The San Francisco call., 1899-08-20

weighty evidence of the treachery of
DreyfuS, Major Cuignet proceeded to re-
count in detail the. task which Genera!
Gonse assigned to him in May. 1898. OF
classifying the documents in the Dreyfus,
EsterhaZy and Picquart cases.
The first question ] will ask here, said
the witness is Is Dreyfus guilty? My
conviction of his guilt is based on three
grounds. First his confession to Captain
1ebrun-Renaud; second, the reasonable
nature of the contents of the bordereau;
third. the results of the examination of
the secret dOssier. / will add to these
three points the evidence or the expert
Bertillon daughter as indirect proof. the
means employed by the family of Dreyfus
to secure the prisoners rehabilitation. L
protest that a campaign has been under
taken against justice, truth and our coun-
try.
The majors outburst of heroics evoked
cynical smiles and indications of dissent.
coupled with marks of assent from the
assembled generals.
dossier of the War Ministry. containing
information relating to the interview be-
tween NJ. TrarieuSy former Minister OF
Justice and Count Ternielli. the Italian
ambassador. (which country" said Cuig-
net. benefited by the treachery.'
Regarding the confessions said to have
been made to Captain Lebrun-Renaud,
the witness said he still believed they
were authentic. adding: If people do not
believe the confessions to Captain Lebrun-
Renaud they will believe no human testi-
mony."
Continuing. the witness reasserted that
the bordereau was written by Dreyfus at
the end Of August. and incidentally the
major protested against Colonel Pic
quarts insinuatiOn against Du Patty de
Clam. He then returned TO the secret
dossier Of the War Office, from which. he
declared. the court was sure to draw i'm
portant deductions.
THE first portion of the dossier," he
said, "shows that in 1893 there was a con-
stant leakage in the Ministry Of War.
We have had proofs of the plans OF fortl-
fications reaching the hands of foreign
power 1t is known to a certainty from
the letter Of an agent of foreign power
that the stolen plans emanated from the
Ministry of War. A vast network OF es-
pionage had therefore been organized
against us headed by agents belonging
to the same power as A CColonel
Schwarzkoppen) the German military
attache. the agents of other powers also
collaborating"
Witness then invited the courts special
attention to this dossier, in which he saic
would be found ample proof OF the prls-
oner's guilt
At this stage of the proceedings Drey-
fus. rose and interrupted the witness
shouting: THAT is a manifest lie"
After this the witness recited in detail
his reasons for the belief that the agent
supplying the information was Frencf
staff officer. He then endeavored to show
that traffic with foreign military attaches
could only have been carried on by pro.
bationer in the department occupied by
DreyfuS.
The witness especially referred TO the
Panizzard telegram of November 2. 1894
which, he explained, left an impression OF
him that in 1894 DreyfuS was an old friend
of the Italian Government. Another doc
ument of the dossier, according to Major
Cuignet, showed beyond dispute that the
bordereau actually passed through tht
hands of Colonel Schwarzkoppen. This
TO the witness, established the authentic
ity of the bordereau, and examination OF
which he pointed out. proved Schwarz
koppen and Panizzardi had the closes
relations in all matters of espionage.
Referring next to the dispatch of Colo
mel Schneider. former Austrian military