Cooking With Christie: Sussing out a mystery with sprinkles?

“He doctored the hundreds and thousands…” 

Upon encountering this solution for the first time in the Miss Marple short story, The Tuesday Night Club, I was left baffled. Why? Because up until that moment, I’d never encountered hundred-and-thousands before.

Or so I thought.

Turns out I knew exactly what they were only by a different name: Sprinkles. 

Since that day, I’ve learned these tiny confections are much like Shakespearian roses — tasting just as sweet whether they are called hundreds-and-thousands, jimmies, jazzies, vermicelli, nonpareils, pearls, shots, or snowies. Though there are minor variations amongst them, to my mind, they all fall under the broad umbrella of sprinkles. 

Okay, fine. 

Satisfied with finding the answer to my question, I moved on to the next Miss Marple mystery. Yet, upon subsequent reads, beyond making me giggle at my younger self, something about “He doctored the hundreds and thousands…” still nagged me. Something I couldn’t quite put my finger on until I started baking cookies every Thursday to share with Seattle Mystery Bookshop patrons on Fridays. 

How did this nefarious fictional husband manage to “doctor” those hundreds-and-thousands? 

At first, I theorized he shook them in a jar with the poisonous powder. The only problem? The baddie intended to do away with his wife straightaway, and I’m not so sure this dusting would impart enough arsenic to achieve his hideous objective. (Nor is this something I am going to fiddle around with to find out. There’s a limit to my dedication to this blog.) 

Moreover, simply tossing the sprinkles around in an arsenic based powder (like so much lettuce in dressing) would leave behind a visual clue. Which could be mistaken for some sort of spoilage. Leading the victim to leave her desert uneaten and her husband’s wicked plan unfulfilled. 

Neither could this villain simply soak the sprinkles in an arsenic solution to impart the element’s death-dealing properties. As sprinkles, being composed primarily of sugar, would melt. Knowledge my much shorter self acquired by watching a generous measure of nonpareils melt into my ice cream nearly every Saturday evening at my grandparents’ house.

So, how did the murderer do it?

Since I’ve never lived in a world where sprinkles, snowies, hundreds-and-thousands, jimmies, jazzies, and nonpareils haven’t been available on grocery store shelves in tubs, tubes, and cartons. It took me far longer than it should’ve to arrive at a solution. 

Or, at least, an answer that makes sense to me

Then, a few months back, during a commercial break in The Great Canadian Baking Show, several of the former popular/winning contestants popped back onto the screen, extolling the virtues of a particular food product by demonstrating its versatility. Witnessing one of the former bakers piping tidy rows of raw sprinkles onto baking sheets caused my little grey cells to sit up and sing.

This was how the foul spouse “…doctored the hundreds and thousands…” 

He made his own.

Theory firmly lodged amongst the folds of my brain, I did a bit of sleuthing to see if this idea was even remotely possible. Whereupon I learned the machine-made sprinkles I love to put on anything, and everything are just over one hundred years old. 

According to Wikipedia and corroborated by advertisements I located, chocolate sprinkles started becoming commercially available across the U.S. around 1921. Seven years after, a pair of Dutch candy companies pioneered a similar product. Which, unlike many of their American counterparts, actually contained real chocolate. (Though how fast these manufactured petite sweets traveled across the English Channel and into the UK, I don’t know.)

Although this technological advent is fairly new (in geologic terms), homemade sprinkles date back several centuries. Apparently, there’s several French pastry recipe going back to the seventeenth century which gives bakers the option of topping their treats with nonpareils or sanding sugar. Even more exciting, thanks to Michigan State University’s Feeding America: The Historic American Cookbook Project, there’s an indexable cookbook with a recipe for nonpareils dating back to 1864!

This quick and dirty timeline, when paired with the fact that Agatha Christie published The Tuesday Night Club in 1927, shows us that Agatha Christie, Miss Marple, and the killer all inhabited a world before mass-produced sprinkles stepped into the limelight. More importantly, the knowledge of how to make snowies at home hadn’t been shunted off to the periphery of baking — yet. (Where these recipes lingered for nearly a century until Covid lockdowns gave people time to explore the margins of baking again.)

