Las Vegas daily optic. [volume] (Las Vegas, N.M.) 1880-1908, 1899-09-02
The Wlckedness of the Dreyfus
Persecution Still Disclosing
Itself.
GENERALS ROUGHLY HANDLED
Mercler Acknowledges to Open
Inc Picquart's Letters Other
Disclosures

RENNEs, Sept. q There was large
number of generals present this morn
ing at the Dreyfus trial. Interest CEN
tered in the testimony of Major Hart
man of the artillery, who has done great
servlcs for the defense. He resumed
his deposition regarding artillery mat
ters, bringing out poinls in the phrase
ology of the bordereau, indicating that
the writer could not be Dreyfus. The
witness wished to enter into the ques-
tion of the Robin shell, but on General
Deloye ohjecting to the statement in
open court, the president of the court
decided to hear this testimony in secret.
In response to questions from Labori
and Demange for the defense, Hart
man said any officer attending Chalons
camp could have obtained sufficient
information to write notes on the
troors and Madagascar matters.
Labori then recalled General Mer-
cier's attack on Captain Freystaetter on
the latter's declaration that the secret
dossier, communicated to the court in
1894, contained document describing
a shell, for which Mercier called the
captain liar. Hartmann affirmed it
was quite possible that the particulars
about a certain shell should have leaked
out in 1894.
General Deloye insisted that Dreyfus
in conversations with artillery officers
could have secured information ON the
subjects mentioned in the bordereau,
to which the major retorted that If any
artillery officer had been questioned by
Dreyfus he would already have come
forward to say so, as the matter was
strict duty.
General Deloye, when questioned by
Labori and DemaDge, said the inventor
of the Robin shell told him Dreytus
had never asked him for any particu-
lars about his shell except on minor
point. The general added that he came
MS a technical witness to show Dreyfus
could be guilty, adding that it was not
his business to say whether he believed
him to be innocent or guilty.
Labori asked Deloye if he knew
whether documents which could Leen
betrayed by the traitor, especially by
the writer of the bordereau, were i'm
portsnt, whereupon the general turned
to counsel and excitedly cried: "Don't
ask me"
These exclamations created a sensa-
tion, which was doubled when Deloye
added there was sufficient in the bor-
dereau to establish that the traitor
knew The Importance of the documents
he was giving up. The witness added !;
"When read the bordereau, was dis
mayed"
Hartmann, in reply to Deloye, reiter-
ated the author of the bordereau was
ignorant of artillery matters for, "if he
meant the 120 hydraulic brake he gave
the particulars of what was long
known, while il he meant the 120
short he employed wrong express
slon'
Mercier here mounted the stage and
remarked that the writer of the bor-
dereau might very well employ the
term hydraulic brake because that was
the term used by the Germans for such
brakes.
M. IIavet, member of the institute,
took up the bordereau from the gram
matical point of view, declaring the
conviction, after studying closely the
styles of both Dreyfus and EsterhaZy,
that the latter wrote it.
Letters exchanged between Colonel
Picquart and General Gonse at the time
when the colonel wanted thorough
investigation of the case were read
Labori then pointed out to Gonse that
these letters never alluded to an alleged
confession of Dreyfus. Gonse replied
it was because he always advised Pic
quart not to mix up in the Esterhazy
and Dreyfus cases. Dreyfus, he added,
had been condemned and his case could
not be re- opened but they were bound
to see if there was another traitor.
The general made bitter complaint
that his letters had been communicated
to M. Scheurer Kestner, former vice
president of the senate, who published
them in a book entitled "Pontius Pi-
late.'
Picquart said he gave Gonse's letters
to his lawyer when he realized he was
object of abominable intrigues aud
when he received in Tunis letter OF
threats from the late Lieutenant Col.
Onel Henry, sent with the assent OF
Generals Gonse and De Boisdeffre.
Picquart added he was not RESPONSE
BILE for subsequent publication of the
letters. Picquart then declared that al
the same time he took the bordereau tC
Gonse, he showed him the secret dos
sier. Therefore Gonse could easily
acquainted himself with probability
of Dreyfus being innocent.
Labori then took Gonse in hand on
the subject of tampering with Pic
quarts correspondence while the col
Onel was in Tunis. Gonse admitted
that one letter was opened and thI
words of this letter used in forging {
telegram which was intended to destroy
the value of the petit bleu. The gener
al insisted, however that only suspected
letters addressed to Picguart wer,
opened. Picquart replied emphatically
that all his letters were opened. Coun
rsel then questioned GOnse on the sub
ject of the late Lieutenant-Colon
uenfy's forgery.
The general replied that he consider
ed itan unfortunate manWuvre directed
against Dreyfus, not against Picquarl
Henry desiring tofurnish proof agains
Dreyfus, of which there was really n,
need, the witness added. as the diplo
matt: dossier contained sufficien
proofs.
Labori asked what they were. Col
onel Jouaust refused to put the ques
tion. Counsel thereup0n declared h
would draw up formal application 70
the reading of these papers.
M. de Fond Lamotte, former Off
Ger of the artillery, testified thatin 189
Colonel Picquart lent him the firin
manual. which he might have kept a
long as he pleased. So the witnes
added, "there was little secrecy
"lf, aa at first asserted. the bordereal