M. Labori.--“Supposing that a post-office stamp had been placed upon
the card-telegram, what, in Major Lauth’s view, would have been the use
of it?”
Major Lauth.--“It would have shown that the paper reached its
destination, whereas without such a stamp it must necessarily have
remained at its starting-point.”
M. Labori.--“Has not Colonel Picquart said, and has not Major Lauth
confirmed the statement, that it had been shown that the origin of this
dispatch was the origin of the _bordereau_?”
Major Lauth.--“When I received it, I could not say that the origin was
not the same, for I received it at second-hand.”
M. Labori.--“Has it ever been pretended that this dispatch was seized
on Major Esterhazy’s premises?”
Major Lauth.--“No.”
M. Labori.--“That is sufficient for me. Then I would like to know
how the dispatch, having the same origin as the _bordereau_, or as
the fragments of paper mingled with the dispatch, could have been
considered as coming from Major Esterhazy’s premises.”
Major Lauth.--“I do not understand you.”
M. Labori.--“I will explain. I asked Major Lauth what would have been
the use, in any point of view, of placing a stamp on the dispatch.
Major Lauth answered that the stamp would have shown that the dispatch
reached its destination. Now, it is necessary that the jury should know
that it has never been said that the dispatch was written in Major
Esterhazy’s hand, and to know also that the writing to the origin of
which Major Lauth was asked to certify was not the handwriting of
Major Esterhazy. The dispatch was addressed to Major Esterhazy. Now
I am inquiring as to the origin. Major Lauth says that the utility
of the stamp was to show that the dispatch reached Major Esterhazy’s
residence. Thereupon I ask: Was the _bordereau_, or the papers
contained in the package that contained the dispatch, or the papers
proceeding from the same source,--were any of these considered as
coming from Major Esterhazy’s premises?”
Major Lauth.--“No.”
M. Labori.--“Then how does Major Lauth reconcile the affirmation
that the dispatch originated as Colonel Picquart had said, with the
declaration that it had been placed in the cornucopia in which torn
documents of this sort were placed?”
Major Lauth.--“It is not for me to explain what Colonel Picquart may
have believed.”
M. Labori.--“All right. I take note of this declaration. What, now, was
the use of strips placed upon the photograph to conceal traces of tear?”
Major Lauth.--“I did not say that I had placed strips in such a way as
to remove traces of writing. Whenever I have had to make a photograph,
Colonel Picquart has asked me to cover up certain lines, or certain
words with a line in the middle. On each occasion I have made plates
concealing a part. He did not explain to me his purpose.”
M. Labori.--“I am much pleased with the answer, for it brings out a
point that had escaped me,--that M. Lauth did not intend to say that
there was anything singular in this photographic treatment of the
dispatch.”
Major Lauth.--“Pardon me, I say that I did not conceal the text. I had
to remove traces of tear, in order to give the dispatch the appearance
of a document absolutely new and intact.”
M. Labori.--“Was Major Lauth ever asked to remove the appearance of
tear from the original?”
Major Lauth.--“Oh! that would not have been possible.”
M. Labori.--“The reply satisfies me. Was not the _bordereau_ also in
bits?”
Major Lauth.--“Yes.”