Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1899-08-28

reproductions of the documents in CON
sequence of imperfections in the
methods employed to reproduce them.
This, he continued, tended to prove rs
terhazy had appropriated the writing
of these reproductions.
"Estcrhazy." exclaimed NJ. Bertillon,
lis man of straw and a scoundrel.
have said this ever since the commence
ment of the Zola trial"
There was a sensation in court at
this remark, which was turned to
laughter. az the witness. in his excite
ment. knocked his portfolios to the
ground.
NJ. Demange asked NJ. Bertillon if he
had submitted EsterhaZy's writing to
the same tests as the bordereau. The
witness replied in the affirmative. eX-
planning that. however. the tests We're
less complete than. in the case of the
prisoner.
Counsel reminded the witness that he
said in 1894 that he found in the Dor
dereau 4 cryptosraphic signature, that
of Alfred Dreyfus.
NJ. Bertillon replied that he was not
now positive on this point. to which. he
AIDED. he attached no Importance what
ever
Referring to NJ. Bertillon's state
mentS, yesterday, that he found in
the bordereau words Dreyfus was in
the habit Of using in documents of the
war Office, NJ. Demange asked how the
witness accounted for this. and the
specialist explained with some confus-
ion, that il was a necessary counter
part of the precautions taken by the
prisoner when he wrote the bordereau.
lin order to make out that he was the
victim of plot" tSensation).
Asked his opinion Of the letter Of
from Matthew Dreyfus. called THE
blotting pad letter." from which the
specialist alleged the prisoner tok the
key word from his work on the Dor
dereau. NJ. Bertillon replied that he
had no opinion on the subject. but he
maintained the letter had ben written
by the same system as the bordereau.
THAT is my hypothesis" said the
witness. Many similar ones can be
found" (Murmurs of disapproVaD.
NJ Labor asked how NJ Bertillon
reconclcd the result Of the present ex-
pariments. namely. that the bordereau
| was written by Dreyfus. tracing Ester
lietEN LlSlllNiN liiIiS. I'LL HIS pIiiiA'''
in 1894 that the bordereau was written
! by Dreyfus unless it had been most
carefully forged.
To this NJ. Bertillon replied that it
was only hypothesis. whereupon NJ.
Labori remarked that the forgery was
then of such a nature as to constitute
proofs in favor of DreyfuS. yet, today
il is made proof against him
said stSinTA +hn
witness admits Esterhazy has written
by the same mathematical methods as
Dreyfus. why has ne attributed the
bordereau % Dreyfus. rather than to
t,Sterhazy2'
NJ. Bertillon-It was on DreyfuS' blot
ting pad that the key word interest"
was found. and Esterhazy might have
had access to this word.
NJ Labori-Does NJ Bertillon admit
that Esterhazy is a traitor?
Col. Jouaust refused to put the ques-
ton to the witness. (Sensation).
NJ Labori asked NJ Bertillon's opin-
ion as to what system Of defence might
have been employed by the writer of
the bordereau if the document had
been found on him.
The witness. in confused and al
most liduhlbtt tome, UttidItl lllt' PMS
oner would then have maintained the
document was a forgery, and would
have adduced it as proof Of a plot.
NJ Labori-In that case. the prisoner
must have foreseen the appearance on
the scene Of Il man 50 eminent as NJ.
Bcrtilon UaughtcrD. capable Of produc-
ing a system 50 ingenious as the one
he has expounded, today Renewed
| lauEhter).
NJ Bertillon retorted that. in his
opinion. a man Of the ability Of the ac
cused could have written a model line
in q quarter of an hour every time he
| had occasion to write.
Replying to further questions. NJ.
BertilIon admitted that he had discov-
cred in Esterhazys writing peculiari-
ties similar to those in the bordereau.
Counsel pointed out that il was i'm
| possible to maintain the hypothesis
| that EsterhaZy was man of straw.
! since. in 1897. when he might very well
have admitted writing the bordereau.
he had confessed nothing. The reason
| ing Of NJ. Bertillon, counsel asserted,
| therefore fell to the ground.
After Il short, incidental discussion
Of the Well forgery. which, it was be-
| lieved was perpetrated by order Of the
project of police, Col. Jouaust asked
the prisoner if he had anything to say
| in reply to the witness. and the atten-
ton of all present was Immediately
riveted on Dreyfus. who explained how
| the explanation. 20. the wretch es-
capped his lips, yesterday.
M. Bertillon." the prisoner said,
| was constantly turning to me while
testifying. and calling me the guilty
man. / retorted wretch, to him.
Those are the circumstances under
which | uttered the word.
II have nothing to reply to the depo-
| sition of the witness: but there is one
| thing Of which I am absolutely sure.
and that is that | am not the writer of
! the bordereau." Great sensation).
| Referring to his papers which were
| seized at the war office, Dreyfus said
| it would not be strange to see notes
| written by officers altered He added:
| Il was shown. yesterday. q note rela-
tive to Gen. de Miribel. There We're iii
the document corrections made by the
chief of department himslf, which
shows that, Immediately after having
written d note, he handed it to the
g 80,