Ottumwa semi-weekly courier. [volume] (Ottumwa, Iowa) 1899-1903, 1899-08-22

orders are absolute. The secret dos
sier can only be examined under GER
tain conditions. II regret il" answer
ed Picquart. but will try to- refresh
my memory
The witness explained why du Patty
de CLAIMS translation of 3D." the Avig-
non document, which had been classed
as idiotic, was open to DOUBT. and why
the document, if it had any meaning
whatever. was as applicable to Ester
hazy as to Dreyfus. Regarding the
correspondence OF the military at
taches. the witness demonstrated its in
Significance as to information asked
for. While du Patty de Clam regarded
the correspondence as convincing and
second bureau, Picquart maintained
that the terms of the correspondence
indicated that the writer intended to
ask friend and not a spy for the
information desired. Many headquar-
tiers officers. he pointed out. are on
cordial and absolutely legitimate
terms with foreign military attaches.
Picqnart then took up the 'Cette ca
naiiIe de d" document. He called the
attention of the court 10 the fact that
it was addressed by schwartzkoppen
to Panizzardi, and not vice resa. as was
long believed. After giving reasons for
believing that Dreyfus was not the
person referred TO. Picquart showed
how du Patty de Clam had endeavored
10 ascribe the authorship of the docu-
men' to Panizzardi, with view of es-
tabiishing a connection which, in real
itv, did not exist between the various
documents in the indictment against
Drevfus. The documents referring
to the French agents journey to
Switzerland. of which Schwartzkop-
pen is said to have been informed,
was only slightly commented upon by
the witness, as he did not attach any
Importance to it. Permit me to point
our TO you. gentlemen" continued Pic
quart. shat this document is not the
property of any particular minister.
Ii was classified as belonging. to The
intelligence department and formed a
part of a well defined dossier a dossier
shut up in one of the drawers of my
desk and afterwards distracted. from
that place. This commentary, there
fore is upon a secret dossier document
improperly removed from my depart
meiit.''j (sensation.) .Mention WAS
made yesterday of the disappearance
of the documents. That is the case in
point" Turning TO the second por-
ton of the dossier. Picquart described
a number of documents as forgeries,
land said that the police reports there
I'm showed nothing serious against
Dreyfms. He intimated that the re-
ports We're ''doctored."
Picquart then told how Esterhazy's
anxiety to get into the war office led
the witness TO investigate him. He
found that 'Esterhazyf was a gambler
and "A lihertine, andsewas endeavoring
to &c: into connection with a British
company. The witness received a
specimen of Esterhazy's handwriting
aud was strnck, with its resemblance
to the writing of the dossier. He
showed it to,du Paty,De Clam and Ber-
tillon,the handwriting expert. De Clam
declared it was the handwriting of
Matthew Dreyfus, Capt. Dreyfus'
brother. Bertillon said SIT was the
writing of the bordereau." Being con-
WINGED that the handwriting Of the
bordereau was that of Esterhazy, the
witness made further investigation
and found that the information con-
tanned therein might well have been
supplied by Esterhazy. He then laid
these facts before General Boisdeffre,
who sent him to General Gonse. The
latter, on learning the facts, said $50
a mistake has been made.'
Describing the Interview with Gonse
when he disclosed the Estarhazy mat
ter, P;cauart said:. when / asked
iGonse for permission to continue tile
the general replied that
it, was impossible both in his opinion
and that of Boisdeffre and the minister
of war, to reopen the affair. When r
pressed the point that nothing could