Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1899-08-31

placed.'f
Maitre Demange, OF counsel for the
defence, returned to counsels' table,
mud, in response to look Of inquiry
from Dreyfus, whispered few words
to tho prisoner, with a shrug of his
shoulders and smile on his face
Dreyfus appeared perfectly satisfied.
Following are the proceedings in de-
tail:
At the opening of the session, con-
siderable comment was caused by the
request of M. Gribelin, the principal
archiyist of the headquarters staff, for
permission to absent himself for p
hours, owing to q summons of tho
Minister of War, Gen. do Marquis de
Galifet, who desired to see him in
Paris. 1t was suggested that the Minis
ter of War wishes to refresh NJ. Gribe-
Inns memory, which is strangely
nti-Drefyus.
Rowland Strong, correspondent Of
the New York Times and member of
tho staff of the Observer of London,
was the first witness called. Ee de-
scribed at length interviews which he
had with Esterhazy, saying the OBJ
server offered Esterhazy f50O for certain
documents and a confession that he
wrote tho bordereau, as published
April 25th. Replying to tho court, M.
Strong said that Esterhazy. while ad-
hitting the authorship of the border
eau, said the documents enumerated
in it had been betrayed by Dreyfus to
Germany.
M. Henri WE'LL, former officer of
the headquarters staff, was then called,
but he was absent, and his deposition
was read. nj. WELLS statement, in
substance, was that Esterhazy told
him. in 1894, that Dreyfus was in
nocent, but that this would not prevent
his conviction, because he was Jew.
| Sensation.
A former sergeant, who was at ore
time employed in the War Office, testi-
| fed to seeing Dreyfus copying the list
of railroad stations mentioned in the
plan of mobilization, to which Droyfus
replied. sit is true, but copied the
list by order of Capt. Besse.'' (Sensa.
| ton.
The evidence of the handwriting ex-
| perts followed. M. Colbert vehomently
protested against the insinuation that
he was an interested witness. Turning
towards the prisoner, he said; AFTER
all, have no right to complain when
| look at this unfortunate man now
before you.'' Great sensation.
The court closely followed M.
Gobert's exhaustive story of his ex.
animation of the bordereau. He
asserted that the handwriting of the
bordereau was natural and fluent, but
that 1t was almost illegible, whereas
Dreyfus, even when writing rapidly,
always wrote most legibly.
Gen. Gonse, it appeared from
Gobert's testimony, was greatly en-.
ragged when he learned Of the report Of
M. Gobert's examination of the border
eau, and visited the expert repeatedly
1t was after NJ. Colbert had refused
to iDcriminate Dreyfus that M. Der
tillon was entrusted with the ex
animation of the bordereau, and, aftel
few hours study, M. Bertillon posi-
lively attributed the bordereau tt
Dreyfus.
| Col. Jouaust asked Nj. Colbert for ;
more definite criticism Of the bordereau
and the witness replied that he noticed
certain similarities between the hand
writing of the bordereau and that o
Dreyfus; but, he added, there wer,
many important differences, which
proved to him that Dreyfus was not th
author Of the bordereau, and hi
opinion had since been confirmed, "be
cause it was now proved the bordercal
was the work of Esterhazy." (Sensa
tion.
GREAT SENSATION.
Replying to the court, M. Gober
suggested that the judges compare til
bordereau with a letter admitted to b
in Esterhazy's handwriting, and date,
from Rouen, August 18th, 1894, ant
with documents written by the pris
oner. "You will then unmistakabl
recognize" M. Colbert added, "tha
the bordereau is in Esterhazy's hand
writing, and not in the handwriting Q
Dreyfus. Great sensation.l
The expert refused, in reply to
question asked by the court, to admi
that the bordereau was written in
disguised hand. He said 1t had bee
written with great rapidity, precludin
all idea Of doctoring or tracing,
There was general movement @
curiosity when NJ Bertillon, the we'll
known anthropometer specialist i
the measurement Of the human body
was called, and the interest deepene
when the chief of the Identificatio
Department advanced to the witnes
bar.
M. Bertillon prefaced his evidenc
by saying his explanations would b
understood only by very Unite
! number, and, therefore, he asked tn
court to permit him to refer 10 docu
ments which he had brought, in orde
! to make his evidence more ineligible
daughter.
In monotonous tones, NJ. Bertillo
proceeded, in the manner of a schot
boy reciting lesson, to demonstrRl
technically how he had reached th
, conviction of Dreyfus' guilt. He sal
he proposed to prove to the court:
First-That the bordereau was
J doctored document.
Second That it could only hay
, been manufactured by the prisoner.
Third-That it had been written in
7 free hand by means of a key-wor
placed beneath tracing paper in such
, way as to be quite visible.
. The witness, continuing, declare
. Dreyfus did not have recourse to i'm
: tating EsLorhazy's free hand writin,
because it required too long to stud,
and he used the tracing process b,
5 cause it is easier to learn and MOI
!, likely to be successful.
= With the view of illustrating h
Y meaning, M. Bertillon handed -FOUR
photographs of the bordereau, ~
During the course of the demonstr;
tion. the specialist advanced to IL
Judges bench, and, with his finge
= pointed out illustrations OF his theorie
!, Mn. Demange and Labor, the iudg
y and others gathered in group arour
Y the anthropometer.
9 Dreyfus appeared to be stupefied |
Z the comparatively incomprehensip
jareon, and many of the audience le