The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1899-09-06

NJ. Paleologue, the representative of the
foreign office, supported Maj. Carriers
views. He said:
81 understand perfectly the Importance
the defense attaches to the production Of
the documents enumerated in the Dor
dereau, seeing that the whole case turns
upon them. But while the request of the
accused appears to be based upon logic
and justice, it seems inadmissible from
a diplomatic point Of view. Considera-
lions of the highest order are opposed to
the government taking the initiative it IS
requested to take with a foreign power"
Col. Jouaust promised that the court
would announce its decision later.
ESTERHAZY DISSECTED.
Serge Bassett, the first witness called
today, testified that the Matin sent him
to London on five occasions to interview
Mai Esterhazy, who furnished mass
of interesting information concerning the
headquarters staff. Esterhazy declared
that he was not the author Of the Dor
dereau, though the witness did not be-
lieve him. Esterhazy complained bitterly
of the generals who, he said, had thrown
him overheard, adding that there was
nothing left for him but to blow out his
brains. The witness advised against sui
eide, and urged Esterhazy to the utmost
endeavor to reveal the truth and the part
he had played. Finally, while walking In
Piccadilly, Maj. EsterhaZy said to the
witness point blank:
well, Ribon Che witness pseudonym),
1 an going to tell you what nobody
knows 1t is 1 who am the author of
the bordereau. I wrote it in 1894, at the
request of my friend, Sandherr. There
was a traitor at headquarters, Dreyfus,
whom Sandherr told me they wanted to
catch 1 did not hesitate to do what
was asked
NJ. Bassett proceeded that, with Ester
Hays consent, he had each of Ester
hays statements verified: Esterhazy
saving that he decided to make the avoW-
ais because he was disguised With his
abandonment by the generals.
In conclusion the witness referred to
offers of money to Esterhazy.
Lieut. Col. Brongniart, member Of the
court-martial-Did Esterhazy tell you
Dreyfus was guilty?
NJ. BasSett-YeS.
Col. Jouaust-The two statements Of
Esterhazy are incompa tibe.
NJ Bassett-It is not for me to recon-
cilc them.
Col. Jouaust said he had not included
Esterhazys letters in the evidence be-
cause he didn't wish the proceedings to be
unduly protracted, but as the defense
insisted, the letters would be produced.
Gen Roget offered to read the first Of
Maj. EsterhaZys letters, in which Ester
hazy offers to prove the existence of q
Dreyfus syndicate. The writer complained
that the general staff refused to hear or
accept information he had obtained.
Maj. Carriere said he also had received
numerous letters from Maj. Esterhazy
which he had never read.
M Labori-Does Gen. Roget consider
the confessions of Esterhazy valid?
Gen. Roget-All versions given by Es-
terhazy are quite incorrect. He is an i'm
poster concerning whom l prefer to ex
press no opinion.
NJ Labori-Does Gen. Roget consider
Esterhazy a man of straw?
Gen. Roget have no proof of the fact,
but I am inclined to believe he is.
NJ Labori-Was he a man of straw in
1894?
Gen. Rogct-No, I do not think so.
NJ. Labori-When, do you think, did he
first contemplate playing the part?
Gen. Roget have made no inYestiga-
ton on that point. Contrary to Ester
hays assertions. the generals Of the
headquarters staff had no relations with
him.
Nj. Labori-Why was Maj. Esterhazy's
role Of straw man not mentioned in the
trial of 1898?
not know.
Col, Jouaust and M. Labori, the former
attempting to protecteGen. Roget from
too close questioning.
NJ Labor insisted, however, and gained
his point. The examination proceeded.
NJ. Labori-Since Gen. Roget expresses
an opinion upon this case, upon what
does he base 1t?
Gen. Roget-On the part generally play
ed by Esterhazy.
NJ Labori-How do you explain the fact
that Esterhazy made no confession dur
ing the lola trial?
Gen. Roget do not know.
M Labori-You had made a speech for
the prosecution rather than a deposition.
I have, therefore, the right to question
and note the fact that you do not reply.
M. Labor then expressed surprise that
there was no mention of q man of straw
until so late day, while all the acts Of
which Esterhazy is accused were long
known.
Senator TrarieuX, eX-minister of JUS
| tice, was the next witness. He looked
| straight at the judges while testifying
He preceded his evidence by saying that
he wished to throw full light upon his
conduct in this case.
When Dreyfus was convicted, the wit
ness said, he was convinced, like every
body else, Of the prisoners guilt but vio-
lent diatribes on the fact that Dreyfus
was a Jew awakened his suspicious. He
therefore consulted M. Hanotaux date
prime minister of France) and the latter
informed the witness of the existence Of
the 'cette canaille de D" document.
though M. Hanotaux failed to inform him
that it had been impaired to the judges
of the first court-martial unknown to
the prisoner. This fact the witness learn
ed later.