Akron daily Democrat. [volume] (Akron, Ohio) 1892-1902, 1899-09-09

A verdict was expected today.
There is a nearly universal feeling tha
Dreyfus will be condemned.
The one source of hope m. Labori
himse If, who said: I'VE fear that Cap
tain Drey fus will be condemned, but W,
do not intend to throw up the sponge
We shall 20 on fighting for him."
NJ. Jaures, tine socialist leader, anc
other prominent Dreyfusards expressed
a similar opinion.
The military precautions are of the
mo st elaborate character, and no at
tempt at disorder is likely to have the
| slightest success.
The ews of the publication of Coun
Won Buelow's speech in The Reichzan
zeiger reached Rennes last night ant
was considered very important on the
We of verdict, which, in some quar-
ters, it was thought will be regarded as {
slight by Germany if it be condemra
ton, as being tantamount to public
refusal to tax the word of Emperor
| w illiam, as his minister is merely his
mouthplece.
During mis- speech, Friday, NJ. De.
mango protested against the suggestion
that it had been attempted to put Ester.
hazy on trial, explaining tnat all the de.
fense desired was that the innocence of
Dreyfus should appear, dazzling and
complete, and that the courtmartial
should proclaim it. Counsel was salts
fled that the judges of 1894 were honest,
like the present judges. But if the
former had seen Esterhazy's handwrit-
ing they would have pronounced a diff
ferent verdict.
Counsel then entered into details,
dealing with the information collected
regarding the prisoner i'll 1894. He said:
1.-The only real information is that
found i'll the cries from his soul. Even
before his conviction, what was his first
cry:
Il will not take my life, because 1
am innocent
NJ. Demange collated upon the pris-
oner's protestations of innocence and
his touching letters to his family.
Some of the letters of the prisoner
We're read, all breathing the same de-
sire TO live to see his honor restored,
though the writer was broken down in
health and spirit.
Five ministers of war;" said NJ. De.
mango. pronounced Dreyfus guilty,
while admitting it was impossible to
produce proofs. General de Boisdeffre,
General Gonse and General Roget also
affirmed their belief in his guilt. But.
happily, they stated reasons and, in
stead of proofs, only accumulated pre-.
sumptions.
After pointing out that the generals
only studied the case at the very mo.
ment when public alteration had re-
duced the whole question to conflict
between Dreyfus and the army. thus
making it impossible that the generals
should not be prejudiced, ana probabili-
ties and presumptions seemed to them
to be proofs. NJ. Demange said: 81
must acknowledge, however. the hon.
esty and honorable conduct of the gen.
erals, who could not have acted other
wise than they have done"
Dealing with the confessions, counsel
read the report of Captain Lebrun-Re-
nault of the Republican guard, who
had the prisoner i'll custody previous to
his degradation, and maintained that
the exact words of Dreyfus, which We're
now known, only reflected ideas Colo.
mel Du Patty de Clam had previously e1-
pressed to the prisoner, adding that al
though Du Patty de Clam maintained
the contrary it was certain Imagination
had played a much greater part than
reason III the acts of Du Patty de Clam.
1t was also significant that the report
drawn up by Du Patty de Clam Oh the
day following his interview with Drey-
fus had disappeared. Du Patty de Clam,
counsel pointed out, had evidently for
gotten his remarks to Dreyfus, as he
had forgotten other facts.
NJ. Demange said he was surprised at
the attitude OF General Gonse toward
the alleged confessions and marveled at
the fact that Captain Lebrun- Renault,
who was sent to the Elysee palace ex-
pressly to repeat the confessions, did not
mention them. 1t was likewise mex
piicable that General Saussier and Gen
erai Mercier took no steps to verify the
socalled confessions, which We're lost
SIGHT of until Ii. Cavaignac sprung them
upon the chamber of deputies as proof
OF the guilt of Dreyfus. The court of
cassation had justly decided that they
were not confessions.
Proceeding to discuss the secret dos
sier, NJ. Demange examined the docu-
ments one after the other. He said that
all interpretations OF the document conf
mencins doubts proof" were hypo-
thetical, but they applied much more
equally to Esterhazy rnan to Dreyfus.
1t was so'with the other documents
There was nothing to indicate that
Dreyfus was concerned any more than
any one else. The leakage ascribed to
Dreyfus could only refer to the plans
of fortresses and this leakage continued
until 1897.
The document containing the words
"Cette Canaille de d. only indicated
a poor devil and could not be ascribed
TO man whom another letter described
as a friend in the second bureau. No
credence could be attached to some
documents. while others did not apply
at all to the prisoner.
The sixth document was a letter by
Count Won Munster-Ledenburg, the
German ambassadSr to France, from
Germany to Colonel Schwartzkoppen,
the military attache of Germany at
Paris, containing the words. ''as regard
Dreyfus, we are easy" Nj. Demange
pointed out that the Drey fus case was
the universal topic of Germany at the
time, and, at first, the German officials
might have been uneasy, but had evi-
IDENTIFY reassured themselves. Counsel
was indignant that because Count Won
Munster-L had not expressly
declared Dreyfus was innocent, the
prosecution had deduced from his
words an avowal of the guilt of Drey-
fus.
In regard to the letters of Nov. 2 and
Nov. IL, sent by Major Panizzardi to
his chief, it has been alleged that they
proved Dreyfus had relations with
Colonel Schwartzkoppen whereas in re-
ality Major Panizzardi merely denied
that Dreyfus had any relations with
Italy. 1t was impossible to doubt the
authenticity of these facts. 1t was In.