Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1899-09-02
nsiole for the subsequent publication

sponsfble for the subsequent publication
of the letters.
In reply Gen. Gonse said he had not
given his assent to Henry's letter, and that
Col. Picquart perceived Vaccinations
against him everywhere.
Picquart then declared that at the same
time he took the bordereau to Gen. Gonse
he showed him the secret dossier There
fore, he claimed. Gen. Gonse could easily
have acquainted himself with the probable
ity that Dreyfus was innocent.
NJ. Labori then took Gen. Gonse in hand
on the subject of tampering with Col Pic
quarts correspondence while the colonel
in Tunis, and Gonse admitted that one
letter was opened, and that the words of
this letter We're used in forging the tee-
gram which was Intended to destroy the
value of the petit bleu. The general in
sisted. however. that only suspected letters
addressed to Col Picquart were opened.
Picquart replied emphatically that all his
letters were opened
Discussing the 'Sepranza'' letters. NJ. La
bori said the last letter. having been pre-
served and not returned by Col. Picquart
might be considered to be a forgery.
Col. Jouaust rebuked NJ Labori for rails
ing the discussion. and counsel retorted
warmly that he intended, according to ar
ticle $40 of the CODE to say whatever he
considered proper on a matter which could
bring light.
Counsel then questioned General Gonse
en- the subject of tina late Lieut.. Col
HsDry's forgery, and the general replied
that he considered 1t an unfortunate ma
Eeuver directed against Dreyfus, and not
against Picquart. Henry desiring to fur
nish fresh proof against Dreyfus of which
there was really no need. the witness
added. as the diplomatic dossier contained
sufficient proofs.
NJ. Labor at once asked what they were.
but Colonel Jouaust refused to put the
question. Counsel thereupon declared he
would draw up a formal application for the
reading of these papers.
Another Point for Dreyfus.
The next witness. NJ. de Fond-Lamotte.
a former officer of artillery, testified that
in 1894 Col. Picquart lent him a firing
manual which he might have kept as long
as he pleased
So the witness added. there was little
secrecy at that time. Any officer could
have obtained one in August. 1884.
Another point in favor of Dreyfus is that
no probationer could have believed in 1894
that he would go to the maneuvers.
The clerk of the court read circular
dated May 10, 1894. announcing that the
probationers would not go to the ma
neuvers.
NJ de Fond-I.amotte concluded by de-
claring that If the prosecution would FOL,
low up the pieces of evidence they would
be absolutely convinced that Dreyrus ola
not write the bordereau
This witness, who is a fellow probatoner
of Dreyfus, proved one of the strongest
witnesses for the defense as he brought out
facts In support of his contention that
Dreyfus could not have written the Dor
dereau.
IF. as at first asserted. the bordereau
was dated May the witness argued
'.Dreyfus could not have written 1 am
going to the maneuvers, because circular
was issued in May informing the prona,
TONERS that they would not go to the
maneuvers while If the bordereau was
dated in April. now asserted. Dreyfus
could not have spoken of the firing manual
nd of To-
Not one of the generals today found
reply to the last argument. which looked
like clincher Gen. de Boisdeffre alone de-
ciaring that although 1t was true the cir
TONERS they knew that they could, never
theless go to the maneuvers if they made
special application
Confronted by Mercier and Roget
Gems MERCER and Roget then went on
the stage and confronted NJ. de Fond-La-
motto, and a heated discussion ensued.
Gen. Roget asked when the witness had
altered his conviction in favor of Dreyfus.
and NJ de Fond-Lamotte replied: "At the
time I was before the court of cessation /
expected proof Of my comrades guilt and
l was thunderstruck when found the date
of the bordereau had been changed.
The prisoner then rose to reply TO Gen.
de Boisdeffre'S argument. He declared he
had never asked for permission to go to
the maneuVers, and recalled that when
Col. du Patty de Clam fixed the date of the
bordereau in August ne. Dreyfus. pointed
out that he could not have written the
phrase. Il going To the maneuvers."
Gen. Roget here interpossd that requests
70 go TO the maneUvers were usually made
verbally. so it could not be proved whether
DreyfHs had or had not asked to go to the
naneuI ers. The general, however, admit
ted that no inquiry had ever been made on
this important point.
The court then adjourned for the day.