The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1899-08-27
The DreyiuS Case in Review.
springfield Republican,


the exclusion of other important matters
The English are said to be more interest
ed in it than in their threatened war il
South Africa, which is annoying to Mr.
Chamberlain. Here in America the
newspapers devote more columns to the
reports of the trial than to any Other
matter. We were not surprised. there
fore, to receive the following communi.
cation from a valued friend:
Hundreds of your readers, lam quite
sure, would thank you if you would give
one column of the Republican to a con-
else statement of the origin, cause and
issue, so far of the Dreyfus case. We
have enough of the matter in all con-
science as it goes, but time and events
and other interests put out of recollec-
ton things and persons that we need to
keep in mind if we would have an in
telligent comprehension of what is doing
and done. We don't keep newspaper
files"
The case dates back to October 10,
1894, when Capt. Alfred Dreyfus, a
French Jew of Alsatian parentage and
birth, was arrested on the charge of
high treason. Capt. Dreyfus had been
on service in the French war office as
a subordinate member of the general
staff. He was an artilleryman About
the middle of December, 1894, he was
tried by court martial sitting in secret,
was condemned and sentenced to depor-
tation and life imprisonment. On Janu-
airy 6, 1895, Captain Dreyfus was pub
licly degraded and was sent to Devils
Island in the tropics, off the coast of
French Guiana. South America. for con-
fnement. There he remained, confined
in chains some of the time and frequent
ly treated with great harshness by his
jailers, until this summer, when, by or
der of the French Government, he was
taken back to France for a new trial.
That trial is now in progress at Rennes.
The chain of causes and events that
compelled this second trial form the bulk
of the story The Dreyfus family was
rich and Mrs. Dreyfus loved her hus-
band All of his friends believed in his
innocence. Their unceasing labors and
unstinted expenditure of money soon
began to have an effect i'll interesting
the public in what they denounced as a
miscarriage of justice. Then facts were
published and revelations made which
convinced fearless and independent
Frenchmen, as well as most foreign OBJ
servers, that, at least, Dreyfus had not
had fair trial. The demand for re
yison" became irresistible.
The great weakness of the trial in
1894 was its secrecy and the undeniable
fact that much of the evidence upon
which Dreyfus was convicted was not
presented either to him or his counsel.
That was denial of the fundamental
principle that an accused man shall be
allowed to defend himself. The charge
against Capt. Dreyfus was that he had
sold or given to the military attache Of
a certain European power information in
documents, concerning French military
secrets, as follows:
l. A note on the hydraulic brake 40,
with the way of manipulating it.
2. A note on the modification intro
duced into the troops of cover t''troupes
de couverture'o.
3. A note on artillery formation.
4. A note relative to Madagascar.
5. A manual on field pieces.
To prove this charge the prosecution
produced sheet of paper (now historic
as the bordereau) its parts pasted to-
gether, upon which was written, I'M
signed memorandum. 1t began with the
announcement that the writer had the
information. noted above. to communi-
cate Then followed an offer to lend the
documents for extracts or to send copy
of each Tin extenso.' This bordereau
was said to have been picked out Of the
waste basket at the German embassy
in Paris by French spy. And the
prosecution claimed that the writing of
the bordereau was the writing of Capt.
Dreyfus.
The bordereau in 1894 was submitted
10 five experts in penmanship, three of
whom judged that Dreyfus had written
it, while two believed that he had not.
This division of opinion weakening the
prosecutions case, General MERCER,
Minister of War at that time, submitted
the SPECIALIZED secret dossier,' or enve-
lope, OF other alleged evidences of Drey-
fuss guilt. The secret dossier was not
shown to Dreyfus or his counsel. and
upon it, together with General Mercier's
own emphatic protestation that the ac-
cused was guilty, Dreyfus was con
demned. 1t was for long the claim or
the war office that the secret dossier
could not be exposed lest its secrets
should endanger the foreign relations OF
France.
Time passed. Dreyfus's friends sub
mitted the bordereau in facsimile, and
some of the captains real handwriting,
to II eminent experts in penmanship, Sc
lected from different nations, and not
one of them came to the conclusion that
Dreyfus had written it, 1t may be
added at this point thar of the three
French experts who. in 1894, decided
that Dreyfus wrote the bordereau, only
two, upon the REORGANIZATION ordered
by the French Court of Cessation this
year, adhered to their original conclu-
sion, which left the original French COM
mission 3 10 2 i'll favor Of Dreyfus on
this point. Anticipating still further, it
may here be said that the Court of
Cessation this year decided that Drcy
fus did not write the bordereau.
The real turn in the campaign for re-
vision came when Colonel Picquart Of
the French general staff came into pos
SESSION of the famous secret dosser and
examined its contents. On the strength
of that dossier he had hitherto supposed
that Dreyfus was convicted on good
evidence. He testifies that he was stupe-
fed to find nothing in the dossier which
could have warranted condemnation,
that there was no evidence in it which