The semi-weekly messenger. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1897-1908, 1899-08-29

that effect, but I gave verbal orders,
in a manner sufficiently clear. (Sensa-
TOM
The general refused to reply to many
Of the questions. For instance, he de-
clined to say whether he had examin-
ed the proofs advanced against Drey-
fus.
NJ. Labori-In short, you considered
it in the nature Of a sensational move
to have Dreyfus prosecuted and sen
fenced? Did you examine previously
the charges against Dreyfus?
General Mercier[ only examined the
| nature of the documents betrayed.
n. Labori-Was 1t not necessary for
that purpose to fix the date OF the Dor
dereau?
General Mercier-I do not think so.
NJ. Labor pointed out the contradic-
; tons in the evidence OF the officers Of
the headquarters staff regarding the
Importance and nature of the contents
of the bordereau n asked General
! MERCER where Dreyfus could a OBJ
aimed particulars about the pneumatic
brake
The general hotly objected to being
| asked to repeat his evidence and M.
| Labor, equally warm. said: IT am
! only asking for definite statements"
MERCER then said he thought Drey-
fus might have had cognizance Of the
brake at Bourges. adding: In any
case, he had a better chance to obtain
such knowledge han ESterhaZey could
! possibly have had"
/ NJ. Labori-General MERCER says
: Dreyfus might have had c~ognizance. I
desire to emphasize that expression.
We shall now prove Dreyfus could not
nave had cognizance of h brake.
Counse proceeded to demonstrate how
vigorously the secret Of the construc-
ton of the brake was guarded n
asked why, in 1894, the charges regard
ing the Robin Melinite shells were not
dwelt upon.
General Mercier-That arises on the
simple fact that it was not known un-
til 1896 or 1897 that information on the
subject vas being divulged. The exist
ence of treachery in regard to the dis
tribution Of heavy artillery among the
army corps was unknown until 1895.
Continuing, M. Labor asked why
General MERCER did not have a report
prepared regarding the confession
Dreyfus lis alleged to have made to
Captain Lebrun-Renault.
General Mercier:-The question Of
the confession was of no Importance
until a revision of the case seemed pos
sible.
M. Labori-What does General Mer-
cier think of EsterhaZey and the part
lie played?
General Mercier-I do not know Es-
terhazey and I do not think about him
at all.
M. Labori-Did you know him at his
trial in 1898?
General Mercier-No.
Colonel JOuauSt-Genera1 MERCER was
not minister of war then.
M. Labori-This is most interesting.
General Mercier declares he knows
nothing of the trial of 1898.
General Mercier-I know nothing Of
it. I leave that to the court-martial
: L-soI @-1ry
to answer in court for my acts, and I
refuse you the right to question me
about my thoughts. ~(Sensation.)
Colonel Jouaust, addressing M. La
bori, said: You are reverting to the
evidence Of General Mercier?"
M. Labori-My object in interrogating
the witness is to revert to his evil
dence.
General Mercier| protest against the
word "interrogatory," for 1 am not a
prisoner.
[Note.-Interrogatory, in French law,
generally applies to the examination of
an accused person by a magistrate.1
M. Labori-It is not a question Of
in~terrogatory. I used the word in most
respectful sense. Will General MERCER
say what he means by the charge pre-
ferred against the partisans of Drey-
fus Of having spent 35,0OO,0 900 francs?
What was this sum used for? The
I ~ L mp
General Mercier-I might just as well
ask you. (Sensation.)
M. Labori-Do you mean to suggest
that it was spent in advertisements and
in buying conscienceS?
General Mercier-I say nothing what
ever.
AS the questions of counsel touched
upon the secret dossier and a certain
document in blue pencil, Gener GOnSe,
General Roget, M. Gribelin and Major
Lauth also participated in the discus
sion, which almost degenerated into a
wrangle.
The government commissary, Major
Carriere, protested against such dis
cussion and Colonel Jouaust ordered
silence.
Major Lauth said he believed a clue
to the blue pencil document existed be-
fore the trial Of 1894, n M. Labor
asked why, in that case. it was no
produced at the trial, since it incrim.
mated the prisoner?
General Mercier said he did not know
of this clue, n Major Lauth disclaim.
ed all responsibility in the matter, as
he was not connected with the prelim-
mary inquiry.
General Gonse said the document ha6
been in the possession Of Colonel Sand.
herr (~Sensation) and ut was by hin
placed in the secret dossier for com
parison with other papers.
M. Labor asked for explanation II
regard to the commentary on the secre
dossier n General MERCER admitted
he destroyed it in 1897.
General m was drawn into tht
discussion and said that he communi
Gated the translation OF the Panizzard
telegram to General Roget while en-
joining absolute privacy on the subject
When asked if he accepted responsi,
bility for this document, General Cha
moin replied in the affirmative, adding
however, the admission that he ha(
made a mistake.
Colonel Jouaust intimated that tn,
court ought to take no notice of tn,
document in question.
DREYFUS REPLIES TO MERCER
Dreyfus here a " a detailed stor!
Of how he employed his time a
Bourges from October. 1889. to Febru
airy, 1890. He said that he was pre-
pairing for his examinations and had n
time to go to h cafes or to think o
anything outside of his duties. Thi
was a reply to General Mercier's aSSer