THE DREYFUS TRIAL.

Waikato Argus, Volume VII, Issue 474, 15 August 1899, Page 2

THE DREYFUS TRIAL.

[united press association], (hy electeic telegraph—copyright). Paris, August 13. The Court-martial at Rennes has been reopened. Dreyfus admitted that a copy of the bordereau, which he hud concealed in his clothes, was kept there to refresh his memorj. M. Jonauste, President of the Court-martial, admitted that Dreyfus was entitled to use it. M. Casimir-Perier repeated the evidence he gave before the Court of Cassation, describing the Munster, Hanotaux incident arising out of the Emperor of Germany's demand for a formal denial that the German Embassy was implicated with Dreyftft. The witness declared that this incident was not the cause of his resignation of the Presidency of the Republic. He admitted that Col. Picquart told him that M. Bertillon, the writing expert, had not impressed the first Court-martial by his evidence. He admitted that M. Waldeck Rosseau, the present Premier, and Af. Reinach, urged hira to direct that the Courtmartial sit in open Court. He replied to these requests that he was unable to intervene in the matter. Witness passionately denied pledging his word to the man accused of treason that the Court-martial should not sit with closed doors, yet the newspapers had published that statement over Dreyfus' signature. Striking the bar ot the witness-box violently, M. Perier nxclaimed with great emotion, " I insist on its being disclosed who lied here." The state merit produced a sensation. Dreyfus mid he understood the witpess' indignation. His own intention had be< n misrepresented. Witness insisted that the letter should be produced, even though his name might be dragged through the mud. He would not allow the |dignity of Franoe to be soiled. This caused a further sensation. M. Jonauste promised that thd letter would be produced. Revisionists declare that Du Paty de Clam's absence from the trial on the ground of alleged illness, is to prevent light being thrown on the case.

M.. Casiniir-Perier, in his evidence, stated that ha informed Count Munster, that France was fully entitled to court-martial the sender of the document seized at the German Embassy. Witress always bettered that Franoe was answerable to herself alone. He hinted that his resignation was due to the Minister for War (General Meioier) withholding information from the Dreyfus trial, including interviews with Count Muuster. Witness was unaware of the secret dessier until a fortnight after Dreyfus' condemnation. General Meroier was examined, and repeated his former evidence given before the Court of Cassation. (Received August 14, 8.30 a.m.) Paris, August 13. General Morcier's evidence mainly consisted of mere statements of a presumptive character. He described the widespread system of espionage instituted by Col. Schwartzkoppen, German attache, and intercepted letters were produced. He said his col* leagues acted discreetly. M. Hanotaux, then Minister for Foreign Affairs, undertook to ask the German Ambassador t» stop espionage. Witness was still convinced that Dreyfus delivered the documents enumarated on the bordereau to the German Embassy. Dreyfus, ail dressing witness, ejaculated " Resign !" and shaking his fist at General Mercier, exclaimed : "You ought to blush !" The interjections produced a sens** tion in Court.

Dreyfus, in the course of a letter, stated that M. Casimir. Perier promised, through Dreyfus' counsel, to ask for a public trial, trustiug that Dreyfus would not divulge the evidence given in camera. (Received August 14,10.6 a.m.). Paris, August 13. General Mercier, continuing, justified his aotioi in communicating to the Secretary to the court-martial doouments containing the expression " Canaille de D. " because France was within an ace of war with Germany. M. Casimir Perier shrugged his shoulders at this statement. Witness said he had expected the Minister to ask for his passports, and he directed General Boisdeffre to prepare for the mobilisation of the army. He was uncertain whether Russia would join France, but the ground was mined and counter mined. On the part of Fra.nce it was necessary, and hence his action in communioating the documents to the Courts.

At the close of General Mercier's evidence M. Of ,simir Perier announced his intention to rebut the testimony given by the witness. General Mevcier was hooted by the public. His evidence is regarded as a fiasco.