Jasper County Democrat, Volume 2, Number 21, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 2 September 1899 — DREYFUS HAS A DAY. [ARTICLE]

DREYFUS HAS A DAY.

CORDIER’S EVIDENCE STRONGLY FAVORS PRISONER. Never Thongbt Bordereau Enough to Warrant Conviction—Backs Opinion with Proof—Former Minister of War De Freycinet Explains ‘'Syndicate.” Tuesday was another good Dreyfus day. Lieut. Col. Cordier, retired, who was a member of the intelligence bureau at the time Dreyfus was there, occupied most of the time of the court martial. His testimony was strongly in favor of the accused. M. de Freycinet, former minister of war, also testified regarding the “foreign syndicate” reported to have been formed to fight for Dreyfus' freedom. He admitted frankly that he had no basis for the statement. Lieut. Col. Cordier was first called to the stand. He testified that at first he believed Dreyfus guilty, but later he became sine there was no proof of the guilt of the accused and certain facts tended strongly to the presumption that he was innocent. He related the first description given of the traitor. It was that he was a colonel, 45 years old and decorated, which did not answer closely to Dreyfus. The last named was 34 and not decorated. Then the witness, continuing, said: "Foreign officers are aware that some of the members of our service make a regular business of treason.” This was received with murmurs of surprise and negation by the audience. “Some of these know only French, but there are others who are linguists, such as Esterhazy, for instance, who is proficient iu the languages.” “Col. Sandherr,” continued Cordier, “was loyal and a patriot and he died an honest man. Trouble began in the bureau with the arrival of Col. Henry. Before that there was harmony. Sandherr disliked Henry. The latter’s famous forgeries were simply committed in order to demolish the evidence amassed by Lieut. Col. Picquart. There is no proof of Dreyfus’ guilt, while on the other hand there were numerous suspicious acts in other quarters.” Maj. Lauth here arose and

disputed certain of the dates and facts mentioned by Cordier. Later, however, he firmly reiterated his statements. M. Labor! then read a telegram from a man named Pages, who was a friend of Col. Sandherr, denying that Matthieu Dreyfus attempted to bribe him (Sandherr). Gen. Rpget now confronted Lieut. Col. Cordier, saying: “What part of my deposition are you pleased to designate as false?” Cordier: “It is all false.” A long dispute between Gen. Roget and the witness then ensued. “Were you not an anti-Semite in 1894?” asked Gen. Roget. "Yes, 1 was,” replied Cordier, “and I still object to having Jews in the army, but not enough to bring false evidence against one of them who is accused of the crime of treason.” This direct thrust at Gen. Roget caused a great sensation. Col. Fleur and Archivist Gribelin of the general staff also confronted the witness. Their argument, however, was without result. Gen. Mercier then took the stand, and to the surprise of every one supported Cordier in some of his statements. He also affirmed Pages’ telegram, read by M. Labori, to the effect that Matthieu Dreyfus ever attempted to bribe Sandherr was correct. The next.witness was former Minister of War de Freycinet. He looked like a little white mouse, which, in fact, is his political nickname. M. de Freycinet testified in barely audible squeaks. The witness tiret testified in regard to the 35,000,000 franc foreign syndicate to free Dreyfus. He said he got the idea that it existed from a discussion with Jamont on possible coincidences and happenings as the Dreyfus case progressed. This was the only basis for his statement to Gen. Mercier that such a syndicate existed. Col. Jouaust, president of the court, then asked the witness what was his opinion of Dreyfus. M. de Freycinet replied: “I will be satisfied, Colonel, with whatever verdict the court renders as correct.” The audience was disappointed at this diplomatic answer, which saved the witness from publicly declaring his opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the accused. M. Labori asked M. de Freycinet: “Do you know a single fact which would lead you to think that any foreign agent had done anything in France to bring about a Tension of the Dreyfus case?” “No, nothin,” replied de Freycinet. “Or anything that would influence the court of cassation?” insisted Labori. “No,” emphatically said the former war minister. The. court adjourned after the testimony of a few minor witnesses was heard. M. Gallichet, a reporter on military matters, and a friend of Col. Henry’s, testified that Henry was uncommonly uncommunicative when the Dreyfus case was on. Belhomme, another handwriting expert, who testified at the Esterhazy trial, persisted that the bordereau was not written by Efeterhazy. He would not say, however, that Dreyfus wrote it. Abraham Cohn Labatt, 97, Galveston, Tex., is dead. He was the second oldest ,Masou in the United States.