The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1899-08-26


whose names were not familiar to the
audience, setting forth that Colonel pu
Patty de clamis too ~ 70 leave he bed,
At Rehnes, at which the audience was
not surprised.
Madame Du Patty de Clam also wrote
to the government commiSsary ofr6riug
q written supplementary depOdtiop
from her husband.
n. Labori. after securing the names
Of the two doctors who signed the GER
tlhcate, asked the court to appoint two
well known physicians to report otici'
ally on Du Patty de CLAIMS condition.
Colonel Jouaust however. declared It
was useless to do 80, as the condition
Of the Invalid was well known.
Rowland Strong. correspondent Of the
New York. Times, and member Of the
stan of the Observer, Of London, was
the Arst witness called, he described
at length interviews which he had with
Esterhazy, saying the Observer offered
Esterhazy $500 for certain documents
and confession that he wrote the bor-
dereau, as published April IS,
Replying to the court, Mr., Strong said
that Esterhazy, while admitting the au-
thorshIp Of the bordereau. said the
documents enumerated IN It had been
betrayed by Dreyfus to Germany,
The evidence Of the handwriting e1-
perts followed. ~. Colbert, after tess
tifying to the facts publishedApril Z.
and April q, vehemently protested
against the insinuatl0n that he was
an interested witness. BE referred 70
his thirty years Of service during which
he mad reported on thousands Of docu.
Inents, and added, viBibly Rffected; u
protest against the term interested e1-
pert" adding, turning towards the
prisoner. "nfter all ! have no right 10
Complain when look at this untortun-
ate man before you" (Great sensA-
dom,
The court closely followed u. Co
bert's exhaustive story OF MS e1alnln-
alton Of the bordereau, and his inter
view with Generals Mercier, De Bols-
deffre and Gonse.
writing Of the bordereau was naturh
and fluent, but that II was almost illeg-
ibie, whereas Dreyfui, even when Wrl!.-
ing rapidly, always wrote most lesl'
Gonse's Refusal.
The witness asked General eouse II
an envelope accompanied the borde-
reau. as he, NJ. Colbert, wished to see
what the writer's careful callgraphy
was like, explaining that the address OF
a letter is always in a drmer hand than
Its contents. -.,...
General Gonse refused the request,
on the ground that the witness must
not know the name Of the aqoressee;
The general also refused TO alloW tne
bordereau TO be photographed alleglns
that IL the war office photographers
,,sre allowed to photograph It all Paris
,voiild he acquainted with the bordereau
Inc next day. (Laughter). TheFeupon
the witness remarked; General Come;
thls Is a very interesting confession On: ~ !.
n. Colbert then suggested that tne
work BE- entrusted to the prefecture OF
police. where NJ. BeFtillon is the pno-
fJntil then, the witness also said, ne
had never heard Of NJ. Bertlllon 40
handwriting expert, saying ne peca,Ile
an expert for this special OCCASION
when he was called in the war ONCE
CLaughter). -. 81.
Testimony, was greatly enraged Wnen
he learned Of the result OF M Go0eItS -.
examination OF the bordereau' anu w
tied the expert repeatedly. Lne ~. ~.
ter always insisted upon learning the
name Of the suspect. o.A...
at was not proper, salu ~: SoOSlt ~
aSoT me TO accuse any one without be-
inc perfectly cognizant OF the facts, es-
nseIaIly In circumstances OF so grave
nature (sensation). would not ac-
euse any one anonymously for 70 40
"a. would be contrary to The law
Amidst laughter in the court, the
,vitnesE described how, from an exam
Instion Of an official report on DreyIus,
from which Dreyfus's name hna peen
ranaoved. NJ, Colbert had the malicious
astiSfactIon OF telling General Gohse
ne name Of the officer they Wanteu 10
arrest. 80. "a ,.s,,,sd
to incrlmlnate Dreyfug that M. beLu-
ION was entrusted with the eKainltla. ~.
lion OF the bordereau, and, atter tew IN
hours, study, N. Bertlllon positively AZ
.Sih,,od the bordereau 70 DreytuS.
Etorn that time forward II. Gopert
bssrd no more OF the DreyfuB case he
vas not asked to submit a report, but
IsgnrIbed II to the then minister 9L
tNStjne N. Guerin, the circumstance IN
tSe case. NJ. Guerin, continued the
.I.I,rSs1 III IntITnated that "theBe were
'oidIsrS; ,sffairs,' which did not concern
him as chief Of the civil judiciary
In Favor of DreyfnS,
Colonel Jouaust asked n. Colbert for
n more definite criticism Of the borde-
reau nnd the witness replied that he
1,,,osd certnIn slmIlarities between the
hondWritInr Of the bOrdereau and that
- DrevfuS. but, he added, there were
many important differences Whloh
proved 10 him that Dreyfus was not
Inc author OF the bordereau, anu hIs
opInlon had since been cohnrmen, pc
cause IL was now proved the DoE9eteAu
was the work Of EsteFhaEy. (senSa-
tlonl. -, \, ooh.r+ arg.
Eested that the Judges eompase the he
IN EsterhaEy's handwriting, and dated
Rn,,en August II, 1885,. and with uocu-
nnentG written by the prisoner
,fYou will then unmlBtnknbly reeoB-
n,zeS M, Colbert added, "that the bor-
dereau IA in EsterhaEy,B handWElunt,;; :;
and not In the handwriting OF DreytuS'
(Grent sensRtion). - ,,.,.t-
The witness at this lunctule luS, u,sI,
aad tho bordereRu as the same which
Vas ,,y submitted to him. and he proceed
wi m noInt out the identity Of letters
,barein with letters In documents ad-
nIttedly written by Esterhazy, saying
TINT while the resemblance was not ap-
nnTent 1"Ts in Dreyfus's handwriting IN
Esterhazy's, there were marked peou-
iiorJiles OF punctuation and the man
ner of beginning lines which Were aiHo
~. - q, Nho tnrdnFpnl. but Whlch