Okay, fine, he made his own sprinkles. 

But how did this villain ensure his unsuspecting wife would eat a lethal amount of arsenic via these crunchy bits of formed sugar? Mind you, this is only an educated guess, but I suspect he substituted rat poison for a portion of the powdered sugar and swapped the clean water for some he’d adulterated with flypaper. Then, he instructed his accomplice to use a heavy hand when applying the poisoned pearls to the top of the trifle. 

(Please, don’t do this.)

Remember, this murder took place in 1926-1927 when manufacturers of rodenticides and insecticides happily embraced arsenic as their active ingredient. Despite the colorants producers added to their products, endeavoring to dissuade people from administering rat poison to their nearest and dearest, this fail-safe often fell short. In this fictional instance, so long as this diabolical husband stuck to making chocolate sprinkles, this “safety feature” was easily circumvented. 

Above and beyond ensuring his wife’s untimely death, this murder-minded spouse accomplished several other feats by making his own hundreds-and-thousands. Recall that aforementioned accomplice? The effort this man took to “doctor” these sprinkles, more than likely, allowed him to manipulate his desperate (according to the text) younger lover/accomplice into carrying his heinous plan over the finish line. 

In a — I did my part, now it’s your turn — kind of scenario.

Though I wonder: Did his female accomplice realize he was setting her up to take the fall? Because I bet dollars to doughnuts, this crooked husband could prove he never set foot in the kitchen the day that terrible trifle was served (and probably most others). Why would he? He had both a wife and a maid to take care of the canning, candy-making, and meals for him.

Next, by partaking of the tainted treat with his wife, he misdirected attention away from the nefariously designed arsenic ladened sprinkles and himself. A calculated risk that bought him a breath of deniability should his wife’s murder and its method come to light: 

OMG, if I hadn’t scraped those hundreds-and-thousands of my portion, I would’ve followed my wife to the grave!/ I don’t care for their texture./ They were contaminated with arsenic, you say? How can that be? My wife always bought XYZ brand. Oh no! Has someone else died?/ They were handmade? You don’t say./ She said what? She‘s crazy! I never did anything to encourage her affections. I was a happily married man./ She says I made those hundred-and-thousands? How? I can’t even boil water!

And so on and so forth. Until…

It wasn’t I who sprinkled the hundreds-and-thousands on that damned trifle.

At least that’s how I imagine the murderer might have used the era’s everyday sexism as a smokescreen, why I believe he made chocolate sprinkles to complete his evil deed, and the method he used to “doctor” the hundreds and thousands in this classic Miss Marple mystery.

My 52 weeks With Christie: A.Miner©2025

Caustic Candy: The Woebegone Case of Rena Nelson

In our last case of Caustic Candy, we will travel roughly three-hundred-and-thirty-seven miles north and slightly west from Hastings, Nebraska, to Pierre, South Dakota, to meet a love-struck woman who nearly managed to send another to prison for a murder she didn’t commit.

In the years leading up to February 27, 1904 — Cordelia Botkin and her infamous cross-country murders continued to make headlines. (Due in no small part to the upcoming retrial Botkin managed to secure for herself — which would ultimately fail.) Despite the police catching and the prosecutors convicting Cordelia Botkin, her evil exploits still inspired/tempted people across the country into trying to rid themselves of an unwanted lover, rival, enemy, or annoying neighbor by sending said person a box of poisoned laced sweets through the mail.

Enter Rena Nelson.

