Norwich bulletin., 1914-11-24
FAMOUS TRIALS
M. ZoLA.

What a monStrouS injustice was the trial of NJ. Zola, the eminent French writer who was arrested, charged with libeling the French army. The charge against him was preferred by the same set of Freuchmen who had con signed the innocent Alfred Dreyfus to a sentence worse than death.
 M. Delegorgue was the president of the Court of Assizes of the Seine who tried ZOla- The hearing consumed 10
 days in February, 1899. Hundreds of
 spectators were present during it's continuation and on the most part
 their conduct was most outrageous and the anti-Dreyfus demonstrations
 were encouraged rather than other wise by those in charge of the trial. This rabble was allowed to accentuate the proceedings by clamor of assent or dissent as the evidence suited or dis pleased them.
 ZoIa, early in January of 1S9 pub lished in a daily paper in Paris called LAurore,'' a letter addressed to Pres l ident Faure, in which he charged ill no | uncertain or mealy terms, an accusa- | tiOn against military tribunals which, l in 1894, had condemned another army of1cer-DreyfUs-to banishment for | life in a penal settlement after his 1 conviction upon the charge of reveal 1 ing army secrets to a foreign govern 1 ment.
 It vase just after the acquittal of 1 Esterhazy for his part in the Dreyfus l degradation and as the author of the ] Bordereau. that Zola wrote the letter | to the President of France accusing | both councils of war of having know 1 ingIy screened the real culprit in pun | ishing Dreyfus and acquitting Ester 1 hay.
 | The letter consumed several columns 1 of The L,Aurore. Thereupon the Min i ister of War, under articles 50 and 31 1 of the Correctional Press Law of July i 29, 1881. which punisnes defamation, l preferred charges against Zola, which 1 charges ignored all the other ibelous 1 criticisms in the letter of what Zola 1 called "the infamieS of the Dreyfus ] trial mainly behind closed doors and 1 with secret testimony" and confined l the prosecution to the charge that the i council of war which acquitted Ester l hay, acted not on evidence, but on l government orders to acquit lest con- | viction should free Dreyfus and con- l Vict the prior council of error.
 1 Nearly all the Paris papers declared 1 that the honor of the French army had 1 been assailed by Zola. and so initiated i a patriotic cry against him. The com | plaint against the prisoner was sub mitted by Gen. Elliot, Minister of l War. and after it was read by the county clerk, the attorney general, M. 1 Van Casoel, opened for the proSecu- 1 ton. After he concluded with a l speech consuming half an hour, ad. Labori, the advocate of Zola, opened his defense in a speech that occupied more than three hours. It is said to 1 have been most eloquently delivered.
 The trial, as it advanced, disclosed great personal feeling between the counsel and strong unconcealed judi l cial bias against Zola. On the second ] day of the trial Zola asked permission to be heard, which was granted Of l course he admitted writing the letter, but defended his doing so in a brilliant speech. Among the other witnesses l called were Paty du Clam, who de- clined to answer questions on the
 ground of military privileges, and Col. Picquart, whose testimony bore great ly in Zola's factor. Then the counsel
 on both sides began summing up l Labori's oration occupied two days
 and during its presentation so bolster ous became the spectators in the
 upon one occasion and said: Alas Monsieur le Judge. I am obliged to be my own policeman
 Labori made a sublime panegyric o1
 his client as author, patriot and friend
 of all victims of injustice. The sessions were finally ended and the jury retired
 for deIiberation. After 9 minutes il
 returned with a. verdict of guilty. Then
 the air was filled with cries of Long live the army! Long live France!
 Down with insulters! Death to Zola.'
 Amid all the confusion Zola cried: 1 These people are cannibalS.'
 l The court then adjourned to deter
 mine upon the sentence. They return. 1 ed few minutes later and condemned the prisoner to the maximum penalty of one years Imprisonment and @ fine ! of 5000 francs.
 l A few days after adjournment the
 accused appealed from the verdict o1 ! the lower court and the appeal being l heard by the Court of Cessation or l Marin 31, the finding of the jury wa: sustained but it applied to Zola what
 was called the BerenEer law reTnittinf
 sentence imposed upon first offenders and consequently the sentence was set l aside.
 4 second trial was held on the fol lowing July IS, but without awaiting |. the result. Zola, by the advice of hi , counsel and friends, and for reasons O
 legal strategy. abruptly left Franc' and took refuge in England and diC . not return to rance until the Dreyfu trial was reversed.