hurt each other, either intentionally or accidentally. They each want what the relationship promises, but they are also afraid of it. Their relationship begins badly on both sides, and it takes a long time for them to repair the damage. And we get to see it happen, not in one book, because it's too complex a process for that - such problems are not so easy to solve. It takes several books, but the wait is worth it.

      The Lord Peter Wimsey books are classics of detective fiction; it was first published in 1930 and is still in print. How many of today's novels will still be in print in seventy years' time? But unlike many classics, Lord Peter has stood the test of time. Yes, in some ways he is dated - the way he speaks, the way he dresses, his whole world, is gone. But his humanity, the relationships he has with his beloved (eccentric) mother the Dowager Duchess, his huntin', shootin' and fishin' older brother the Duke of Denver and the appalling Helen, the Duchess; his valet - not only manservant but also right-hand-man and, in a way, trusted friend - these are still very relevant.

      The Lord Peter Wimsey books are some of my favourites; I've read all of them over and over. If you like a well-written story with excellent characterisation and some fiendish plotting, then you will enjoy these books too.
    • 4/5
      Strong Poison by Dorothy L. Sayers is the fifth featuring Lord Peter Wimsey, a nobleman and an amateur detective.The story takes place in 1930 London. Mystery author Harriet Vane is on trial for the murder of her lover, Philip Boyes. The trial ends with a hung jury and is scheduled to be heard again in a month. Following the trial, Lord Peter visits Harriet in prison and declares his belief in her innocence and promises to catch the real murderer. He also announces his intention to marry her - which she rejects. Lord Peter enlists his friends and associates in his endeavor - DI Charles Parker, Hon. Freddy Arbuthnot and a highly entertaining "spy", Miss Murchison.To be honest, it took me a bit to get into the book. The original crime is presented by the judge at the trial summarizing the case before sending the jury out for deliberation. In both book and audio format, this setup was slow and ponderous. However, once Wimsey starts investigating the crime, the pace picks up and the story becomes more interesting. There is a seance scene with Miss Murchison which is laugh-out-loud in parts. The crime is, of course, solved.Rating: 4 stars.
    • 4/5
      My first Sir Peter Wimsey story and it won't be my last! Sir Peter is clever and amusing and in this story, works hard to absolve a young woman of a murder charge before she is sentenced to death. The clock is ticking to discover how and why a man is poisoned with arsenic and rescue the fair damsel.
    • 4/5
      This was my second Dorothy Sayers novel (immediately following my first) and I enjoyed it just as much. The question of who committed the murder in this case was relatively straightforward but the trick was in how it was done. The plot was decently complex and the strategies used by Lord Peter Wimsey are amusing and clever. Like with the first one I read, one of the things I enjoyed most was the witty dialogue. I highly recommend her!
    • 5/5
      So funny. A bit of Wodehouse, a bit of Christie, I'd say a bit of Mitford as well if it weren't so completely anachronistic. The mystery was very weak but it's a lovely way to get eccentric characters together and have them do eccentric things. An Eccentric Novel, which is kind of my favourite genre. Terrific female characters. Unforgettable, hilarious scenes. I'm so pleased I found Sayers, what a treat that book was.
    • 2/5
      I know, it is me, I am wrong, this book is the greatest thing ever, but I found it precious and silly and the characters were sort of ridiculous, and not in a good way. I am clearly not the target audience, despite being middle aged and a fan of PBS.
    • 4/5
      I loved this! It made me laugh, and I didn't see the mystery's solution coming.

