Colonel Henry.--“No.”
The Judge.--“But one of the witnesses yesterday said that it was?”
M. Labori.--“Pardon me. Permit me to interrupt to ask that the question
be put as we frame it. I protest; there has been already too much said.
I ask that the question be thus put: Did Colonel Henry once do this?”
Colonel Henry then admitted that he placed his signature on the secret
file. The witness was then confronted with M. Leblois, whom Colonel
Henry said that he had never seen, except in Colonel Picquart’s
presence.
M. Leblois.--“I had a long discussion with Colonel Henry concerning
a matter that had been under examination in the office of the public
prosecutor at Nancy.”
The Judge.--“In the absence of Colonel Picquart?”
Colonel Henry.--“We talked once in the presence of Colonel Picquart.
The latter said to me: ‘When we shall have need of additional
information concerning some matter of spying, here is M. Leblois, who
will be able to lend us his aid.’ Well, I have never conferred with M.
Leblois.”
M. Leblois.--“This conference lasted several hours in your own private
office. You admitted it before the council of war.”
_Testimony of M. de la Batut._
The next witness was M. de la Batut, who testified as follows:
“At the time of which I speak Lieutenant du Paty de Clam was giving a
course of instruction to the conditional volunteers of a year. When
the conditional volunteers came to the regiment, they were given, as
a subject of historical composition, ‘The Wars of the First Empire.’
I wrote such a composition as I was able to from my recollections of
the matter, and I finished by saying that it was to be hoped that
henceforth intelligence, and not cannons, would govern the world. The
next day the lieutenant-colonel sent for me, and said: ‘You are from
the south; you shall have a fortnight in prison.’ I answered: ‘My
colonel, I am not exactly from the south, I am from Dordogne.’ ‘Yes,
yes, you are from the south. You shall have a fortnight in prison for
your composition.’ And I was taken to prison. The colonel, who was
absent, returned the next morning, and, probably finding my punishment
excessive, hastened to relieve me of it.”
M. Clemenceau.--“After he had thus relieved you, was the punishment
replaced by another of a more general character?”
M. de la Batut.--“Yes; the colonel said to me: ‘I relieve you of your
punishment, because it was a little too severe, and you have not yet
the military spirit. But you and all your comrades will get no leave of
absence for a month.’”
Then the following witnesses were successively called and dismissed,
because their testimony was to relate to the Dreyfus case: Major Besson
d’Ormescheville, M. Maurel, M. Vallecalle, M. Eichmann, M. Gallet, and
M. Roche. Then came Major Ravary.
_Testimony of Major Ravary._
M. Labori.--“I find the following in Major Ravary’s report: ‘One
evening, when Lieutenant-Colonel Henry, on returning to Paris, suddenly
entered M. Picquart’s office, he found M. Leblois, the lawyer, who
paid the colonel long and frequent visits, sitting near the desk and
searching with him the secret file. A photograph bearing the words,
“That scoundrel D...” had been taken from the file and spread upon the
desk.’”
M. Ravary.--“There is an error. It is _a_ secret file, not _the_
secret file.”
M. Labori.--“I ask first not what this file contained, since it is
secret, but to what it related?”
M. Ravary.--“I do not exactly understand. A witness said that there
was a document spread between M. Leblois and Colonel Picquart. I know
nothing more.”
M. Labori.--“Unless it is understood that there is always to be some
method of evasion, I insist on a reply from M. Ravary. Here we are
squarely in the Esterhazy matter. We have Major Ravary’s report. He was
the official reporter. It is not possible that he accepted testimony
that has been contradicted here by the evidence of M. Gribelin and M.
Henry. It is not possible that M. Ravary accepted evidence without
pressing the witnesses. It is not possible that a matter so serious
as a secret file should have been referred to in a report read to the
council of war without resulting in an examination of its contents.
I do not ask what its contents were, but to what it related. If the
witness cannot answer, I shall infer that judicial examinations before
a council of war are carried on as we have never seen them carried on
in trials in which we take part.”
M. Ravary--“I protest that all our examinations are carried on with the
greatest honesty and conscientiousness. As to the document of which M.
Labori speaks, it did not interest me, and for this reason. I had an
accused man before me, Major Esterhazy. I was to seek proof either of
his innocence or of his guilt, and this document had nothing to do with
Major Esterhazy.”
M. Labori.--“This document was a part of the Esterhazy file. I ask
the court to ask M. Ravary, who conducted the examination, what this
document was.”