The semi-weekly messenger. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1897-1908, 1899-08-25

such as Ferret, entering the office.
A BAD SHOWING FOR ESTER
HAZEY.
M. Grenier, former project of Bel
fort, was h first witness called. He
said he considered EsterhaZey to be an
irresponsible parsonage ESterhazey,
he continued, was b orderly officer OF
the witness father, who always praised
his fidelity and devotion; but Ester
haZey, even then, was a disappointed
man. He was always complaining OF
Of deception, grumbling at fate and liv-
ing in great style without means to Up
hold it. He s~quandered successive leg
acies. At Esterhazey's request, the
witness made numerous attempts to
get him into the ministry of war, which
EsterhaZey declared was necessary in
order to enable him to pass for lieuten-
ant colonel.
THE SPY LA JOUX.
Lieutenant Colonel Rollin, Of the in
telligence department, was the next
witness. He described the spy, La
Joux, employed in the department, as a
bad spy" whom 1T was found neceS-
a r to suppress.
M. Labori asked the witness whether
he knew La Joux had offered to make
revelations in the Dreyfus affair, and
the witness replied that La Joux wrote
to the minister of war asking for as
sistance and referring to the Dreyfus
case.
The clerk of the court read a letter
in which, after dwelling upon his ser
vice, La Joux said it was in consequence
of Henry's exactions that the spy,
Cuers, had become an enemy instead
of an ally. He also described a con-
versation with Cuers, in which the lat
ter declared Dreyfus had lever been
heard of at the army headquarters in
Berlin and that on the news of the ar
rest of Dreyfus, General Won Valdez
see summoned all the German military
attaches in Europe to Berlin and they
unanimously declared that not one of
them had ever had relations with Drey-
fus. Cuers added that he himself had
never heard of Dreyfus. La JOux then
complained of his abandonment by the
headquarters staff and the measures
taken against him by officers OF the
ministry of war. He spoke OF the
promises of Colonel Sandherr and Hen
ry, who gave him credit for most of the
success in the work in the intelligence
bureau.
After reading this letter M. Labor in
quired: "Can Lieutenant Colonel Roll1n
explain how a man regarded as a rogue
n bad egg is now receiving a pension
of 200 francs monthly"
The witness replied: ut is no doubt
in recognition OF his previous services
Uaughter.)
Then M. Labor asked if the witness
assumed responsibility for the report
of November 80, 1897, which was attrib-
uted to a foreign military attache.
The government cOmmissary, Major
Carriere, protested against this Ques-
ton, saying it referred to affairs of
state and should not be answered ex-
cept behind closed doors.
M. Labor pointed out that he had
-rr1oI a~I
Colonel ROllin replied that he had no
knowledge regarding the translation of
the document in question.
At this M. Labor called the atten-
ton of the witness to the cautious ma
ture of his reply n asked him how
the document came into the possession
of General MERCER.
General Mercier thought the witness
was not justified in answering it. But
in reply to further queries, MERCER de-
clared he took the full responsibility
for the translation submitted to tha
court
MERCER AT BAY.
Thereupon M. Labor pointed out that
when the document was produced, Gen
| eral MERCER was no longer minister OF
I war, and asked what right then, ha6
he to lave in his possession a document
which was a state secret.
III dl AlClClSI ulO uOI 1Cp1y.
Counsel then asked what right haG
Genera MERCER to retain possession OF
all the documents in the secret dos.
sier.
General Mericier vas silent.
M. Labor: Il am asking for the Off
cial responsibility and 1 make note o.
the fact that it is refused. I will re.
serve the right to take all the meas.
ures which I think proper" (Sensa
tion.)
Counsel added that he later would asl
Colonel Jouaust to recall General Mer'
1 cisr and would put numerous question:
to him to which, however, counsel add
ed, he could foresee the general would
refuse to reply. prolonged sensation.
Dreyfus then made a statement re
garding a passage Of Rollins evidence
referring to HI searches made in hi
! CDreyfus) residence in 1894.
Everything" said the prisoner, wa.
seized without exception"
Colonel Jouaust: Some of the page
were missing of your notes aiken a
the lectures given by the military col
lege. That mas been the subject of re
mark"
Dreyfus: NO, my colonel, not il
1894" ~(Sensation.)
Ferret, a former secretary Of the min
istry of war, then told of finding Drey
fuS and a civilian in the war office, gu
Of office hours, apparently prying abou
for information. Witness was asket
why he had not referred to this in 1894
but he could give no good reason
Dreyfus protested against this evi
dence, terming it a vile insinuatiol
concocted by a former minister OF war.
Great SenSation.)
THE PROSECUTION CHECKMATEI
The prisoner said that it was mos
difficult for a civilian t o obtain entry t
the war office.
/ The prosecution undertook to refut
this statement by citing instances
Dreyfus retorted that If these case
were true there la been gross negli
gence in the office, for the rules wer
strict.
Maitre Demange added that if civil
tians had such eaS access to the docu
ment rooms Others beside officers Nigh
have secured contraband information.
SOME DELICATE QUESTIONS.
Lieutenant Colonel Berth. who wa
chief of DreyfUs' bureau in 1894, fol
lowed. He gave the prisoner a bad rep
utation for curiosity and negligence /
= - - - --:A