Recognising the Hand of Judgment. Ch.15

 

The Dreyfus Case, 1894 - 1906

 

     Alfred Dreyfus was born October 19th 1859 in Alsace. Little did he know  in  his  childhood  days that his name would appear  in  all  the world's encyclopaedias for something he hadn't done!

 

     In 1882, in early manhood, Dreyfus entered the École Polytechnique having decided on a military career, and by 1889 had risen  to the  rank  of Captain.  He was hard-working  and  conscientious,  which aroused  the jealousy of his fellow officers.  What is more,  he was  a rich man,  the son of a wealthy textile manufacturer,  and worst of all (to  them) he was a JEW.  And in France there was a great deal of anti-semitism in those days. It was as rife as in Germany and Russia.

 

     In 1894, when Dreyfus was rising towards the peak of his career in the War Ministry, a certain letter fell into the hands of the French General Staff.  It was addressed  to  Colonel  Max  von  Schwarzkoppen,  the  German  military attaché,  and  contained  a list of military secrets which  were  being offered for sale to the Germans.

 

     There was little to go on that could lead to an arrest,  but being a very serious matter,  someone had to be found.  It was reasoned  that the  culprit must have been a junior gunnery officer who had served  in several camps before joining the General Staff. Because of the jealousy amongst  his fellow men,  and the fact that he was a Jew,  Dreyfus  was picked on to be the culprit. They compared his handwriting with that on the letter, and found it to be very similar. He was arrested on October 15th of that year, and brought before a Court Martial.

 

     The  legal proceedings were highly irregular. He vigorously denied complicity. There was  so little evidence  to  go on that it looked as though Dreyfus would have  to  be acquitted. They had co-opted the assistance of handwriting experts, who had  expressed  considerable doubt about the letter being the  work  of Dreyfus.  What  is  more  he was found to have a  first-class  military record.  Someone  in the police force thought he had found evidence  of him  being a gambling man,  but this was also proved to be untrue  - it turned out to be another man of the same name.

 

     The  Court was just about to conclude the case and acquit Dreyfus, when  Commander  Hubert  Joseph  Henry  appeared.   He  was  Chief   of Intelligence  in  the War Office,  and had  conducted  the  preliminary enquiry.  In  his  hand  was a sealed packet,  which he handed  to  the judges. Inside the packet were papers that proved Dreyfus' guilt beyond a shadow of a doubt. The main item was an 'intercepted' letter from the Italian military attaché,  Panizzardi,  to his German counterpart,  von Schwarzkoppen.  It referred to the traitor in the French War Office  as 'that dirty dog "D"'.

 

     On  December  22nd Dreyfus was found guilty and sentenced to  life imprisonment on the infamous "Ile du Diable".  The "Devil's Island" was situated off the coast of French Guiana in the South Caribbean Sea.  It used to be a leper colony, but that very year had become a French penal settlement.  It  was somewhat less than one square mile  in  area,  and anyone sent there might just as well consider themselves dead.

 

     Although  Dreyfus had persistently argued his complete  innocence, and even after sentencing, his family continued  their campaign for his acquittal,  there  was a great deal of anti-semitic feeling at large in France,  and it was aired in the press of the day.  Dreyfus came to  be the symbol of supposed disloyalty amongst the Jewish population.

 

     If  that  was  the end of the story,  it is doubtful  whether  any record  of it would have remained,  other than in some  obscure  French military  journal.  But  after  about two years,  in  1897,  it  became apparent  to the General Staff that French military secrets were  still being passed to the Germans.  The Dreyfus file was re-opened,  and  the new  investigating  officer was Colonel Georges  Picquart,  who  probed rather  too  intensely for the likings of some of his senior  officers, who  removed  him  from his job and arranged for him to  be  posted  to Tunisia.  They  were of the opinion that the honour of the French  Army was of greater importance than the fate of one Jewish officer.