An unattached woman in her late twenties, Rena lived six miles north of Pierre, South Dakota, on a farm with her parents working as a nurse around the city. (Though, as she had no formal training, I think it’s more likely Rena acted as a nurse’s aide.) In any case, on Saturday, February 27, Rena and her father went into Pierre. One of the must-visit spots, whenever one visited town, was (of course) the post office. On this day, a parcel and a letter waited for Rena. Carefully slitting open the parcel’s wrappings, she discovered someone had sent her a box of chocolates. Popping one in her mouth, Rena stood at a counter chewing whilst reading a letter from her Aunt. By Sunday night, Rena was beginning to feel a little iffy, though still well enough to pen a return letter to her relation in Boone, Iowa. On Monday, Rena’s family sent for the doctor.

Who in turn sent for Sheriff Laughlin. 

Whilst slowly succumbing to a hitherto unknown poison her doctor suspected was delivered via bonbon, Sheriff Laughlin listened to Rena point the finger at her own murderer. Taking Rena’s hunch and the suspect box of confectionary with him, the Sheriff left the Nelson household. His first stop was the chemists, where he handed off the sweets for testing. His second was the telegraph office, where he wired his counterpart in Boone, Iowa, asking them to arrest his prime suspect.

By this point, it was Tuesday, March 1, 1904, and the local newspapers got wind of a possible Botkin copycat within their midsts. By the following day, regional papers had picked up the story, and by the next, the national press. 

On March 4, the State Chemist, Professor Whitehead, confirmed the local physician’s worst fears: Rena had ingested corrosive sublimate. Otherwise known as mercury chloride, this compound was used in developing photographs, preserving specimens collected by anthropologists & biologists, to treat syphilis, and as a disinfectant. In acute poisoning cases, like Rena’s, the chemical’s corrosive properties wreak havoc on internal organs. Causing ulcers in the mouth, throat, stomach, and intestines. Leading to a burning sensation in the mouth/throat, stomach pain, lethargy, vomiting blood, corrosive bronchitis, and kidney failure. Even today, doctors face an uphill battle in mercury chloride poisoning. Back in 1904, the only option available were iodine salts.  

Unfortunately, Rena’s organ damage proved too extensive for any hope of recovery.

But who did Rena accuse of killing her, and why? This was the question the newspapers, public, and residents of Pierre clamored after Sheriff Laughlin to reveal. For that answer, we must travel back three years to Boone, Iowa. Where for a season, Rena worked at the Boone Telephone Exchange as an operator while living with her Aunt. During this time, Rena met Mr. Sherman Dye, who worked for the Northwestern Railroad as a clerk in one of their roundhouses. 

The two soon started dating. 

When Rena returned to Pierre, the pair continued their romance via pen & paper and carried on in this fashion for the next two-and-a-half years….Until November 1903, when Mrs. Belle Dye, Sherman’s wife and mother of his child, accidentally discovered Rena’s letters and photos stashed in the family’s chicken coop.

Mr. & Mrs. Dye separated on Christmas 1903.

Now, it’s unclear when Sherman told Rena he was married. However, thanks to the letter Rena penned to her Aunt on that Sunday when she started suffering from the effects of the corrosive sublimate, we do know that Sherman initially ‘misrepresented his marital status’. Telling Rena he’d obtained a divorce. However, when Sherman revealed he was, in fact, still married — for whatever reason — Rena chose to continue the relationship rather than giving him the old heave-ho. 

Rena even went so far as to write Belle several letters asking her to grant Sherman a divorce as he wanted to marry her. 

Finally, on January 23, 1904, Belle wrote back, asking Rena to leave them both alone — pointing out that she was ‘interfering with a husband and wife.’ And therein lies the crux of Rena’s deathbed accusation. She claimed Belle was jealous because Sherman transferred his affections from his wife onto herself. Rena also told the Sheriff she recognized the handwriting on the parcel’s wrapping as that of Mrs. Belle Dye’s — but only after ingesting the poison-laced chocolates.

On March 6, 1904, with a South Dakota issued arrest warrant in hand, Sheriff Laughlin arrested Belle Dye — in Boone, Iowa.

