The age-herald., 1899-08-19
 DIRTY WORK OF HENRY AND ESTERHAZY
Leakage at Headquarters and How Major Lauth Conducted Negotiations
 With the Spy.

Turning to the leakage at headquarterS, the witness described the negotiations or Major Lauth with the spy Richard Cuers, at Basle showing how the spy promised information about the leakage and how he Picquart, was induced to allow Lieu tenant Colonel Henry to accompany Major Lauth to Basic.
 Picauart also described the vague replies of Henry when questioned on the subject of Esterhazy before his departure and the futility of the visit to Basic because oi Cuers' refusal, when he saw Henry to im- part the promised information. This incl dent caused the witness to wonder whether, instead of trying to make Cuefs sreak, Henry and Lauth had not done everything possible to impose silence upon him.
 Before the Basic incident, Colonel Pic quart had decided to speak to General De Boisdeffre about Esterhazy.
 In answer to my request" said the witness, "General De Boisdeffre wrote me asking me to meet him at the train on his arrival from vichy While driving from the railroad station to the generals hotel told him all had done in regard to Es- l ttihazy. I affirm that General De Bois- deGre knew that this question was to re-
 main a secret between us and that I was not tc mention it except to the minister of war.
 Wanted to Enter War Office "I kriew Esterhazy was anxious to enter the war office and I did not regard his de- sire faverably. I communicated my ini- pressions to my chiefs who approved all my steps and the application of Esterhazy wss rejeo ted. His insistance, however, l only increased my uneasiness regarding 1 him. and I resolved to obtain a specimen | or his handwriting. I was immediately | struck with tho similarity of his hand | writing and that of the berdereau, and, | forthwith, l had the letters of Esterhazy, which were in my possession, photograph | ed and slowed the photographs to Major | Du Paty de Clam and M Bertillon (hand- | writing e1perD between August 9 and | September B."
 The colonel emphasized this point be- l cause M Bertullus affirms that he saw the | photographs in May, in 1896, and made a 1 note of them whereas the letters were not l written on that date. The conflicting tes- | timony of Picquart and Beruillon on this l point that had been used would discreddt 1 the formers evidence. Colonel Picquart, | continuing, said, Dupaty De Clam, on see ing the writing, forthwith declared 1t was that of Matuhew Dreyfus, the brother of | Captain Dreyfus.
 The witness, continuing, safd: You | know. he maintained that the bordereau l is the joint work of Alfred and Matthew l Dreyfus.' M. Bertillon said That is the | writing of the bordereau.
 r l had obtained the handwriting, but the only | information I imparted was that it was | current and recent handwriting. M. Bertillon then suggested that it was
 a tracing, and ended by saying that if it was current handwriting it could only have | emanated from some one whom the Jews
 had been exercising for year in initiating | the writing of the bordereau. Beyond All Doubt "At M BertHon's request I left the pho 1 totgraphs with him. When he returned them | he said he adhered to his opinion, and | earnestly asked to see the original When | l saw beyond doubt that the handwriting I of the bordereau was Esterhazy's, and I seeing that documents mentioned therein | might have been supplied by Esterhazy, 1 that the words I am going to the maneu- | vres' could perfectly well apply to Esterha- | zy, and that Esterhazy had secretaries at | his disposal to copy document so voIumi- | nous at the firing manual. resolved to | consult the secret dossier to see what part
 of the treachery might be ascribed to
 Dreyfus and to assure myself whether the | dossier contained anything discriminating l get his advice.
 "I frankly admit was stupefied on read | ing the secret dossier. I expected to find
 matters of gravity therein and found in | short, nothing but documnt which might | apply just as to much to Esterhazy as to | Dreyfus. an unimportant document, men | tioning D'Avignon, and a document which
 1t seemed absurd to apply to Dreyfus, I namely, the 'Cette Canaille De D. docu- | ment.
 Lastly I recognized a report appended | in the handwriting of Guene, which ap- | peared to be at least worthless as the sec | ond document. It was then evening. had | stayed late alone at the office in order to examine the documents thoroughly. I
 -'.