The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1899-08-18

can present in the most specious guise
what amounts absolutely to nothing.
You cannot imagine. gentlemen, what
1 people, in order to get money, If only a
modest twenty franc piece, have brought
to the Intelligence Department in the
shape of so-called information, which
examination has proved to be worthless.
Dreyfus displayed the keenest interest
in Pieauart's protracted analysis of the
dossier, which the whole audience listened
to with profound attention. The mem
bers of the court martial and the former
Ministers of War were equally interested
OF the latter, Generals Billot and zurlin-
den were in full uniform. General Mer-
cier was attired in civilian clothes. Near
them sat NJ Bertulus, the examining
| magistrate who gave such strong testi-
mony for Dreyfus yesterday Madame
Henry widow of Lieutenant Colonel
Henry. who yesterday taxed M Bertulus
with being Judas, was not present.
Concluding his examination Of the se-
cret dossier. Colonel Picquart explained
how he had acquired the conviction that
the bordereau was written by Esterhazy
and how he ascertained that the anti
Dreyfus proofs were worthless He began
by detailing how he first learned of the
existence of Esterhazy and his efforts to
discover something about him
The witness earnestly asserted that the
first occasion on which he saw Ester
hays name was when he read the ad-
dress Of the petit bleu He said he was
| not acquainted with Esterhazy and never
had Esterhazy watched
| PREVIOUS to this the utmost efforts had
oeen made to prove the contrary and to
show Picquart knew Esterhazy before the
discovery of the petit bleu
The Colonel emphasized this point. with
the yiew as he explained, of showing how
certain newspapers had travestied the
facts, and he created a mild sensation bv
adding:- =
Il shall have occasion to point out
other and similar examples
Inc witness then rebutted the charges
against him of unnecessarily delaying the
prosecution of Esterhazy. He said his
ooJect was to avoid arousing suspicion in
regard to an officer who, perhaps. was
entirely innocent.
What mistake" he added. ewould
nave been ayerted in 1894 had they actea
m the same way in regard TO Dreyfus.',
This remark caused murmurs of appro-
val IN court
what the witness gathered about Ester
hazy's character, he continued. created
The worst impression upon him. but he
learned nothing to connect Esterhazv
with any act of espionage Therefore. he
did not mention his suspicious. An
agent, however, was ordered to watch
Esterhazy, who had completely COM
promised himself through his reia tions
with an English company, of which he
had agreed to become a Director.
That could not be permitted in the
case of a French officer" said Picquart.
Moreover, Esterhazy gambled led a life
of debauchery and lived with Mademois-
/ ellie Pays
Turning to the leakage at Headquarters,
| the witness described the negotiations of
Major Lauth with the spy, Richard
Cuers, at Basle. showing how the spy
promised informed about the leakage and
| how he, Picquart. was induced to allow
lieutenant Colonel Henry to accompany
Major Lauth to Basic.
Picquart also described the vague re-
plies of Henry when questioned on the
subject of Esterhazy before his depart
| ure and the futility of the visit to Basle
because of Cuers' refusal when he saw
! Henry, to impart the promised informa-
| ton.
This incident caused the witness to
| wonder whether, instead of trying to
/ make Cuers speak, Henry and Lauth had
not done everything possible to impose
silence upon him
Before the Basle incident, Col Picquart
had decided to speak to General de
Boisdeffre about Esterhazy.
TN answer to my request said the
witness, General de Boisdeffre wrote me,
| ac clxf hi
his arrival from Vichy While driving
from the railroad station to the Generals
hotel I told him all had done in regard
| to Esterhazy.
II affirm that General de Bolsdeffre
knew that this question was to remain a
secret between US and that I was not to
mention it except to the Minister of War.
II knew Esterhazy was anxious to en-
! ter the War office and | did not regard
| his desire favorably. 1 communicated my
| impressions to my Chiefs. who appro-
we'd all my steps, and the application of
! Esterhazy was rejected.
ssHis insistance, however, only increas-
| ed my uneasiness regarding him and I re-
solved to obtain a specimen Of his hand
! writing. / was Immediately struck with
| the similarity of his handwriting and
i that of the bordereau, and, forthwith.
1 had letters of Esterhazy which were in
! my possession photographed and showed
| the photographs to Major Du Patty de
Clam and NJ. Bertillon (the handwriting
experp, between August Is and Septem-
Der 80
The Colonel emphasized this point be-
cause M. Bertillon affirms he saw the
photographs in May, 1886. and made a
| note of them, whereas the letters were
|
The conflicting testimony of Picquart
and Bertillon on this point had been used
to discredt the formers evidence.
Colonel Picquart, continuing, said Patty
de Clam, on seeing the writing, forthwith
declared it was that of Matthew Drey-
fus, the brother of Captain Dreyfus.
The witness, continuing, said
You know he maintained that the
bordereau is the joint work of Alfred and
! Matthew Dreyfus.
M Bertillon said
That is the writing of the bordereau.'
IN. .Bertillon tried to discover where
I had obtained the handwriting, but the
only information / impaired was that 1t
was current and recent handwriting.
M. Bertillon then suggested that 1t was
tracing and ended by saying that if 1t
was current handwriting it could only