Unfortunately, for Sheriff Laughlin, returning to South Dakota with Belle in tow wasn’t as easy as simply catching a train. Facing the same conundrum his counterparts in California and Delaware found themselves in a few years prior with Cordelia Botkin — Sheriff Laughlin needed to navigate Iowa law, which had never faced a case where the (impending) murder took place in a separate state from where the instrument of destruction was mailed from. The first blow to the Sheriff’s extradition of Belle came when the Iowa Supreme Court quashed the North Dakota arrest warrant — which labeled Belle as a fugitive from justice. However, since Belle never entered South Dakota, it followed that she’d not fled back to Iowa afterwards. 

So, by definition of the law, Belle wasn’t a fugitive.

Not willing to let this woman get away with murder, Sheriff met with Iowa’s Governor Cummings on March 7, hoping he’d intervene. While he did, on advice from State Attorney General Mullan, Governor Cummings made a different call than his Californian counterpart. Not only did he free Belle on March 9 with a writ of habits corpus, he also let Sheriff Laughlin know that Belle could neither be extradited to South Dakota nor would she meet a murder charges in Iowa. 

Belle needed to be tried in South Dakota, where the deed took place, or not at all. 

Undoubtedly, seeing which way the wind was blowing before Governor Cumming made his announcement, Sheriff Laughlin made one last Hail Mary play to get Belle Dye back to South Dakota to face justice — he applied to the US Postal Inspection Service. As one of the only investigative federal bodies at the time (the precursor to the FBI wouldn’t be founded until four years later), the Sheriff hoped they’d charge Belle with misuse of the mail. (As sending poison thru the post was, and is still, illegal.) If the Special Agents found enough evidence to charge her, then Federal Marshals could cross state lines, arrest Belle without a warrant, and bring her back to South Dakota.

Whilst all this legal wrangling went on, Rena Nelson died on March 8, 1904. 

Noticeably absent from the side of Rena’s deathbed was Sherman Dye. Rather than comforting his dying lover, he chose to support his wife during her detention. Not only defending Belle in the press, Sherman also paid multiple visits to Belle in jail with their daughter Dolly.

On March 10, the same day Postal Service Special Agents arrived in Pierre — the Coroner’s Inquest into Rena’s death was held. The verdict from the jury was a foregone conclusion: “Miss Nelson came to her death through eating some tablets or chocolate candies contained in a box received through the United States Mail at Pierre, South Dakota and postmarked Boone, Iowa and contained corrosive sublimate in sufficient quantities to cause death.”

However, the most significant feature of the inquest, which would throw the whole case on its ear, occurred as the spectators congregated outside the courthouse discussing the case….

My 52 Weeks With Christie: A.Miner©2023

Caustic Candy: Florence McVean — A Victim Once Again?

Now, on with the post.

Sometime between seven and eight o’clock on March 14, 1899, the doorbell rang at No. 4015 Cook Avenue. 

Despite the hour, Florence McVean answered the summons and found a heavily veiled woman in black standing on her doorstep. Not recognizing said woman through her costume and in no way aided by a streetlamp’s distant glow, Florence asked, “Is there anything I can do for you?” The beveiled woman moved forward and answered, “Damn you, I have you now!” Whereupon, the mystery woman lifted the lower edge of several layers of concealing lace and revealed the presence of a pint glass full of liquid — which she then flung onto Florence’s face, neck, and bosom. Collapsing into a heap, screaming in pain, Florence watched helplessly as her attacker dashed down the front steps, up the street, and into the night.

Florence’s younger sister, Miss Mary McGraw, who’d run to the drugstore for some medicine, returned home from her errand a short while later and found Florence lying prone across the threshold, crying in pain. Not knowing what happened, only that her sister said her face was burning, Miss McGraw and her mother sent for Dr. Lyda. 

Doctor Lyda rapidly diagnosed the substance splashed onto Florence’s face as Carbolic Acid. 