 

     This  whole affair was made absurdly complicated by the activities of  two  men.  Colonel  Picquart had unearthed  evidence  that  clearly indicted  Major C.F.Esterhazy as having forged the original documents  that brought Dreyfus to trial.  This new evidence cost him his job. And then during the quietness that followed,  the other culprit decided to do  a little  'rearranging'  of  the documents,  remove some of  the  Dreyfus papers,  and  tamper with the Panizzari letter,  (which he had  himself written,) in order to cover up his own guilt.  This was none other than Commander  Henry.  But  in this act he brought about his  own  undoing, because  Picquart  had  taken the precaution of photographing  all  the documents.  It was not long before the forgery came to light, and Henry was arrested.  When the case came before the court he confessed to  the act  and was put in prison,  where on 31st August 1898,   he  committed suicide.

 

     Because  of this new evidence,  Major Charles Ferdinand  Esterhazy was brought before a court martial but strangely enough, acquitted.

 

     Meanwhile,  the  French novelist Emile Zola had taken  an  intense interest  in  the this case,  being convinced of  Dreyfus's  innocence. Using  the  power  of his pen he wrote an open letter about  the  case, which  was headed "J'Accuse," even going so far as to accuse the  court martial  who had acquitted Major Esterhazy.  This resulted in  a  libel case,  which  Zola lost.  He was given a year's imprisonment and  fined 3,000 francs.

 

     At  the time of the Zola letter,  which was read by  some  200,000 people  on the day of its publication,  the Dreyfus case had  attracted widespread  public  attention,  and had split France into two  opposing camps.  The  “anti-Dreyfusards”  saw it as an attempt  to  undermine  the authority of the country's military,  and opposed any new trial. On the other hand,  the “Dreyfusards” saw the issue as one of principle,  of the freedom  of  the individual pitted against the military authority  with little hope of assistance. Amid uproar in Parliament the government was pressed  by the Nationalists to bring Zola to trial,  which resulted in his sentence.

 

     From  1898  to 1899 the Dreyfusard cause gained  strength.  A  new ministry, led by René Waldeck-Rousseau,  took office in June 1899 and resolved to bring the affair  to an end.  Dreyfus was brought back from Devil's Island for retrial,  and appeared before a new court martial in Rennes on August 2nd 1899.

 

     On  September  9th  the  court still  found  Dreyfus  guilty,  but pardoned him.  Dreyfus accepted the act of clemency, but reserved the right to do all in his power to establish his innocence.  Esterhazy had  already panicked  after the Henry exposure,  and had fled to Belgium,  and then London.

 

     Eventually  a new trial was granted in 1904,  a civilian court  of appeal.   Dreyfus  was  found  to  be  not  guilty,  and  all  previous convictions  were reversed.  On July 22nd 1906 he was restored and  re-instated  by  a parliamentary bill,  and decorated with the  Legion  of Honour.

 

     After further short service in the army,  in which he attained  to the  rank of major,  he retired to the reserves.  Apart from his active service during World War I, when he reached the rank of lieutenant colonel, commanding an ammunition column, he faded into obscurity, dying on July 12th 1935 in Paris, at the age of 76.

 

     The  Dreyfus  Case,  or  "l'Affaire" as it came to  be  called  in France,  was an important landmark in the history of the Third Republic and of modern France. From the turmoil of which it was the centrepiece, emerged a sharper alignment of political and social forces,  leading to such  drastic  anticlerical  measures as the  disestablishment  of  the church  from the state in 1905,  and to a cleavage  between  right-wing nationalists  and  left-wing antimilitarists that haunted  French  life until 1914 or even later.

     On  each  side were mobilised France's most eminent literary  men, and  the violent controversy destroyed the cohesion of French life  for more  than  a generation after.  A conjunction of  mistaken  loyalties, repeated stupidities,  base forgeries,  and excited extremisms inflamed the situation into a national crisis.

 

     At best it evoked a passionate repudiation of anti-semitism, which did  France  honour;  at worst it revealed and  intensified  a  chronic internal division that was to be a major source of national weakness.

 

     But  there is another reason why Dreyfus has been included in this study.  Another man was in France at the time of the Dreyfus trial, and the  effect it had on him was so great that it led to a completely  new thrust to his life.  This was none other than Dr Theordore Herzl, about whom we must speak in the next chapter.

 

HOME PAGE

R.H.J. INDEX

NEXT CHAPTER