The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1899-08-29

troubles MS country was undergoing.
Later he said ne r-n1nnb bered CONVEX
sation with Cen. .Jamopr al r-hich there
was a reference - n.oney. comtns from
abroad in support of the Grey1us assi-
tatiOn, (which, while disinterested IN
France might not be so abroad.
NJ De Freycinet, however, did not re-
member the details of the conversation
nor could he say if any specific amount
was mentioned.
NJ. De Freycinet then alluded to his
fears that attacks on the chiefs of the
army might be prejudicial to disci-
pline," adding, might not these at
taclzs lead to the disappearance of dis
cipline and what then would be the re-
suit if we found ourselves in difficulties
with a foreign cOuntry?'
In short NJ De Freycinet delivered a
The testimony of minor witnesses
concluded the days proceedings.
PROCEEDINGS IN DETAIL
Following are the proceedings in de-
tail:
The appearance of Col. Cordier, form
erly deputy chief of the intelligence
department of the war office as the
first witness at the DreyfuS court mar
tiaI today aroused great interest, as
since his previous appearance the col
oneI has been released by the minister
Of war from his oath of professional
secrecy Speaking in firm audible
tones, the colonel testified that Sep
tember %, 1894, he left Paris on a fort
nights leave of absence and that moth
ing was then known in the statistical
department of the war Office of the dis
cOVery of treason.
Continuing, Col. Cordier said that the
day after he returned to Paris, Col.
Sandherr, who appeared greatly dis
treSSed. handed him copy of the bOr-
dereau on foolscap paper. Sandherr and
COrdier animatedly discussed the bor-
dereau, Sandherr considering it ample
evidence of treason.
The document was photographed and
an investigation was opened, resulting
in suspicious against Dreyfus being
aroused. Prior to this there was no pre-
sumption of Dreyfus' guilt 1t was Oc-
tober s that the suspicious of the pris-
oner's guilt became definite.
Witness said he believed the bOr-
dereau arrived at the war Office after
September "A.
He could not say VINO received it.
Very few officers were then aware that
treason had been committed. Witness
thought it necessary to enter these par
ticulars in reply to the statements of
his assistant, Major Lauth, before the
court of cessation.
At this point. Major Lauth, rising in
the center of the court, exclaimed; Il
beg leave to speak, my colonel"
Proceeding with his testimony, Colo
mel COrdier said he believed the bor-
dereau was handed to Colonel Sand
herr by Colonel Henry.
Cordier then explained what was the
Ordinary channel by which fnforma-
tion reached the war office.
THE ORDINARY CHANNEL
1.-The ordinary channel" the witness
said was a very clever spy attached
to the intelligence department, who had
the habit of visiting great houses, but
who preferred the company of servants
to the company of their masters"
Cordier then described the method of
piecirg documents and showed how
the bOrdereau was pasted together by
Henry, who was usually entrusted with
such work.
The witness said piecing documents
possessed fascination for the men who
were engaged upon such work, like the
passion of fOrtune-telIing by cards.
Mon who have once pieced papers,"
said the witness amidst laughter, will
always continue to do So
Referring to the spy who has been
dubbed as the ordinary channel"
Colonel Cordier said the former did not
directly receive the documents from the
embassy from which they were alb
Stracted- a woman, he explained, serv-
ed as an intermediary and the Ordin-
ary channel having been closed, it was
found necessary to negotiate directly
with the intermediary, otherwise the
woman with whom rendezvouSes were
usually made in churches. But as the
ordinary channels" services were still
available elsewhere. his pay was con-
tinued. Possibly, continued the wit
ness the spy endeavored to renew his
relations with the embassy
Such was the situation at the moment
u.
AS TO THE LEAKAGE.
Dealing with the leakage discovered
by the military authorities, Colonel
COrdier said he ascertained it was oc-
curing at BOurges.
Witness recalled the fact that an ar
tificer named Thomas was sentenced
for treason in 1894.
The foreign correspondents did not
notice his arrest and consequently a
letter addressed to him was intercept
ed and a reply was sent. This letter
asked for plans of a shell. The head
quarters staff obtained the plans and
sent them to Thomas correspondents.
The latter replied, thanking Thomas
and enclosing bank notes which were
credited to the funds of the headquar-
ters staff. Whatever has been said to
the contrary, witness maintained that
the leakage at BOurgeS could not be as
cribed to Dreyfus.
This was also the opinion of Colonel
Sandherr, who frequently had recourse
to witness intimate knowledge of this
question in the futile efforts to discover
evidence against Dreyfus.
COrdier's evidence greatly interested
his hearers, as he described the var
iOuS leakages. He especially referred
to very serious case designated as
leakage of st Thomas Acquinas," in
which clerk of the church of St
Thomas Acquinas, Paris, was mixed up
in espionage and serious leakage in the
of marine.
The witness recalled how information
of the leakage of 1894 was received
primarily.
The name mentioned was that of a
gentleman As years of age and decora- /
ted, who used to convey documents to
the embassy. which the witness de-
scribed as a house with a large gar |
den.
Col COrdier emphasized the fact |
that the above personal description did |
not bear the slightest resemblance TO I
Dreyfus but resemb1ed much more 1
closely another officer whise name had /
been mentioned and who could no long |
4r be prosecuted. or convicted
The witness then referred to the spy |