      Also-- I want a butler.
    • 3/5
      A Lord Peter Whimsey mystery. Good minor characters, but too talky for me, plus unrealistic love story. Not really my cup of tea.
    • 5/5
      Definitely the best of this series so far. Harriet Vane is on trial for the murder(by poisoning) of her ex-boyfriend. Peter Wimsey falls in love with her, wants to marry her and sets out to prove her innocence. Very well plotted, with a plausible motive and method and a satisfactory villain. Miss Climpson again excellent, stooping to faking spiritualist abilities, but unable to reconcile it with her conscience to hold a seance on a Sunday. Miss Murchison and the whole Cattery organisation are inspired. Finally, the dialogue between Peter and Harriet was excellent for its frankness, humour, equality and the respect with which he treats her conscience, past decisions and her right to determine her future.
    • 4/5
      Back to the beginning of the Wimsey-Vane series, and I enjoyed this one as much as Busman's Honeymoon. Good mystery, witty characters ... a real delight.
    • 4/5
      From the public gallery Lord Peter Wimsey falls in love with Harriet Vane, the accused in a murder trial, and a complete stranger to him. When the jury is not able to come to a decision, a new trial is ordered thus allowing Wimsey one month to come up with the evidence that will prove her innocence - of which he is certain. Lord Peter has a couple of advantages as a sleuth: his great wealth allows him to hire help without limitation; and probably in deference to his aristocratic status, he is granted many liberties. His excuse for questioning the victim's father: "I know Miss Vane. In fact I like her very much, don't you know." This comes after only one brief meeting with her! I love the golden age mysteries especially those with Lord Peter Wimsey, one of my favourite characters. This was a particularly fun story from Sayers.
    • 3/5
      Nicely written Golden Age mystery where Harriet Vane is first introduced into Peter Wimsey's world. It seems quite obvious that she's guilty of having murdered her former lover, but Lord Peter is not convinced and tries to work out what actually did happen. The mystery is peeled back bit by bit with strong input from some interesting minor characters.
    • 5/5
      The Mystery section of our library has run out of space, so they've been doing a succession of special promotions to show off parts of the collection, up at the front with new books. Previously, they did crime novels of or about the Depression, to tie in with the Steinbeck Big Read.
      Now they're doing mysteries set in the UK. I've checked out two of the Christie's I had been meaning to reread, in their pretty new dustjackets, and I also picked up this one. Even though I know there's at least one copy in the house, I checked it out, because they need the room.
      So far, 26 pages in, I'm loving it.

      ***

      Perhaps November is best spent reading mysteries from the 30s and 40s. I can't help comparing Wimsey's courtship of Harriet Vane to Charles' endless pining for Mallory in the books by O'Connell.
      Anyway, a fine, traditional sort of whodunnit, enlivened by Sayers' humorous tone. Sweet, really.
    • 3/5
      I probably should've read these in order, but my book club picked out a couple to read, so this was one of them.

      'Strong Poison' is a solid, old-fashioned mystery. I thought it was a little bit predictable, but Sayers being influential on the development of the mystery genre probably has a lot to do with that.

      Harriet Vane, mystery writer, is accused of the murder of her ex-lover. The evidence against her seems pretty damning - but Lord Peter Wimsey, dilettante investigator, is convinced of her innocence, and will commit his not-insignificant resources to clear her name. But is he blinded by his romantic infatuation with the accused?

      The sequences with Miss Climpson and the faux-seances were the highlight of the book, for me.
    • 3/5
      This of course is the Wimsey novel in which he meets his future wife Harriet Vane by seeing her on trial for the murder of her former lover. There is some quite good dialog between them, but the story is not my favorite since the victim was poisoned by arsenic and Sayers (like Vane, and unlike some mystery writers of the period) knew enough about arsenic poisoning to make clear it is very unpleasant (though not as nasty as the poison in The Documents in the Case).
    • 3/5
      By now you will have surmised that I got a load of Sayers books in 2006 and had at them. True.

      This one is the first one with Sayers' authorial insertion character, Harriet Vane, which works out a lot better than you might expect. Sayers is quite realistic about herself, it's Wimsey she puts on a ludicrous pedestal.

      Reread in August 2011.
    • 3/5
      This was the first Peter Wimsey mystery that I didn't find totally satisfying. I had really high hopes; I couldn't wait to find out how Peter and Harriet met, and why Peter fell in love with her.

      It starts off promisingly enough - the judge is summarizing the case against Harriet for the jury, who are about to start their deliberations. It's a pretty strong case; Harriet's former lover died of arsenic poisoning, and Harriet had been buying arsenic for research purposes.

      Now, first of all, it was really easy to figure out who the real murderer was. Normally Sayers keeps me guessing much longer than she did here.

      Second of all, Peter does almost nothing from beginning to end. Miss Climpson and her staff do all the actual detecting - Peter mostly flops around feeling a little useless because love for Harriet has impaired his judgement.

      Third of all, Peter is already in love with Harriet as the book begins. Not only do we not see him actually falling in love, the first thing he ever says to her is to ask her to marry him. This is romantic and all, but what makes Peter and Harriet's relationship so magical to me, at least, is their repartee - they're so well matched in wit, sensibility, and principle. I thought something more mature than love at first sight would bring them together.

