The San Francisco call., 1899-08-31
making his deposition, remarked TO
friend
Il am leaving an atmosphere Of ac-
quittal"
EVIDENCE OF EXPERTS
FAVORABLE TO DREYFUS
BertilIon's System Again the Object
of Attack by Counsel for
OreVfuS,


Never. member of the institute and di-
rector of the School of Ancient Manu-
scripts, was the first witness called lie
dopcsed in favor of Dreyfus.
After Mn Molinier and Giry and NJ.
Pfoot member Of the institute, had testi-
fed in favor Of Dreyfus, General peioye
testified against the prisoner on the ar
tllery references in the bordereau.
The evidence of NM Meyer Molinier
and Giry. who are handwriting experts
u5 The first rank. was a strong point for
Dreyfus. They are most emphatic in de
c,aring the bordereau was written by
Estcrhazy. and created a better impress
sion than did NJ Bertillon
General Mercier asked TO be allowed 10
reply to NJ. Molinier, and then, confirm
ing he professors statement that Ester
hazy had changed his handwriting since
1921 ruZzed the audience. That Ester
hazy should have deemed it advisable TO
change his handwriting since the date Of
the nordereau. which appears at first
s.sbt to indicate that he wrote it. and
that General Mercier should support Nj.
Ai.iilieI, aroused discussion as to rs
imgoCt. There are some persons VINO
vest erdaN support of the honorable na-
ture OF NJ Matthieu Dreyfus visit TO
Colonel Sandhorr in 1894 in behalf OF his
brother. and the general! move to-u3!
AN indication Of some change Of attitude,
perhaps Il prelude to candid avowal of
his mistakes Of. 1891. ON the other hand,
many think General MERCER, fearing that
Saturday exposure VIII dlscredIt MN
altogether with the judges, has conceived
The Tdea Of giving way on certain points.
which, moreover. are almost inconteSti-
lie. and thus, TO some extent. reinStatc
himself by an affectatiOn OF impartal!tN.
Nj IlcOt related an interesting con-
Nersation which he had with the AuStro-
hungarian military attache. ColoHei
Schneider. mention Of whose name evoked
prompt protest from Major Carriere IN
the name Of the Government and state.
C0lglel Schneider, according TO this Wit
ness. admitted that ESterhaZN acted as
spy and wrote the bordereau.
General Roget, with his usual shrewd-
ness, seized upon NJ. Picot's statement
that Colonel Schneider expressed aston
ishm5nt that French officers should have
the bad taste 10 question the word OF for
CIgu officers, to mount the platform ana
made short speech in defense Of the
attitude Of the French officers, cOnClud-
ing with the remark:
Il inteTNrned because when French Otd-
GERS lgre. attacked they have the right TO
defend themselves.
These words wiz be published all over
France ana Will tend to make General
Roget more popular with the army.
General DelOye repeated his testimony
before the Court Of Cessation, relating TO
the l20 short cannon hydro-p pneumatic
brake and the Robin shell. DTeyfuS, in
reply, made d really clear statement, eX-
planning that he saw the hydrO-pncumatic
brake once at Bourges, once at the School
or W ar. and that ne never saw ii used
because, while on the general staff, he
was never present at firing practice
Major Carrlere then made application
10 nave the court sit behind closed doors
tomorrow, explaining that he desired TO
submit to the court certain documents
prepared by the gunnsry bureau. contain
ing information which ii was not desirable
TO discuss IN public. In court, after de-
liberation. granted the application and
also acceded TO the request of the de-
fehse that their witness, Major Hart
mann OF the artillery. be allowed to be
present, as be would give important
testimony showing that Dreyfus could
not have written the paragraphs in the
bordereau concerning artillery.
Following are the more important pro-
Ceedirgs in detail:
The nrst witness to-day, NJ. Paul Meyer,
member of the institute and director Of
the School Of Ancient Manuscripts,
care which led to his'conviiction that II the
handwriting. but was actually written by
Islerhazy. The witness explained that
II his evidence before the Assizes Court
he was unable to be so positive in regard
10 the writer because he had only seen
4 fac simile of the bordereau but at the
Court OF Cessation he saw the original.
Il convinced myself said NJ. Meyer
by magnfy!ng glass that the border
eau was written in free hand and with
out hesitation, whereas it is precisely
hesitation in the formation of strokes that
reveals the method Of tracing. l can
aH!Tm thdt Il Is in the writing and in the
very hand Of Eserhazy. This is perfectly
clear to me- fCommOtion.D
At the conclusion of mis- testimony the
witness gave demonstration OF the fall
lacy of the BertilOn system.
Professor AUguste Molnier of the
School Of Ancient Manuscripts gave sim
liar evidence. He said that each fresh
examination of the bordereau only served
work Of Esterhazy Amid deep attention
the witness demonstrated how the con-
clusions Of the experts who attributed the
bOrdereau TO Dreyfus were mutually de-
strucuVe, and dwelt on the defects Of NJ
BeruH2n arguments, pointing out the
striking resemblance Of the alleged doc
tored handwriting with Esterhazy's writ
ing, who, he added, in everybody's opin-
ion, had relations with Colonel Schwarz-
koppcr, the former German military at
tache at Paris; and the dissimiaritieS be
tween the writing of the bordereau and
that Of the prisoner.
The members of the Court-martial were
evidently much interested and asked Pro-
bssor Molinicr number of questions TO
which he replied, holding his conclusion
that EsterhaZy was the writer Of the Dor
dereau. General MERCER requested TO
speak, and called attention TO the fact
that in his testimony before the Court of
Cessation Professor Molnier said a
change was apparent in EsterhaZy's writ
ing after 1894 and asked that the profess
SOrs former evidence be read
". Labor. leading counsel for the de-
fense, inquired if General MERCER inter-
vened with the object of verifying Pro
lessor Molinier's evidence. Counsel added
that It seemed to him that General
Mercier interviewed less in the character OF
witness than as a Government commits
Sary. He therefore would be grateful TO
the general if he would explain the bear
ing Of his remark.
Mercier replied that the special point he
desired was to confirm the evidence of
Professor MOlinier. which he said corrobo-
rated NJ BertiliOn's statement that Es-
tcrhazy, the man of straw could change
his handwriting in order to replace Drey-
tus In conclusion General MERCER said:
Having emphasized the point in regard
to the change IN Esterhazy's handwriting
in 1897, perhaps before, l am satisfied"
(COmmotiOn)
Professor CRY, also of the school Of An
cient Manuscripts, traversed about the
same ground covered by Professor Moli-
nier.
Counsel asked whether General Mercier
had meant to intimate that Esterhazy's
handwriting had become more or less like
that Of DreyfUs since 1897. to which the
general replied that he had not wished TO
express an opinion, but he reiterated that
NJ. Bertillon had shown that Esterhazys
handwriting had become more like that of
IN that case, MERCER should not have re-
peated the evidence of Grenier before the
Court of Cessation as Grenier showed
that Esterhazy's calligraphy had become
less and less like the writing OF the bor-
dereau and Of Dreyfus
VI. Bertillon, at this juncture, said he
desired to speak, but the president of the
court Colonel Jouast, hastily arose and
81 id amidst laughter: ''rne Sitting is