The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1899-08-19
DREYFUS
FLARES UP.
Calls One of the Witnesses
Against Him Liar.
Reference to the Evidence of
nj. BertillOn
CAUSES LAUGHTER.
Army Officers Continue to Ar
que the Case.
Offering Their Own Opinions
Instead of Facts.
CAUSES LAUGHTER.


Instead of Facts.
Rennes. Aug. 19-No special incident
occurred this morning when the second
trial by court martial of Capt Alfred
Dreyfus of the Fourteenth artillery
charged with treason. was resumed at
the Lycee.
The first witness called today was
Major Cuignet, formerly attached to
the ministry of war.
The witness who declared he was
convinced of the prisoners guilt was
cross-examined by NJ Demange, of
counsel for the defense, who succeeded
in pointing out that several of his
statements contradicted his previous
dispositions.
The president of the court. Col. Jou-
aust asked Dreyfus if he had anything
to say, whereupon the prisoner rose
and again Vehemently protested against
the denunciations 1evelled against him,
an innocent man.
Gen. De Boisdeffre was the next wit
ness called.
THE EVIDENCE.
Following is the evidence in detail:
Major Cufgnet. the first witness called
was not in uniform as he is not at
present attached to any corps: Before
beginning an account of the special IN
Vestigatfons into the case which was
ordered to make by ministers OF war
from NJ CaVaignac to NJ. Freycinet."
said the witness. I wish to mention
personal fact which in conjunction with
the evidence already heard Will cOnst1-
Iute fresh proof OF the prisoner s mas
Greet behavior when employed on the
headquarters staff [ was on the stan
when Dreyfus was a prObatiOner, dur
ing the latter half of 1898. Among 9th
er duties I was connected with the
railroad service and the mining OF rail-
roads with the view of interruptlng
traffic in case of need. It is hardly nee
essary to point out the secret charac-
ter Of such matters. DreyfuS was a
probationer on the eastern railroads
and had been ordered to specially study
the mining on them and possessed in
formation relating solely to them. One
day Dreyfus asked me to give him the
general scheme of mining which l pos
sessed, giving as a reason for his re-
quest that he was anxious to increase
his knowledge and that it was neces-
sary for him to know the general
scheme in order to properly carry out
the work entrusted to him. I replied
that I did not see the necessity OF CIV
ing him the scheme and that in any
case he had better apply to his own
chief. Major Bertin. Dreyfus pretend
ed Berth would not impart any infOr-
nation. Day after day he pestered me
so that finally having no reason to dis
trust him began giving him xplana-
tions Dreyfus displayed the keenest
later his house was searched these
notes were not discoverable. do not
know what became of them. But il is
difficult to believe they were destroyed
considering the Importance he seemed
to attach to the information and the
persistence shown in procuring it
After launching the above declara-
ton, which he apparently considered
to be weighty evidence of the treachery
of Dreyfus. Major Cuignet proceeded to
recount in detail the task which Cen
Csonse assigned to him in May, 1898 of
classifying the documents in the Drey-
fus. Esterhazy and Picquart cases.
The first question 1 viii ask here,
is said the witness, is Dreyfus guilty2
My conviction of his guilt is based on
three grounds:
.'F'irst-His confession to Capt Le-
brun- Renault-
'Second-The technical nature of the
contents of the bordereau.
''Third-The results of the examina-
tion of the secret dossier.
EVERYBODY LAUGHS.
Il will add to these three points the
evidence of the expert, Bertillon, Qaugh-
teri. IS indirect proof of the meaps
employed by the Dreyfus family to Sc
cure the prisoners rehabilitation.
I protest that a campaign has been
undertaken against Justice, truth and
our country
The majors outburst of heroics
evoked cynical smiles and indications
of dissent coupled with marks of as
The witness next spoke of the secret
dossier of the war ministry, containing
information relating to the interview
between NJ. Trarieux. former minister
of justice and Count Ternielli the
Italian ambassador. Which company"
said Cuignet. benefited by the
1reachery2
Regarding the confessions said to
have been made to Captain Lebrun-
Renault witness said he still believed
they were authentic. adding. If people
DO not believe the confessions to Capt
Lebrun- -Renault they win believe no
human testimony
Continuing. the witness FeaSserted
that the bordereau was written by
Dreyfus at the end of August and in
cidentally the major protested against
Col Picquart's insinuations 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 important deductions.
CONSTANT LEAKAGE
The first portion of the dossier." he
said, shows that in 1898 there was a
constant leakage in uhe ministry of
war. We have had proofs of the plans
or fortihcations reaching the hands
OF foreign power. 1t is known to
a certainty from letter of
an agent of foreign power that
the stolen plans emanated from the
ministry of war. A vast network of
espionage had therefore been orga nized
against US, headed Dy agents belong
ing TO the same power as A Colonel
Schwartzkoppen, the German military
ATTACHED, the agents of other powers
also collaborating
Witness then invited the courts
special attention TO this dossier in
which ne said would be found ample
proof OF. the prisoners guilt
~ this stage Of the proceedings