The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1899-08-29
NOT SO SURE OF
THEIR GROUND
Continued from First Page)

which would not be found upon the ex-
animation Of fifty million other dOcu-
ments NJ Bcrtllon would. therefore,
say the document was fabricated. But
he would be wrong. for / borrowed the
page from report written by NJ. Ber-
uion himself
NJ BertIlon demanded permission 10 re-
ply 10 the witness, and Colonel Jouaust
replied. IL cannot grant your request. and
i Will not grant such permission 10 any
of the fourteen experts. except I'M the
case OF personal explanation
VI. Ecrt,AOu. II wish 90 speak Of the
manner in which / reconstructed the Dor
dereau"
Colonel Jouaust: "Why. YOU are discuss
Ing the case. / cannot allow you to speak
except IN regard tQ % personal fact"
ADHERED TO ORIGINAL REPORT
NJ. TeyssOniers followed He sliI he ad-
hered ia ali respects to his report dateI
OCTOBER a. l.3i 600 which he expressed The
opinion that the hordere8u was she work
Of the writer of ne documents seized at
the prisoners residence. For purposes of
comparison. the witness lengthdy crit-
clsed ,he borderelu letter by letter. point
ing ont resemblance 90 the prisoners
handwriting.
Referring 20 the court. witness said he
was megible and be had never seen The
document dictated 90 DreyfIs
The copy OF the bOrdcrcau made hy
Dreyfus was then handed 10 VI. reysson-
iers. who declared 81 had never been given
20 him for purposes Of comparison. tsen-
sati0nJ
The witness AIDED that DIE would require
three days 90 give AN opinion $40 e. He
could not conclude his examination ON
the spot. Hc must have time.
Here. q member Of the courtmartiIl elV-
ing The result OF his examination Of The
bordereau. remarked: "1he letter / IS ale
ways isolated. even al the beginning OF
words"
To this NJ. Teyssoniers replied ,hat ,his
regularity was also found ln tee pi 's-
oner's handwriting.
When he was invited 20 reply % the
witness. Dreyfus said that Tefs,1niers
remarks seemed 90 him quite incorrect
and i'm order 20 reply properly me l.he
~vlsonev4 must have the documents under
his eyes As regards the criuci7m on
the subject of paragraphiug. Dreytus add
cd: Il beg to reply that one o9eS ,o'
make a fresh paragraph except When De-
oInnin, a new idea. Every time / begin
new idea in anything. ! write make
=. .,aragraph." The prisoner IN con-
cfuslon asked the president of the court
49, ,oouost the witness before he retired
-, .,ro5rce the d0cumens furnished % MN
s,. cornnaris0n. of which the defence had
no knowledge. ..,..,
Colonel JouaGst: Certainly.
NJ Tovssonlers thereupon added tnat
,,-.,, referring 10 his report after 1871 ne
S',,n5 be had concluded that the writer
ga ,+tenn,ed 10 disguise his handwriting.
buf mat towards the end he haA Ie.'i'7''
into his ordinary Handwriting.
Tho witness having begged le'Fe 3"
s,oak of personal fact aldre7''h- we
,nd0as said. Before you, 1 arm o"N5
witness. but" turning toward .'4
fe1ce "bef0re this other u.oul'' '''''
n.rbqps an accused person.
Colonel Jauaust: Not a. 'i'' '''
not accused. ,.. 81 am nm
- nerson." Here the witness picN-
u, ,,n nevsnaper which DE had oro'sh-
...,.b him and began 90 read "heieu ~"
49, rauau-t said: "Tou cannot Ieaa
.r, a.. n newspaper. &C. IS true. repueI
- ,r....s,,ia-s ..hut &C. is also the iep'i'
M NJ. Ballot DE Beaurepalr' - 90
~,I,,af Touaust. I'VE have no neeu ~
-....,7.- tts reports OK the Judge. Inc
incident IS closed. .,.,...,-t.-,
AZ INTERESTING WITNESS.
Af,e~ q b-ief suspension Of the sitliHs
! .,o court resumed hearing testimony. an"
N cb.ravav. the archivlst and expert lh
,,,.,, ,nanueoripfs. was called % tne
,,ttrose bar. His deposition was So lhau-
| drbie that ne had 90 DE requested 20 SPEAK
! mp. o,.--.. or NTH
| .v., corea~ues though acting under sei'a-
.. s--.r.--.'--e v-.~e comn''s -i.nee ia
.,.n- +l. hIricror md number
..... f.- .rmrI uH rI ni
! r 1fnarer, n'n1nIfnt
/ e.. Emo latter documor's. and hv Tho
| process Of eliminating. fixed upon one re-
v..,,t.lir,, fine b0rdereau. I was then fur
,.t.l ,citb specimens OF the handwrlt-
,'-., T., question but was not told the name
80, yriter. 7 asked II the document
ia =. regarded as genuine. and was
Ia, .ho nlace which Sc emanated could not
| ,''" 80 toned bv me and which could
- 40 doubt IN regard 20 It's value.
-. must inform the court that. IN
.he f,ct that handwriting which
10. 30, nr0ducel I'm ls4 ana Nnlch rs
W. -. at,in ~ the handwriting or the
'N,.-aS,, and the handwriting OF Drey-
~. 10 sInce been submitted 10 me-
~, 49,. ,oai,tain with the same degree OF
.,a,,,,. ,be conclusions n nv former
.rt ard 7 can only make one stare
.,,, ,,roe,v-ffas these Two hihu"ii'-
| lr~-s resemble tho hordereah
ct should however. point out enc OF 'ne
| ,...,.., atsstmHarfties on when lalu
! st-ess between the writing or tne oor
| dereau and the documents suonhited lof