Also known as Phenol, this organic compound is used as an antiseptic, disinfectant, and local anesthetic to treat sunburns & hives. (This last application once gave Agatha Christie a “nervous horror” as a hospital pharmacy dispenser — as Christie feared she’d mis-prepared a carbolic acid ointment for a patient.) Carbolic Acid presents a threefold danger. Not only will the liquid rapidly generate second and third-degree burns, your skin absorbs the organic compound poisoning your heart and central nervous system, while the sweet-smelling vapor will do additional damage to your eyes and lungs.

Hence why, Dr. Lyda reported to the papers that Florence hovered near death whilst putting her chance of recovery at one in a hundred. And if Florence did manage to rally, he predicted she would bear heavy scars at best and lose her eyesight (and perhaps the organs themselves) at worst.

The newspapers, which had all but forgotten Florence, lept all over this unexpected turn of events. Speculating as to whether or not Florence’s original claims, that a jealous rival tried to poison her, were true….Because who would intentionally throw acid in their own face?

Which brings us to August 30, 2010 and the case of Bethany Storro. 

Suffering from a then undiagnosed mental disorder, Storro attempted to take her own life by smearing her face with drain cleaner. Initially, she’d planned to drink the caustic chemical as well, but in light of the searing pain burning her face, Storro couldn’t bring herself to take a sip. Panicked at the thought of explaining her actions, Storro left her house and went to a nearby park. According to an eyewitness statement, she dropped to the ground and began screaming that a black woman with a ponytail threw acid in her face.

This was curious as said eyewitness swore he’d not seen anyone approaching or anywhere near Storro when she began screaming for help. 

Storro’s story unraveled further when doctors eventually discovered something odd. Storro’s chemical burns, which roughly correspond to the areas where you’d apply a mud mask, failed to follow the splash pattern consistent with this style of violent crime. Not a single drop of the caustic liquid broke her hairline, ran under her chin, or spattered onto her ears, lips, neck, chest, or back. Storro’s claims that a pair of sunglasses saved her eyes and brows fell short with police — because why would you need to wear shades thirty-eight minutes before sunset?

Suspicions raised, it didn’t take law enforcement long to trace the purchase of the drain cleaner and gloves back to Storro herself, at which point she confessed to everything. (BTW — After paying back the small amount of money she’d spent from funds donated by the community, authorities decided not to press charges. Storro would spend little over a year in a mental health facility that diagnosed and treated the underlying mental health issues that led to her suicide attempt.)

Casting aside, but not forgetting his earlier conclusions about the veracity of Florence’s claims of harassment, Chief Campbell took this new threat on Florence’s life seriously. Not only did he assign Chief of Detectives Desmond to the case, he also allocated another half-dozen detectives to hunt down the perpetrator. 

With so many resources dedicated to a single case, it didn’t take long for irregularities to start surfacing.

Florence’s explanation as to why she answered the door at such a late hour (for the 1890s) was totally reasonable — she thought it was her sister at returning home. The police could just about understand why it took until the next morning for someone in the household to alert them to the brutal assault. More difficult to fathom was Miss Mary McGraw’s fluctuating and contradictory timelines (yes, plural) she gave authorities about her movements on the night in question. However, what truly stuck in the detective’s collective craws was motive: During the first investigation Doctor Glasgow made it crystal clear to authorities, newspapers, and the public alike that he held zero affection for Florence. Surely these profuse and forthright negative declarations would render any lingering jealousy inert? Therefore the barbarity of the attack didn’t align with the wafer thin motive.

Then there’s the evidence the cadre of detectives didn’t find.

No one, other than Florence herself, witnessed the attack. No one, other than Florence, saw a veiled woman running from the scene. In fact, Chief Detective Desmond couldn’t find a single trace of this mystery woman anywhere. Nor could he locate a single one of Florence’s neighbors who heard her screams. And the one and only suspect in the case, Zoe Graham, possessed a rock-solid alibi for the night of the attack.

So, who flung carbolic acid in Florence’s face? 