      There's a little bit of a twist - but I guessed it around the same time as I guessed the murderer, which is to say pretty early on.

      I still enjoyed Strong Poison, quite a bit, but Sayers has done better.
    • 5/5
      I have long loved the novels of Dorothy L Sayers, in particular those featuring Peter Wimsey and Harriet Vane. I haven't re-read them for a while, though. So discovering them on audiobook has been very exciting. I have just finished listening to the audiobook of Strong Poison, which was wonderful, and will be starting on Have His Carcase soon. I had forgotten how much humour there is in Strong Poison, and it's not just Lord Peter's wit. Ms Climpson's and Ms Murchison's investigations are a hoot!
    • 4/5
      Good fun as usual. The love story subplot was mildly entertaining, but fairly minor. The primary mystery was interesting and wrapped up nicely - and the Spiritualist/medium interlude was hilarious and brillant.
    • 3/5
      Sayers, Dorothy L. Strong Poison. New York: HarperPaperbacks, 1995.Lord Peter Wimsey is at it again. Only this time in addition to solving the mystery he's looking to fill his personal void. He wants a wife. While his methods are a bit strange (he proposes to a virtual stranger, someone he is trying to prove isn't a murderer) you can't help but love his enthusiasm. Harriet Vane is a mystery writer who just happens to know a thing or two about poison so when her estranged fiancee shows up dead...poisoned...guess who gets the blame? For all appearances this is an open and shut case. She had the motive and the means but Lord Wimsey thinks differently. Her first trial is thrown out due to a deadlocked jury so Wimsey has time to rebuild Harriet's defense...and propose with the promise "I've been told I make love rather nicely" (p 46).
    • 4/5
      The novel in which Harriet Vane is introduced and Miss Climpson is bowed out. It was a difficult book to write since it, unlike previous books, strayed into the territory of the romance novel. Lord Peter has to be made sexy somehow and is, in unfortunate paragraph, described as imperious. At least no bodices were ripped.Miss Climpson, who was introduced in Unnatural Death, has most of the best dialogue. Unfortunately, while her campaign to discover the will is ingeniously conducted, it is difficult to believe in the extraordinary spiritualist beliefs of the nurse whom she deceives.Norman Urqhart's improbably lengthy description of the career of Cremorna Gardens' various relative over the breakfast table suggests that Sayer's just didn't want to be bothered to write dialogue.Sayers is occasionally quite poetic, as when she describes Lord Peter's realization that he is growing older and less carefree.Her satire of Bohemian London _is_ funny, but so broad that it is not as funny as some of her other efforts.
    • 5/5
      Strong Poison by Dorothy Sayers is one of my favorite books in this series. A woman is on trial for poisoning her lover. The evidence points, overwhelmingly, to her guilt -- but Lord Peter is convinced that she is innocent. In fact, he takes a rather personal interest in this particular case. . . .This book introduces a character who plays a significant role in future books, and also advances certain through-running plot lines. The dialogue is excellent, even better than in the earlier books, and a few lines had me nearly rolling with laughter (there's a conversation between Lord Peter and his sister concerning pajamas that is particularly noteworthy). I reread this book more recently than most of the others, so had some vague memories about the solution to the crime, but this is one of those rare detective novels that bears rereading even without that element of surprise.
    • 5/5
      Where I got the book: my bookshelf.Lord Peter Wimsey's latest case has high stakes. He's fallen in love with the accused, novelist Harriet Vane, and has one month to save her from hanging for the death of her former lover, Philip Boyes. Boyes was poisoned with arsenic, the method Harriet used in her latest novel; and who else would want to kill a young man of dubious talent and no wealth?As my bookfriends have reminded me, Sayers used this novel to work out some of her own relationship issues with an ex-boyfriend, the writer John Cournos. He had pressured her to sleep with him and she'd refused; after their breakup, she had a rebound affair that resulted in a secret illegitimate child, thus proving her point. In Strong Poison Sayers has Harriet live "in sin" with Boyes and then break up with him when he proposes marriage, on the principle that he made a fool of her by propounding free love and then going all traditional after she'd given in. Wimsey, of course, is not in the least bit perturbed by Harriet's past (having sown his own wild oats fairly liberally) and proposes at their first meeting. I remember reading that Sayers intended to end the book with Harriet and Peter falling into each other's arms, and then realized that this would be completely wrong for the character she'd written. It takes another two books and five years of the characters' lives to get to yes.As far as the mystery goes, this is fairly standard stuff, based almost entirely on motive (thus, I believe, breaking Wimsey's own rule that when you know how, you know who--the how only gets worked out at the last minute). The charm of this book lies in seeing the characters break out into so much human fallibility. Love is in the air all over the place, and Charles Parker and Freddy Arbuthnot also get in on the romance act.The charm of Sayers' books is their sheer readagainability, if I may put it that way. I notice that nearly all the reviewers have read the book before. It's literary comfort food, still fresh and satisfying despite its age, and even though I'd read it several times before I had a hard time putting it down. Hence the five stars despite my realization that there is an enormous, clanging inconsistency in the story, and it is this. Miss Climpson, brought in once again to go into the female world where Wimsey cannot easily achieve a sufficient degree of inconspicuousness, behaves as if she knows nothing about the case she is investigating. And yet this is the very same Miss Climpson who was on the jury at the Vane trial and thus knows every detail. Yes, the very same Miss Climpson, despite her name changing from Alexandra (in Unnatural Death) to Katherine (amusingly, one time, Katherine Alexandra as if Sayers knew she'd got something wrong but couldn't be bothered to check). I'm trying to remember if Miss C appears at all in subsequent books - I have the feeling that she fades away after this one, leaving Wimsey all the investigative glory.

