The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1899-08-30

/
Whatever has been said to the contrary,
witness maintained that the leakage At
Bourges could not be ascribcd 90 Drey,
fus. This also was the opinion of Col.
! Sandherr, who frequently had recourse to
the witness intimate knowledge Of this
! question in the futile efforts to discover
! evidence against Dreyfus.
The witness recalled how informal ton
of the leakage of 1894 was received prima-
rily. The name mentioned was that of a
gentleman forty-hve years OF age and
| decorated, who used to convey documents
! TO the embassy which the witness des-
cribed as q house with n large garden.
| Col Cordler emphasized the fact that
| the above personal description did not bear
the slightest resemblance to Dreyfus, but
resembled much more closely another Of
! flcer. whose name had been mentioned and
could no longer be prosecuted or con
| vicied
Referring next to what he styled the
| huge undertaking of Richard CUers. La
JouX & Co." the colonel declared the oh
| ject was nothing less than recruiting Ger
man spies for the service of the French
| government. one of Cuers' special devices
| continued the witness, was furnishing
/ Germany with false Information. He,
therefore, WRs sometimes Obliged to say
he had succeeded in sub0rduating
French officer. and In this way Cuers was
! Hlbuteu 10 uCtidIe he Hdi ioilpNtH iHe
collaboration of an officer OF the head
quarters staff. Proof of this could be
found a headquarters In a dossler of false
| documents delivered to Germany.
These documents" added Col. Corder.
ARE, no, doubt in all the better order be
| cause the archivist Gribelin, wears blue
| speciac,es." Uaughter)
Col. Jouaust called the witness to order
and the remark was withdrawn witness
| declaring amidst peals of laughter, 'it
escaped me, Monsieur le President
withdraw the speotacles."
Cordier then described the events prior
to the arrest of Dreyfus. and showed that
only single real leakage namely, the
plans of the fortresses, had occurred at
| the time of his arrest The document
known as "Cette canaille de D" he ex-
planned was contemporaneou with this
leakage.
He Denounced Roget.
at has been said" continued the wit
ness, "that l made a mistake on this point
and confounded the document with an
| other containing the initial alone. l
should like very much to see the docu-
| ment In order to assure myself that it
| had not been tampered with. 1t Is not,
| however. of any importance, except to
| show that Gen. Rogets evidence concern
ing me Is false from beginning to end"
| (Sensation)
Revertng to the manner in which sus-
| picions against Dreyfus crystalllzed, the
| colonel described the efforts to pry into
| the prisoners life, and said the informa-
ton at first received was very bad and
constituted strong proof agtinst the pris-
| oner Later however. II assumed quite
a different aspect It was admitted that
| before his marriage Dreyfus was not 'un-
| improbable morally, nor was he entitled
to wear a wreath of orange blossoms"
| GIaughter)
But, Col Cordier added after his mar
| riage Dreyfus was quite different. The
witness also said that while Dreyfus
| boasted of his conquests, NJ Cordier was
of the opinion that those who boasted
the most accomplished the least. Q4augh-
| teri
In 1894 the witness regarded as INSULT
| cient the sole proof against Dreyfus, name
| ly the bordereau. He did not believe the
| prisoner was guilty, but the fact that
| the judges were unanimous In convicting
| him, changed the witness mind. His
| doubts however, returned when he saw
| that the date of the bordereau received
in September had been fixed as May. Col
| Picquarts investigation and the infamous
| campaign against Picquart increased the
| suspicious Of the witness.
Now Believes Him Innocent.
"In 1894 declared Col. Cordier, emphatic
| ally, II had been assured by the unanml-
! y
vinced OF the guilt of Dreyfus. Now 1 am
| absolutely convinced OF his innocence"
| Great excitement)
Replying to the president. he declared
| that the approaches of the Dreyfus family
| to Sandherr, were not attempts al corrup-
ton, and that Dreyfus brothers re-
mark, our fortune Is at your disposal
| was only the expression of the family g
ardent desire to save an innocent member
of st.
Replying to Col. Jouaust's request to
| state what he knew regarding Henrys
relations with Picquart, Ccrdler said good
| fellowship prevailed in the depaf tment un-
! til the appearance of Henry. who had
| been forced on Sandherr. Henry had close
| relations with the supreme chief and his
| colleagues suspected he might report what
he heard in the office divisions, and what
occurred In the department. Some sup
ported Sandherr and others supported
| Henry.
Maitre Labori asked the witness what
he knew In regard to the arrest Of Drey-
| fus.
II remember" Cordier replied, chat
one Of the proofs advanced against Drey-
| fus was that during the dictation scene
he looked In mirror. That is going too
far. If Dreyfus looked IN the mirror IL
was because he had seen another head
besides his own there There was an ar
| rangement of mirrors, and since it must
be told, / will say Il, behind the curtain
were two ears listening Dreyfus, there
fore, might have seen something besides
his own face in the mirror"
Letter Ruled Out.
Al this Juncture, NJ Labori informed the
president Of the court that he had received
telegram signed Pages" announcing the
dispatch of a letter relative to the rela-
tions between Col. Sandherr and the Drey-
fus family Counsel added that he had
himself received a telegram as follows:
Il declare Col. Sandherr told me distinct
ly that neither before nor after the con-
victioa was an offer Of money made to
him"
Col. Jouaust announced that he would
not read the letter because he knew moth
ing If the writer and asked the usual
question Of Dreyfus. who replied that he
would refer merely 90 the scene on Oct 10.
preceding his arrest
~ was" he said, 80 fantastic that /
frankly confess ] understood nothing con-
nected with "a. IL was conducted under
such conditions, that I do not know what