Virginian-pilot. (Norfolk, Va.) 1898-1911, 1899-09-03

~ GA GAiOSC - ;
words and that, therefore, the writer
of The bordereau must have been an
officer of the ministry. But one thing
has struck me-: Who sent out that
circular? 1t was the third bureau, the
chief of which was Lieutenant Colonel
Du Patty de Clam. VIM had the Dor
dereau in his hands for the previous
20 days
M. De Fond Lamotte, by this, intend
ed to show that Dn Patty dc Clam pur-
posely used the words new plan" in
the circular ordered by what the wit
ness described as "arguing In Il vicious
circle to back up his contention that
an officer of the ministry wrote the
6orderenu and that that officer was
Drcyrus."
ROGET CATCHES a TARTAR.
General Roget then rose 20 reply TO
NJ. De Fond Lamottc, but found he had
caught a Tartar. He did not succeed
in shaking the witness testimony
while II. DE Fond Lamotte took the
unprecedented course OF actually ques-
tloning General Roget and getting the
better of him once or twice. The two
men stood exchanging heated argu-
ments. and Colonel Jouaust was twice
Obliged TO ask them not TO sneak to
each other and TO remain calm. Gen
eral Roget especially WAS excited, par
ticulnrly when he fo.ad that he was
making no Impression on his opponent,
VINO, on the contrary. scored off him.
hoSet was unused To this treatment.
as hitherto he has had his own way and
neen allowed To bully witnesses.
y DAMAGING ADMISSION.
Finally. on Roget declaring that
Dre%fus might have written I am GO
,ns to manouvers' because he could
nave asked special permission, which Is
Invariably granted, NJ. Demange asked
MN II there was any proof that Drey-
ius uid ask such, Permission no this
Roget replied: II don't know: no
trace has been found of his apci!ca-
ton"
This answer brought chorus of
On from the audience. because had
Dreyfns asked traces would easily have
been forthcoming.
Roget then said that Dreyfus might
nave asked verbally, in which case no
found. w
Quite So" rcioincd NJ. Demanrc.
put the head OF Bureau could he ask
en- whether such request was made"
This practically ended the session.
Which was one OF the most interesting
Dreyfus5 yet held.
Inc military witnesses followed tho
evidence with Ill eyes and ears. OK
changing condolences, which, judging
from the expressions on their faces
were evidently far from agreeable.
THE PROCEEDINGS IN DETAIL. +
The following are the proceedings in
detail
When the Dreyfus court-martial re-
assembled this morning. Major Hart
mann. of the artillery, whose deposit
tion was interrupted yesterday by the
adjournment OF the court, assembled the
witness stand and completed his tcs-
hmony referring to his examinat ton of
the paragraphs of bordereau relating
to notifications in artillery formations.
lie Indicated that Dreyfus could not
have had the information contained in
the bordereau
TIE FIGURE MANUAL.
Discussing the figure manual, Major
hartmann showed that It was widely
distributed in August. 1891, and there
lore, could have been borrowed by an
officer OF any arm of the service at
tending the gunncry school But the
comments In the bordereau, In the
opinion OF witness. could only be at
trlbuted TO non-artillery officer.
Members Of the cHurt-martial then
questioned Major Hartmann. who diff
Tered with them as regards the mean
ing or sentences in the bordereau, and
me witness proceeded to snow how Es-
terhlZy could have supplied the infor-
nation iHutrTrer II TIC D0rdcTeau. -
Replying 10 further questions the
MAJOR SAID that while he was con-
nected with the artillery technical de-
partment he never saw Dreyfus.
GENERAL. DELOYE'S COMMENTS.
General Deloyc here advanced again
and remarked that Major Hartmann's
evidence did not give him the impress
SION That 1t wholly accorded with the
real facts. (Sensation.)
Continuing the General proceeded to
refute Major Hartmans arguments. He
asserted Drcyfus could have casually
distracted Information from the con-
Versatlon oil officers acquainted with
the details of the gun and the brake
The witness did not doubt that If an
artillery officer had been asked for the
information by Dreyfus he would have
come forward TO say SO, "as it would
have been his strict conscientious
duty" (Commotlon)
THAT IS ALL"
AT the conclusion of his testimony
Major Hartman asked If the ARTILLERY
Department of the War Onice has MOI
investigated the leak at Bourges. and
General Deloye replied:
There have been many inquiries into
many leakages. but the Artillery De-
Partment has never inquired into them.
iNe''t'N ~ DieyIuS IL was asked to
do so and supplied information. but
that is ALL"
Replying to Col. Jouaust. Gen. Deloye
said he had made an inquiry at Rourges
relative to what Dreyfus might have
divulged concerning the Robin shell.
ana Robin. at that time, declared Drey-
tus had never asked him for such in
formation.
at this stage of the proceedings there
was an animated discussion between
Zen. i1eioye and NJ. Labori, who closely
NllNSt iAlnlnl Il ,.A., .c.L