The Portland daily press., 1899-08-31

writing who. he added, in every body, 8
opinion had relations. with Col. Schwartz
knppen, the former German military
attaohe at Paris, aud the dissimilarities
between the writing OF the bordereau,
ana that Of the prisoner.
General Mercler requested permission TO
speak and called attention 10 the fact
that In his testimony before the court Of
cassation Prof Molinier said change
was apparent In Estsrhazy's handwriting
after 1894, and asked thnt the professors
former evidences De read NJ. Labori,
leading counsel for the defense, jumped
mp and inQuir, IL General Meroier inter-
vened with the object of verifying Prof.
Molinier's evidence. Counsel added that
IL seemed to him that General Mercier in
terxened less In the character of witnuss
than as q representative of the govern
ment commissioner. de, therefore. would
be grateful to the general IL he would
kindly explain the bearing of his remark.
Merc,er replied that on this special point
be desiied TO confirm the evidence Of
Prof Moiinier which, he said, corrobo-
rated NJ. Bsrtillons statement that
Esterhazy, the man Of straw. chang
his handwriting In order TO replace Drey-
fus. In conclusion General Mercisr said
"Having emphasized the point IN regard
TO the change IN Esterhazy's handwriting
In 1897, perhaps before, am satisfied.
(Commotion.)
Prof. Giry, also of the School of
Ancient MSS, traversed ground similar
to that covered by Prof. .Molinier. He
said the bordereau had only a superficial
likeness to Dreyfus's handwriting and
asserted that it was certainly the work of
Esterhazy.
The witness also said the bordereau
was not written with the aid ofakey
words
nj. Labori asked II the witness had
noticed a change in Estarhazy's caligra-
ply, and Prof Giry replied that he had
studied the question but did not think
thore had been any marked change.
Counsel then asked whether General Mer-
cier had meant to intimate that Estar-
hazy' handwriting had become more or
less like that of Dreyfus since 1894, TO
which the general replied that he had
not wished to express an opinion but he
reiterated that N. Bertillon had shown
that Estsrhazy's handwriting had become
more like that of the berdereau. There
upon M. Lsbori retorted that in that case
General Mercier should not have repeated
tho evidence of NJ. 6renier before the
court of cessation. as NJ. GreDier showed
Esternazy's caligraphy had become less
and less ike the writing, both of the bor
dereau and OF Dreyfus.
Nj. Bertillon, at this juncture, said he
desired to speak, but the president of the
court, Colonel Jouaust hastily rose and
said amidst laughter, "1he Sitting is
suspended"
Then NJ. Bertillon re-seated himself
In high dudgeon. On the resumption of
the sitting III. Georges Picot, u member
or the institute, was called for the de-
fence, Maitre Demange of counsel for the
prisoner explaining that Picot WINS sum-
moned because in May last he had an in
terview with reign military attaohe,
during the course of which mention was
made of the document inserted in the
dossier by General Meroier.
Colonel Jouaust reminded the witness
to be very cautious in his statements.
Aftpr prOmisin0 to axareiaa care. All
Picot started with saying that he had an
interview with the Austro- Hungarian
military attaohe. This caused Col.
Jouaust to intervene, saying: "But you
cannot continue like this.''
Major Carrier, the government COM
missary, also exclaimed sharply: 81 pro-
test in TIE name of the government and
the state against the indiscretion COM
mitted by the witness.
NJ. Pioot then recommended his testi-
mony, eliminating the Austro- Hungar-
ian. He said he had an interview with a
'certain military attache," andsthat the
conversation turned upon the Dreyfus
case. The attache expressed surprise at
the incorrect attitude of the French
officers in doubling the word of foreign
officers.
my impression, added the witness,
twas that he WAS anxious to assert hrn-
ly and unequivocally the absolute inno-
oence of Dreyfus." (Sensation.)
s"Regarding the bordereau," continued
M. Picot, ''the attache said only three
documents enumerated were referred to,
the real fact being that the others were
padding, meant to swell the dossier."
The witness noticed that the attache
employed the expression hydraulic
brake" and never pneumatic brake. >
In regard to Esterhazy the attache, M.
Picot said. declared that he considered
him a swindler.
The attache also asserted that Ester
hazy had relations with Colonel Schwartz
koppen, who dismissed him because Es
terhazy only brought information devote
of interest
1t WAS then, Picot said. tina
\ Esterhazy- tried to enter the wa
Office and almost succeeded, and 1t wa
then that he wrote to Colonel Schwartz
koppen the letter since known as th'
bordereAu, In reply to ths writer OF the
bordereau, added M. Plcot, Colone
Schwartzkoppen wrote the telegram car,
known as the petit bleu, But
on reflection, he cIumpled 1t up and threy
1t in the fire place.
At this lunoture General Roget asked
leave to speak. He said he must stIongl
protest against M. Picot's evidences re-
garding the military attaches surpris
that French officers did not believe theil
foreign colleagues.
s.What does the witness think" oontin
ued General Roget, "of the foreign Office
who. having caused the publication Il
statement of General Mercier. who after
wards was obliged to acknowledge tn
authorship of document, the paternit
of which he at first denied"
NJ. Pioot retorted that he had only re
peated statements made to him and ha
abstained from continents on them. II
had therefore nothing to say in repl
to General Roget's questions.
NJ. Dsmange intervening, asked Gen
eral Roget II be did not think the foreig
offices mistake was exeusabls since tn
word report had been applied to do,
ument not possessing the character 9
the report.
''It Is not for me to accuse or excuse,
replied the General. 81 contine myself
pointing out to the court that the conve
sation repeated occurred in May, th
is to say at the time the investigation
49, @SF