The daily morning journal and courier. [volume] (New Haven, Conn.) 1894-1907, 1899-05-30
REVISION OF DREYFUS CASE
EYIDENCE POINTING no ESTER
HAY As THE CULPRIT.

| HIZY as THE CULPRIT.
Important Statement of M. de Beaupre
| Before Court of Cassation-Esterhaz
| Sought In Treason Resources Neces-
sary to Carry on u Life of Dissipation
Dreyfus Had No Motive to Act as u
Traitor.
Paris, May 29.-Arguments before the
court OF cessation on the application for
a revision of the Dreyfus case were be-
gun this morning. The report of M.
Ballot de Beaupre recommending re-
vision was read 1t thoroughly reviewed
the case and the contradictory evidence
upon which Dreyfus was accused. The
entire afternoon was occupied by M.
Ballot de Beaupre in reading extracts
from and analyzing the statement of
NJ. Mornard, counsel for Nine. Drey-
fus. whoich was a lengthy recital of
facts, some of which were very impor-
tant.
After reading M. Mornard's defense,
which concluded by maintaining that
the material evidence of the bordereau
and the moral evidence cropping out
during the inquiry pointed not to Drey
fus, but to Esterhazy as the culprit M.
Ballot de Beaupre dealt with the ques-
tion of motive. He read the police re-
port furnished by M. Guenee, the de-
tective, all unfavorabe to Dreyfus, and
reports of the prefecture of police,
pointing out that there had been a con-
fusion of Dreyfus with others of the
same name who had been mixed up
with gambling and disreputable female
associates. The latter reports were not
produced at the trial in 1894. M. Ballot
de Beaupre then pointed out that Drey-
fus could not have acted as traitor
from anger or disappointment, as he had
the finest prospects of an excellent mill
tary career. On the other hand, Ester
hazy, the reporter alleged, was soldier
of fortune always begging from the
money lenders.
Continuing, the reporter read letters
written by Esterhazy abusing France
and the French army, these producing
a deep impression upon the audience.
He referred to a letter written by Es-
terhazy to Baron Rothschild, dated
June Il, 1894, to the effect that If his
application for money were refused, he
would have no resource but to kill his
family and then to commit suicide.
CT
hazy's language on the even of the date
when the bordereau was placed" The
inference to be drawn was that Ester
hazy sought in treason resources neces-
sary to carry on life of dissipation
At this point, with the evident ap-
proval of all who listened M. Ballot de
Beaupre quoted from M. Mornard |
statement as follows: although JUS
tce has been rendered more or less i'm
potent with regard to Esterhazy by the
latter's acquittal Of the charge of being |
the author of the bordereau, it Is none
the less the duty of the supreme court |
to restore to liberty an innocent man
condemned
Prior to the adjournment, M. Ballot
de Beaupre read a letter from the Brit
tached to the British embassy in Paris,
the deposition of General
Marquis De Gallifet, This letter reach
ID M. Mazeau through diplomatic chan
1els In it General Talbot said that
Marquis de Gallifet had misinterpreted
his (Talbot's) words, as he had never
1ad personal relations with Esterhazy
n the way of espionage, but had sim
1ly heard that Esterhazy's character
vas we'll known to the foreign military
attaches. The court adjourned at half
oast six, when very few of the public
ret remained in the vicinity.
Among the small audience were Gem
rial Chanoine, former minister of war;
md the mother of Dreyfus. M. Ballot
lie Beaupre read his report amid relig-
Gus silence. The most characteristic
eature of his address is a scrupulous
His first days task was
o summarize the ground and to clas-
ify and explain the documents in his
,ulky portfolio. Tomorrow he will give
lis personal opinion of the matter; but
lis aim appears to be to let the evidence,
o far as possible, speak for itself. The