The record-union., 1899-08-17


On leaving the witness box Nine.
Henry looked sternly at the prisoner.
General Roget followed. He trav-
ersed the old ground giving his reasons
for his conviction of the guilt Of Drey-
fus He declared there was no charge
against Esterhazy, with the exception
of the resemblance of his handwriting
to that of the bordereau. Moreover,
the witness added that there had been
a new fact since the judgment Of the
Court of Cessation, namely, Ester
hazy's confession that he wrote the
bordereau.
But he added, Esterhazy advanced
and withdrew his confession intermlt-
tently If Esterhazy had rendered
services to the Intelligence Department
there would have been traces of them
in the cash book, but no money had
been paid and Esterhazy, though sup
posing he worked out of pure benevo-
lence, he would have been paid. Yet
there was no trace of such payments.
Esterhazy had said he wrote the bor-
dereau under the orders of Colonel
Sandherr.
But" declared General Roget, Il,
clare it is false Colonel Sandherr was
absolutely incapable of such an order.
| add that it is inadmissable, because
Colonel Sandherr was the last person
to know of the existence of the bor-
dereau which was received in the or
binary way. This bordereau was hand
ed to Colonel Henry and was brought
by him to the Intelligence Department.
l., lNxr
Henry after he had pieced it together
Colonel Sandherr only saw 1T later.
"Esterhazy has also said the docu-
ment was stolen from an Embassy ana
brought by porter. 1t is false to say
the Intellige ence Department ever had
any relations with a porter of that En-
bassy. 1t is possible Esterhazy is pre-
pairing some surprises for us, between
now and the end of the trial. They
won't disturb me any more than other
surprises
Referring to the question of the COM
plicity of Henry and Esterhazy, the
witness said: IF Henry had been the
accomplice of Esterhazy, how can it be
admitted that he himself brought the
bordereau, which might have caused
him to be suspected, to the Intelligence
Department."
General Roget spoke for three hours
without adducing any new facts, only
reiterating in the most forcible terms
what has been banded about in the
anti-Dreyfusard press for year past
The most interesting part of his testi-
mony was his attack on Colonel Pic
quart, which will undoubtedly lead to
the conformation of the two men.
He treated Dreyfus without mercy,
both IN words and attitude. In fact,
it seemed at times as though he would
provoke the prisoner into striking him.
The Generals manner was most pas
sionate. In his outburst at the end
of his testimony he uttered the most
ruthless attacks with the air of one de-
livering a pleasant Sunday school ad
dress, leaning over the front of the wit
ness rail, slipping from a glass of water,
wiping his lips and wiping his brow,
with perfect self satisfaction. But
again and again he would half turn in
his chair and pointing his finger at
Dreyfus, would repeat some cruel &C
cusation, at the same time fixing his
eyes on the prisoner, his head inclined
forward like that of a cobra waiting
the moment to strike.
Dreyfus was not affected and stead
lily returned his gaze, sometimes
throwing a glance at the President of
the court. as though appealing for per-
mission to reply. Once. when General
Roget had flung one of these darts, he
stopped and deliberately paused, one
could see the fire in Dreyfus' eyes, and
in his tightly clenched jaws could be
~
within him.
The Captain of Gendarmes, seated by
Dreyfus, watched him closely. The
seconds passed like hours and the spec
tators held their breath General Ro-
get seemed purposely to prolong the
sitting, in order to make deeper i'm
preston. 1t was a perilous moment,
but Dreyfus won the battle over his
passions and when Roget's voice was
at length heard again every one knew
the danger was passed and a deep
drawn sigh of relief came from the au-
dience.
The General discoursed lengthily on
the famous scene with Colonel Henry
in the office of M. Burtulus, the exam
lining magistrate, and said NJ. Bertulus
asked Henry to inform the witness
that he, NJ. Bertulus. was a friend of
the army and pledged the witness to
call and see how he would communi-
cate the result of his conversations
into Blanche and "Speeranza" forger-
les. "In reply" said General Roget, Il
said: When you see NJ. Bertulus you
will thank him in my behalf. Tell him
the investigation does not interest me
in any way | added that / was dis
tressful of this proposal which
pointed out was perhaps a trap"
The General added that NJ. Cavaig
nae (then Minister of War; approved
of his course to M. Bertillon.
The Court next dwelt on the seizure
of papers at the house of Nine Pays,
on which NJ Bertulus largely found his
conviction of the guilt of Henry, ow-
ing TO the mention in them of the name
of a spy, Richard" at Cuers and
Basle where it was we'll known spies
We're in the habit of meeting Then
the General tried to refute NJ. Bertulus
statements, declaring that he only
brought three of these documents TO
the War Department and that they did
not contain the mention of Basle or
Cuers as stated by NJ. Bertulus.
The latter, however, has already
shown before the whole Court of Cas-
sation that while he was mistaken in
saying the words appeared in those
documents, they did not appear in
other papers seized at Nine. Pays resi-
dence