The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1899-09-10
THE DREYFUs VERDICT.


| It cannot be said thai the verdict in the
! Dreyfus case was a surprise, and yet in
one sense il was The attitude of the
! president of the court martial and of the
! generals of the army virtually satisfied
those who studied the situation carefully
! that it was the purpose of the court mar
! ual 10 render verdict of guilty, no matter
| what the evidence might be. Therefore
| the verdict was not a surprise, but the
\ whole civilized world outside of France is
morally certain that Dreyfus is innocent,
and therefore the verdict is. in a measure,
a surprise.
All the evidence there is against Drey-
fus is known. It has about ali been pub
lished. and it has been read and COM
mented on wherever there are printing
presses. The civilized world was a jury in
the case. and that jury has declared that
Drefus is not guilty. 1t felt certain that
he was not guilty when Gen. MERCER, the
principal witness for the prosecution, fail
ed to produce any evidence against the
accused. From the beginning of the trial
TO the end of it there was no evidence pro-
duced against Dreyfus-that is, evidence
that would have commanded respect in
any court in this country or England. The
two bits of evidence that made the most
impression were not of sufficient import
ance to affect an unbiased court One was
The alleged confession of Dreyfus. The
cross-examlnation of the witness who gave
this evidence caused II TO be discredited
In all unpreiudiced minds. The other was
the evidence of the Austrian adventurer
who said that somebody told him that
Dreyfus was conveying military secrets
to the agents of foreign governments
Dispatches from the Austrian capital made
it clear that this witness ought to have
been in an insane asylum Instead of a
witness before a court martial that had
the power to condemn a soldier of France
TO a living death. Besides, his testimony
was hearsay, and hence of no account.
If the members of the court martial had
relied on the evidence that was produced
against Dreyfus 1t could not have con-
victed him. The same evidence practical
ly was produced before the court of cas-
sation. the highest court OF France, and
that tribunal declared him innocent. How
is 1t then that a military tribunal, NOT
possessing a fraction of the ability of the
civil court to sift truth from a mass of
falsehoods, found. him guilty? There is
| only one answer to that question, and that
is that 1t was the purpose of the court
martial to find a verdict of guilty, even
without evidence to justify it, The rulings
of the president of the court showed that,
and the statement of Gen. MERCER and
| at he he - fI,.o
| trial, that a verdict of guilty would be
rendered. showed it. 1t seems, however.
that there were two members of the court
who had a conscience. They could not be
buldozed by the generals.
WIN Dreyfus accept the verdict and go
to prison, or will he make a still further
| fight? There is no doubt that If there
is chance for further fighting he will
take 1t. His counsel have said as much.
1t is probable that the court of cessation
will be appealed to again. What can be
accomplished through that court remains
to be seen. Having practically declared
the accused innocent once, a way will be
found probably for 1t to do so again.
WIN France accept the verdict? The
great majority of the people will, because
The majority are against Dreyfus. They
don't know anything about the evidence,
but they believe him guilty because the
generals have said so. They want to be-
lieve him guilty, and the assertion of the
generals affords them an excuse for doing
so. But there will be trouble in France,
If not this week then next, or at some
time not very far In the future. Peace
cannot prevail In nation in which such
a INDUSTRIOUS perversion of justice is posi-
BILE The public cannot be in a normal
mental condition, and, not being so, it is
only a question of time when such dis
turbances viii come as will threaten the
existence of the republic