Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 10.pdf/215

 190

The panel included three merchants; a roof- to prosecution the advantage of knowing builder, a coppersmith, a leather-dresser, a what case is to be met. wire-drawer, a seedsman, a gardener and a Labori with seeming logic contended that draper — men easily swayed by military if Esterhazy was guilty, Dreyfus was il power. legally held; and that in the coming trial the In a criminal trial in France the presiding doings of both war councils must necessarily judge is really the district attorney, and prac be examined and compared together. The tically an embodiment of the jury. His judge immediately ruled to the limited scope power is almost absolute over counsel and asked by the attorney general. The judge prisoner. First came the usual dialogue also read letters addressed to him by Colonel between judge and accused for preliminary de Clam, Ex-President Casimir-Perier and record; and the answers were recorded of the complainant, all declaring they would name, profession, age and residence. The not attend as witnesses because what they jurors being seated, the complaint of General knew was known only under official privilege. Billot, minister of war, which served as in This led to a discussion between counsel dictment, was read. This contained such which continued the whole day, and revealed generalities as a synopsis of the Zola letter to any English or Americans present that a (not even set out verbatim), averring it to French court does not possess that strong be a "series of insults and slanders directed compulsory power over subpoenaed witnesses against two ministers of war, some general which his home courts exercise; and, also, officers, and army officers of all grades under that privilege of refusal to testify is not a their orders." These having been read by statutory right but depends merely on judi the court clerk, Attorney General VanCassel cial clastic discretion. The discussion dis opened for the prosecution and claimed only closed great personal feeling between coun one question for the jury. Did the council sel, and strong unconcealed judicial bias of war act in obedience to orders in acquit against Zola. The second day of trial was ting Esterhazy? He declared that he should notable for the wife of poor Dreyfus becom not permit any suggestion of a re-opening of ing the first witness. Fifteen written ques the Dreyfus trial. " There shall not be any tions were read to her by the judge, com revolutionary revision of a conviction which posed by counsel for Zola, which were ruled is res judicata. We have not selected the out because irrelevant to the Esterhazy defamation of the Dreyfus council, only defamation. At the end of the reading the that of the Esterhazy one." audience in the rear made hostile manifesta When he concluded the floor was given to tions, not only in angry allusions to Dreyfus's Monsieur Labori the advocate of Zola, and wife, with bitter allusions to Jews, but hissed Labori when he arose to address the judge. of established fame and eloquence — to an swer the attorney general and outline his Turning vexedly to the audience he shouted, own defense. The former consumed only a " If you think you can prevent me from half hour, but Labori's speech occupied doing my duty, you are mistaken; " and three hours. It is perhaps a fair method to then facing the attorney general added, •' let allow adverse openings to be heard by the them howl, I am only to be embarrassed if jury in connection with each other so that it they should applaud me." The attorney gen can properly appreciate the evidence that is eral sarcastically rejoined and Labori asked to follow; but that course is apt to confuse that Zola might be heard. The judge per the minds of the jury, because it is hard for mitted, and the accused began to address jurors to separate statements from facts, the jury, but the judge said: "You must and the opening of defense in limina gives address me." Zola begged pardon and be