The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1898-02-09
zoLA RAISES A BIG HOWL.
CLAIMS RE is NOT GIVEN THE
SAME SHOW AS A THIEF.

o,+hurst Brought on by the
c,,,rt,s Refusal to Put a Question
Madame Dreyfus-The Judge De-
10 ArnIust the Defense After an
r,ment on the Point Mt Issue.
n,r,s Feb. S.-When the trial of Emile
nv, and NJ. Perreux, manager of the Au>
rora growing out of the formers denun-
,iation of the Esterhazy court martial in
letter to the newspaper mentioned, was
r..,r,ed in the Assizes Court of the Seine
,,-5sv. scenes similar to those of yester-
dav morning were witnessed.
when the court opened there was a ter
,ifc struggle to enter, people fighting their
vav with blows and kicks toward the
court room.
The entrance of NJ. Zola was the signal
for an outburst, during which the few
cries of "Vive Zola" were drowned by
shouts Of "Abas Zola."
When the Judge entered the scene was
50 tumultuous that he directed the mu-
njcipal guards to force the crowds from
the doors and to remove some of the peo-
ple from the overcrowded halls.
Madame Dreyfus was the first witness.
NJ. Lahore asked her whether she could
say under what circumstances she was
informed by Maj Patty du Clam in 1894 of
her husbands arrest. The judge declined
to put the question.
NJ Zola here arose and cried: 'T de-
sire the same treatment as the assassin or
the thief. They have always the right to
defend themselves, but am deprived of
this. I am Knocked and insulted in the
streets and the obscene press drags me in
the mud. You see, gentlemen of the jury,
the position 1 am in. 1 wish to have my
witnesses heard, but am prevented"
But do you not know the law?" the
judge asked NJ. Zola.
No l don t know, and do not want to
know" was the reply.
The scene caused great excitement
among the spectators.
NJ. Lahore presented a statement claim
ing the right to ask Nine. Dreyfus certain
questions in the interest of justice.
The advocate general, M. Van Casset,
argued that the court could not re-adju-
dicate facts already legally decided. The
court then decided against the defense, say
ing that no question, not contained in the
indictment would be heard
After hearing Nine. lie Blois, NJ. Scheur-
er-Kestner and Casimir-Perier. the trial
was adjourned until tomorrow.
M. LIE Bois, a lawyer and a witness for
the defendants, testified that he and Col
Picquart were old friends, and consequent
ly when Col Picquart was connected with
the war intelligence department he con-
suited the witness on certain grave mat
ters he had unearthed in connection with
the carrier pigeon affair al Nancy, and in
regard to which he had received menac-
lat I
matter arose. M. Scheurer-K -Kestrer ques-
TONED the witness on the foregoing mat
ter and the witness gave him certain in
formation, including letters which Gen
Gonz wrote to Col. Picquart, which con.
Nhced NJ Scheurer- -Kestner of the limo
cence OF Capt. Dreyfus. The witness
urged M Scheurer- -Kestner to apply fc
the minister of justice TO annul the Drey.
Ius Judgment in view of the secret docu-
ment submitted to the court martial, but
aS ne was lacking in material proofs, NJ
ocneurer-Kestner had not acted immedi-
Htely.
Continuing, the witness spoke of the
HuIsues against Col. Picquart when the
laller was transferred to Tunis FINALLY
the witness laid the matter before the
government
NJ ocheurer-Kestner, who was next eX.
1nliHed, SAID he learned last July that Col
Vquart mad discovered that the Burdreal
n"9 not been written by Capt. Dreyfus
ulu ne submitted Maj. Esterhazy's hand
MnuHs 10 VI. Bertillon, who agreed thai
aT ~ was IN the same hand as the Burdreau
ne witness suggested to Gen Gonz thai
Iiesh expert examination be made, bu
uie General dissuaded him from doing so
CT 1hls stage of the proceedings NJ
o0ueuIer-hestner was about to give tn,
- VI me correspondence between Gen
GoHz ana Col. Picquart showing tha
favored aft
S9 ease but the presiding Judge rule(
"a the evidence was inadmissible
w. LAHORE then intervened saving. &c
eSh mat these letters be read in court
Noia was aware of the existence D
1br9I,..l letters: 1t is time that light wa.
'nIoWn on the case.''
Iuo Judge, however, reiterated that tn,
i1leIs We're inadmissible, as previous no
IoIu I"u not been given. This caused M
-'N"Ic to remark: There is stiu tim
tbo G'illnu INN unlcate them TO you and then &
+be io5. oG Know that is impossible" replied
JUuge, as the law forbids it,
h. w. SIemenceau, counsel for M. Perreux
~ Oeciared that Col. Picquart submittet
inc ieltefs to the president of the Drey
Ty1l oourt martial, who impounded then
II '"oul reading them to the court. TIM
m"9 impossible to give notification o
".vM as evidence
fn1t. AACSNuSF lDe0 t0I0 of the con
~. oi ", me letter, in which Col. Picouar
wiz mat fresh facts had been discovere
t5, mn "a would be eagerly seized upon b
scandal" VIZ "0uiu create d grea
T. H' coma replied that 1t was too lat
,'P the matter now"
h..,' ficquart, in another letter. accord
rte 10 the witness, urged that the whol
e.s 1'T ne exposed or there would lie
"a " GI.lhulng, the witness said: ''I wen
t55 'gn. ~ Billot, the minister of war. an
MN I1n what l knew. / offered to com
- dls Gen. Gonz' letter, but ne re
te-,tl Ihen It was agreed that the in
~ ~" should not be divulged. Never
Itsho3S, me government newspapers pub
.,I an account of the interview.
eti;Idu Idu interviews with the premier (Al
= and told him everything 1 knew
ne w. ocheurer-Kestner further said tina
.SFer mentioned the name of Mai. los
s,a4y' except to the government Bu
q, t,sne Slne later Matthew Dreyfus brothe
1NliIed Dreyfus) came to him ana dc
Sf+t mat he also had discovered ina
~ Esterhazy was the author of IN
Ntieuu, whereupon the witness tol
~ '.Illeu Dreyfus 10 write to the rniniste
Fs,"rl mar which he did, denouneing Ma