The record-union., 1899-08-31

lery at the War Office, was called to
the witness bar. He repeated his ex-
plantations given before the Court of
Cessation as to the various peculiari-
ties Of the artillery, particularly with
reference to the brake of the "12V'
short gun.
The witness said he considered that
in 1894 it would have been impossible
for any officer serving with his regi-
ment to communicate anything in re-
gard to the brake of this gun. He add
ed that although the gun was in use
at Rennes, the officers forming the
court-martial, among whom was one
officer commanding '120' short gun,
| had only the vaguest ideas about this
gun, while in 1894 the details of the
pneumatic brake could have been
known to very few officers.
The court closely questioned General
Deloye, and a Judge asked when it
was known that the German shell &C.
91' presented analogieS to the Robin
shell.
General Deloye said it was in 1894.
The Judge-Not before 1891?
General Deloye-No.
The Judge-It was the information in
regard to the pneumatic brake, con-
tanned in the provisional instructions
about the 120 short gun, which was
communicated?
General Deloye-Yes.
The Judge-Was it possible for an
officer of the headquarters staff to pro-
cure the firing manual?
General Deloye-It was not impos-
sible if he adduced a plausible pretext.
Colonel Jouaust-Was the brake man.
ufactured at Bourges?
General Deloye-Yes. at the foundry.
The Judge-And the Robin shell?
General Deloye-At the gunnery
school,
M Demange-Was the distance be-
tween the two establishments great?
General Deloye-The foundry was
contiguous to the gunnery school.
When Dreyfus was asked if he had
anything to say he replied:
Il do not intend to discuss the terms
of the bordereau nor advance any
theories about it. 1t must be known
what is in the notes and what is their
nature and their value before the re-
suits can be suggested. Mention has
been made of the 120 short gun. 1
state briefly for the second time, all
that l know in 1SS9-90 at Bourges of
this gun l knew the principles of the
pneumatic brake.
General Merciers deposition recalled
the fact that he was Inspector General
at Bourges in 1890. He must remem-
Der the lecture given in the presence
of all the officers both of the gunnery
school and foundry, and all the depart
mentS of Bourges and the officers of the
garrison artillery. He must recollect
the final lecture given on the subject
of the pneumatic brake. on which he
made the customary rough sketch. This
is to be found in the ST. Cyr lectures.
All my knowledge of the pneumatic
brake was derived from the lectures.
AS regards the brake itself, l have seen
it twice once in the courtyard of the
gunnery school at Bourges and once
in the school of war. I have not seen
it in action. l have not seen the 120
short gun fired. / have never been
present at the firing trials, but the
probationers attended.
Mention has also been made of the
shrapnel shell of 1891. The knowledge
of General Deloye on this point is
much more extensive than mine, and
everything he has said is quite correct.
In 1894 | studied the shell, and in a
necessarily complete study reached the
conclusion that the shell of the 1894
pattern was shell in which the bullets
were kept in place by smoke general
| ing substance intended to produce
dense clouds of smoke in bursting, in