The gold leaf. [volume] (Henderson, N.C.) 1881-1911, 1899-08-17

The following article reviewing the
former trial of Capt. Alfred Dreyfus
is Of special interest Just now in view
of the re-opening of his case:
(Sir Godfrey Washington in National Re-
view.)
The court-martial on Drevfuf was
pronounced by Col. Sandherr. the
head Of the intelligence depart ment,
to be the chef d'oeuvre of the Etat
Major. Among the various persons
holding high rank in the State who
have made themselves responsible
for declaring Drcyfus to have been
regularly and justly condemned is
NJ. Charles Dupuy, the present Prime
Minister. Before long, however, he,
like everybody else. will have to say
that the condemnation was neither
regular nor ust.
The monster illegality was that at
the court-martial documents were
secretly communicated by the War
Office to the Judges in the absence of
Dreyfus and his counsel. Such an
act would not only invalidate the
decision. but would constitute a
grave criminal offense in these who
were gully of it, the officers who gave
and the judges who received the
documents, and this whatever the
nature of the documents. That some
such communication did in fact take
place has been notorious ever since
the first disclosure to the public by
the Eclair on the 10Th of September,
1896, and it has been made the subject
of innumerable protests. But no
Minister of War has been honest
enough or brave enough to tell the
truth about it. Mercier, who was
responsible for the court-martial,
when asked by the President Of the
highest criminal court of the land,
declines to answer. Billot pleads
that .'he has never been able to in
quire into that matter" Cavalgnac
'shas never turned his attention in
that direction" Zurlinden declares
that Sin spite of his researches he
has never been able to ascertain
whether the charge is true one or a
mere table, All he can say is that
there is no trace in the War Office Of
any such communication having been
made. The Court of Cessation has
abstained from summoning any OF
the officers who served on the court
martial; but one of them, Capt.
Freystaetter, has come forward and
made a statement which has not yet
come to hand, but which certainly is
not a contradiction of the charge of
communication.
A HEINOUS CRIME.
The court, however, had before it
some evidence upon the point. NJ.
Casimer-Perier, who was President
of the republic at the time, deposed
that MERCER at the time informed
him that a certain document, ace
canaille de D. which is certainly
not in the legal dossier, had been
shown to the Judges. MERCER, how
ever, did not tell him that the same
document had been withheld from
Dreyfus; so the President was left
under a false impression. Then
Picquart, who had been deputed to
attend the court-martial Though not
the deliberations of the Judges, }
swears that, from discussions with
| Sandherr and de Boisdeffre at the
time, he was aware that secret
dossier had been communicable; and
he also swears that Sandherr, when,
| on retiring, he handed over the office
| to Picquart, told him where he would
| find the secret dossier which had
been shown to the judges; and that,
when, in 1896, he examined the
dossier, he found it to contain four
| pieces. together with a commentary
upon each of them by du Patty de
| was this very document, ''Ce canaille
de D." spoken of by Mercier to
| Casimer-Perier This is enough to
| show that that document, at ali
events, was communicated to the
| Judges, and that the crime was com
mitted. But were there any others
1t would be rash to take it for granted
that all those which Picquart found
were shown: still more so that no
| other documents were shown, in our
present state of knowledge, which is
so limited, the question is of i'm
portance chiefly with respect to q
telegram of November ,, 1894, from
Panizzardi to the Italian headquarters
| staff at Rome, which at the time was
intercepted by the French Govern
ment. The history of this telegram
will be given later on. Here | will
| only say that if, as the Figaro asserts,
| a falsified version of this telegram q
version which incriminated Dreyfus
| instead of the true version. which
eNculpated him, and among the docu
ments secretly communicated to the
Judges behind the back OF Dreyfus
then. indeed, the crime was most
heinous. and the anxiety of Morciel
and others to conceal the facts would
be more intelligible even than it is
now. The Figaro is in possession o
copy of the evidence taken by the
court, and processes to speak on tn,
authority of that evidence.
Whether, as is further asserted il
that journal, there were also com
municated to the judges. behind th,
back of Dreyfus and TO his pre-
judice. other documents, some
of them forged or mendacious
| will not undertake to say. Bu
among the documents so alleged Il
have been communicated are: Il
Forged letters from the Emperor o
Germany to Dreyfus. (2) Patty d
CLAIMS commentary, or, rather.
| copy of the ORIGINAL commentary