THE DRE

and the more evidence accumulated by Captain Dreyfus to prove his innocence, the greater seems to be his portion of woe. He has been vindicated ov

xon rule, that every man must be regarded as innocent until he is proven guilty. The French say that trials may be greatly simplified if the presumption of guilt is attached to every defendant in a

eyfus was convicted, let us suppose that French methods could be transferred to the United Sta

accused of stealing a dog.

r-"Not

dge your guilt, we may be compelled to cast suspicion on gentle

acknowledge my guilt whe

og. Now, if you come before the tribunal and prove that you didn't steal the dog you are going to humiliate a great many well known and sensit

I admit stealing the dog w

ver see the dog said

sir." (Profou

audacity to stand there an

t many other peo

hem, so I don't propose to have their names hauled in here. Of all the men who saw the dog and h

teal the dog. I can prove that he confessed to steali

ld by very dear friends of mine, and if I permit the introduction of such testimony, there is no telling what they will sa

't think of any

nk a moment. Nearly every man is guilty of something. If w

cknowledge any degree o

mable people think otherwise, but I suppose we shal

skipped out in order to avoid arrest, but these details have no weight with me. I am satisfied that if the defendant did not steal the dog mentioned in this affidavit, he must have stolen some other dog that we know nothing about. Ever since this wretched defendant was first accused of this crime I have been going around saying that he was

much for your testimony.

t letter of the name of the man who stole the dog. Although there are 100,000 persons in town whose names begin with 'D,' I had no difficulty in coming to the conclusion that the particular 'D' who stole the dog was the scoundrel now on trial. The reason that I came to this conclusion was that he used to wear a red necktie

l now have some e

that the man who stole the dog was a brunette. Some people claim that this fact points to the innocence of the defendant, who is a blonde; but my theory is that the defendant dyed his hair and whiskers so as to cause them to resemble the hair and whiskers of a certain innocent man, then he borrowed a suit of the innocent man's clothes and went and stole the dog, and the resemblance was so perfect that even the innocent man and the dog were both deceived. The innocent man thought that he, and not the defendant, had

en you think

ing in my theory, it is simply im

obliged. Call th

well liked down in our neighbourhood, where he formerly resided, and if the cour

o you think

ince I heard him say one morning, 'I have something to do this afternoon.' It is evident to my mind that when he

are quite sure that

ness-"Of

there any oth

iles away, attending a picnic. I can prove, also, that I didn't need a dog; that I never liked dogs; that I had no earthly motive for

ng to do with the case. I'll sentence you to six mon