The daily morning journal and courier., 1899-08-25

general said that when Dreyfus was ar rested he knew of no other proof against
 him than the bordereau. There were
 therefore, only suspicious, but it was
 urgently necessary not to lose time in arresting him in order to stop the trea- =
 sonable practices.
 M. Labori here asked Colonel Jouaust to secure the testimony of M. Paplland
 editor of the Libre Parole, in regard to
 the "Dixi" letter, in which the name of
 Dreyfus was disclosed as that of the of
 ficer arrested for espionage. As Colo mel Jouaust hestated M. Labori insist ed upon the necessity for an examina- = tion of the latter, "in order to reach the truth I am seeking for
 "The whole responsibility for this case" M. Labori added, T believe, real ly rests upon the late Lieutenant Colo nel Henry and Colonel Du Paty de Clam"
 Resuming his examination of General Mercier, M. Labori asked him several l questions as to why he at first ascribed the date of the bordereau to the month of April. General Mercier said that in 1894 he was only acquainted with the | general reasons which existed for be- lieving Dreyfus guilty, and had not paid much attention to the details. The gen. eral refused to reply to many of the questions. For instance he declined to say whether he had examined the proofs advanced against Dreyfus
 M Labori-In short, you considered it in the nature of a sensational move to have Dreyfus prosecuted and sentenced l 1vp ina ol,o against Dreyfus?
 General Mercier-I only examined the nature of the documents betrayed.
 M Labori-Was it not necessary for that purpose to fix the date of the bor- l dereau?
 i General Mercier-I do not think so Further, I declare that Maitre Labori is 1 discussing the whole trial of 1894. That may have some interest from a histori- cal point of view. But, since the court of cessation quashed the Judgment, it seems to me that it is not for us now to revert to the various features of that trial.
 CONTRADICTIONS IN TESTIMONY. ! M. Labori pointed out the contradic- l tions in the testimony of the officers of the headquarters staff regarding the 1 importance and nature of the contents of the bordereau, and asked General Mercier where Dreyfus could have ob- tained particulars about the pneumatic brake.
 The general hotly objected to being | asked to repeat his testimony, and M. Labori, equally warmly, said: T am only asking for definite statements p1 l.. that Dreyfus might have had cognizance of the brake at Bourges, adding: "In any case, he had better chance to ob- tain such knowledge than Esterhazy could possibly have had"
 M. Labori retorted: General Mercier says 'Dreyfus might have had cogniz- ance.' l desire to emphasize that eX- pression, We shall now prove that Dreyfus could not have had cognzance of the brake" He proceeded to demon- strate how vigorously the secret of the construction and of the brake was guarded, and asked why, in 1894, the charges regarding the Robin melinite shells were not dwelt upon
 General Mercier replied: That arises from the simple fact that it was not known until 1896 or 1897 that informa- tion on the subject was being divulged. The existence of treachery in regard to the distribution of heavy artillery among the army corps was unknown until 1895.
 The passages at arms between M La bori and General Mercier were followed with the keenest interest. Both men were mutually suspicious of each other; and there was considerable acerbity, Colonel Jouaust at times finding diff culty in preventing the discussion from wandering outside legal paths.
 Continuing, M Labori asked why General Mercier did not have report prepared regarding the confessions Dreyfus is alleged to have made to Cap tain Lebrun Renault.
 General Mercier-The question of the confessions was of no importance, as revision of the case seemed impossible.
 M. Labori-What does General Mer- cier think of Esterhazy, and the part he played?
 General Mercier-I do not know Ester hay and 1 do not think about him at all.
 M, Labori-Did he know you at his trial in 1898?
 General Mercier-No
 Colonel Jouaust-General Mercier was not minister of war then.
 M. Labori-This is most interesting. General Mercier declares he knows nothing of the trial of 1898.
 General Mercier-I know nothing of it. l leave that to the court martial which | tried Eeterhazy. l have only to answer in court for my acts, and l .efuse you | the right to question me about my | thoughts. (Sensation.)
 Colonel Jouaust Undressing M. Labo- | rD-You are reverting to the testimony l of General Mercier?
 M, Labori-My object in interrogating l the witness is to revert to his testimo- | ny.
 General Mercier-I protest against the | word interrogate," for am not a pris- | oner Gnterrogatory, in French law, | generally applies to the examination of | an accused person by magistrate)
 M Labori-Is it not a question of in- terrogatory. 1 used the word in the most respectful sense. Will General | Mercier say what he means by the | charge preferred against the partisans of Dreyfus of having spent 35,O00,O0O | francs? What was this sum used for? | The amount is simply ridiculous.