Chief Campbell once again pointed the finger at Florence herself: “As I study the case from beginning to end, I confess I turn to the idea I first advanced that Mrs. McVean has been persecuting herself. What for cannot be clearly seen but it may be one of those manias sometimes seized upon by woman, which, when once adopted, carry them way past where they thought when they began.” Newspapers expanded on this new wrinkle, theorizing Florence used the acid attack to acquit herself of Chief Campbell’s initial accusations of self-persecution.

Despite the Sheriff’s moderately sexist thoughts, did she really do it?

Though it galls me to disbelieve the victim of a violent crime, the most damning part of the carbolic acid episode (for me) was Florence’s miraculous recovery. While I understand carbolic acid (by comparison to its bigger and badder cousins nitric, sulfuric, and hydrochloric) is considered a weak acid — it can still wreak some serious havoc. So for doctors to announce, a mere four days after the attack, that other than some peeling skin, Florence’s eyesight would remain unchanged, her skin unscarred, and her overall health unaffected? It feels a tad, well, suspicious and calls to mind the Bethany Storro case.

On top of which, the urge to inflict further damage to “prove your innocence” reminds me of Christiana Edmunds — who, twenty-nine years earlier, engineered two separate poisoning plots (which resulted in one murder and earned her the nickname The Chocolate Cream Killer) to prove to her crush, Dr. Beard, she didn’t try murdering his wife (without success). 

Only in this case, Florence flung acid at herself instead. 

And while Doctor Glasgow, Mrs. Graham, and Sheriff Campbell all thought this self-persecution conclusion was correct — I find it difficult to reconcile the poison pen letters, arsenic laced chocolates, and acid-throwing incidences with a thirty-five-year-old widow. They seem to me like acts perpetrated by a naive young woman.

Someone like a single, younger sister, perhaps?

As the news articles focused on Florence, we don’t know the state of Mary and Florence’s relationship. However, experts have established that Poison Pen Letters are often written by those nearest and dearest to the recipient. Since the abuse contained within the correspondence aimed the majority of its vitriol towards Florence rather than the doctor, it could point in Miss McGraw’s direction. 

Do the abusive letters point to some hitherto unknown well of resentment within the younger woman? Did Miss McGraw write them to help her big sister find happiness with another man before Florence was ready? Or did she want Doctor Glasgow for herself? Did these good (or bad) intentions spiral out of control and the resulting violence snapped her out of the grip of whatever illogical thought process she’d fashioned to justify her actions?

I’ve no clue.

However, I do know Miss McGraw repeatedly insinuated herself into the case. Not only did she, not Florence, initially take the case to Sheriff Campbell. Miss McGraw also reported to the newspapers she’d taken control of the household’s mail before the arrival of the tainted candy. Virtually ensuring the arsenic ladened chocolates wouldn’t pose a threat to anyone in the house. Next, she vocally supported Florence’s claim that she’d not set foot downtown in the months prior to the bonbon’s arrival. Finally, she handled all the interactions with the press as her sister recovered from the acid-throwing incident.

Speaking of the night of March 14th, if Mary threw the acid on her sister it would explain the confusing and contradictory accounts of her errand to the drugstore. The veils and the rest of her costume could’ve been secreted away until Dr. Lyda stabilized Florence, then burnt or otherwise discreetly discarded later that night. Thereby explaining the time gap between the attack and when someone notified the authorities.

As to the clerk from the Busy Bee Candy Store, eyewitness identifications are notoriously unreliable, and we don’t know how closely the two sisters resembled one another. Miss Mary McGraw could’ve used Florence’s calling card, styled her hair like her sister’s, worn her clothes, and led authorities down the garden path. 

While my theory about Miss McGraw doesn’t conform as well with Occam’s Razor, as does the one put forth by Sheriff Campbell, it’s within the realm of possibility. Unfortunately, due to the doctor’s pronouncement of Florence’s impending full recovery, the newspapers quickly lost interest in the story and Florence and Mary faded back into their lives in St. Louis.

My 52 Weeks With Christie: A.Miner©2023