29 APRIL 1899, Page 17


THE revelations in the Dreyfus case caused by the publi- cation of the evidence in the Figaro become more and more sensational. In that evidence we see the General Staff when they have to abandon one weapon against their victim picking up another, and again and again the new weapon breaks in their hands. For example, Captain Cuignet entirely throws over Du Paty de Clam, and describes him as the insti- gator of the Henry forgery. At the same time, Captain Cuignet insists that Dreyfus is guilty, and relies upon a telegram sent by Panizzardi, the Italian Attache, to his Government. It turns out, however, that it was a false form of this telegram that was wittingly used by the War Office in order to prove the guilt of Dreyfus. The telegram, which was in cypher, was first tentatively deciphered by the Foreign Office in a way that might be taken to impli- cats Dreyfus. Later a correct decipherment was obtained, which in effect read in Dreyfus's favour. Yet incredible as it sounds, the War Office, having both versions, used the false one. Fortunately, Captain Cuignet was foolish enough to accuse the Foreign Office to the Court of Cessation of having falsified the text of the telegram. This was more than the Foreign Minister, M. Delcasq, could endure, and he accordingly sent the expert, M. Paleologue, to the Court of Cessation to tell the true story. If this were not enough, Captain Cuignet also relied on another false document known as No. 44 of the secret dossier. This M. Paleologue was also obliged to denounce as a forgery. The original of this docu- ment is alleged to have disappeared from the War Office, and three and a half years after its disappearance it was " recon- stituted" from, memory by the General Staff. Space does not allow us to give more of the week's revelations, but we may mention that it has been shown that the document supposed to have been'found in Dreyfus's waistcoat when a prisoner was either a pure invention or was put there by those in whose custody he was.