M. Scheurer-Kestner, after repeating the substance of the foregoing
letters, continued his testimony as follows:
“Such, gentlemen, is the _résumé_ that I have been able to make from
memory of these fine letters, which honor their author, both as a
soldier and as a man. After reading them, I was convinced that there
had been an error. I saw that General Gonse, Colonel Picquart’s
superior, shared his ideas, and looked upon revision as a possibility.
What had I to do? My first duty was to inform the minister of war,
and show him the documents which proved that the handwriting of the
_bordereau_ was the handwriting of Major Esterhazy, and not that of
Captain Dreyfus. That was what I did. I had a long conversation with
General Billot, and showed him the documents that I possessed, though
I did not speak at that time of the correspondence between General
Gonse and Colonel Picquart, thinking it better not to do so. But I
was not slow in offering this correspondence to the government, and
naturally I was authorized to keep a copy of it. Unhappily new events
had taken place, and the government perhaps had changed its attitude;
I do not know; in any case, my offer was refused. It seemed to me that
the honor of the government, of the republic, of democracy, and of the
army required that the initiative in such a reparation should come from
above, and not from below.
“Then what happened? The day after my visit to the minister of war, in
which I spoke to him of the documents and showed them to him (that was
October 31),--on the day after, November 1, though it had been agreed
between us that our conversation should be secret, that it should not
be noised abroad, that there should be no mention of it, what did I see
in the newspapers inspired, so I was told, by the minister of war,--my
visit to the minister related with false comments. It was said that
I had shown nothing, that I had refused to give the minister of war
proof of the innocence of Dreyfus, when, in fact, I had been with him
three hours, begging him to make the proof public, and offering to cry
it from the house-tops. He either would not, or could not, do it. He
confined himself to saying: ‘He is guilty.’ ‘Prove to me that he is
guilty,’ I said. ‘I cannot prove it to you.’ That was General Billot’s
answer when I had brought important documents, and when my heart was
full of all that I knew through the reading of the letters of which I
had just spoken. That is how I came to my present conviction, and that
is the way in which I gained courage to take up a cause which is a
cause of humanity, truth, and justice.”
M. Labori.--“M. Scheurer-Kestner has told us of his conversation
with General Billot. Will he now be good enough to tell us if he has
interviewed the prime minister?”
M. Scheurer-Kestner.--“I had several interviews with the prime minister
in the early days of November. To him I told all that I knew, all that
I had learned. I offered to him the letters that passed between General
Gonse and Colonel Picquart, for to him I could speak of what had
happened at the bureau of information.”
M. Labori.--“Whence and under what circumstances came M. Mathieu
Dreyfus’s denunciation of Major Esterhazy? Did not M. Mathieu Dreyfus
have a conversation with you in which he revealed to you the name of
Major Esterhazy,--a name which had come to his knowledge by a path
wholly different from that by which it had come to your ears?”
M. Scheurer-Kestner.--“I had not uttered the name of Major Esterhazy
in the presence of a single private individual. I had mentioned it
only to the government when, on November 12, I received a message from
M. Mathieu Dreyfus, asking me to receive him at my house. I had no
relations with him; he had never been at my house; I had never seen
him; I was not acquainted with him. He came, and this is the story that
he told. A certain M. de Castro, whom he did not know, was walking on
the boulevards, at the time when they were selling the placards which
contained the proof of treason,--placards which bore portraits on
both sides, and in the middle a _fac-simile_ of the _bordereau_. M.
de Castro, who is a foreigner, and who theretofore had not been much
interested in this matter, bought one of these placards simply to pass
away the time, and, as soon as he had it in his hands,--I make use
of a word which he used himself when he told me the story later,--he
was dazed. ‘I went home,’ he said, ‘took out the package of letters
from Esterhazy that I had in my desk,--thirty or forty of them,--and
made sure that I was not mistaken. The _bordereau_ was really in his
writing.’ M. de Castro hurried to the house of M. Mathieu Dreyfus,
and it was after this visit that M. Mathieu Dreyfus came to me in the
evening to say this: ‘You must know the author of the _bordereau_. It
is said that you have been occupying yourself with this matter for
a long time, with an earnestness really feverish, and that you are
searching for information everywhere. Then you must know whom they
have substituted, or tried to substitute, for M. Alfred Dreyfus as
the author of the _bordereau_, since I know that you are convinced,
from the examination of handwritings, that Alfred Dreyfus is not the
author of it.’ And, as I refused to give him the name, he said: ‘Well,
if I speak the name, and if the name that I speak has come under your
eyes in your investigations, will you tell me so?’ I answered: ‘In
that case I shall consider myself unbound, and will say yes.’ Then M.
Mathieu Dreyfus spoke the name of Major Esterhazy, and I said to him:
‘Under the circumstances in which you find yourself, it is your duty
to state this immediately to the minister of war.’ For at that moment,
thanks to the newspapers, a certain number of superior officers were
under suspicion, and I was very glad that, under the circumstances in
which this fact appeared, these superior officers would be placed out
of the question. Thus it was that M. Mathieu Dreyfus pointed out Major
Esterhazy to the minister of war as the author of the _bordereau_.”
M. Zola.--“I beg M. Scheurer-Kestner to give us further details
regarding his interview with General Billot, in order to emphasize a
thing which I consider of great importance. You know, _Monsieur le
Président_, that they accuse us, and that they accuse me personally,
of having been the cause of the frightful crisis that is now dividing
the country. They say that we have produced this great trouble
which is disturbing business and inflaming hearts. Well, I should
like it to be clearly established that General Billot was warned
by M. Scheurer-Kestner of what would take place. I would like M.
Scheurer-Kestner to say that he is an old friend of General Billot,
that he addresses him with the utmost familiarity, that he almost wept
in his arms, and that he begged him, in the name of France, to take the
matter up. I would like him to say that.”
M. Scheurer-Kestner.--“The conversation that I had with General
Billot, who has been my friend for twenty-five years, was a long one.
Yes, I begged him to give his best attention to this matter, which
otherwise was likely to become extremely serious. ‘It is incumbent
upon you,’ I said to him, ‘to take the first steps, make a personal
investigation; do not trust the matter to anyone. There are bundles
of documents in certain offices. Send for them. Use no intermediary.
Make an earnest investigation. If you will promise to make this earnest
personal investigation. I pledge myself to maintain silence until I
shall know the result.’ As I left, General Billot asked me to say
nothing to anyone. I agreed, but on one condition. ‘Two hours,’ I
said, ‘are all that is necessary for this investigation. I give you
a fortnight, and during that fortnight I will not take a step.’ Now,
during that fortnight I was dragged in the mud, pronounced a dishonest
man, treated as a wretch, covered with insults, and called a German and
a Prussian.”