Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1899-09-09

fus and Esterhazy. 1t had only to prove
Dreyfus guilty and could not do so. On
the contrary, we have shown that Dreyfus
did not possess the document commun!-
Gated, nor the information contained in
it."
Gen. Mercier's Change of Front.
Dealing with the note referring to the
covering Of troops NJ. Demange pointed out
Gen. Mercier's change of front on this sub
ject. In 1894 the general contended that it
was with reference to the commands of
these troops that the leakage occurred,
while he now asserted that it was regard
ing the mobilization and transport of the
troops The prosecution had thus advanced
two versions, which must cause the judges
terrible searchings Of conscience, especially
as no proofs had been furnished. What
right had the prosecution to advance state
ments without corroboration? Counsel put
it to the consciences Of the judges and he
had asked this Of Gen. Mercier himself.
Continuing to plead with great warmth
and eloquence and with clear, closely rea-
soned arguments, which were followed with
breathless interest by the entire audience
NJ Demange declared he did not believe in
the completely of Henry and Esterhazy,
for Henry was honorable and loyal If he
had been the accomplice of Esterha2y
Henry would have destroyed the bordereau
Possibly Henry had inadvertently d.
vulged information to Esterhazy, under the
he inc y1fh
an honorable, straightforward man like
himself, and discovering In 1898 that he
had placed his hands in a traitors, he COM
mitted a crime upon which counsel declined
to enlarge since the pernetrator had al
ready paid for it with his life. What other
explanation could be given of the suicide
of this man with whom the whole army
sympathized, even after the discovery of
the crime.
What Did Henry Mean:
Henry had spoken of scoundrels. Was
not one of these Esterhazy and the other
Weyl, the latter having unconsciously be-
trayed Information. Gen. Saussier had
every confidence in Henry's loyalty, and
Esterhazy might have received informa-
ton from Henry or Weyl who were un-
conscious informers A loyal soldier, Gen.
Billot, had, moreover, said the traitor was
not alone. In his mind he connected the
names of Esterhazy and Dreyfus.
Counsel did not profess to clear up the
1t must be proved that Dreyfus knew Es-
terhazy and Weyl. He ON. Demange) did
not fear whatever light could be thrown on
the case. Three men were in the intelIi-
gence department-Henry, Esterhazy and
Weyl. Esterhazy had even placed the 9TH
ers under pecuniary obligations, and all
three were closely bound together.
Replying to the hypothesis deduced in the
note relating to the modification of the
artillery, M. Demange pointed out that the
Information could have been obtained by
Esterhazy at the Chalons camp, while, re-
garding the Madagascar note, Dreyfus had
never had possession of 1t, though one
of his most bitter prosecutors, Col. du Patty
the firing manual, counsel showed how Es-
terhazy secured a copy of 1t and pointed
to the fact that his government had asked
Col Schwartzkoppen for supplementary in
formation, which showed that the original
intelligence was incomplete and supplied
by an incompetent person, not an artillery
man.
The memorandum to Col Schwartzkop
pen asked for the firing manual, which
must therefore have been offered, and for
the graduation bar, which Esterhazy had
obtained.
Had all these proofs existed against
Dreyfus, how strong would have been the
case for the prosecution. But their hy-
potheses were not even probable, while the
theories of the defense were all supported
by documents culed from the secret dos
Sier.
Dealing with the last line Of the bor-
dereau, Il am going to the maneuvers,"
counsel produced note written by Drey-
fus proving that he knew in May, 1894,
that he would not attend the maneuvers
with his regiment.
Counsel dwelt upon the Importance of
the fact that the probationers absolutely
knew they would not attend the maneuvers,
though certain individuals cherished the
hope that exceptions might be made in
their favor.
Only one actually applied to General de
Boisdeffre for permission, but the latter
did not promise anything. M. Demange
protested against the government commits
sioners assertion that 1t had been agreed
that the probationers should attend the
maneuvers as officers of the headquarters
staff, and said he wished to know if Major
Carriere adhered to his statement on the
subject.
Major Carriere recalled that General de
Boisdeffre had declared he had promised to
do his best to satisfy the probationers.
NJ Demange-"And you call that an
agreement"
Major Carriere-"Certainly."
M Demange-"Then we do not agree as
to the meaning of the word in the French
language"
AUTOMOBILE GUN CARRIAGE.