The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1899-05-30

Dreyfus. Continuing, the report dealt with
Lieutenant Colonel Henry's conversation
with Dreyfus when the latter was trans
ferred to the cherche Midi prison. Dreyfus
said:
1T IS terrible 1 am accused OF a frightful
thing"
Henry asked Of what he was accused and
Drefus replied. II am accused of the crime
| OF high treason
"The devil" answered Henry. But on
| what ground?"
II don't know" said Dreyfus. II am near
| " mad. I would prefer to receive bullet in
the head. / am not guilty. This accusation
| is the death of my life"
| To this Henry said: 'If you not
| guilty. you must not lose your head. An in
nocent man is always strong. Have you a
| family?'
yes" replied the prisoner. "a wife and
| children. ] am we'll off and 1 must have
justice done me-
THAT does not come within my compe-
tence.' was Henry's next remark. but
| justice will certainly be done you. Do you
know what you are accused of?''
Yes. am accused of giving documents
| to foreign power
What documents?'
81 don't know. Du Patty de Clam only
| spoke of secret and confidential documents,
| without further explanation. / replied that
during my probation at the general stan
| office many documents passed through my
hands, but that l communicated them to
nobody"
| The Ormes-Chevilles report concluded
with saying that Dreyfus. having a supple
Il -I,x% %tA1
| for espionage.
| REVISION IMPERATIVE.
| NJ Ballot de Beaupre then reviewed the
| judicial history of the case and said ii now
| rested with the court to pronounce judg-
/ ment He upheld the statement that there
| was sufficient presumption that doubts and
! errors existed and that they justified re-
| vision of the case. He had examined the
| different cases in which the court has an
| nuled sentence without retrial. and said
/ that in his opinion, the court ought not TO
| consider the idea of annulling the sentence,
but should only consider revision of 1t. A
| revision, he contended. was imperative, and
in support of his statement, he rehearsed
the facts on which the application for re-
| vision was based, among which he included
| the culpabe Vaccinations OF Henry and
Du Patty de Clam against Dreyfus. their
| Outrageous schemes to force the hand
of the minister of war and oblige him 10
prosecute Dreyfus. and the convincing ef-
| fects'' of their depositions on the court
martial.
Ballot de Beaupre then reviewed Major
Esterhazy's connection with the case as al
| ready known
After reading NJ. Monard's defense, which
concluded by maintaining that the material
n
evidence cropping out during the inquiry
pointed not to Dreyfus by to Esterhazy as
the culprit NJ Ballot de Beaupre dealt with
the question of motive. He read the police
report furnished by NJ. Guene. the detec-
tive. all unfavorable to Dreyfus and reports
of the prefecture of police. pointing out that
| there had been a confusion of Dreyfus with
| others of the same name who had been
mixed up with the gambling and disreputa-
BILE female associations. The latter reports
were not produced at the trial in 1894. M.
Ballot de Beaupre then pointed out that
Dreyfus could not have acted as traitor
from anger or disappointment. as he had the
finest prospects of excellent military
career. On the other hand Esterhazy. the
reporter alleged, was a soldier OF fortune,
always begging from the money-lenders.
ESTERHAZY'S THREAT.
Continuing. the reporter read letters writ
ten by Esterhazy abusing France and the
French army, these producing deep i'm
preston upon the audience. He referred 10
letter written by Esterhazy to Baron
Rothsohild dated June 2l 1894. to the effect
that If his application 'for money were re-
fused he would have no recourse but TO kill
his family and then commit suicide" Such
said the reporter. was Elsterhazy's language
| he of ba dot xyha % h0rderoar
was placed" The Inference to be drawn
was that Esterhazy sought, in treason. re-
sources necessary to carry on a life OF dis
sipation.
AT this point, with the evident approval OF
all who listened, Nj. Ballot de Beaupre
quoted from NJ. Monard's statement as fol-
| lows: Although justice has been rendered
! more or less impotent with regard to Ester
| hazy by the latter's acquittal of the charge
| of being the author of the bordereau, Ii Is
none the less the duty of the Supreme Court
to restore liberty TO an innocent man un-
justly condemned
Prior to the adjournment NJ. Ballot de
Beaupre read a letter from the British gen.
eral, Talbot, who in 1881 was attached tc
the British embassy in Paris. rectifying the
deposition OF Gen. Marquis de Gallifot. This
letter reached NJ. Nassau through diplo-
| matte channels. In IL General Talbot SAID
| that Marquis de Gallifot had misinterpreteo
his (Taibot's) words, as he had never hac
personal relations with Esterhazy in the
way of espionage, but had simply heard tha
Esterhazy's character well known tc
the foreign military attaches.
The court adjourned at $50 o'clock wher
very few of the public yet remained in the
vicinity. The Republican guards imme
4 tl,
of police was dispersed.
TRIAL OF TWO .PATRIOTS."
NM. DerOulede and Marcel-Habert
Arraigned en- a Serious Charge