The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1899-08-24

the captain an opportunity OF attend
ing.
A LIVELY INCIDENT.
A lively incident followed. NJ. Labor
having asked leave to interrogate Gen
eral MERCER, the government commits
Sary. Major Carriere, took occasion to
remark that while a counsel had the
right to ask questions, he had no bust
ness to draw deductions. to which the
lawyer dryly replied that he had always
acted with full knowledge of the re-
strictiOns imposed upon counsel and
that he had no need of lessons from
Major Carriere and would not accept
them.
General MERCER was then recalled
and it was noted that he had donned
his uniform for the first time. The i'm
preston thereby created was that the
general. expecting a hot cross eXamin-
alton, thought that his uniform would
perhaps protect him.
NJ. Labor said he desired to know if
General MERCER admitted ordering
Colonel Maurel to communicate secret
documents to the court martial of 1894.
General Mercier-I knew I did not
have the right to give formal orders
to that effect, but gave moral orders
in a manner sufficiently clear. (Sensa-
tiOn.)
Counsel proceeded to closely question
the general, referring to the "Dixi" ar
ticle in the Libre Parole.
MERCER replied that he was so ac-
custOmed to violence from the press,
that he paid no attention to that ar
ticle. He added that he paid no more
attention to the eulOgieS of the Libre
Parole than to the statements of other
newspapers.
Replying to further questions, the
general said that when DreyfuS was
arrested he knew of no other proof
against him than the bOrdereau. There
were, therefore, only suspicious, but it
was urgently necessary not to lose time
in arresting him in order to stop the
reasonable practices.
THE "DIXI' /, LETTER
NJ Labor here asked Colonel Jou-
aust to secure the evidence of NJ. Pa
regard to the 'Dixi' letter, in which
the name of Dreyfus was disclosed as
that of the officer arrested for espion-
age.
AS Colonel Jouaust hesitated, NJ La
bOri insisted upon the necessity for an
examination of PapilIand. lin order to
reach the truth L am seeking for
The whole responsibility for this
case" counsel added, I believe really
rests upon the late Lieutenant Colonel
Henry and Colonel Du Patty de Clam .
Resuming his examination of Cen
era1 MERCER, NJ. Labor asked him sew
eral questions as to why at the first
ascribed date of the bordereau. April.
General MERCER said in 1894, that he
was only acquainted with the reasons
which existed for believing Dreyfus
guilty and had not paid much atten-
ton to the details.
The general refused to reply to many
clined to say whether he had examined
the proofs advanced against Dreyfus.
NJ. LabOri-In short, you considered it
in the nature of a sensational move to
have Drefus prosecuted and sent
enced? Did you examine previously
the charges against Dreyfus?
General Mercier-I only examined the
nature of the documents betrayed.
NJ. Labori-Was it not necessary for
| that purpose to fix the date of the Dor
dereau.
LET BYGONEs BE BYGONES.
Gen. Mercier-I do not think so.
Further, I declare NJ Labor is dis
cussing the whole trial of 1894. That
may have some interest from a histori-
cal point of view, but since the court
of cessation quaShed the judgment it
seems to me that it Is not for US now
to revert to the various features of
that trial.
NJ. Labor pointed out the contradic-
! lions in the evidence of the officers of
the headquarters staff regarding the
Importance and nature or the contents
of the bOrdereau and asked Gen. Mer-
cier where Dreyfus could have obtain
ed particulars about the pneumatic
brake.
The general holly objected to being
asked to repeat his evidence and NJ
Labor, equally warm, said: 4 am
only asking for definite statements
MERCER then said he thought Dreyfus
might have cognizance of the brake at
/ BOurgeS, adding: In any case, he had
a better chance to obtain such know
ledge than Esterhazy could possibly
! have had
NJ. Labori-Gen. MERCER says Drey-
fus might have had cogntzance. I de-
I sire to emphasize that expression. We
| shall now prove Dreyfus could not have
/ had cOgnizance of the brake.
| Counsel proceeded to demonstrate
| how vigorously the secret of the con-
/ structiOn of the brake was guarded,
| and asked why in 1894 the charge re-
| garding the Robin Melinite shells were
/ not dWelt upon.
Gen. Mercier-That arises from the
| simple fact that it was not known until
! 1896 or 1897 that information on the
| subject was being divulged. The exist
! ence of treachery in regard to the dis
! tributiOn of heavy artillery among the
| army corps was unknown until 1895
| KEEN INTEREST SHOWN.
The passages at arms between NJ.
I Labor and Gen. MERCER were followed
! with the keenest interest Both men
/ were wary and mutually suspicious of
| each other and there was cOnsiderab BILE
| acerbity, Col JOuaust at time finding
| it difficult in preventing the discussion
| from wandering outside legal paths
Continuing, NJ Labor asked why Gen.
| MERCER did not have a report prepared
regarding the confessions Dreyfus is
| alleged to have been made to Capt.
Gen. Mercier-The question of the
! confession was of Importance as a re
| vision of the case seemed impossible
NJ. LabOri-What does Gen. MERCER
| think of Esterhazy and the part he
| played?
Gen. Mercier-I do not know Ester
hazy and do not think about him at
all.
NJ. Labori-Did he know you at his
| trial in 1898?
Gen. Mercier-No.
Col. JOuaust-Gen. MERCER was not
minister of war then.
NJ. LabOri-This is most interesting.
| Gen. MERCER declares he knows moth
ing of the trial of 1898
Gen. NIercier-I know nothing of it;
I leave that to the court martial which
tried Esterhazy- I have only to an
swer in court for my acts and I refuse