The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1899-09-10
VI. DEMANGE,s ARcUwrxr
DI"ANUE's ARGUMENT.
riee Tor the Prisoner That Availed
Little with CoIoueI Jou.u.t


Lyeee. the whole town bristled with SOL
oiers All the streets near the court were
guarded at intervals by double lines of in
iantry' two companies of infantry sat on
the church steps adjoining the Lycee with
their arms stacked In front of them, while
IN the courtyard Of the prison and at various
otner points cavalry could be seen in readi-
ness. Every one entering the court was
subjected 10 the closest scrutiny. Even the
women who attended the session were de-
prived OF their small sunshades before be-
ing permitted to pass. larger crowd than
usual witnessed the passage of Dreyfus
from the prison to tie Lycee, but the
crowds were nowhere large and aside from
the presence Of the military the town was
as tranquil as usual
Inc last session Of the court-martial
opened at 7:30 a. m. Madam abort was
among the few ladies present end in the
press seats there were only about fifty re-
porters The prisoner looked flushed and
In III health, apparently suffering from the
great strain. Baron Russell of Killowen.
the lord chief Justice of England, was again
present. among the prominent witnesses
only Senator Trarieux. the former minister
OF justice, remained seated in the front
row or the witnesses seats In the Sec
ond row of the privileged public. facing the
judges. sat Matthew Dreyfus, brother of the
prisoner. His sunken eyes and careworn
race reflected his anxiety and anguish 1t
was evident that he had not slept during
the night He was attired IN black. Can
tam Dreyfus sat beside a captain of gem
oarmes and as NJ. Demange refuted the
arguments made In the speech of the
government commissary NJ. Carriere, the
prisoner continually turned his face toward
Matthew. to watch the effect IL had upon
him. Captain Dreyfus however. did not
display the intense emotion with which his
neart on this critical morning must have
been bursting.
denoarmes were plentifully distributed
among the audience and posted in the
gangways around the courtroom. There
was pleasant contrast in their pretty,
oiue uniforms, with white cord trimmings
to the sober attire of the majority of the
spectators. AS thew watched what was
going on in the court their hands
rested on the black leather cases. in which
nestled big army revolvers. The silence
was only broken by the occasional rustline
OF reporters notebook or the neigh of an
artillery horse. picketed In a street be-
SIDE the Lycee. Now and then there was
the sound OF the rafting of a rifle or the
cianking OF the sword of some officer
hastily crossing the courtyard, where the
troops were stationed
SPLENDID ORATORY.
Inc peroration of NJ. Demange was a
splendid piece of oratory. His voice
numbered through the court and echoed
outside. The officers and troopers sta
TONED in the courtyard crowded around
the entrance of the hall, standing on tiptoe
10 catch glimpse of the speaker, while
inside the hall many of the audience were
moved 10 tears. The speech was very
skiilfully arranged and was devoted to de-
monsning, stone by stone. the edifce built
up ny the general staff. NJ. Demange be-
gan py saying: When yesterdays sitting
was ended I was about to deal with what
Is called the direct evidence. namely. the
technical value Of the bordereau. The nrose-
cution, by taking separately each of the
notes containing information supplied by the
writer Of the bordereau deduced the onin-
ION that Dreyfus alone could have COM
municated information on the documents
III he had at his disposal proof of this he
should have given ii. 1t devolves upon the
pubic prosecutor to prove that Dreyfus
possessed this information, and nobody but
ne. Ihat Is how the question must be put
We are before court of justice, with which
suppositions have no place In order to pro-
duce proof / must ask and we must know
what was the information supplied. Conse-
quently We must have the notes delivered
otherwise We have to deal with a nv
pothesis. That is my first objection. to
which / challenge the public prosecutor to
reply
Counsel. remarkiag that the hypothesis
accepted In 1894 could not now be main
tanned, proceeded to infinitely examine the
theories OF the headquarters staff, especial
ly General Rogets, whose arguments he re-
futed seriatim. He similarly analysed the
evidence OF General MERCER reiterating the
arguments as to the utter improbabiity of
an artilleryman employing the correct terms
used in the bordereau in connection with
artillery matters.
Counsel then reviewed the well-known
facts in the case showing that Colonel
Schwartzkoppen, the German military at
tache at Paris, supplied information to his
government years before regarding the '.1aO
short" field. He said that only the internal
construction Of the brake Of this gun re-
manned secret. but Dreyfus knew nothing
about 1t and never asked for information
on the subject from the few officers know
Ing II. Therefore. counsel contended, Drey-
fus could not have betrayed this secret.
Regarding the practical tests of the gun,
NJ. Demange continued, Dreyfus was SINH
larly ignorant. General Mercier's statement
that Dreyfus attended the trials could be
dismissed, as it had been proved that the
only leakage resulting from those trials had
been furnished by the spy Grenier 1t was
thus apparent into what error all the wit
nesses supporting the prosecution had
fallen. Their opinions had been most i'm
perfectly formed, and the judges must be
on their guard against it. honest and sincere
as it doubtless was.
NO EVIDENCE AGAINST DREYFUS.
After refuting the imputations against
Dreyfus based on the firing manual. which
he said were purely Hypothetical. NJ. De-
mango continued emphatically: The prose-
cution has no right TO rest content with
hypothesis. We are In court CT Justice
The defense alone has the right to say Il
is impossible. II is the duty Of the public
prosecutor TO produce evidence. bus he has
adduced none against Dreyfus."
After showing that the prisoner had never
seen the '12o short field gun fired, counsel
read letters from Esterhazy proving that
the latter attended the Chalons camp and
probably witnessed the trials. But the
prosecution" added NJ Demange, had not