The record-union., 1899-08-31

gard to the change in Esterhazys
handwriting in 1897, perhaps before,
am satisfied" (Commotion)
Professor Giry, also of the School OF
| Ancient Manuscripts, traversed about
the same ground covered by Professor
Molinier. He said the bordereau only
had superficial likeness to Dreyfus
handwriting, and asserted that it was
certainly the work of Esterhazy. The
witness also said the bordereau was
not written with the aid of key words
| M. Labori asked if the witness had
noted a change in Esterhazy's cali
graphy, and Professor Giry replied that
! he had studied the question, but did
not think there had been any marked
| change.
Counsel then asked whether General
Mercier had meant to intimate that
Esterhazy's handwriting had become
more or less like that of Dreyfus since
| 1894, to which the General replied that
he had not wished to express an opin-
ion, but he reiterated that M. BertilIon
had shown that Esterhazy's handwrit-
ing had become more like that of the
bordereau.
Mercier should not have repeated the
evidence of Grenier before the Court
of Cessation, as Grenier showed that
Esterhazy's caligraphy had become less
and less like the writing of the bor
dereau and of Dreyfus.
M. Bertillon, at this juncture, said he
desired to speak, but the President of
the court, Colonel Jouaust, hastily rose
and said amidst laughter: 1.-THE sitting
is suspended
Then NJ. Bertillon resumed his seat
in high dudgeon.
On the resumption of the sitting NJ.
Georges Picot, member of the In
stitute, was called for the defense, NJ
Demange, of counsel for the prisoner,
explaining that Picot was summoned
because in May last he had an inter-
view with a foreign military attache,
in the course of which mention was
made of the document inserted in the
dossier by General Mercier
Colonel Jouaust cautioned the witness
to be careful in his statements
Then, after promising to use care,
Picot started with saying that he had
an interview with the Austro-Hun-
garian military attache.
Colonel Jouaust stopped the witness
saying: you cannot continue like
this
Major Carriere, the Government Com
missary, also exclaimed sharply: 'I
protest in the name of the Government
at the statement and the indiscretfon
committed by the witness"
NJ. PicOt then recommended his tes-
timony, saying he had an interview
with certain military attache. and
that the conversation turned upon the
Dreyfus case. The attache expressed
surprise at the incorrect attitude of
French officers. sin doubling the word
of foreign officers
My impression" added the witness.
"was that he was anxious to assert
firmly and unequivocally the absolute
innocence of Dreyfus. (Sensation.)
Regarding the bordereau," contin-
ued NJ. Picot, "the attache said only
three documents enumerated were re-
ferred to, the fact being that the 9TH
ers were padding meant to swell the
dossier''
The witness noticed that the at
tache employed the expression "hv-
draulic BRAKE" and neven pneumatic
brake"
In regard to Esterhazy M. Picot
said the attache declared that he con-
sidered him a swindler. The attache
also asserted that Esterhazy had rela
tions with Colonel Schwarzkoppen. who
dismissed him because Esterhazy al
WAYS brought information devoid of
interest.
1T was then" continued Picot. that
far~1aa 4,~io
fee, and almost succeeded. and it was
then that he wrote to Colonel Schwarz-
koppen what is since known as the bor
dereau- In reply to the writer of the
bordereau. Colonel Schwarzkoppen
wrote the telegram card known as the
petit bleu, but on reflection he crumpled
1t up and threw it into the fireplace"
AT this juncture General Roget asked
leave to speak, and stationing himself
beside the witness. said he must strong
ly protest against NJ. Picot's evidence
regarding the military attaches sur
prise at the fact that French officers
did not believe their foreign colleagues.
What does the witness think" con-
tinued Roget. "of the foreign officer.
who, having caused the publication in
the Figaro of a denial of a statement
Oh NSHeFdl MeFcler. was afterWarde y
obliged to acknowledge the authorship
of document the paternity of which
he at first denied?"
M. Picot retorted that he had only
repeated statements made to him. and
had abstained from comments on them.
He had, therefore, nothing to say in
reply to General Roget's questions
M. Demange, intervening, asked Cen
eral Roget if he did not think the for
eign officers mistake was excusable
since the word report" had been an
piled to a document not possessing the
character of the report.
''It is not for me to accuse or ex-
cuse," replied the General II conffne
myself to pointing out to the court
that the conversation repeated occurred
in May, that is to say, at the time
the investigation of the Court of Cas-
sation was already known. For my
part I only intervened because French
officers have been arraigned, and when
being accused. French officers have the
os% Y