The semi-weekly messenger. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1897-1908, 1899-09-01

the ~bordereau could not have been
traced, adding that it was an utter i'm
possibility. He then proceeded TO il
lustrate why this was h case n 10
prove the falseness Of NJ. Bertillon's de-
d~uctions.
In conclusion, NJ. Paray-Javal said,
amid laughter, that he thought NJ. Ber-
tillon was a very intelligent man, but
that his system was false and he, the
witness, was convinced that only self
esteem prevented NJ. Bertillon from ad-
ditting his error.
ANOTHER WITNESS AGAINST
BERTILLON.
II. Bernard. an inspector of mines,
who took high honors at the polytechnic
school, who followed NJ. Pa~ray-Javal at
the witness bar, said he appeared to
refute a proportion OF NJ. Bertillon's
evidence which was based on false cal
culations.
Witness said he was greatly surpris-
ed that N. Bertillon thought fit to have
ecOurse to psychological arguments to
prove that the bordereau was fabricat-
ed and that the methods which might
have been employed in writing certain
words were such as to constitute proof
against Dreyfus.
NJ. Bernard also said he "a a~stonish-
&c at the fact that NJ. Bertillon had
undertaken to account for the shape
of letters and the space between words.
There vas not 1.25 milimetre, as alleg-
ed by NJ. Bertillon, but 1.56. Moreover,
the writing of the boTdereau q natu-
raj and rhythmic, while its character
and size showed it was not written by
either a short sighted or a long sight
ed person. The witness then proceeded
to illustrate photographically his con-
tentiOn that the bordereau was not d
fabricated document.
In conclusion, NJ. Bernard exhibited to
the judges a plate representing a page
of current handwriting and said:
IF it is examined by NJ. Bertillon's
| system it will show certain peculiarities
which would not be found upon the ex-
animation Of so, 900, 900 other documents.
NJ. Bertillon would, therefore, say the
document was fabricated. But he would
: be wrong, for 1 borrowed the page from
a report written by NJ. Bertillon him
self"
BERTILLON'S REQUEST TO REPLY
DENIED.
NJ Bertillon demanded permission to
reply to the witness. Colonel Jouaust
replied: Il cannot grant your request
n I will not grant such permission to
n Of the fourteen experts, except in
| he case of a personal explanation"
! NJ. Bertillon: Il wish to speak of the
manner in which 1 reconstructed the
| bordereau.
Colonel Jouaust: why, you are dis
cussing the case. 1 cannot allow you
to speak except in regard to a per-
sonal fact"
! AN EXPERT AGAINST THE DE-
I PENDANT.
NJ. Teyssoiners followed. He said he
adhered in all respects to his report
dated October 10, 1894, in which he ex-
pressed the opinion that the bordereau
was the work of the writer of the doc
uraents seized at the prisoners resi-
dence. For purposes of comparison, the
witness lengthily criticised the borde-
reau letter by letter, pointing out re-
semblances to the prisoners hand
writing.
Referring to the court, witness said
he had noticed the prisoners handwrit-
ing was illegible and he had never seer
the document dictated to Dreyfus.
The copy Of the bordereau made by
Dreyfus was then handed to M. Tvs
sonieres, who declared it had never
been given to him for purposes of COM
parison. (Sensation.) The witness
added that he would require three
days to give an opinion on it. He could
not conclude his examination on the
spot. He must have time.
Here, a member of the court-martial
giving the result Of his examination OF
the bordereau, remarked: THE letter
7 is always isolated, even at the be-
ginning of words"
To this M. Teyssonieres replied that
this popularity was also found in the
! prisoners handwriting.
When he was invited to reply to the
witness, Dreyfus said NJ. Teyssonieres
remarks seemed to him quite incorrect
and that in order to reply properly he
the prisoner, must have the document:
under his eyes.
GAS regards the criticism on the sub.
ject of paragraphing," Dreyfus added
Il beg to reply hat ones does no,
make a fresh paragraph except begin.
ming a new idea. Every time I begir
a new idea in anything I write, I make
a paragraph.
The prisoner in conclusion, asked the
president Of the court to request the
witness before he retired to produce the
! documents furnished to him for com
parison, Of which the defense had nc
knowledge.
Colonel Jouaust: Certainly"
NJ. ~Teyssonieres, thereupon, added
that on referring to his report of 1884,
he found he had concluded the writer
had attempted to disguise his hand.
writing, but that towards the end he
had lapsed into his ordinary hand.
writing.
The witness begged leave to speak OF
a personal fact. Addressing the judge
he said: Before you, 1 am only a wit
ness but Cunning toward the defense,
before this other tribunal, / am per.
maps, an accused person."
Colonel Jouaust: Not at all: you
are not accused"
M. T~eyssonieres: Il am an accused
person."
Here the witness picked UP a news.
paper which he had brought with hin
and began to read, ~whereupon Colone
Jouaust said: You cannot read
newspaper"
1T is a newspaper, it is true" re.
piled NJ. Teyssoineres, but it is also
the report of NJ. Ballot de Beaupre."
Colonel Jouaust: we have no neeG
to consider the eport of the judge
The incident is closed"
CHARAVAY CHANGES HIS VIEWS
AS TO DREYFUS' GILT.
After a brief suspension of the ses.
sion, the court resumed hearing testi.
mony n NJ. Charavay, the archivisi
and expert in ancient manuscripts
was called to the witness bar. His dep.
0ctrsD- 49,