The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1899-08-19

yeritable speech for the prosecution de-
livered by General Roget when referring TO
the Quenelli case
The president of the court. Colonel Jou
aust here interposed. saying rs 1t per-
sonal matter?"
Il shall be very brief, colonel" replied
Picquart. Il am. moreover ready TO re-
Ply to all questions the court may ask on
the subject, For the moment shall con-
line myself to the following explanations:
The Quenelli case occurred between May
30 and July IL. 1896, at which period, on
account of the family bereavement. l was
able to pay very little attention TO my Of
nee duties. In my absence Colonel Henry
acted for me. Moreover, devoted most
of the month OF July 10 journey for the
headquarters stan. which also prevented
me from attending to my ordinary duties
was, therefore. able to give only very in
termtttent attention to the Quenclli case
Besides this. Quenelli was a returned con-
wet who had contravened q decree of ex-
pulsion and had been caught red handed
IN another criminal act. He was at first
sight not particularly interesting per-
sonage.'
Al this point General Roget arose and
said; II wish to be allowed to reply
You SHALL" said Colonel Jouaust.
Colonel Picquart continuing. said II
protest absolutely againat tho allegations
that consented to the communication Of
secret documents to members of the Drey-
fus court martial without the prisoners
knowledge. ! never ordered such COM
munication, and IL 1t was done 1t VAS
without my cognizance.
L hasten to add that in my opinion 1t
would have been an insult to lie court TO
believe its members would lend themselves
to such machination.
am ready | rpnpat "a ranly IN nny
question. / will only point on; thnt all
General Roget has recounted in detail was
published in general terms In the Gauols
January -
Then the colonel proceeded to discuss
the phrase occurring in the bordereau II
am going to the maneuvers. y He said tnere
was no question of practitioners going to
the maneuvers in September. This he
pointed out would have curtailed their
period of probation in an entirely un-
usual manner
After dealing with the testimony Of ex-
perts at the court martial of 1894. Pic
quart proceeded to examine the secret
dossier, close analysis of which he as
serted was particularly unnecessary owing
TO the weight the document had with the
members Of the court martial In 1894
This dossier, continued the witness
may be divided into two parts. The first
contains three documents:
Il. document known as the 'd'Avig-
non document the terms of which AFRO
about as follows: Doubt the proofs; serv-
ice letters; situation dangerous for men
with French offices; no information from
an officer of the line; important only as
coming from the ministry, already some
where else.
80. The document containing the words
'Cette canaille de D.
"3. document which is nothing but
n N GwityprlaOl 10 N
behalf of foreign power.
THE second part of the dossier," con-
tnued PIcquart, consisted chiefly of a
supplementary review of the first 1t con-
tanned the gist of seven or eight docu-
ments, one which 'Cette canaille de D.
will serve for the purpose of comparison
1t also contained the correspondence OF
attaches "A and B. -
These initials. 1t should be hume IN
mind, represent Colonel Schwartzkoppen,
former German military attaehe at Paris,
and Major Pani2ardi. the former military
attache of Italy, at the French capital,
At this juncture the colonel said II
would facilitate his explanations II he
were permitted TO see tho secret doss'er
adding"I have already had ii In my hands,
but fear my memory may fail me on
some points"
What you ask replied the president OF
the court, is impossible. The minister's
orders are absolute. The secret dosser
can only be examined under certain con-
ditions."
II regret It," answered Picquart. 'bu,
will try TO refresh my memory
The witness next explained why Major
Patty de CLAIMS translation Of the d'AWg-
non document which has been classed as
ldlotic, was open to doubt and that the
document, If it had any meaning Whatever,
was as applicable to Esterhazy as to Drey-
fus.
Regarding the correspondence of the
military attaches the witness demonstrat-
ed the insignihcapce of the information
asked for.
While Patty de Clam regarded the CORE
spondence as convincing and as clearly IN
dlrstlng an officer OF the second bureau,
Picquart maintained that the terms OF the
correspondence indicated that the writer
had intended to ask a friend and not q
SOY for the Information desired. Many VINO
had quarters Offices he pointed out were
ON cordial and absolutely intimate terms
with the foreign military attaches.
Colonel picquart then took up the Ca
naille de D." document, He called the
attention of the court to the fact that 1t
was addressed by Schwartzkonen TO
Panizardi and not vice versa, as long be-
lieved After giving his reasons for be-
lieving Dreyfus was not the person re-
ferred to In that document Picquart showed
how Patty de Clam endeavored to ascribe
the authorship of the document to Pani-
zardi with the view OF enabling connec-
ton, which in reality did not exist be-
tween the various documents In the in
dlctmert against Dreyfus.
The document referring TO Inc French
agents journey to Switzerland. of which
Schwartzkoppen is said to have been in
formed, was only slightly commented upon
by the witness, as he did not attach I'M
portance to It, The detail with which thA
colonel dealt with the evidence. the clear
ness of his language and his deductions
had great effect on the audience ana elicit
ed general admiration.
The former chief of the Intelligence de'
partment concluded his examination OF the
first portion OF the secret dossier by say
ing: May ] be allowed TO express deep
regret at the absence of Major du raty de
Clam. 1t seems to me Indispensable that
this officer. who wrote the commentaries
ON the secret dossier, should be summoned
to give evidence here. He would give
us his "reminiscences and would heip
him. Ganghter.) But" added Picquart.
since ! am dealing with this question OF
the commentaries of Major du Paty 40
Clam, permit me to point TO you, gentle
men, that this document was not the prop
erty of any particular minister. IL was
classified as cling to the inteiilgehcs
department and as you see II formed part
dO9sfpr WDlcu