Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1899-08-16

Did you ever hear, Col. Jouaust asked
the witness, ''of letter Col Henry is said
to have addressed to Major Esterhazy?'
Never" replied Madame Henry.
On leaving the witness box Madame
Henry looked sternly at the prisoner.
Roget ON the stand.
General Roget followed. He traversed
the old ground. giving his reasons for his
conviction Of the guilt Of Dreyfus He de-
clared there was no charge against Ester
hazy. with the exception of the resemblance
of his handwriting to that of the bordereau.
Moreover. the witness added, there had
been new fact since the judgment Of the
court of caSSation-namely, EsterhaZy's
confession that he wrote the bordereau.
But. he added. Esterhazy advanced and
withdrew his confession internationally. If
Esterhazy had rendered services to the in
telligence department there would have
been traces of them in the cash book. But
no money had been paid Esterhazy, though,
even supposing he worked out of pure
benevoience. he would have been paid. Yet
there was no trace of such payments. Es-
terhazy had said he wrote the bordereau
under the orders of Col. Sandherr.
But" declared Gen. Roget, Il, who knew
Col. Sandherr we'll. declare this false. Col.
Sandherr was absolutely incapable of such
an order. / add that it is inadmissible be-
cause Col. Sandherr was the last person to
know of the existence of the bordereau,
which received in the ordinary way.
This bordereau was handed to Col. Henry
and was brought by him to the intelligence
department. 1t was shown to others by
Col Henry after he had pieced it together.
Col Sandherr only saw it later.
Esterhazy has also said the document
was stolen from an embassy and brought
by porter. 1t is false to say the intelli-
gence department ever had any relations
with a porter of that embassy. 1t is pos
sible EsterhaZy is preparing some surprises
for us between now and the end of the
trial. They won't disturb me any more
ntE wis
Referring to the question of the COM
plicity of Henry and Esterhazy, the witness
said:
eff Henry had been the accomplice of
Esterhazy now can it be admitted that he
himself brought the bordereau. which
might have caused him to be suspected. TO
the intelligence department.
General Roget while tesufying constant
ly turned toward the prisoner to see the
impression made by his deposition, which
was virtually a speech for the prosecution.
Scene With Col. Henry.
The general discoursed lenghtily on the
famous scene with Colonel Henry in the
office of NJ. Bertulus, the examining magis-
trate, and said NJ. Bertulus asked Henry to
inform the witness that he. M. Bertulus,
was a friend of the army, and begged the
witness to call and see him when he would
communicate the result of his investiga-
lions into the Blanche and "Speranza''
forgeries.
I'm reply said General Roget, IT said:
when you see ii. Bertulus, you will
thank him in my behalf. Tell him the in
vestigation does not interest me in any
way.
Il added that 1 was rather distrustful of
this proposal, which, l pointed out, was
perhaps trap.
The general added that NJ. Cavagnac
Uhen minister OF war; approved of his
course toward NJ. Bertulus.
The general next dwelt on the seizure of
hDilSp al Madame
which M. Bertulus largely founded his con-
viction of the guilt of Henry, owing to the
mention in them of the name of spy,
Richard at Cuers and Basic. where. it
was well-known, spies were in the habit of
meeting. Then the general tried to refute
M. Bertulus' statements. declaring Henry
brought three of these documents to the
war office, and that they did not contain
the mention of Basic or Cuers, as stated by.
NJ. Bertulus.
The latter, however, has already shown
before the whole court of cessation that,
while he was mistaken in saying The words
appeared in those documents. they did not
appear in other papers seized at Nine.
Pays residence.
and more excited, frequently wiped the per-
SEPARATION from his brow and moistened his
lips with water.
Roget Makes a Declaration.
At this point the general thought it de-
srable to make a declaration that he did
not desire it to be said that he questioned
the good faith of some of the witnesses
who had been heard. He added:
II make this statement so that there shall
be no misunderstanding, and in order that
my words be not msinterpreted. Never
theleSs, their testimony is open to criticism,
even as our utterances are criticised
Continuing, the witness said:
m. Casimir-Perier deposed before the
court of cessation that an ambassador call
lay nj al 1nrfa oil 1.f Cfn
ment that important documents were found
at his embassy. The ambassador, now
ever, knew it was a fact. But, admitting
that he did not know 1t, there is nothing
surprising in the occurrence. in view of the
facility with which attache "a Il don't
mention his name, as the minister has for
hidden it, allowed compromising letters to
lie around. l read one such letter, which
was very compromising to a person whose
name 1 cannot mention. Why. therefore,
should not the bordereau go astray?'
The general insisted upon the truth of
the statement that military attaches "a
ard D. under which letters he referred
TO Col. ScnwartZkoppen of the German en-
bassy at Paris and Maj PaniZZardi of the
Italian embassy at the French capital at
the time. worked together almost daily,
and he quoted a passage from a letter ex-
changed between them, as follows:
M. Hanotaux, the SLY fellow, is glad at
the embassy's denying. The embassy must
deny
Dreyfus' Name In document.
In the same document, declared Gen.
Roget was a name written twice, and the
NAME he asserted, was that of Dreyfus.
The name of EsterhaZy, he added. was not
found in any of the documents, none Of
which could be ascribed to him with the
exception of the Petit Bleu, which Col.
Picquart discovered in such an extraordi-
nary matter"
The witness said he then felt great I'M
easiness in regard to the document con-
tanning the words, "cette canaille de D.
A certain military attache said the gen
erai later on in his testimony, informed
Col. Sandherr that there was some one who
initiated mis- handwriting perfectly. The
lame of Dubois" the witness said, was
found in the correspondence of the military
attaches.
Dubois, the general explained. was an
unfortunate who futilely tried to sell the
secret of the smokeless powder used in the
French army.
If said Gen. Roget, mo person can be
found whom the initial D. can apply, to
whom does it then apply?'
AS he made this remark the witness faced
about and looked fixedly at the prisoner,
who. however, merely shrugged his Shoul-
ders.
Now continued the general "the ex-
plantations furnished this point by Nj.
Trarieux (former minister of juStice) trou-
bled me somewhat but 1 do not insist
Here General Roget paused. the excite
ment under which he was laboring being