    Book preview

    Strong Poison - Simon Winchester

    CHAPTER I

    THERE WERE CRIMSON ROSES on the bench; they looked like splashes of blood.

    The judge was an old man; so old, he seemed to have outlived time and change and death. His parrot-face and parrot-voice were dry, like his old, heavily-veined hands. His scarlet robe clashed harshly with the crimson of the roses. He had sat for three days in the stuffy court, but he showed no sign of fatigue.

    He did not look at the prisoner as he gathered his notes into a neat sheaf and turned to address the jury, but the prisoner looked at him. Her eyes, like dark smudges under the heavy square brows, seemed equally without fear and without hope. They waited.

    Members of the jury—

    The patient old eyes seemed to sum them up and take stock of their united intelligence. Three respectable tradesmen—a tall, argumentative one, a stout, embarrassed one with a drooping moustache, and an unhappy one with a bad cold; a director of a large company, anxious not to waste valuable time; a publican, incongruously cheerful; two youngish men of the artisan class; a nondescript, elderly man, of educated appearance, who might have been anything; an artist with a red beard disguising a weak chin; three women—an elderly spinster, a stout capable woman who kept a sweet-shop, and a harassed wife and mother whose thoughts seemed to be continually straying to her abandoned hearth.

    "Members of the jury—you have listened with great patience and attention to the evidence in this very distressing case, and it is now my duty to sum up the facts and arguments which have been put before you by the learned Attorney-General and by the learned Counsel for the Defense, and to put them in order as clearly as possible, so as to help you in forming your decision.

    But first of all, perhaps I ought to say a few words with regard to that decision itself. You know, I am sure, that it is a great principle of English law that every accused person is held to be innocent unless and until he is proved otherwise. It is not necessary for him, or her, to prove innocence; it is, in the modern slang phrase, ‘up to’ the Crown to prove guilt, and unless you are quite satisfied that the Crown has done this beyond all reasonable doubt, it is your duty to return a verdict of ‘Not Guilty.’ That does not necessarily mean that the prisoner has established her innocence by proof; it simply means that the Crown has failed to produce in your minds an undoubted conviction of her guilt.

    Salcombe Hardy, lifting his drowned-violet eyes for a moment from his reporter’s note-book, scribbled two words on a slip of paper and pushed them over to Waffles Newton. Judge hostile. Waffles nodded. They were old hounds on this blood-trail.

    The judge creaked on.

    "You may perhaps wish to hear from me exactly what is meant by those words ‘reasonable doubt.’ They mean, just so much doubt as you might have in every-day life about an ordinary matter of business. This is a case of murder, and it might be natural for you to think that, in such a case, the words mean more than this. But that is not so. They do not mean that you must cast about for fantastical solutions of what seems to you plain and simple. They do not mean those nightmare doubts which sometimes torment us at four o’clock in the morning when we have not slept very well. They only mean that the proof must be such as you would accept about a plain matter of buying and selling, or some such commonplace transaction. You must not strain your belief in favour of the prisoner any more, of course, than you must accept proof of her guilt without the most careful scrutiny.

