The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1899-08-22
THE EVIDENCE IN DETAIL.
Scandals, Lies. FOrgeries and Dis
honor Furnished Sensations.

~ IN DAS
honor Furnished Sensations
RENNES, Aug. 1.-The evidence in detail
of each witness before the court-martial
to-day was both bold and spicy at times
and the defense let no witness leave the
stand without showing his mistakes or else
his willful persistence in giving false testi-
mcny. Dreyfus, who was frequently on his
feet, showed repeatedly the impossibility of
the truth of much of the most important
accusations.
General Fabre, former chief Of the fourth
bureau Of the general staff, was the first
witness to-day. He said that in his official
capacity he compared the handwriting OF
the bordereau with the writing Of various
officers In his bureau, including the hand
writing of a probationer who had been in
the bureau during the previous year and
who had not favorably impressed his COM
rades. This probationer, Dreyfus. who was
regarded as untrustworthy and insincere in
his pretensions, was. according to the wit
ness, equally disliked by his comrades and
superiors, and was, Fabre added, constantly
endeavoring by all sorts Of means to learn
the secrets Of the plan of concentration of
the eastern railway system, and in his anx-
iety to secure information neglected his
duties. His official duties. witness also
said, placed 1t In Dreyfrs's power to dis
close the documents referred to in the bor-
dereau. Witness could emphatically deny
all Dreyfus had said on this subject.
When Major Berth showed witness the
bordereau the latter was struck with the
resemblance of the caligrapEy. Creyfus was
the only officer who made a bad impression
in his bureau and the opinions of the chief
Of staff and heads of other departments
confirmed witnesses belief. General Fabre,
In conclusion, declared he was still as firm
ly convinced as in 1894 that the prisoner was
the author of the bordereau. tSensation.1
After NJ. Demange had pointed out the
discrepancies in Fabre's present statements
and those he voiced in 1894 Col. Jouaust
invited Dreyfus to reply. The prisoner said
General Fabre quite correctly described the
work in which he was engaged when a pro-
bationer, especially emphasizing that he had
to keep the dossier relating to the concen-
tration centers on the eastern system post
ed up. This was not a fictitious task. The
| prisoners reply was made in calm. measured
tones and his frankness seemed to favorabiy
impress the judges.
Colonel D'Aboville. former deputy chief
of the fourth bureau, related how Fabre
had shown him a photograph Of an anony-
nous note in which the writer admitted to
lis correspondent, evidently foreign to the
army that he had confidential documents
TO communicate. The witness told Fabre
that the ocume mentioned showed the
writer could only be an artillery officer. con-
| nected with the general staff, who particf-
pated In the expedition of the headquarters
stan in June and July, 1894. The position OF
Dreyfus corresponded with these conditions,
and ''to their great surprise" a striking re-
semblance was apparent in the writing OF
Dreyfus and the anonymous letter. Witness
further declared that only a probationer
could possess the information mentioned In
the bordereau. 1t was not only because OF
the resemblance of the handwriting that
suspicious were directed at Dreyfus. but be-
cause he was in a position to be acquainted
with the documents enumerated.
TRIPPING A WITNESS.
NJ. Demange wished to know why Colonel
D'Aboville said in 1894 that in order to dis
cover the author OF the bordereau he
thought 1t necessary TO investigate the Of
GERS who participated In the expedition of
the general staff that year.
Witness replied that he was induced to do
so by the expression in the bordereau, II am
going to the maneuvers," for he considered
the expedition of the general STAFF equiv
alent to the m~aneuvers. although troops
were not actually present.
Counsel. pointing out that a great deal of
argument was founded on the expression.
Il am going TO the maneuvers." said that II
should no De forgotten that in 1894 the ex-
preston was understood to apply to the ex-
petition of the headquarters stan.
In reply TO the usual question Dreyfus said
that he had never held any conversation
with Colonel Sandherr. the late chief OF the
intelligence department, Who was so little
acquainted with him that he once addressed
him by another name.
Greater interest In the proceedings was
manifested when the name of the next wit
| rees was announced. former chief Of the de.
1co11 Iued ON second Page3