The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1899-05-19
THE pnor AeArNsr p1coUAnr.
Hts Accusation Against the stan once In
. Memorial to the Court.

~ WV 0NsbNA1N ~ AhA ouHs
PARIS. May Is. The memoirs Of Col.
Plcauart. which he sent to the Court OF Cassa-
ton on Wednesday. proceeds. after treating OF
the charges against him OF conveying informa-
ton from the Esterhazy and Dreyfus dossiers.
to deal with the other charges Of forgery and
using forgeries. He points out that though
Lauth's and Gribelin's accusation was formu-
lated in the course OF Pellieux's inquiry. It was
not communicated to him during that in
quiry nor during Ravary's investigation
nor Esterhazy's trial. but Immediately pre-
ceding Plc1uart's evidence in the lola trial
The stan ONCE sent Commandant Bessieres
to sound him as to his intentions. using the
pretext OF warning him against indiscretiors
that would be likely to lead to diplomatic COM
plications. Picauart answered that he in
tended to speak the whole truth. Thereupon
Lauth and Gribelin. who had already given
their evidence. were hastily recalled for the
purpose Of launching accusations against Pic
quart. Lauth's hating evidence being a sup
plement to Junck's testimony during Fabre's
and Tavernier's Investigations.
Col. Picquart proceeds to demonstrate that
the petit bleu was in acknowledgements hand
writing. yet Tavernier did not compare It with
acknowledged specimens Of Schwartzkoppen's
penmanship. but only with a doubtful ex-
ample. which. Picquart hints. may he an
other forgery kept specially for this pur-'
pose. Respecting the erasure In the petit
bleu and the rewriting on it OF Ester
hays name. Col. Plcquart clearly intimates
that he believes this was Lauth's handiwork.
Fortunately, an expert was able to detect the
erased word. which was originally Esterhazy.
thus upsetting the abominable trick making 1t
appear that Picquart had substituted that name
for another. Picquart further demonstrates
that the erasure was made subsequent to the
document leaving his possession.
He requests that Roget be recalled to explain
the falsehood to which he deposed before the
Court Of Cessation on Nov. "a. in which he
alleged that early photographs reproduced the
ensures. This statement is easily dlsproved
by the production Of stereotypes made by Pic
quarts order In the spring Of 1895. In which
no sign OF erasure appears. Experts gave evil
dence bearing out this fact on Oct. 81. 1898.
Consequently it was impossible for Roget to
ignore the fact on Nov. "a following.
The Staff Office long hesitated as to which
charge. forgery or the use thereof. to bring
against Picquart. but finally decided to allege
both. though they were self-contradictory.
Moreover. Tavernier found that the petit bleu
had not been written or scratched by Pic
quart. Nevertheless. his report accuses Pic
quart OF forgery.
The Dreyfusard press 10 increasing the vio-
lence OF its demands for the prosecution Of
Gen. MERCER.
The memorial concludes with a suggestion
that further inquiries be made respecting the
origin Of certain documents; that Gen. Gonse
and Roget be confronted concerning the erasure
in the petit bleu; that a search be made to
discover the author OF the erasure. and that q
supplementary examination be held Of Guenee
and Gonse for the purpose OF obtaining an ex-
PLANTATION Of the general method OF the ma
chinations against Picquart.
The Figaro. which will publish all the fore
going Tomorrow. completes the memorial by
the addition OF four documents describing the
variations in the evidence OF certain witnesses
at the different inquiries.