    "Having said just these few words, so that you may not feel too much overwhelmed by the heavy responsibility laid upon you by your duty to the State, I will now begin at the beginning and try to place the story that we have heard, as clearly as possible before you.

    "The case for the Crown is that the prisoner, Harriet Vane, murdered Philip Boyes by poisoning him with arsenic. I need not detain you by going through the proofs offered by Sir James Lubbock and the other doctors who have given evidence as to the cause of death. The Crown say he died of arsenical poisoning, and the defence do not dispute it. The evidence is, therefore, that the death was due to arsenic, and you must accept that as a fact. The only question that remains for you is whether, in fact, that arsenic was deliberately administered by the prisoner with intent to murder.

    "The deceased, Philip Boyes, was, as you have heard, a writer. He was thirty-six years old, and he had published five novels and a large number of essays and articles. All these literary works were of what is sometimes called an ‘advanced’ type. They preached doctrines which may seem to some of us immoral or seditious, such as atheism, and anarchy, and what is known as free love. His private life appears to have been conducted, for some time at least, in accordance with these doctrines.

    "At any rate, at some time in the year 1927, he became acquainted with Harriet Vane. They met in some of those artistic and literary circles where ‘advanced’ topics are discussed, and after a time they became very friendly. The prisoner is also a novelist by profession, and it is very important to remember that she is a writer of so-called ‘mystery’ or ‘detective’ stories, such as deal with various ingenious methods of committing murder and other crimes.

    "You have heard the prisoner in the witness-box, and you have heard the various people who came forward to give evidence as to her character. You have been told that she is a young woman of great ability, brought up on strictly religious principles, who, through no fault of her own was left, at the age of twenty-three, to make her own way in the world. Since that time—and she is now twenty-nine years old—she has worked industriously to keep herself, and it is very much to her credit that she has, by her own exertions, made herself independent in a legitimate way, owing nothing to anybody and accepting help from no one.

    "She has told us herself, with great candour, how she became deeply attached to Philip Boyes, and how, for a considerable time, she held out against his persuasions to live with him in an irregular manner. There was, in fact, no reason at all why he should not have married her honourably; but apparently he represented himself as being conscientiously opposed to any formal marriage. You have the evidence of Sylvia Marriott and Eiluned Price that the prisoner was made very unhappy by this attitude which he chose to take up, and you have heard also that he was a very handsome and attractive man, whom any woman might have found it difficult to resist.

    "At any rate, in March of 1928, the prisoner, worn out, as she tells us, by his unceasing importunities, gave in, and consented to live on terms of intimacy with him, outside the bonds of marriage.

    "Now you may feel, and quite properly, that this was a very wrong thing to do. You may, after making all allowances for this young woman’s unprotected position, still feel that she was a person of unstable moral character. You will not be led away by the false glamour which certain writers contrive to throw about ‘free love,’ into thinking that this was anything but an ordinary, vulgar act of misbehavior. Sir Impey Biggs, very rightly using all his great eloquence on behalf of his client, has painted this action of Harriet Vane’s in very rosy colours; he has spoken of unselfish sacrifice and self-immolation, and has reminded you that, in such a situation, the woman always has to pay more heavily than the man. You will not, I am sure, pay too much attention to this. You know quite well the difference between right and wrong in such matters, and you may think that, if Harriet Vane had not become to a certain extent corrupted by the unwholesome influences among which she lived, she would have shown a truer heroism by dismissing Philip Boyes from her society.

    But, on the other hand, you must be careful not to attach the wrong kind of importance to this lapse. It is one thing for a man or woman to live an immoral life, and quite another thing to commit murder. You may perhaps think that one step into the path of wrongdoing makes the next one easier, but you must not give too much weight to that consideration. You are entitled to take it into account, but you must not be too much prejudiced.

    The judge paused for a moment, and Freddy Arbuthnot jerked an elbow into the ribs of Lord Peter Wimsey, who appeared to be a prey to gloom.

    I should jolly well hope not. Damn it, if every little game led to murder, they’d be hanging half of us for doin’ in the other half.

