Kansas City journal. [volume] (Kansas City, Mo.) 1897-1928, 1899-08-20

ments and which produced much emotion
in court, and occasioned from Dreyfus un-
expected outbursts of pent-up feelings.
The prisoner spoke several times to-day
with an Indignation which rang sincere.
But he never struck those chords which
thrilled his hearers last Monday and Satur-
day.
The confrontations of Dreyfus and ther
Picquart with General Gonse and General
Billot were only side issues which did not
raise questions of fundamental Importance,
and cannot be said to have had much effect
either way. so far as the testimony itself
is concerned. But, from the point of view
OF the prosecution, 1t is always a clever
game to bring the generals on the stage
IN the role of indignant defenders of the
honor of the army, for, as superior officers.
their appearance is bound to exercise GER
tain impression on the judges all of whom
are of junior rank
Moreover, to-day gave General Billot the
opportunity for one of those melodramatic
speeches on the loyalty of former minis
ters of war which always go down with the
crowd and which this morning elected an
outburst of cheering from the public in
court, which demonstration was quickly
suppressed by the gendarmes, and the
hearing was adjourned until Monday.
N Cuignet, the nrst wItness called, was
NOT IN uniform, as he is not at present at
account OF tie special investiga tons into
the case which l was ordered 10 make by
ministers Of war, from NJ. Cavaignac to NJ.
De freycinet" said the witness, Il wish
10 mention personal fact which, IN con-
junction with the evidence already heard,
VIII constitute fresh proof of the prisoner 5
headquarters staff. l was the staff
when Dreyfus was a probationer during
the latter half of 1893. Among other du-
ties, l was connected with the railroad
service and the mining of railroads with
the view OF interrupting traftic in case of
need II is hardly necessary to point out
sne siie secret character of such matters Drey-
rus was probationer on the Eastern rail-
roads and had been ordered to specially
study the mining of them and possessed
information 1 relating solely to them. One
oay Dreyfus asked me to give him the gen.
efai Scheme of mining which l possessed,
giving as reason for his request that he
was was anxious to increase his knowledge
ana that 1t was necessary for him to know
the general scheme in order properly to
carry out the work entrusted to him. I
replied that did not see the necessity of
giving MN the scheme and that In any
case he had better apply to his own chief,
Major Bertin. DreyfIs pretended Bertin
would not impart any information. Day
after day he pestered me. so that finally,
having no reason to distrust him, began
giving him explanations Dreyfus dis
played the keenest interest, and took copi-
searched, these notes were not discover
able. do not know what became of them.
But 1t Is difficult to believe they were de-
stroyed, considering the Importance he
seemed to attach to the information and
the persistence in procuring it,
after launching the above declaration,
weighty evidence of the treachery of Drew
rus, Major Cuignet proceeded to recount in
oetall the task which General Gonse as
signed to him in May, 1895, of Classifying
rha1
and Picquart cases.
The first question I will ask here is"
sala me witness: Is Dreyfus guilty?' NY
conviction of his guilt is based on three
grounds: '-'' &c
First-His confession to Captain Le-
"second-The technical nature of the
contents of the bordereau.
Ihlrd-The results of the examination
OF the secret dossier.
II will add to these three points the evil
dence of the expert, Bertillon Qaughter). as
ihdirect proof of the means employed by
me preyfus family to secure the prisoner s
Il protest that a campaign has been un-
oertaken against justice, truth and our
The majors outburst of heroics evoked
cynical smiles and indications of dissent.
coupled with marks of assent from the as,
sembled generals.
The witness next spoke of the secret dos
sler OF the war ministry, containing infor-
mati1n M lon relating to the interview between
and Count ernie nnTteT Tbs tssn of jqstee
sador, which country" said Cuienef
benefited by the treachery.'
baae bnesanoihg the Confessions said to have
oeen made to Captain .Lebrun- -Renault,
V,lth withess said he still believed they were
RsWe,,I1 Reye 1he concessions to Captain LeBrun-
inony; Continuing. the witness reassarted
thht the bordereau was written by Dreyfus
at me end OF August. and, incidentally, the
Qtpuf f,rt ~ r,.-
insinuations against Paty de Clam He
then returned to the secret dossier of the
war office, from which, he declared, The
tions.
The first portion of the dossier," he
said shows that, in 1898, there was a con-
nave had proofs OF the plans of fortifica-
tions reaching the hands of a foreign pow
er. 1t IS known to a certainty from the
teu.er tbat IRON, from "a, an agent of a foreign power
istry of war. A vast network of espionage
had, therefore, been organized against US,
power rs a Colonel Schwartzkoppen. the
German military ATTACHED, the agencs Of
other powers also collaborating"
Wltness then invited the courts special
attention to this dossier. in which he said
would be found proof of the prisoner 5
guilt. .
At this stage of the proceedings, Dreyfus
Ihat is manifest lie"
After this the witness recited In detail his
reasons for the belief that the agent sup
plying the information was French staff
off1cer He then endeavored to show that
traffic with foreign military attaches could
only have been carried on by a probationer
In the department occupied by Dreyfus.
The witness specially referred to the
PaniZzardi telegram of November 9. 1Sg4
Which, he explained. left an impression on
him that, In 1884, Dreyfus was an old friend
OF the Italian government.
Another document of the dossier, accord
ing to Major Guignet. showed beyond dis
pute that the bordereau actually passed
through the hands. of Colonel Schwartz
koppen. This, to the witness established
the authenticity of the bordereau, an ex-
animation of which, he pointed out, proved
Schwartzkoppen and Panizzardi had the
closest relations in all matters of espion-
age.
g. Referring next to the dispatch of Colonel
Schneider. former Australian military at
tache at Paris, denouncing as a forgery a
letter purporting to have been written b.
the attache, in which he was represented
as referring to efforts being made b.
SchwartZkoppen and Panizzardi to conceal
their relations with Dreyfus, witness main
tanned that General Mercier's statements
on the subject were correct, and that the
authenticity of the latter had been proved.