The Worcester spy. [volume] (Worcester, Mass.) 1898-1904, 1899-08-17

be suspected to the intelligence depart
ment?"
| The general next dwelt on the seizure
Of papers at the house of Mime. Paws
on which M. Bertulus largely founded
his conviction of the guilt of Henry,
owing to mention in them of the name
of a spy Richard" at Cuers and Basic.
where 1t was well known spies were
IN the habit of meeting. Then the gen
eral tried to refute M. Bertulus' state
ments, declaring Henry brought three
or these documents to the war office,
and that they did not contain the men
ton of Basic or Cuers, as stated by M.
Bertulus. The latter, however, has al
ready shown before the whole court of
cessation that, while he was mistaken
in saying the words appeared in those
documents, they did appear in other
papers seized at Nine. Pays residence.
| Continuing, the witness said: IN.
Casimir-Perier said before the court of
cessation that an ambassador called to
demand an official denial of the state
ment that important documents were
found at his embassy. The ambassador,
however, knew it was a fact. But. adj
mitting that he did not know it, there
| is nothing surprising in the occurrence,
in view of the facility with which the
attache "A Il do not mention his name.
as the minister has forbidden it) al
lowed compromising letters to lie
around. l read one such letter, which
was very compromising to a person
whose name I can not mention. Why,
therefore, should not the bordereau go
astray?"
In the same document declared
Gen. Roget, was a name written twice
and the name was that of Dreyfus The
name of Esterhazy was not found in
any of the documents, none of which
| could be ascribed to him, with the ex-
cept1on of the Petit Bleu, which Col
Picquart discovered in such an extraor-
binary manner" The witness said he
then felt great uneasiness in regard to
the document containing the words
| "Cette canaille de D. A certain
military attache, said the general, later
on In his testimony, informed Col
| Sandherr that there was someone who
initiated mis- handwriting perfectly. The
name of Dubois" the witness further
said. was found in the correspondence
of the military attaches. Dubois" the
general explained, was an ''unfortu.
nate" who vainly tried to sell the secret
OF the snokeless powder used in the
French army.
II" said Gen. Roget, mo other per.
son can be found to whom the initia
y can apply. to whom does it apply?'
AS ne made this remark, the witness
faced about and looked ffxedly at the
prisoner, who, however, merely
shrugged his shoulders.
j But do not insist" Here Gen Roge,
paused the excitement under which hc
! was labor4ng being almost uncontroll.
aple. In thick choking voice he con.
tinued: And vet in the presence Of dis.
interested testimony like mine you viii
not allow preference to be shown to the
evidence Of persons who have benefited
by that treason"
Al this point the general broke down
and tears streamed down his cheeks
| Resuming his testimony the general sci
to work in the effort to prove the gull
OF Dreyfus He declared there were
traces OF treason in every paragraph
or the bordereau and that Dreyfus
alone, not Esterhazy, could be acquaint.
ed with the plans it contained. Ht
criticised the deposition Of Major Hart.
mann OF the Twenty-second artillery il
regard to this point.
The witness then traversed the OLD
ground trying to prove that Dreyfus
alone was aware Of the secrets Of the
new artillery guns, of the plan for the
concentration of troops and of the con.
tents of the firing manual He then en-.
deayored to show Col. Picquart had re.
! course to fraudulent methods with The
intent VI discriminating some one Other
than Dreyfus and declared Picouart
spent one hundred thousand francs witt
the object Of organizing campaign Of
surveillance of an unfortunate officer
who was guiltless.
This one hundred thousand francs. he
added, was a reserve accumulated 1N
Col. Sandherr by strict economy from
the funds at the disposal OF the wal
office. This reserve had entirely dlsap
| peared.
In response to gestures of contradic-
ton from M. Demange, Gen. Roget ad-
mitted the figures quoted were perhaps
exaggerated.
The witness next accused Col. Pic
| quart of suppressing documents tend
ing TO compromise Dreyfus
As the general was evidently greatly
fatigued. Col Jouaust suggested that he
continue his testimony tomorrow. The
colonel then addressed the prisoner
asking him If he had anything to say
IN reply to Gen. Roget. Dreyus re-
Piled: mo, my colonel. 1t Is frightful
that, day after day, for hours. should
tnus have my heart, my soul and my
very entrails torn without being per-
I mitted to reply. 1t is terrible torture to
impose upon an innocent and loyal
soldier. II is frightful thing, fright
full. frightful."