    "And which half would you be in?" enquired his lordship, fixing him for a moment with a cold eye and then returning his glance to the dock.

    Victim, said the Hon. Freddy, victim. Me for the corpse in the library.

    Philip Boyes and the prisoner lived together in this fashion, went on the judge, "for nearly a year. Various friends have testified that they appeared to live on terms of the greatest mutual affection. Miss Price said that, although Harriet Vane obviously felt her unfortunate position very acutely—cutting herself off from her family friends and refusing to thrust herself into company where her social outlawry might cause embarrassment and so on—yet she was extremely loyal to her lover and expressed herself proud and happy to be his companion.

    "Nevertheless, in February 1929 there was a quarrel, and the couple separated. It is not denied that the quarrel took place. Mr. and Mrs. Dyer, who occupy the flat immediately above Philip Boyes’, say that they heard loud talking in angry voices, the man swearing and the woman crying, and that the next day, Harriet Vane packed up all her things and left the house for good. The curious feature in the case, and one which you must consider very carefully, is the reason assigned for the quarrel. As to this, the only evidence we have is the prisoner’s own. According to Miss Marriott, with whom Harriet Vane took refuge after the separation, the prisoner steadily refused to give any information on the subject, saying only that she had been painfully deceived by Boyes and never wished to hear his name spoken again.

    "Now it might be supposed from this that Boyes had given the prisoner cause for grievance against him, by unfaithfulness, or unkindness, or simply by a continued refusal to regularise the situation in the eyes of the world. But the prisoner absolutely denies this. According to her statement—and on this point her evidence is confirmed by a letter which Philip Boyes wrote to his father—Boyes did at length offer her legal marriage, and this was the cause of the quarrel. You may think this a very remarkable statement to make, but that is the prisoner’s evidence on oath.

    "It would be natural for you to think that this proposal of marriage takes away any suggestion that the prisoner had a cause of grievance against Boyes. Anyone would say that, under such circumstances, she could have no motive for wishing to murder this young man, but rather the contrary. Still, there is the fact of the quarrel, and the prisoner herself states that this honourable, though belated, proposal was unwelcome to her. She does not say—as she might very reasonably say, and as her counsel has most forcefully and impressively said for her, that this marriage-offer completely does away with any pretext for enmity on her part towards Philip Boyes. Sir Impey Biggs says so, but that is not what the prisoner says. She says—and you must try to put yourselves in her place and understand her point of view if you can—that she was angry with Boyes because, after persuading her against her will to adopt his principles of conduct, he then renounced those principles and so, as she says, ‘made a fool of her.’

    Well, that is for you to consider: whether the offer which was in fact made could reasonably be construed into a motive for murder. I must impress upon you that no other motive has been suggested in evidence.

    At this point the elderly spinster on the jury was seen to be making a note—a vigorous note, to judge from the action of her pencil on the paper. Lord Peter Wimsey shook his head slowly two or three times and muttered something under his breath.

    After this, said the judge, "nothing particular seems to have happened to these two people for three months or so, except that Harriet Vane left Miss Marriott’s house and took a small flat of her own in Doughty Street, while Philip Boyes, on the contrary, finding his solitary life depressing, accepted the invitation of his cousin, Mr. Norman Urquhart, to stay at the latter’s house in Woburn Square. Although living in the same quarter of London, Boyes and the accused do not seem to have met very often after the separation. Once or twice there was an accidental encounter at the house of a friend. The dates of these occasions cannot be ascertained with any certainty—they were informal parties—but there is some evidence that there was a meeting towards the end of March, another in the second week in April, and a third some time in May. These times are worth noting, though, as the exact day is left doubtful, you must not attach too much importance to them.

    "However, we now come to a date of the very greatest importance. On April 10th, a young woman, who has been identified as Harriet Vane, entered the chemist’s shop kept by Mr. Brown in Southampton Row, and purchased two ounces of commercial arsenic, saying that she needed it to destroy rats. She signed the poison-book in the name of Mary Slater, and the handwriting has been identified as that of the prisoner. Moreover, the prisoner herself admits having made this purchase, for certain reasons of her own. For this reason it is comparatively unimportant—but you may think it worth noting—that the housekeeper of the flats where Harriet Vane lives has come here and told you that there are no rats on the premises, and never have been in the whole time of her residence there.

