The Worcester spy. [volume] (Worcester, Mass.) 1898-1904, 1899-08-31
MERCER ADMITS 1T
Does Not Deny That Esterhazy Has Al
tered His Handwriting.

Does Not Deny That Esterhazy Has Al
tered His Handwriting.
Rennes, Aug. 30.-The first witness
today, Paul Meyer, member Of the In
stitute and director of the School of
ancient manuscripts, described his re-
searches in connection with the Drey-
fus case, which led to his conviction
that the bordereau was not only in Es-
terhazy's handwriting, but was actu-
ally written by Esterhazy.
Prof. Auguste Molinier, of the School
of Ancient Manuscripts. gave similar
evidence. He said that each fresh ex-
animation Of the bordereau only served
to convince him further that 1t was the
work of Esterhazy.
Gen. MERCER requested permission to
speak, and called attention to the fact
that in his testimony before the court
of cessation, Prof. Molinier said a
change was apparent in Esterhazy's
handwriting after 1894, and asked that
the professors former evidence be read.
M. Labor inquired If Gen. MERCER in
tervened with the object of verifying
Prof, Molinier's evidence. He added
that it seemed to him that Gen. Mer-
cier INTERVIEWED less in the character OF
Il WlIneSS IIltIl DIS d IGDTCSclldlANC VI
the government commissioner.
MERCER replied that on this special
point he desired to confirm the evidence
of Prof. Molinier, which, he said. cor
roborated Ne. Bertillon,S statement that
Esterhazy, the man Of straw, changed
his handwriting in order to replace
Dreyfus. In conclusion Gen. MERCER
said: Having emphasized the point in
regard to the change in Esterhazy's
i T
am satisfied"
Prof. CRY, also Of the School of an
cient manuscripts, covered ground sim
liar to that covered by Prof. Molinier.
NJ. Bertillon, at this juncture, said he
desired to speak, but the president of
the court Col Jouaust, hastily rose and
said, amidst laughter: THE sitting is
suspended" Then M. Bertillon reseat-
ed himself in high dudgeon.
On the resumption of the sitting,
George Picot, a member of the institute.
was called for the defence, Maitre De-
mango of counsel for the prisoner, ex-
planning that Picot was summoned be-
cause in May last he had an interview
with foreign military attache, in the
course of which mention was made of
the document inserted in the dossier by
Gen. MERCER.
M. Picot started with saying that he
had an interview with the Austro- Hun
garian military attache. This caused
Col. Jouaust to intervene, sayingi But
you cannot continue like this"
NJ Picot then recommended his testi-
mony, eliminating the 'AuStro-H unga-
rian." He said he had an interview
with certain military attache," and
that the conversation turned upon the
Dreyfus case. The attache expressed
surprise at the incorrect attitude of
the French officers in doubling the
word Of foreign officers. MY impress
sion" added the witness, was that he
was anxious to assert firmly and un-
equivocally the absolute innocence of
Dreyfus."
''Regarding the bordereau," continued
M. Picot, 1.-The attache said only three
documents, enumerated, were referred
to, the real fact being that the others
were padding, meant to swell the dos
sier." The witness noticed that the at
tache employed the expression Thy
draulic brake" and never pneumatic
brake"
In regard to Esterhazy, the attache,
M. Picot said, declared that he consid-
cred him swindler. The attache also
asserted that Esterhazy had relations
with Col. Schwartzkoppen, who dis
missed him because Esterhazy only
brought information devoid Of interest.
L.
chat Esterhazy tried to enter the war
office, and almost succeeded, and it was
then that he wrote to Col Schwartz
koppen the letter since known as the
bordereau. In reply to the writer of the
bordereau, Col. Schwartzkoppen wrote
the telegram card, known as the Petit
Bleu. But, on reflection, he crumpled
it up and threw it in the fireplace.
At this juncture Gen. Roget asked
leave to speak, and stationing himself
beside the witness, said he must strong
~ protest against M. Picots evidence
the military attaches sur
prise that French officers did not be-
lieve their foreign colleagues. What
does the witness think" he continued,
"of the foreign officer who, having
caused the publication in the Figaro Of
an emphatic denial OF statement OF
Gen. Mercier's, was afterwards obliged
to acknowledge the authorship of doc
ument, the paternity of which he had at
first denied?"
M. Picot retorted that he had only re-
peated statements made to him, ana
(Continued ~, paca QN