Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1899-09-03
TIDE HAS TURNED,
50 It Seems as Regards
the RenneS Trial,
THE OREYFUSITES ELA[ED'
Judges Must ACquit Prisoner Alter
Yesterdays Session.
STRONG pRO-DREYFUs TESTIMONY.
r, stands Practically Uncontesteu'
Too. Neither Mercier Nor "onse NJ
futing Any Material Poin'-iro
ceedinGs in Detail.
STRONG pRo-DREYFUs TESTIMONY.
ceedings in Detail.

PENNIES. September 2.-Elation Is the
only word that expresses the feelings Oh
the Drevfusards after to-day's proceed
ings. The tide has turned at last' 'hey
saw. and Dreyfus cannot be condeulheu
after the evidence given this mornings
The spirits Of the Dreyfusards are qui'e
mercurial. Every day since the opening
OF the trial has seen them rise OF Ia'"
Recently they have been falling heaVilN
the close of the morning sessions general
ly finding them in anxious conversation
accompanied by ominous shakngs oil
their heads. To-days buoyancy, there
fire is all the more noteworthy Iester-
cay was a fairly good day, but to-days
session. they claim, puts the verdict out
Of doubt. and the judges must aeQuit
Dreyfus.
Major Hartmann, Of the artillery. occu-
ried nearly half the session with the con-
clusion Of hos expert evidence to the ell
feet that Dreyfus as an artillery oihcer'
would not have displayed such Ignorance
regarding the guns and brakes as was
shown in the bordereau, while the other
Subjects Of the bordereau were matters
upon which any officer could inform HIM
self.
Major Hartmann's testimony practically
stood uncontested. as neither GeherA'
Gonse nor General MERCER refuted any
material point therein.
ESTERHAZY'S HANDIWORK.
NJ Hayet. a member Of the institute
then entered upon the grammatical as
moot Of the bordereau, and in vigorous
but eloquent language devoted himself TO
chewing that the construction Of the Dor
dsreau bristled with strong and IN MS
oninion. conclusive marks Of Esterhazy
bandiwork. while the phraseology bore
no resemblance to Dreyfus's style
The next stage of the proceedings was
the reading of the Gonse-Picquart cores
oondence. exchanged at the time Colonel
Picouart suspected Esterhazy and want
ed General Gonse TO probe the matter to
the bottom.
This brought NJ. Labori to the 'front.'
and in a series Of questions he brought
ont sharply before the court the machlna-
lions of which Colonel Picquart was the
victim at the hands of the Major, from
the moment ne showed desire to
thoroughly silt the matter
GONsE DISCONNECTED.
NJ Labor. for the first time, got Gene
raj Gonse TO admit that he ordered the
tampering with Picquart's letters, IN or
der as ne said, to ascertain PlcquartS
dolnes while he was chief OF the lnlel-
ueence Bureau. a little later VI. LaDoVi
evidently dlsconcerted General Gohse' loI
tho latter blurted out that bleutehdhl-
Colonel Henry committed his forgery III
order TO have fresh proofs against prey
fms The audience smiled audlDly at inns
General Gonse then added: But il was
unnecessary. since the diplomatic dossler
contained discriminating aocui'1"'9 VII"
Drevfus written i'm tull
General Gonse evidently meant the
Panizzardi dispatch. when mas aIe@uy
been ruled out OF court.
PROTEST FROM LABORL
NJ. Labor protested emphaticaly' e%-
claiming: There are no such docu-
Taants ,; and then asked General Gonse
to enumerate the documents to when ne
alluded. ...
colonel Jouaust, presloenJ OF the court
martial however. declined to put the
question. wnereupon NJ. Labor sald ne
reserved 10 himself the right 10 submit
FORMAL appucauon Tor tnese documents.
1'hrn came the eading witness OF the
da,- A. dc FOnd-Lamotte, prODauoher
contemporaneOusly with Dreyfus' VINO -
now a clvil engineer, ana mas no reason
10 fear the wrath of the military clique
STRONG POINT FOR DREYFUS.
The witness opened D. declaring that
despite the racu mat ne nad brother
nm the garrison at Rennes, he came 70
tell what ne knew i'm favor OF Dreyfus,
and ne proceeded 10 make statement
which. according 10 the Dreytusards,
practically decides the case.
First he recalled the fact that circu-
lar was sent TO the prObationers on May
IA. 1884, informing Jnem tnae tney must
not 20 10 the mauOeuyres, thus showing
that the man VINO wrote the bordereau in
August and said II ann going 10 the ma
noeuvres" could not ne DreyIus.
The witness then pointed out that none
of the ministers. VINO. he believed acted
in good faith, were informed OF the ex-
istence OF this circular. which" h de-
clared. II consider vital point in the
case"
This circular" he continued skaters
the prosecution, because, after May nth,
Dreyhis could not say, i am going 10
the manoeuyres for then he knew ne
would not 90, while, prior TO May 18th,
he could not have known the five dOcu-
ments comprised in the bordereau."
ANOTHER STRONG POINT.
VI. de Fond-Lamotte then brought out
another strong point. Abiding 10 the
notifications OF the disposition Concern
ing the troops, he said the writer of the
bordereau used the term new plan"
''Now," said the witness, 1T has been
impressed upon you that on October bth,
a circular was sent out by the War Min
istry containing those very words, and
that therefore, the writer Of the borde-
reau must have been an officer OF the
ministry, but one thing has struck me
who sent out that circular? II was the
third bureau, the chief OF which was
northumberland Du Patty de Clam,
who had had the bordereau in his hands
for the previous twenty days"
NJ. de Fond-Lamotte. by this. intended
TO show that Du Patty de Clam purposely
used the words new plan In the cir
cular In order, by what the witness de-
scribed as arguing in a vicious circle
TO back up his contention that an officer
OF the ministry wrote the bordereau, ana
thar that officer was Dreytus.
ROGET ON THE RACK.
General Roget then rose 10 reply 10