The San Francisco call., 1899-08-17

to inform the witness that he, NJ. 'Ber,,
tulus, was a friend of the army, and
begged the witness to call and see now
he would communicate the result of his
! conversations into blanche and "sper-
ANA" forgerieS.
IN replyf' said General Roget, ~ said:
! When YOU see NJ. Bertulus you VIII thank
him in my behalf. Tell him the inVestlga-
tion does not interest me in any way; l
added that | was rather dlstrustful OF TINS
proposal which. l pointed out, was per-
haps a trap.
The court next dwelt on the seizure of
papers at the house of Madame Pays, on
which NJ. Bertulus largely founded ms
conviction of the guilt of Henry. owing
to the mention in them of the name OF
spy, Richard at Cuers and Basic, Where
ii was we'll known spies We're in the haplt
! of meeting Then the general tried 10 re
flute NJ Bertulus' statements, declaring
that Henry brought three of these docu-
ments to the War Department ana that
they did not contain the mention OF BaSle
or Cuers, as stated by NJ. Bertulus. The
latter, however, has already shown before
the whole Court of Cessation that whlie
he was mistaken in saying the WORDS APP
peared in those documents, they did not
appear in other papers seized at Madame
Pays residence.
General Roget, who was becoming more
! and more excited, frequently wiped per-
spiration from his brow and moistened his
| lips with water. At this point the gen.
eraI thought it desirable to make a decla-
ration that he did not desire it to be said
that he questioned the good faith of some
witnesses who had been heard. lie adoed.
II make this statement. so that there
! shall be no misunderstanding and in order
that my words may not be nlslnterpfeteo.
Nevertheless their testimony is open to
criticism, even as our utterances are crlu-
cised.''
mir-Perier sdeposed before the Court of
Cessation that an ambassador called to
make official denial of the statement that
Important documents We're found at his
I ia,,, Ih.a IT SG4EiOr. however.
knew it was a fact. But admitting that
he did not know it, there is nothing sur
prisfng in the occurrence. in view OF the
facility with which attache (don men
ton his name, as the Minister has for
hidden III allowed compromising letters to
! lie around. l read one such letter which
! was very compromising to person whose
name cannot mention. why; therefore
should not the bOrdereau go astray?'
The general insisted upon the truth OF
the statement that military attaches "A
and "B" under which letters he referred
to Colonel SchwartZkoppen of the Ger
man embassy at Paris and Major Paniz-
capital at the time, worked together al
most daily, and he quoted passage from
a letter exchanged between them, as FOL
lows: M. Hanotaux, the sly fellow, is
glad that the embassy is denying. Inc
embassy must deny"
In the same document, declared General
Roget, was name written; ana the
name he asserted. was that or 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
Colonel Picquart discovered in such an
extraordinary manner, ,.
The witness then said he felt great un-
easiness IN regard to the document con
tanning the words "Cette canaille de
D." A certain military attache, said the
EoeneI later pa sandherr nr tha there was
some one who initiated his handwriting
perfectly. The name of Dubois, the wit
the military attaehe. Colonel Dubois, the
general explained, was an unfortunate
| officer" who futilely tried to sell the Sc
cret of the smokeless powder used IN the
II" II said al General Roget, mo other per-
| son can be found to whom the initial y
! AS he made this remark the witness
| faced about and looked fxedly at the
| prisoner, who, however, merely shrugged
! his shoulders
Vow continued the general, "the ex-
! plantations furnished on this point by M.
| Trarieux former Minister of Justice)
troubled me somewhat, but don't In
Here General Roget paused, the excite
ment under which he was laboring being
! ing voice he continued: ''And yet, in the
| presence of disinterested testimony like
mine, you will not allow preference to be
| shown to the evidence of persons who
have benefited by treason"
At this point the general broke down
| and tears StreameQ GOWN MS cHSehS.
Resuming his testimony, the general set
| to work in his effort to prove the guilt
| of Dreyfus He declared there were
traces of treason in every paragraph of
the bordereau, and, that Preyfus alone not
Esterhazy could have been acquainted
with the plans It contained He criticised
| the deposition of Major Hartmann of the
| Twenty-second Artillery In regard to this
! point. -
! ground trying to prove that Dreyfus
! alone was aware Of the secrets of the
| new artillery guns, Of the plans for the
! concentration of troops and the contents
! of the firing manual. He then endeavored
! to show that Colonel Picquart had re-
! course to fraudulent methods, with the
usvnVrnN rTkIN