Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1899-08-15
HIS ENEMIES ON TIE STAND,
Continued from First Page

Continued from First Page
formation showed the necessity of con-
tlnuing the reforms in our artillery
commenced by that great initiator,
Gen. MERCER. |. who am neither an
engineer nor an expert in handwriting, :"
added Gen. BilloI, saw in that direc-
ton the grand work he accomplished. :"
After this Gen. Billot referred to Col.
Picquart's proposition to entrap Ester
hazy, whom he suspected. but Gen.
Billot forbade this. He added that Col.
Picquart always acted without author
ity. Gen. Billot next referred to the
eminent services Picquart rendered the
army leading TO his being entrusted
with confidential mission to the east
afterwards to TuniS. He energetically
protested against the allegation that
he had desired TO send Col. Picquart
to place from which he would never
return. He explained his devotion to
the country and army and anxiety re-
specting the secrets of the national de-
tense often entailed exceptional meas
ures, like resignation and going to dis
tant points from which it was possible
" 1Clul IL Will d ouOCliOi lam anu
where heroism certainly wiped out
everything except treason. (Sensa-
ton.
After justifying his course towards
Col. Picquart, Gen. Billot explained
what he had done in connection with
Esterhazy He then renewed his pro-
tests against the attack the defenders
of Dreyfus made upon him during the
trial of M lola. and concluded with
expressing regret that while in power
he was Obliged to devote most OF his
time to the Dreyfus affair, which time,
lie added, ought to have been given to
the guardianship of the national de-
Tense.
M. Demange invited Gen. Billot to
explain the statements of MN. Bar
thou and Poincare, former ministers,
that the general was once so doubtful
of the guilt of Dreyfus that he did not
sleep for several nights.
Gen. Billot acknowledged the state
mentS were true.
Answering questions of counsel, the
general said Col Picquart's revelations
produced doubts in his mind, but, he
added all the same his conviction OF the
guilt of Dreyfus remained unchanged.
There was a great sensation when M.
Demange mentioned the opinion express
sed by NJ. Barthou that Gen. Billot had
been forWarned in regard to the torg-
ery Of Lieut.. Colonel Henry. The gem
eral acknowledged that the Henry forg-
ery was among the factors arouslng
his doubts.
Continuing Gen. Billot said he was
immensely surprised and deeply affect
ed by the revelation of the forgery.
He said: Il never could have believed
a superior officer could be guilty OF
forgery"
M. Cavaignac, former minister OF
war. was the next witness called. Re
plying to the president of the court
he said he was the first cabinet minister
to assume responsibility to Dreyfus.
He had closely followed the inquiry of
the court of cessation and still desired
to associate himself with the response
bility of those who, in 1894, protected
the country and the army against
treason. (Sensation.)
Continuing, the witness said that
among the principal points upon which
he based his conviction was the con-
fession to Captain Lebrun-Renault In
support of which contention he quoted
a passage from an alleged letter OF
Dreyfus, but which in reality was part
of Gen. Comes report OF the minister
of war on Col. Dupaty de Clam S report
of the alleged confession.
NJ. Cavaignac admitted the possibility of
mistakes in human testimony and said
they ought to be taken into account when
condemning fellow man. But, he assert
ed, he was convinced of the guilt of Drey-
fus because his accusers were so entirely
in agreement in their testimony.
According to NJ Cavaignac, even in his
attempts to hide his crime, the accused
had allowed words to escape him which
indisputably established his guilt Every
thing according TO this witness, con-
demned Dreyfus, and he claimed, in spite
of the prisoners denials, it was established
that he had been everywhere where ii was
necessary to procure the information in
question.
1t was impossible, according to NJ
Cavaignac, to credit that Esterhazy was a
traitor, even admitting the bordereau was
written by him. Esterhazy, he insisted
could have only acted as the Intermediary
of an accompice The inquiry of the court
of cessation proved treason was really
committed. and he, NJ. Cavaignac, had not
based his conviction of the culpability of
Dreyfus solely on the handwriting of the
bordereau. In the secret dossier, he point
ed out, there were many elements for con-
viction and he proposed 10 discuss all the
allegations made by foreigners with the
view of excupating Dreyfus.
Col Jouaust asked NJ. Cavaignac 10 ex-
plain the discovery of the Henry forgery
and the witness repeated the statements
he had already made on the subject.
The Henry forgery said NJ Cavaignac,
''as alleged, was in order TO secure a re-
vision of the case by the court of eassa-
ton and was not even alluded 10. This
forgery. therefore, should remain outside
the scope of the questions submitted TO
this court-martial. That is my opinion"
Replying TO another question, NJ. Cavaig-
nae said his statement that Dreyfus went
to Brussels in the middle of 1894 rested
on hear-say.
NJ Cavaignac introduced during the
course of his evidence, a memorandum
written in German, asking for various in
formation. wanted by the embassy which
appears TO have been unearthed from the
archives of the bureau of information Of
the war office. He said he believed it was
written by a military attache
NJ. Demange asked why NJ Cavaignac
who was so DESTROYS to incriminate Drey-
fus. had not produced this document in
the chamber of deputies. The witness re-
piled that he had other means Of reaching
the ends Col Jouaust then told Dreyfus
!.