    "On May 5th, we have another purchase of arsenic. The prisoner, as she herself states, this time procured a tin of arsenical weed-killer, of the same brand that was mentioned in the Kidwelly poisoning case. This time she gave the name of Edith Waters. There is no garden attached to the flats where she lives, nor could there be any conceivable use for weed-killer on the premises.

    "On various occasions also, during the period from the middle of March to the beginning of May, the prisoner purchased other poisons, including prussic acid (ostensibly for photographic purposes) and strychnine. There was also an attempt to obtain aconitine, which was not successful. A different shop was approached, and a different name given in each case. The arsenic is the only poison which directly concerns this case, but these other purchases are of some importance, as throwing light on the prisoner’s activities at this time.

    The prisoner has given an explanation of these purchases which you must consider for what it is worth. She says that she was engaged at that time in writing a novel about poisoning, and that she bought the drugs in order to prove by experiment how easy it was for an ordinary person to get hold of deadly poisons. In proof of this, her publisher, Mr. Trufoot, has produced the manuscript of the book. You have had it in your hands, and you will be given it again, if you like, when I have finished my summing-up, to look at in your own room. Passages were read out to you, showing that the subject of the book was murder by arsenic, and there is a description in it of a young woman going to a chemist’s shop and buying a considerable quantity of this deadly substance. And I must mention here what I should have mentioned before, namely, that the arsenic purchased from Mr. Brown was the ordinary commercial arsenic, which is coloured with charcoal or indigo, as the law requires, in order that it may not be mistaken for sugar or any other innocent substance.

    Salcombe Hardy groaned: How long, O Lord, how long shall we have to listen to all this tripe about commercial arsenic? Murderers learn it now at their mother’s knee.

    I particularly want you to remember those dates—I will give them to you again—April 10th and May 5th. (The Jury wrote them down. Lord Peter Wimsey murmured: They all wrote down on their slates, ‘She doesn’t believe there’s an atom of meaning in it.’ The Hon. Freddy said What? What? and the judge turned over another page of his notes.)

    "About this time, Philip Boyes began to suffer from renewed attacks of a gastric trouble to which he had been subject from time to time during his life. You have read the evidence of Dr. Green, who attended him for something of the sort during his University career. That is some time ago; but there is also Dr. Weare, who, in 1925 prescribed for a similar attack. Not grave illnesses, but painful and exhausting, with sickness and so on, and aching in the limbs. Plenty of people have such troubles from time to time. Still, there is a coincidence of dates here which may be significant. We get these attacks—noted in Dr. Weare’s case-book—one on the 31st of March, one on the 15th of April and one on the 12th of May. Three sets of coincidences—as you may perhaps think them to be—Harriet Vane and Philip Boyes meet ‘towards the end of March,’ and he has an attack of gastritis on March 31st; on April 10th Harriet Vane purchases two ounces of arsenic—they meet again ‘in the second week in April,’ and on April 15th, he has another attack; on May 5th, there is the purchase of weed-killer—‘some time in May’ there is another meeting, and on May 12th he is taken ill for the third time. You may think that is rather curious, but you must not forget that the Crown have failed to prove any purchase of arsenic before the meeting in March. You must bear that in mind when considering this point.

    "After the third attack—the one in May—the doctor advises Boyes to go away for a change, and he selects the north-west corner of Wales. He goes to Harlech, and spends a very pleasant time there and is much better. But he has a friend to accompany him, Mr. Ryland Vaughan, whom you have seen, and this friend says that ‘Philip was not happy.’ In fact, Mr. Vaughan formed the opinion that he was fretting after Harriet Vane. His bodily health improved, but he grew mentally depressed. And so on June 16th, we find him writing a letter to Miss Vane. Now that is an important letter, so I will read it to you once more:

    DEAR HARRIET, Life is an utter mess-up. I can’t stick it out here any longer. I’ve decided to cut adrift and take a trip out West. But before I go, I want to see you once again and find out if it isn’t possible to put things straight again. You must do as you like, of course, but I still cannot understand the attitude you take up. If I can’t make you see the thing in the right perspective this time I’ll chuck it for good. I shall be in town on the 20th. Let me have a line to say when I can come round.

    YOURS, P.

