The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1899-08-20

the Lycee. The first witness called to-
day was Major Cuignet, formerly at
tached to the ministry of war. The
witness, who declared he was convinced
of the prisoners guilt, was cross-exam-
med by Nj. Demange, of counsel for the
DEFENSE, who succeeded in pointing out
That several of his statements contra
dicted his previous depositions
The president of the court, Colonel
Jouaust. asked Dreyfus if he had any
thing TO say, whereupon the prisoner
arose and again vehemently protested
against the denunciations Ieveled
against him, an innocent man.
Major Cuignet was not in uniform,
as he is not at present attached to any
corps.
Before beginning an account of the
special Investigations into the ca
which l was ordered to make by min
listers of war from NJ. CaVaignac to NJ.
de F'reycenit," said the witness, L
wish to mention a personal fact, which,
in conjunction with the evidence al
ready heard. will constitute fresh proof
of the prisoners indiscreet behavior
when employed on the headquarters
staff. l was on the staff when Dreyfus
was probationer during the latter half
of 1895. Among other duties 1 was
connected with the railroad service and
the mining of railroads, with the view
of interrupting traffic in case of need.
1t is hardly necessary to point out the
secret character of such matters.
Indiscretion of Dreyfus.
'Dreyfus was a probationer on the
eastern railroads and had been ordered
to specially study the mining on them
and possessed information relating sole
" to them. One day Dreyfus asked
me to give him the general scheme of
1izn i
reason for the request that he was anx-
ious TO increase his knowledge, and
that il was necessary for him to know
the general scheme in order to properly
carry out the work entrusted to him.
l replied that 1 did not see the neces-
sity of giving him the scheme, and that
in any case he had better apply to his
own chief. Major Berlin Dreyfus pre-
tended Berth would not impart any
information.
Day after day he pestered me, so
that finally, having no reason to dis
trust him, 1 began giving him eXpiara-
lions. Dreyfus displayed the keenest
interest and took copious notes. When,
later. his house was searched these
notes were not discoverable. L did not
know what became of them. but it is
difficult TO believe they We're destroyed.
the Importance he seemed
10 attach to the information and the
persistence shown in procuring il"
Convinced of His Guilt.
After launching the above declara-
ton, which he apparently considered to
De weighty evidence to the treachery of
Dreyfus, Major Cuignet proceeded to
recount in detail the task which Cen
eral Gonz assigned to him in May, 1898,
of classifying the documents in the
Dreyfus. Esterhazy and PicQuart cases
ion, I 1el- h.a~
said the witness. lis. is Dreyfus guilty?
My conviction of his guilt is based ON
three grounds:
First his confessions TO Captain lie
Brun- Renault; second, the technical
nature of the contents of the border
eau: third, the results of the eXami-
nation of the secret dossier.
I will add to these three points the
evidence of the expert Bertillon Qaugh-
teri as indirect proof, the means en-
ployed by the Dreyfus family to Sc
cure the prisoners rehabilitation. l
protest that a campaign has been un-
dertaken against justice, truth and
our country"
The majors outburst of heroics evok-
ed cynical smiles and indications of
dissent coupled with marks of assent
from the assembled generals.
The witness next spoke of the Sc
cret dossier of the war ministry con-
tanning information relating to inter |
views between Major TarrieuXv. former
of justice and Count Ternielli !
he Italian ambassador (which coun- |
try said Cuignet. benefited by the |
The Alleged Confessions.
Regarding the confessions said to |
l:tv,. been made to Captain LIE Brun /
the witness said he still be
ieved they were authentic, adding If |
PEOPLE do not believe the confessions to |
captain lie run-Renault they will be-
ieve no human testimony" Continuing
he witness reasserted that the border
.au was written by Dreyfus at the end
# August, and incidentally the major
against Colonel Picquart's
against Du Patty de Clam.
he then returned to the secret doSSier,
# the war office from which, he de-
dared, the court was sure to draw i'm
)ortant deductions.
THE first portion of the dossier." he
aid shows that in 1898 there was a
CONSTANT leakage in the ministry of
var We have had proofs of the plans
# Notifications reaching the hands of
foreign power. 1t is known TO a Ger
ainty from the letter of an agent of
foreign power, that the stolen plans
from the ministry of war.
\ vast network of espionage had there
ore been organized against us, headed
" agents belinging to the same power
s a Colonel Schwartzkoppen) the
iernan military attache, the agents of
tfler powers also collaborating"
Dreyfus Says It Is Lie.
Witness then invited the courts spec
nj attention to the dossier, in which
e said would be found ample proof of
he prisoners guilt.
At this stage of the proceedings Drey-
US rose and interrupted the witness,
houting that is a manifest lie
After this the witness recited in de-
all his reasons for the belief that the
gent supplying the information was
french staff officer. He then endeay-
red to show that traffic with foreign
Military attaches could only have been
arried on by a probationer in the de-
artment occupied by Dreyfus. The
fitness especially referred to the Pa
izZardi telegram of Nov. 2, 1894, which,
e explained, left an impression on him
hat in 1894 Dreyfus was an old friend
the Italian government.
Another document of the dossier, ac- ]
ording 10 Major Cuignet, showed be-
ond dispute that the bordereau ac- (,
1ally passed through the hands of Col I
mel SchwartZkOppen. This to the wit
ess esta blished the authenticity of the
ordereau, an examination of which he S
limited ont proved Schwartzkoppen s