M. Clemenceau.--“Yes or no, has he demonstrated the principle of his
system to a lawyer of the appellate court of Paris?”
M. Bertillon.--“Certainly not. I have often defended myself against
the imputations of Bernard Lazare and company. But the most absurd
statements have been attributed to me.”
M. Clemenceau.--“M. Bernard Lazare is not a lawyer of the appellate
court of Paris. Has the witness had a twenty minutes’ talk concerning
the principle of his system with a certain lawyer of the appellate
court of Paris?”
M. Bertillon.--“When you shall make your questions more precise, I will
try to remember more precisely. I repeat that it is impossible to speak
intelligibly of the Dreyfus case without the documents before us. If
you only knew how for the last three years I have been pestered in all
ways! They ask me insidious questions. They accuse me of this and of
that. How many friends have become cool toward me because of the _rôle_
attributed to me in this matter! I assure you that it is not funny. My
conscience is at ease, but I have suffered much during the last three
years. Now they make me one of the accused. That has nothing to do with
the Zola case.”
M. Clemenceau.--“Has the witness had a twenty minutes’ talk with our
_confrère_ Decori, a lawyer of the appellate court of Paris, concerning
the principle of his system?”
M. Bertillon.--“Oh! it is possible that I have spoken to M. Decori, as
to many others, of the Dreyfus case, and of the insults that have been
heaped upon me in connection therewith.”
M. Clemenceau.--“Now we will go on to something else. If tomorrow a
new traitor were to be discovered in France, and if M. Bertillon were
to be asked to demonstrate the guilt of this new traitor by an expert
examination similar to that of which we have been speaking, is it
probable that M. Bertillon’s system would be applicable to this new
traitor and his handwriting?”