    "Now that, as you have realised, is a most ambiguous letter. Sir Impey Biggs, with arguments of great weight, has suggested that by the expressions ‘cut adrift and take a trip out west,’ ‘I can’t stick it out here,’ and ‘chuck it for good,’ the writer was expressing his intention to make away with himself if he could not effect a reconciliation with the accused. He points out that ‘to go west’ is a well-known metaphor for dying, and that, of course, may be convincing to you. But Mr. Urquhart, when examined on the subject by the Attorney-General, said that he supposed the letter to refer to a project which he himself had suggested to the deceased, of taking a voyage across the Atlantic to Barbados, by way of change of scene. And the learned Attorney-General makes this other point that when the writer says, ‘I can’t stick it out here any longer,’ he means, here in Britain, or perhaps merely ‘here at Harlech,’ and that if the phrase had reference to suicide it would read simply, ‘I can’t stick it out any longer.’

    "No doubt you have formed your own opinion on this point. It is important to note that the deceased asks for an appointment on the 20th. The reply to this letter is before us; it reads:

    ‘DEAR PHIL, You can come round at 9:30 on the 20th. If you like, but you certainly will not make me change my mind.’

    "And it is signed simply ‘M.’ A very cold letter, you may think—almost hostile in tone. And yet the appointment is made for 9:30.

    I shall not have to keep your attention very much longer, but I do ask for it at this point, specially—though you have been attending most patiently and industriously all the time—because we now come to the actual day of the death itself.

    The old man clasped his hands one over the other upon the sheaf of notes and leaned a little forward. He had it all in his head, though he had known nothing of it until the last three days. He had not reached the time to babble of green fields and childhood ways; he still had firm hold of the present; he held it pinned down flat under his wrinkled fingers with their grey, chalky nails.

    "Philip Boyes and Mr. Vaughan came back to town together on the evening of the 19th, and there would seem to be no doubt at all that Boyes was then in the best of health. Boyes spent the night with Mr. Vaughan, and they breakfasted together in the usual way upon bacon and eggs, toast, marmalade and coffee. At 11 o’clock Boyes had a Guinness, observing that, according to the advertisements it was ‘Good for you.’ At 1 o’clock he ate a hearty lunch at his club, and in the afternoon he played several sets at tennis with Mr. Vaughan and some other friends. During the game the remark was made by one of the players that Harlech had done Boyes good, and he replied that he was feeling fitter than he had done for many months.

    "At half-past seven he went round to have dinner with his cousin, Mr. Norman Urquhart. Nothing at all unusual in his manner or appearance was noticed, either by Mr. Urquhart or by the maid who waited at table. Dinner was served at 8 o’clock exactly, and I think it would be a good thing if you were to write down that time (if you have not already done so) and also the list of things eaten and drunk.

    "The two cousins dined alone together, and first, by way of cocktail, each had a glass of sherry. The wine was a fine Oleroso of 1847, and the maid decanted it from a fresh bottle and poured it into the glasses as they sat in the library. Mr. Urquhart retains the dignified old-fashioned custom of having the maid in attendance throughout the meal, so that we have here the advantage of two witnesses during this part of the evening. You saw the maid, Hannah Westlock, in the box, and I think you will say she gave the impression of being a sensible and observant witness.

    "Well, there was the sherry. Then came a cup of cold bouillon, served by Hannah Westlock from the tureen on the sideboard. It was very strong, good soup, set to a clear jelly. Both men had some, and, after dinner, the bouillon was finished by the cook and Miss Westlock in the kitchen.

    "After the soup came a piece of turbot with sauce. The portions were again carved at the sideboard, the sauce-boat was handed to each in turn, and the dish was then sent out to be finished in the kitchen.

    "Then came a poulet en casserole—that is, chicken cut up and stewed slowly with vegetables in a fireproof cooking utensil. Both men had some of this, and the maids finished the dish.

    "The final course was a sweet omelette, which was made at the table in a chafing-dish by Philip Boyes himself. Both Mr. Urquhart and his cousin were very particular about eating an omelette the moment it came from the pan—and a very good rule it is, and I advise you all to treat omelettes in the same way and never to allow them to stand, or they will get tough. Four eggs were brought to the table in their shells, and Mr. Urquhart broke them one by one into a bowl, adding sugar from a sifter. Then he handed the bowl to Mr. Boyes,

    Enjoying the preview?
    Page 1 of 1