The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1899-09-06

name of Dreyfus had been substituted for
and he Of OF
bordereau. Lastly said NJ. Trarieux,
there appeared the cynical Henry forgery.
All these facts created a great impression
regarding the headquarters staff. i accuse
no one. but assume that the chiefs were de-
ceived." M. Trarieux pointed out that If
fus existed in 1896 General Gonse would
have shown Lieutenant Colonel PicQuart an
order to stop the investigation.
SAY ESTERHAZY is GUILTY.
After an interview with NJ. Scheairer
Kestncr, the witness said, he became con-
WINGED of the guilt of Esterhazy. and said
his duty conscientious citizen and sem
ator, and, perhaps, as an ex-minis n, and
that to fulfill this duty he must devote
himself to a work Of justice. In describing
the steps taken in support of revision, NJ.
Trarieux mentioned interview he had
with a foreign ambassador, who in tones
of the most profound and affecting SINGER
ity, declared that Dreyfus never had rela-
lions with him nor with any military at
tache or officer of the army of his country.
NJ. Trarieux asserted the Importance of
this statement of the ambassador, who en-
ergetically reaffirmed the absolute inno-
cence of DreyfuS. The ambassador added
that he had investigated and found moth
ing to implicate Dreyfus. Further the am
bassador said, he had seen in the hands of
Colonel Panizzardi a letter from Colonel
SchwartZkOppen proving the guilt Of Ester
haZy who, his excellency added. generally
communicated information of minor value.
Kestner's revelations Major EsterhaZy
called Colonel Schwartzkoppen, and 1t
was then that dramatic scene OF violent
recriminations and threats occurred. The
ambassador also showed the witness that
the "Cette canailie de D." phrase did not
apply TO DreyfuS.
more and more imprisoned and tramped
back and forth upon the plat orn. He eX-
planned that, notwithstanding me confiden-
tial nature of his revelations. the ambassa-
dor had accorded him permission TO COM
municate ii to the judicial authorities. In
subsequent interview which the witness had
with the same ambassador, the latter had
informed him that the Henry forgery.
which had just been discovered, had long
been known to his government and that
the French government had been aware of
1t for year.
NJ Trarieux continued: Certain passages
of what 1 have asserted may be taken ex-
ception to, but among men who honor me
In listening there Is not one who doubts the
sincerity of my language or the truth of
should not adduce here the evidence of
foreigner. That is NJ. Cavaignac's opinion,
and do not oppose 1T, but it had no foun
dation either in fact or in law. The testi-
mony of foreigners is not disalOwed by
law, which does not restrict the field of in
vestigation of a judge. to whom it merely
Moreover, Colonel Panizzardi was cited to
appear in case Of swindling at Versailles.
This country should be bold and proud
enough to seek the truth everywhere. Be-
sides, was there not yesterday somewhat
unexpected evidence of foreigner who re-
lated remarks of a foreign sovereign? Why
should the testimony of foreign representa-
tives be opposed here? Even the supreme
head of the army, the gallant soldier, De
Gallifet, has not shurnk from adducing be-
fore the Court of Cessation the testimony
of General Talbot
M. Trarieux said he suspected neither the
the court-martial of 1894, but only the ma
ture Of the documents submitted to that
MERCER CRITICISED.
Criticising General Mercier's role as a
witness, M. Trarieux said he was surprised
that the ex-minister of war had not in
cluded in the dosser the official version
of the Panizzardi cipher telegram. With re-
gard to General Roget and Captain Cuignet,
the witness declared that their allegations
that Colonel Panizzardi had informed his
ambassador that Colonel Schwartzkoppen
had had relations with Dreyfus were abso-
lutely unfounded. On the contrary, the wit
ness asserted, Colonel Panizzardi expressly
stated that Dreyfus had no relations with
any foreign attache. General Roget and
Captain Cuignet had therefore misread-he
would not say misinterpreted-the report
IL
their statements
General Roget attempted to intervene, but
M. Trarieux continued. reasserting the
already referred to, M. Trarieux continued
said 'Esterhazy is the traitor"
Continuing. NJ. Trarieux said 1.-The. su-
preme Court has given its decision, and our
very eyes confirm its judgment"
NJ. Trarieux proceeded to show that Maj
E Est az confession must be genuine
traitor is sought, he is the man. He is over
whelmed with debts and is a man of loose
habits. He wrote the .uhlan' letter to
soul of Frenchman. And yet he is placed
on a level with a young captain of ire
proachable conduct against whom nothing
Doubt is no longer possible
After demonstrating, in his way, why
questions Of the guilt OF Dreyfus Isis Is impos-
longer the time for pleading falsehoods;
1t is the hour for pacification. 1t is also
that small as we as great n Witho9t ds
tinction of sex or person, shall have their
rights"
After a brief desultory Interchange Of
remarks the court retired to deliberate over
the application OF NJ. Labori for an order
on the government commissary to request
the French government to invite foreign
governments to supply documents enumer-
ated in the bordereau. After brief interval
it was unanimously decided to reject the ap-
plication Of NJ. Labori, on the ground that
the court did not consider itself compe-
tent to pronounce Judgment which might
entail diplomatic action by the government.
1t was also decided unanimously to exam
inc NJ. De Cernuschi tomorrow behind
closed doors. At 80 a. m. the court adj
journed for the day.
In view of the rejection by the court
martial Of NJ. Labori's motion, the defense
intend to issue subpoenas to Colonies
Schwartzkoppen and Panizzardi. The SUBJ
poenas will be transmitted by the court
martial through the minister of war, the
minister of justice and the minister of for
eign affairs. successfully, and thence
through the French ambassadors at Berlin
and Rome. Colonels Schwartzkoppen and
Panizzardi can elect whether they shall ap-
pear before the cOurt-martial or make de-
positions before magistrates in their re-
spective countries, in which latter case the
dispositions will be transmitted as evidence
TO the court-martial through diplomatic
channels.