The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1899-09-07
IT Is HIS NOW TO
DESTROY OR SAVE
Continued from First Page.)

time Of the court martial from the hour
of its converting at $3.50 a. IN, until
$50 o'clock.
The public sitting of the court open
ed at $40 a. m, with brief exchange
of unimportant remarks between Maitre
Demange and General Roget. Senator
TrarieuX, formerly Minister of Justice,
was then called to the witness stand.
NJ. Labori questioned NJ. TrarieuX with
regard to the Petit Bleu.
M. Trarieux replied that he had ex-
amined the Petit Bleu which had been
the cause of the accusation against Col
onel Picquart. If the witness had not
known in the first place that the genuine
document had been falsified he would
never have received Picquart at ms
house on the day the latter was arrested.
! The witness had not accused COMMAND
ant Lauth any more than others.
| NJ. Trarieux yehemently defended nc
quart against the charge of tampeflhs
| with the Petit Bleu, the original genu-
| inencss Of which was proved by the very
use 10 which Picquart had put 1t when
he submitted 10 his superiors the Schelhe
Of dccoy letters which he proposed 10
send to Major Esterhazy, in when was
to be introduced the exact wording OF
| the Petit Bleu.
picquart therefore, was man or un-
| furnished honor when he was prosecuted
| for forgery. All the evidence showed
| THAT Picquart was not connected with
the erasures which thus constituted a
new forgery and a new device to squelch
Picquart
Il cannot believe" added the ex-Min-
| lister of Justice, warmly, that the num-
| Der of persons who perpetrated these
| forgeries was very great. We have
| discovered one source from which ema-
mated other forgeries. / have not far
| to 20 to seek him."
General Zurlindem followed. He ex-
| plained that he deposed both In the
capacity of Military Governor of Paris
| and Minister of War. He had played
a most important part in the Du Patty
| De Clam, Picquart and Esterhazy cases
/ The proceedings in the case of Major
/ Du Patty De Clam had caused him great
| anxiety. The witness wished for more
| light with regard to the ground upon
which revision of the trial of Captain
! Dreyfus was demanded and the charge
| emanating from other officers Of the
general staff against Lieutenant-Colonel
Picquart.
After further explanation by General
/ Zurlinden, NJ. Labor asked permission
! to speak.
Colonel Jouaust: 1T Is with regard
to the evidence of NJ IrarieuX."
/ NJ. Labor: 1T is with reference to
/ the erasure on the Petit Bleu."
Colonel Jouatpst Sharply: I'm that
case, no. We are trying Dreyfus, not
the Picquart case"
! NJ. Labor: "Allow me, Mr.. President.
/ 1t is the question of document alleged
! to be device of Picquarts against
4 Esterhazy, but which the defense main
| tain constitutes proof of Esterhazy's
/ treachery."
NJ Labor pointed out that contrary
| to General Zurlinden's intimation, the
/ erasure seemed to have assumed consid-
cradle Importance in his mind.
General Zurlinden replied:
at was myself who discovered the
erasure. | first thought it attributable
! to an attempt to remove a blot, and
therefore it did not possess, in my mind,
the Importance which others attached
1 to it''
NJ. Labor: 'Was the erasure subse-
quent to the first photograph
General Zurlinden, amid intense ex-
element, admitted that the Tavernier in
/ quiry showed that the Petit Bleu had
not been scratched when it reached the
statistical section of the Intelligence
Department and that consequently the
erasure was not the work of Lieutenant
Colonel Picduart.
NJ Labor asked NJ. Palelogue's per-
mission to read a document belonging
to the diplomatic dossier, conclusively
proving, as he claimed the genuineness
of the Petit Bleu.
NJ Palelogue: II do not know the
document referred to-"
M. Labor: "The document relates to
conversation between DelcasSe (For-
mer Prime Minister and Count Won
MISUNDERSTANDING German Ambassa-
dor to Paris, in which the Ambassador
is represented to have said that Colonel
/ Schwartzkoppen admitted he had sent
Major EsterhaZy a number of telegraph
/ forms"
NJ Palelogue: II can only confirm NJ
1 Labori's statement. There is in the di-
plomatic dossier document reciting q
/ conversation between NJ. Delcasse and
/ Count Won Munster Ledenburg, who
stated that Colonel Schwartzkoppen
could not say he had written it him
self, because he had not seen it; but
the Ambassador said he believed that
| it had been sent by him Colonel
Scwartzkoppen)."
Replying to NJ. Labor, NJ. Trareux
dwelt at length upon the charges, which
he described as fairy tales against Pic
quart, who had been alleged to be an
agent in the pay Of the Dreyfus family
and whose object, as asserted was to
put Esterhazy, an innocent man, in the
place of Dreyfus, the culprit.
NJ Trarieux read a letter which he
wrote to General Billot June list, 1898,
protesting against these falsehoods. To
| this letter General Billot had replied
/ that he had not instituted the inquiry.
Colonel Jouaust protested against the
vehement language of the witness. who,
he said, could not maintain statements
affecting judges.
You are no longer giving evidence"
added the President of the court martial.
You are delivering a speech for the de-
fence You have assumed the role of