The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1899-09-02

his letter, which was quite contrary 10
it's effect. Gen. Oeloye, to whom Gen.
Roget appealed, said he had been con-
suited by the minister of war as to what
ought to be done in connection with the
letter and witness read the report Whlch
he made on the subject to the president
of the republic, who he added, imme-
diately signed an order relegattng Lieut..
Brugere to the territorial army. After
this Lieut.. Brugere again arose and en-
phatically maintained that he made no
statement in the sense indicated by Gen.
Roget, but had only alluded to some per-
sonalities, and had not mentioned the
French army. 1t would have been absurd
to do so, he continued, since the F'rench
army consists of all citizens over twenty
years of age.
NJ Labori said he thought 1t would be
advisable to produce the letter In ques-
ton, and Col Jouaust promised to ask
the minister of war for the document.
AN ACT OF JUSTICE.
Gen. Hippolyte Sebert, retired, Of the
marine artillery, preceded his testimony
BY saying he did not think he ought to
withhold the evidence he was able to
give as he felt it would contribute to the
reparation of judicial error. The gen
eral then criticised the bordereau from
a professional standpoint, pointing out
the writer must have been low-classed
man negotiating directly with corre-
spondent on whose doles he was de-
pendent. He said he was probably en-
officer, but certainly not an artillery Of
ficer, adding that this was proved by the
employment of expressions an artillery
malI could not have used.
The witness gave a number Of instances
showing the dense ignorance displayed in
gunnery technicalities by the writer of
the bordereau, and, amid profound 81
lence. Gen. Sebert declared that his study
of the case had led him to the conviction
that the bordereau could not have been
written by an artillery officer. nor by
an officer belonging to a special arm
of the service, who had passed through
the Polytechnic school.
Gen. Sebert referred to the satisfaction
he felt at knowing experts of the high
est standing in handwriting had con-
firmed his opinion and had dismissed M.
Bertillon's assertions, saying that on
examination he, the witness, had easily
found proof of the worthlessness Of that
demonstration.
Il reassert most emphatically," Gen.
Sebert concluded, that the bordereau
was not written by an artillery officer,
nor by an officer who passed through the
Polytechnic school, l have been sustain
ed in giving my evidence by my firm be-
lief in the entire innocence of Dreyfus,
and l am glad I have had strength
enc ugh to bring here the stone which l
have to lay on the edifice of reparation
which you are constructing so carefully
and conscientiously, while holding aloof
from outside passions. This edfice IS
worl: of appeasement and peace which
will restore the country to an era Of con-
cord and union
A brief suspension of the session fol-
lowed.
When the session was resumed Col.
Jouaust called Maj. Ducros, of the ar
tillery, who showed that Dreyfus had
abundant opportunities in 1894 to obtain
information relative to guns, but did not
take advantage of them.
Gen. MERCER tried to belittle this testi-
mony by saying Dreyfus was probably
aware that knowledge of the Ducros gun
wa; no longer of Importance, since the
gun had been rejected in favor Of the
Deport gun.