New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1899-08-15

the allegatlons maui ~
~ exculpatng Dreyfus.
rvr1rs NERVOUS AND AGITATED.
r,,r,re NJ. Cavaignac's arraignment Dreyfus
was nervous and agtated
r,,,h tho view OF exculpatng Dreyfus. for In
80 no said there would be official deniais
nth would leave plenty of room for the truth
y. oocane Besides. 1t was quite possible the ac-
sod was guilty OF treason without ha'i"s
ia direct relations with the agents OF ior
H., Government A certain Ambassador hau
admitted that his military attache had spieu
rrder the immunity granted to diplomats M
cavaignac also found in the contradictory s'a'e
.,,on,e NJ foreign diplomatsts that Dreyfus was
vol known at various chancelleries.
co,oroI .Jouaust asked NJ. Cavaignac to ex-
,ot, the discovery Of the Henry forgery, ana
,ho witness repeated the statements he had
already made on the subject He dwet al
length on NJ Cugnets long Investigation
colonel Jouaust then asked What do you
fink OF the Henry forgery IN relation 10 the
facts now occupying our attention.?
"Tbc Henry forgery" replied NJ. Cavaignac
"as alleged. was in order to secure revision OF
tho cas, by the Court OF Cassation and was not
oven alluded to. This forgery. therefore. should
remain outside the scope of the questions sub
mtted 20 this court martial. That is my opin-
| ion"
Replying to another question. NJ. Cavaignac
said his statement that Dreyfus went to Brus-
sells in the middle Of 1894 rested on hearsay.
NJ. Cavaignac introduced during the course OF
! his evidence memorandum. written in Ger
] man asking for various information wanted by
! the Embassy, which appears to have been under
| the archives OF the Bureau Of Information Of the
War Office He said he believed it was written
by military attache.
NJ Demange asked why NJ. Cavaignac. who
was so anxious to ncrmnate Dreyfus, had not
produced this document in the Chamber of Dep
utles. The witness replied that he had other
means Of reaching the ends.
Counsel for the prisoner then questioned NJ.
Cavagnac in regard to his statement that Cen
eral de Boisdeffre was absent from Paris No
vember &. when General MERCER declares that
he was there. The witness replied that General
de Boisdeffre was certainly absent on that date.
Colonel Jouaust remarked that this point would
be elucidated when General de Boisdeffre ap-
peared.
THE PRISONERS COMMENT.
Colonel Jouaust then told Dreyfus to rise, and
asked him II he had any remarks to make upon
the evidence. The prisoner in a low voice, re-
Piled
II am astounded that the man who produced
in the tribunal of the Chamber the Henry
| forgery can come here and base his convictions
Of my culpabillty matters which the Court
OF Cessation has already disposed Of" Great
sensation)
General Zurlinden. also former Minister OF
War. the next witness. He began by point
ing out the obligation resting upon those direct
| ing espionage to do everything possible to save
those serving them when the latter were dis
! covered He then declared that he still regarded
the bordereau being decisive proof of the
guilt Of Dreyfus, and said 1t would be impossi-
BILE for those who were prosecuting Dreyfus to
be acting from esprit de corps, and it would be
as unjust to say So as TO say they approve the
"odious act just committed in the vicinity"
This inquiry into the honor Of the army, he con-
tinued. had nothing to do with the affair.
General Zurinden then traversed the old
ground. and declared that nothing not even
Esterhazy's confessions, had occurred to change
his convictions The prosecution Of Dreyfus.
the witness asserted, was quite Unforeseen, and,
therefore. the idea of Vaccinations was I'M
tenable The reiteraton by General zurlinden
OF his firm belief that Dreyfus wrote the bor-
dereau created lively excitement
| NJ. Demange suggested that If Colonel Fabre
had not thought of examining the handwriting
Of the probationers the bordereau would then
have been eternally buried in the archives Of
the Ministry Of War; and" he remarked IF
this is the case it must be evidence that there
was nothing in the bordereau which indicted
Dreyfus."
General Zurlnden, in a troubled voice ac-
knowledged this fact conclusively and tried to
explain. NJ Demange however, got General
Zurnden to admit that IT was not until after
the condemnation that the study OF the bor-
dereau seemed to indicate that It was the work
OF probatiOner.
In reply to further questions, General Zurn-
den said that in order to know the whole truth
in regard to the bordereau they must have the
four notes therein mentioned. They must be Sc
cured.
At this point Dreyfus interJected: Il asso-
ciate myself with those words. my Colonel.
also desire the truth l only ask for the truth"
These statements caused renewed excitement
in court.
CHANOINE AND HANOTAUX TESTIFY.
General Chanoine next testified. He briefly af-
frmed his belief in the culpabty Of the pris-
oner.
The appearance OF NJ. Hanotaux, the former
Minister Of Foreign Affairs who followed him
in the witness box, reawakened the interest oi
the audience. He declared that he had nothing
to add to his evidence given before the Court
| OF Cessation He said he never had cognzance
either as a Minister a private individual,
Of any secret dossier. He recalled the circum-
stances under which he took office. saying that
foreign politics then presented grave difficulties.
The negotiations with Great Britain and Bel
GUM in regard to Africa. the war in Madagas-
car. and the state OF affairs in China were
pointed to. He then related how he was made
acquainted with the Dreyfus affair by General
MERCER and NJ. Dupuy in the presence Of NJ.
Guerin, and read the notes. already produced
| nv NJ PalenlogMe. giving the observations he