Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1898-07-11
THE TRIAL OF NJ. lola
A REVIEW OF 1T BY ANTHONY VI.
KELLEY, LATE OF RICHMOND.
ODDITIES OR FRENCH JUSTICE.
The Military Witnesses Allowed to
Make Long Addresses to the Court.
lola Was Defended by One Lawyer
Only.

Judge a. III. Kelley, In Virginia Law
Register.)
The stenographic report OF the first trial
OF M. lola, a volume OF over a thousand
octave pages. has just been published. and
have thought II might interest the read
presented some OF the differences between
the French procedure and our own, as
therein exhibited.
The history OF the very interesting case
out Of which this trial grew Is, briefly,
this: In the latter part OF December, 1894.
Captain Alfred Dreyfus. an artillery OFF,
Ger, attached to the general staff, and on
duty at the Ministry OF War, was tried by
court-martial, with closed doors, on the
charge Of reasonable communication of
army secrets to a foreign government.
He was found guilty. sentenced to de-
graduation from his rank, expulsion from
the army, and perpetual confinement in a
penal colony.
1t is not contested that the only evil
dence OF his guilt, Of which either he or
his counsel had knowledge, was the al
legged similarity Of his handwriting to that
of a certain document, called In all the
trials, "the bOrdereau"-a document with
out date, signature, or address, consisting
OF thirty lines. written on both sides OF a
page of very thin letter paper. by which
the writer promised to furnish his corre-
spondent five described pieces or informa-
ton. alleged to be army secrets.
Dreyfus protested his innocence in the
most passionate manner, and when 1t be-
came known, as it did shortly after his
deportation, that OF the five experts in
handwriting, who testified at the trial,
two declared that the discriminating pa
per was not by Dreyfus, and third de-
cided against him with some reserve,
protest which soon gathered enormous
strength, arose in the highest ranks Oh
civil life against what was termed bar
barrie Injustice This criticism received n
marked impetus from an article published
on the 18th of September 1896, in the
Eclair a semi-military journal. and bit
ter denouncer OF Dreyfus, alleging that
Dreyfus was not condemned alone, OF
principally on the supposed similarity OF
handwriting but on another document
or other documents. Thereupon Maltre
Deuange. the counsel OF Dreyfus, publish
ed over his own signature, letter OF de-
NAL. IN which he affirmed in the most SOL
emn manner that no other proof, docu-
meut. or statement whatever was ever
! communicated TO him or to his client,
| save the "bordereau." This brought out
! the response that the other documents
were privately communicated TO the
| court-martial after the trial was
over and while the court was IN
elaboration! And this is now uni
yersally conceded. About the same
| time lie Matin published fac smile Oh
] the famous "bordereau"-a document
| which was supposed 10 be under seal IN 4
| safe Of the War Department-and the ac-
| curacy OF this copy was admitted on the
| Zola. trial by one Of the officers VINO con-
| demned Dreyfus.
Inst AT this time accident placed In the
hands of Colonel Picquart, an officer IN
| the Intelligence Department, some private
| letters of an infantry officer named Ester
| bazv md the Colonel was struck with the
| renarkable resemblance of the writing or
| these letters to the "bordereau.' AT least
! two other investigators VINO had samples
| Of Esterhazy's writing-Mathew Dreylus,
| brother of the condemned officer, and Nj.
| scbeurer- Kostner, the Nice-Presldent oil
| tho french Senate-came independently
| Ia the same conclusion, and on the 10Th OF
! November 1896. Mathew Dreyfus publish
| ed a letter he had previously written
without effect TO the Minister OF war
! denouncing Esterhazy as the real author
Of the "bordereau." Thus pupllciy chai
| lenged the Minister was compelled 10 act
and the trial Of Esterhazy was ordered.
| also Inv court-martial. 1t resulted, after
| n secret hearing in the acquittal or the
| accused on the testimony OF experts, IL
was said.
A sCATHING CRITICISM.
on the 18th of last January NJ. Zola, the
| wel-known novelist. publlsileu III - Au
rore an open letter TO the President OF the
| Renublic. which. after a shlful presenta-
ton Of the history of the affair, concluded
With a violent denunciation Of the pro-
ceedings OF the two courts-martial and
scatbing criticism of several hlgh oincers
of the army, declaring in terms, that inc
| sentences were rendered by order OF the
| government. the latter to conceal the IL
| legality of the former, and lnNltihg the
government to try him for defamation
Seven DAYS afterwards the Minister OF
| War filed a complaint with the Procureur-
| General attached TO the Court or AppedIs
an officer whose functions are someWhd'
| similar TO those Of Our Commonwealth
| Attorney, in which he singled three sen,
fences out of nine or ten coluihhs VI
| Zola's letter-those assailing the courts
martial-and demanded the prosecution
OF Zola for defaming those courts. TINS
| complaint. put in proper form by the
Procureur. was communicated by sepa-
rate processes In writing TO Nj. PerreuX
| the nuhlisher OF L'Aurore, and TO LOla
suumoning them to answer on the Ith OF
February at the Palace of Justice. Tines,
nrocesses contained each the day, month
| and wear of delivery to the accused, the
name profession, and domicile or the
| Procureur. the name Of the officer (huis-
| sier) who served the summons, the name
| profession, and domicile OF each or the
| accused. and the name OF the person al
| the domicile of each accused In whose
| hands the process was left; and 1t Is sig
| nidcant OF the extreme Journalism OF
French proceedings, that the omission OF
anv one of these many indications would
have rendered the process absolutely null
| and void. The process always concludes
with the cost OF service; ana II may b
of interest TO know that in this case Il
was 10 centimes. or 10 cents of our money
Five days before the trial the accused
| as required by law, furnished the Pro
cureur. in writing, with a list % Of the
facts which they proposed proving C) o.
the documents they purposed introducing
| "a of the witnesses they wished summon
| ed. and inasmuch as one OF The witnesse!
was General Billot. the Minister OF War
the accused prayed the Minister of Jus
tice to procure a decree of the Cabine
allowing General Billot to testify.
Three magistrates OF the Court Of APP
neals in each department are designated