The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1899-08-29
THE STORY OF THE DAY.
Testimony In Detail Given at the
Dreyfus Courtmartial.

Rennes, Aug. 2S.-M. Paray-Javal
draughtsman, resumed his testimony al
the opening of the court this morning.
and with the assistance of blackboard
proceeded to show the fallacy of calcu-
lations of NJ. Bertilion and the latter
unfairness in not submitting the hand
writing OF Esterhazy to the same tests
as the prisoners He declared, how
ever, that even if NJ. BertillOn had done
! SO. the results would not have proved
/ anything The witness, however, in
sisted that NJ. Bertillon had adopted a
vicious method in only making a par
| tial experiment.
/ Continuing, NJ. Paray-Javal proceeded
to show that the geometric regular
I tiles alleged by NJ. Bertilion did not in
reality exist He pointed out a num-
Der of irregularities in the handwriting
of the bordereau, and said the same ir-
Irregularities were particularly notice
able in Esterhazy's caligraphy. He con-
tended that the alleged irregularity of
the key word. interest" was only APP
proximate. and proceeded to illustrate
his arguments on the blackboard.
showing that all NJ. Bertillon's proof
applied as equally to EsterhaZy as TO
Dreyfus.
Finally NJ. Paray-Javal declared that
NJ BertiIlon's measurement of the word
interest" which served as the basis
for the whole system, was entirely
false, and therefore NJ. Bertillon's en-
tire system falls to the ground and
no longer exists" (Great sensation.)
Could Not Have Been Traced.
This witness, who had awakened the
interest of his hearers, maintained that
the bordereau could not have been
traced, adding that it was an utter i'm
possibility. He then proceeded to illus
trate why this was the case, and to
prove the falseness of NJ. Bertillons de-
auctions.
In conclusion, NJ. Paray-Javal said
that he thought that NJ. Bertillon was
a very intelligent man, but that his
system was false, and ne, the witness,
was convinced that only self-esteeln
prevented NJ. Bertillon from admitting
his error
NJ. Trissonieres said he adhered in all
respects to his report dated Oct. 80
1894 in which he expressed the opinion
that the bordereau was the work of
the writer of the documents seized at
the prisoners residence. For the pur-
pose of comparison. the witness length
lily criticised the bordereau. letter by
letter, pointing out resemblances TO the
prisoners handwriting.
In conclusion. NJ. Trissonierres said he
InOuSnI III was ltHpoSSiDle 10 ma more
tangible reasons than those which in
duced in him the belief. which he hoped
the court would share. tSensation.)
Replying to the court, NJ. Trission-
ierres said he had not noticed the pris-
oners handwriting was illegible, and
he had never seen the document die
tated TO Dreyfus. The copy of the bor-
dereau made by Dreyfus was then
handed to the witness, who declared
it had never been given to him for
purposes of comparison. (Sensation)
Reply of Dreyfus.
When he was invited TO reply to the
witness. Dreyfus said NJ. Trissionierres'
remarks seemed TO him quite incor-
rect" and, that in order to reply prop
eriy, he, the prisoner. must have the
documents under his eyes. As regards
the criticism on the subject Of para
graphing, Dreyfus added:
Il beg to reply that one does not
make a fresh paragraph except when
beginning an ew idea Every time / be-
gin a. new idea in anything-I write
make paragraph
The prisoner. in conclusion, asked the
president of the court to ask witness