Jasper County Democrat, Volume 2, Number 21, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 2 September 1899 — THE DREYFUS TRIAL [ARTICLE+ILLUSTRATION]

THE DREYFUS TRIAL

Borne Dramatic and Sensational Features of the Evidence. Dramatic and sensational as was Thursday’s session of the Dreyfus courtmartial, it yielded less substantial advantage to the defense than the friends of truth and justice anticipated. The political character of the trial was strongly emphasized. For the first time the court itself directly intervened to shield and protect the military witnesses. The refrain so familiar at the Zola trial, "this question will not be put,” was frequently heard during Labori’s attempt to crossexamine Mercier, the chief of the conspirators. Besides, many of the questions which counsel did put and which the court could not decently rule out as irrelevant Mercier simply declined to answer, being sustained by the presiding officer in his refusal. All that Labori succeeded in showing was that Mercier was intriguing with Paty de Clam on the very eve of the present trial, that he inserted an alleged incriminating document in the secret dossier which he had illegally held and that he had tried to prevent the defense from knowing its contents. This document Col. Jouaust wso forced to rule dut. All the rest of the scathing cross-examina-tion related to the trial of 1894, now known to have been flagrantly lawless and unfair, and had iu» bearing on the question under inquiry except as tending to prove the existence of prejudice and conspiracy. At the opening of Friday's session of the court-martial, a doctor’s certificate to the effect that it was impossible for Du Paty de Clam to be present was read. M. Labori asked the court that an official physician be sent to examine De Clam, but Col. Jouaust refused. M. Gobert, handwriting expert of the Bank of France, was called. Gobert told how he was originally called by the war office to examine the bordereau. After comparing it with specimens of Dreyfus' handwriting he declared that from first to last it was not the work of accused. Gen. Gonse was called to confront the witness. Gonse said that Gobert was wrong in the details of his testimony, whereupon the expert earnestly demonstrated the correctness of all he had said. Gonse retired discomfited, but insinuated that Dreyfus had known the witness in the bank. Dreyfus denied emphatically that he had ever known Gobert. The rest of the day's session was given over to the testimony of M. Bertillon, head of the anthropometric department of the Paris police, and who maintains that he has proved Dreyfus was the author of the bordereau. Bertillon came into court accompanied by four soldiers carrying charts, portfolios, compasses, logarithm tables, photographs, etc., which looked like the properties in a comic opera. The audience burst into laughter at the sight. The judges themselves looked dismayed as the procession approached the platform, and all those in the court who did not have to be there fled from the room. The rush for the doors was noted by Bertillon, who remarked that it took intelligent people to understand what he was going to demonstrate. After arranging his paraphernalia about him on tables and Chairs, the witness began by stating that the bordereau had been produced by' the forces of nature, but that somebody must have written it., This was given in the manner of a man announcing a great discovery. M. Bertillon continued by declaring that the bordereau had been traced by Dreyfus, who had cleverly imitated his own handwriting. Then Bertillon proceeded to give the exact measurement of each pen stroke, and showed the court a large diagram resembling the plan of a fortress. This he claimed proved mathematically that Dreyfus was guilty. The witness stopped constantly to untie packages and surround himself with a mysterious apparatus to the increased bewilderment of his auditors. Bertillon proceeded to demonstrate his whole system, which, with its ratios and angles, was understood by no one in the court. The table in front of the witness was filled with charts which came iuexhaustively from numerous pouches. Bertillon’s exhibition discredited the whole expert system. His reasoning was based on taking as a fact some charge against Dreyfus which was unsupported by evidlence and then arguing in a circle.

Uncle Sam—Yes, Miss Columbia, we will take good care of our stormstricken wards. —Williamsport (Pa.) Grit.