The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1899-09-04


views Of Dreyfus' character. for which
Dreyfus' own family were unwilling TO
give guarantees
NJ PafnIeve asserted that both N.
Hadamard and himself hay always been
satisfied that Dreyfus was innocent
As the alteration between General
CEOnse and NJ PainIeve was rapidly be-
coming heated. NJ Labor interviewed
A sharp passage at arms followed be-
between NJ Labor and Colonel JOuaust,
leading TO considerable excitement
NJ Labor asked General Gonse why
he had Incorrectly reported certain in
formation he had collected
Colonel Jouaust refused to put the
question and invited NJ Labor to study
mOderari0u
NJ Labor retorted. The defense is
using its rights with the utmost mod
Grafton"
Colonel Jouaust-No, you are not 7
beg you not TO drown my voice when
I am speaking Your very tone is want
ing in moderation Moreover, I con-
slider the question unimportant-
There were prolonged murmurs Of
assent and dissent among the audience
at this declaration by Colonel JOuaust-
NJ Labori said he was surprised that
General Gonse had included incorrect
Information in the secret dOssier and
asked General Gonse who made up the
secret dCssier-
General Gonse-I composed one of the
secret d0sSierS by means Of annexed
documents communicated to ministry;
tiers were made Up before they had any
cognizauce of these documents
NJ LabOri-DOeS General GOuSe as
sumo responsibility for this secret dos
sier TO July 1882
General Gons-Yes- 7 had charge
of it.
NJ Labor-How happens it then that
a telegram from the French ambassa-
dor at Rome, sent by the foreign Office
To the war office referring to payments
TO Esterhazy by an Italian agent was
not added TO the secret dOssier2
General GOus-There were plenty OF
others All were not included, but only
the most important
N LabOri-Was the information OF
the French ambassador at Rome OF less
Importance than the garbIed cOnversa-
ton OF N PainIeve2
Colonel Jouaust-I viii not put the
question
NJ. Laborf-Why was the information
against DreyfuS always included in the
dossier, and never any discriminating
EsterhaZy2
Colonel-I also refuse to put that
question
NJ Labori-Au right; think the
question itself fully answered the pur-
pose
Commandment Cuignet- who made up
the secret dOSsfer, replying to Colonel
JOuauSt explained that he omitted eV-
erything ernanatine from foreigners as
interested and misleading TO France
Several documents OF this kind had been
omitted. particularly one reciting con-
VersatiOu between a foreign sovereign
and a French attache, in the course OF
which the sovereign was represented as
saying that what was occurring in
France was proof of the power OF the
That adding Commandant Cuig-
ret might be regarded against
Dreyfus. but nevertheless, it was not
included in the dossier-"
NJ Demange expressed surprise that
the document in question had not ap-
peared in the war Office dOssier-
Commandment Cuignet-It does not
appear there because 1t was not re-
ceived at the foreign Office
NJ PaleoIogue- intervening, said that
the foreign Office only acted as an in
termediary IN that matter
VI Labor commented in a surprised
way upon the fact that these alleged
proofs against Dreyfus were still
spoken Of and demanded that all proofs
be produced once for all
Gen ChamOin was asked by Col
JOuaust if he had any explanations to
offer and replied that his duty was
merely to produce the secret dOSSier
and that ne could not say nyrhIng re-
garding documents outside the dOssfer-
Replying TO NJ Labor, COmmandant
Cuiguet declared that there were. dOcu-
meuts relating TO Dreyfus in doss1er
connected with espionage in the intel
ligence department
NJ. Labor said he must insist that all
these documents be produced at the
which NJ CeFuuschi is to be examined
Gen Billot- formerly minister of war
here, mounted the platform and said
he was glad that reference had been
abled him to protest against the in
abIed him top rotest against the in
situation that he handed Commandment
Cuignet a document from the secret
dOssiar. He had handed the document
in question to NJ Cavaignac-
NJ. Demange begged that Col JOuaust
ask NJ Cavaignac TO produce the dOcu-
ment but as N Cavaignac was not
present the incident was temporarily
closed
NJ Layet. who is on the staff of The
Temps testified that the spy Guennee
informed him that the war Office had
indIsputabIe proof OF the guilt OF Drey-
fus and cited a snapshot photograph
representing Dreyfus couversing with
military attache at Brussels
After a brief recess of the court mar
tiaI DR.. PeyrOt depOsed that he met NJ
BertuIus, judge of the court of cassa-
ton at Dieppe. after the arrest of
Lieut. Col Henry and that NJ Bertulus
narrated to him the dramatic scene in
his Office with Henry
NJ Bertulus was very jubuant over
Heuryis arrest and said he was con-
vince If Henry were detained every
thing would be known in due time
n Temps, a special commissary of
the railway police, depOsed that he
photogra pied the bOrdereau by order
of Col Sandherr- He had not manipu-
ing marks upon the document
When the fac-simile of the bOrdereau
was published Lieut. Col PIcQuart order
ed the witness 10 discover VINO mad TuF-
uished the Photographic copy W lille en-
ga ged in the iUEeStigat ton of this matter
Lieut. Col Henry upon one occasion ap-
preached the witness and clearly eviuced
great Uneasiness at the successive reveIa-
lions in the Dreyfus affair Lieut. Col.
Henry told the witness that the revela-
lions could only have emanated from an
individual who had the documents in
hand
Lieut. Col Henry. the witness testified
added They can only eE1auate from our
Office where only Picquart- Laurh- GtbeI1
or myself could have revealed them
Z am sure that neither Lzuth CfrIbeitu
nor myself have been 50 fudiscreet- You
would do well to discover who Is respou-
sfble-'
q. TOMS $1,000 znccezziEe zteIz n his