Kansas City journal. [volume] (Kansas City, Mo.) 1897-1928, 1899-08-22
remark in COURT last week that an innocent

tlVeiy, IN calm voice, to the various
points raised by the witnesses. 1t was in
response to Captain Junck that he made his
longest statement, occupying about ten
minutes, during which he used the notes
| he mad taken while Junck was speaking
| and, with methodical arrangement of facts
and in unequivocal language, effectively dis
cussed the Inaccuracies of Junck's testi-
mony. The prisoner punctuated his re-
marks with moderate, we'll chosen gestures
of his right hand, standing erect, facing
his judges and holding his gold braided
kepi in his left hand.
The third point. the conduct Of Junck
in repeating condolences made to him as
a comrade, by Dreyfus, disgusted his hear
ers and, in the mind of any right think
ed the value of the remainder of his evil
dence. He and Dreyfus sat together in the
same Office and, naturally, exchanged con-
tidences regarding their relations with
women. But, 1t was pointed out, no one
but contemplate person repeats them in
court, especially in the case of man pass
ing as an officer and a gentleman.
DreyTus. in replying, scored distinctly
when he brought out Junck's utter lack of
sense OF honor and himself declined to en-
ter into q discussion of the matter.
"A striking figure in court is Matth!eu
Dreyfus, brother of the prisoner, who
usually sits in one of the front rows of the
the seat infront Of him, his chin resting on
his hand, and his intelligent face turned to
the witness stand With eye and ear he
follows every word and gesture of those
on the stage and his looks reflect the alb
sorbing anxiety of his mind The audience
may utter and smile, but his features
never relax into the semblayfce of q smile.
Ihey only soften with a look of pity as
he glances at his brother seated on the
stage ana compelled to submit ito the
ruthless fire which his enemies one after
another level at him from the witness box
General Fabre, former chief of the fourth
bureau OF the general staff, was the first
Witness to-day. He said that in his Of
ncial capacity, he compared the handwrlt-
Ing of the bordereau with the writing of
various officers in his bureau, including
the handwriting of a probationer, who had
been in the bureau during the previous
his comrades
sarded as untrustworthy, and insincere in
MS pretensions, was, according to the wit
ness ness, :; equally disliked by his comrades and
endeavoring by all sorts of means to learn
the secrets of the plan Of concentration of
the Eastern railway system. and, in his
anxiety to secure information, neglected
his duties. His official duties witness also
said, placed it in Dreyfus' power to disclose
the documents referred to in the bordereau:
Dreyfus had said on this subject.
When Major Bertin showed witness the
bordereau, the latter was struck with the
resemblance of the caligraphy.
Dreyfus was the only officer who made a
pad impression in his bureau and the opin-
ions of the chief of staff and heads of 9TH
er departments confirmed witness belief
General Fabre, in conclusion, declared he
was still as firmly convinced as in 1894 that
the prisoner was the author of the bor-
dereau. fSenSation.)
After NJ Demange had pointed out the
discrepancies in Fabre's present state
ments and those he verified in 1894. Colonel
Jouaust invited Dreyfus to reply. The pris-
oner said General Fabre quite correctly de-
scribed the work on which he was engaged
when probationer, especially empnasiZ-
to the concentration centers on the Eastern
system posted up. This was not fictitious
task
The prisoners reply was made in calm,
measured tones and his frankness seemed
to favorably impress the judges.
Colonel d Aboville, former deputy chief of
showed him a photograph of an anonymous
note in which the writer intimated to his
correspondent, evidently foreign to army"
that he had confidential documents to COM
municate.
The witness told Fabre that the docu-
ments mentioned showed the writer could
only be an artillery officer, belonging to
the general staff. who participated in the
June and July, 1894.
The position of Dreyfus corresponded
surprise" a striking resemblance was ap-
parent in the writing of Dreyfus and the
anonymous letter. Witness further declared
that only probationer could possess the
information mentioned in the bordereau.
1t was not only because of the resemblance
Of the handwriting that suspicious were
in position to be acquainted with the
documents enumerated.
Greater interest in the proceedings was
manifested when the name of the next witt
ness was announced, Former Chief of the
Detective Department Cochefert, who was
present when Dreyfus underwent the die
NJ. Cochefert declared he knew absolute.
ly. nothing of the Dreyfus case when the
ed him to confer with him on the subject
OF the bordereau, and the suspicious in re-
gard to Dreyfus. General Mercier Coche-
proceedings which ought to be followed ana
introduced him to Patty de Clam. Subse-
quently, after NJ Bertillon's report, the
The witness proceeded to describe the ar
rest and famous scene of the dictation test
saying that. from the first remark dropped
by, Paty de Clam, the prisoner displayed
evident uneasiness.
Then the ex-ehief of detectives, Patty de
Clam, placing his hand on the prisoners
name of the minister of war. arrest you"
AT the time of the examination of Drey.
rus; witness tn s,g gained the impression that he
minister of war asked his opinion
During this formal examination, Coche-
fert added, Dreyfus protested his inno-
not know what they wanted or of what he
was accused. Witness afterward sealed up
the papers Patty de Clam seized at Drey-
fus' residence.
Replying to the court, Cochefert said that
since mis- first appearance on the scene he
had nothing to do with the Dreyfus affair,
which was in the hands of the military au-
thorities. He had not then seen the writ
ing of the tordereau, otherwise his i'm
preston might have been modified
During the course of his reply witness
mentioned Esterhazy, but his remark was
inaudible.
After the remarks of NJ. Demange, Colo
prisoner replied:
"No; will reply when Patty de Clam is
here"
NJ. Gribelin. the principal archivist of
the headquarters staff, was the next wit
ness. He testified with great volubility and
expressed the opinion that, when Dreyfus
was arrested in 1894, he was enacting a
charges against him. even the most obvious
and least important things, and in declar-
Ing himself ignorant OF matters which
should have been known to every officer of
the general staff.
The witness said he was cognizant of
Dreyfus' relations with loose women. In
support of this assertion, he mentioned an
aIlegeo voluntary statement made by
Matthew preyfus. brother of the prisoner,
In the witness presence. that he had been
obliged to pull his brother from the clutch
es or woman of this description living
near Champs Elysees
N Gribelin recapitulated the leakage at
military headquarters. the arrival of the
bordereau, etc. and dwelt on the system of
espionage conducted, under cover of dIplo- |
matte immunity. by agents A, and c.
Colonel Jouaust-"When was the border. |
eau received at the intelligence depart |
ment?"
NJ. Gribeln-'The bordereau arrived at 1
in the morning September a. 1894 After
examining 1t, we did not hesitate to at |
tribute 1t to an officer of the headquarters
staff"
Colonel Jouaust-"when was it submit |
ted to Colonel Sandherrr"