The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1899-08-15

periods and accompanied by grand gestures.
His argument was a piece Of special plead
INK and in word was simply one
more speech for the prosecution. Although
there was not suggestion OF any new fact
in NJ Cavaignac's evidence. he perhaps.
more than any one else. succeeded in
giving an air OF plausibiiity to the suspicious
against the prisoner. He insisted upon the
genunencss OF Capt. l.ebrun- Rrnauds story of
n confession. but to everbodys surprise he
admitted that EsterhaZy probably wrote the
bOrdercau. NJ. Cavagnac declared that DreyfuS
WINS the only officer III tho War Office who went
everywhere where information could be OBJ
tanned as to the facts mentioned in the borlc-
reau. He had been proved guilty OF indlscre-
tons, and it had been proved that he asked
for Information about the Robin shell The
accused denied these facts. but nevertheless
they had been proved. hanson declared that
he saw him taking notes during n lecture. but
Dreyfus denies that he knew anything about
the matter lie has denied knowledge that 1t
is certain he possessed hence no must have
had motive for his dcnials. namely. to hide
his guilt.
NJ. Cavaignac gave his opinion OF NJ. Bsrtil-
Ion. lie said that learned man had declared
to him that he believed Esterhazy had for
four years carefully sought TO initiate the writ
ing OF the bordereau. The witness admitted
that he did not now believe that Dreyius vrote
the borderrau. He proceeded to discuss the
secret dossier and the foreign evidence. He
added that IL he had not determined to conilne
he could easily reconstitute the history OF
treason from the secret dossier
This was the style OF argument employed by
NJ. Cavaignac. Occasionally during his flow OF
eloquence he gave a half glance toward Drey-
fus. who sat with folded arms. apparently an
impressive spectator. NJ Cayaignar retired,
looking discounted. and then entered
Gen. Iurlinden. the fourth OF the famous
six war ministers. Unlike Cavaignac. he was
convinced that Dreyfus wrote the bordereau.
II" considered NJ Bertiilon's evidence on this
point conclusive. but he had no new fact or
argument to offer.
In response to the Presidents question at
the close Of Gen. ZurIindens evidence. Dreyfus
simply repeated his ignorance OF the Dor
dereau, saving in regard to it: Il demand only
Justice and the truth"
Gen. Chanoine was the next witness. He
spoke for five minutes inaudibly and then NJ
Demamge asked him il the bordereau was the
basis OF his belief in Dreyfus's guilt. The wit
ness seemed afraid to answer.
so then YOU know nothing about IT." OK
claimed VI. DpmanRe. Diminishing the witness
contemptuously.
VI. HauotauX then took the stand. He re-
vicwed the history Of the Dupuy Ministry of
1884 and read a note made then of Gcn Mnr-
cers first communication to tho Cabinet
about Dr"yius. In this note NJ. HauotauN
records his opinion that the evidence is not
sufficient to support the charge OF treason
against a French officer. and that his trial
would be likely to produce foreign cOmplica-
tions. Therefore he tried his hest to prevent
the court-ma:t'al. Much of NJ. Hanotaux's
evidence was inaudihIe.
The court then adjourned until Wednesday.
NJ. CdsimlrpGrc and Col. picQuart received
orations a. they left the court. Rennes woke
up for few moments as tho officers and wit
neSses pissed through thN streets ard tharn
much cheering and shouting II "Nive
rArmrc."
NJ Cnvngnar enumerated the chief points Of
his belief in Dreyfus's guilt. and added that a
foreign Ambassador had declared that the doe
uments mentioned IA the Lurlercau had act
unllv reached tn" coverrmcrt for which t'l.y
were intended. In roU!y 10 question to one
Of tho Judges the w.tuoss Repeated the story
about Drcytus being seen in Brussels. aud
said that he had sought to avoid observation.
When VI. Cavaignac was asked a question BY
another OF tn" Judges respecting one 81 the
pieces Of evidence. Dreyfus pointed out that
there was isrnnslntOn Of German in il.
The witness admitted that there was a slip
He repeated III" German OF the document and
entered into an explanation OF the translation.
DreytuS here made not" and handed il to
MaItre Dcmangc. who asked another question
respecting the translation. which was poorly
answered. Maitre Demnnge then ask cd how it
Was that the witness had not mentioned the
bordcreau in tho tribunal. NJ. tavaignac said
his conviction OF the accused's guilt was not
then based on the bordereau but on avowa
made by DreyfuS
Maitre Domange thercupon told the witness
that h" had come to Rennes basing his belief
on three documents. two Of which were false.
while the third did not apply to Drcyfus at all
VI. Cavaignac became excited and entered upon
an argument, which Dreyfus interrupted cx-
claiming; This man comes here supporting
a forgery on which the Court OF Cessation has
done Justice ="