New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1899-08-30
WITNESSES AT RENNES.

Colonel COrdier's testimony at Rcnnes yester-
day was equally entertaining and impressive
This officer was Deputy Chief Of the Intelli-
cence Bureau under Colonel Sandherr al the
time Of the arrest Of Captain Dreyfus. He was
therefore familiar perhaps more familiar than
any other man now living-with the occurrences
Of that time He was recently released by the
Minister of War from all obligations IF profess
sional secrecy and therefore spoke Yesterday
with entire freedom snd with most refreshing
frankness.
The salient feature n his testimony was that
relating 10 the date OF the bordereau. or Of its
reception az the War Office from the back stairs
sneak thief who IS said 10 have secured it from
q waste paper basket Down 10 September o.
1894, he said nothing had been heard Of the Dor
dereau. and there had been only one leakage Of
information on that date he left Paris for
fortnight The day after his return Colonel
Sandherr showed him a copy Of the bordereau
which had been brought 10 him 10y Henry. the
forger That fixes the date of the bordereau as
not prior 10 September %. But since then the
prosecutors Of Captain Dreyfus have fixed il 5
in MAY The witness said that he never con
sidered the bordereau convincing proof Of the
guilt Of Captain Dreyfus, but when he heard
that the court martial had unanimously voted 10
cOnvict him he reckoned he must be guilty. sup
posing some other valid evidence to that effect
had been presented But now. knowing that
there could have been no other valid evidence
hut that the whole case must have rested upon
The hordereau and that the date Of The latter
had been dishonesty altered by the prosecution
he had changed his mind and believed Captain
Dreyfus 10 be innocent In that all fair minded
men will sympathize with him. Captain Frey
staetter on Saturday testified that not only So
crct bur garbed and forged documents We're
submitted n the Judges in the 1894 court mar
tial Now Colonel COriicr tells ". gith indiS
putab:e M. hcrty thar TN horGcTonc itself was
caIbled as 10 IFS date Honesty dated it would
have lad no force. they put upon il date
which they know 70 he false il oydcT To make it
count AGAINST C8Ttair Dreyius If such villany
was necdful 10 secure 4 conviction. who can be
leve the conviction was Just? Two other points
l Colonel Cordcrs testimony are 10 be noted
with plo2SUrr One is that ne unhosifatingly
branded General Roget's testimony as a pack of
lies, and the other that he scattered 10 the winds
the wretched c2inmny about Captain Drcyfus's
brother and his alleged attempt 10 bride Colonel
Sandhcrr. in tho rofutatOn Of which libel il is
to be observed. he compelled even General Aler
cier IN Join him
Another interesting witness was NJ. De Frey
cnet. one Of the most experienced and respected
statesmen in France. His testimony was brief
aud bore not directly upon the guilt or innocence
OF Captain Dreyfus but upon the attitude Of the
Government toward the case and toward the re
vision thereof. He showed the utter emptiness
Of the mares nest which General MERCER had
discovered relating 10 tho raising Of $1,000 900
abroad for the defence Of Captain Dreyfus, and
then dwelt with much emphasis upon his desire
to sec the whole controversy ended and peace
and unity restored 10 France In that latter
sentiment all can cordially agree with this ven
cradle statesman. All can sympathizc with him,
too. when he says that daily TO depict the army
chiefs in the blacklist colors must have q fatal
effect upon military discipline Yes. But what
would be the effect upon the army and the whole
naticn If the conviction were reached that the
army had become a tyTannical power. superior
10 law and justice? That, it strikes us. would
be even more deplorabe and more dangerous
To shake the confidence Of soldiers in their
chiefs would be bad TO destroy the confidence
u the nation in the army would be fatal
General Roget also went upon the stand again