Page:The New International Encyclopædia 1st ed. v. 06.djvu/532

* DREXEL INSTITUTE. 462 DEEYFUS. Tides cvoniiig classes in all deparlments. These courses are graded, some ol tliem extending over three years. The Institute carries on, fur- thermore, "an ini|iortant eduintional work through the means of free puhlie lectures and concerts. The numher of students in attendance in the several departments in 1002 was 1200; in the evening' courses. 2000. Tlie library, contain- ing ,30.000 volumes, is es|iecially strong in works on art. science, and technology. The president of the Institute from its foundation, and to whom its organization ami the development of its courses must be largely ascribed, is .James Mac- All -tcr. DREYFUS, drft'fus', Ai.frep (18.50—). A French artillery ollicer, who was brought into prominence as the central figure in one of the most celeljrated eases of modern political history. He was born in Miilhausen, Upper Alsace, of Jewish parentage, removed to Paris in 1S74, studied at the t'haptal College and at Sainte- Baibe. entered the Kcole rolytechnique in 1878, and later attended the Ecole d'Application (:?chool of .pplied Gunnery). After serving as second lieutenant in the Thirty-first Regiment of artillery at Le Mans (1882-8.3). and in the Fourth Mounted Battery at Paris, he was ap- pointed eai)tain in the Twentv-first Regiment of artillery. September 12. 1880. On April 21, ISnO. he entered the Ecole de Guerre, where he ranked among the leading ten of his class. Within a year after leaving this institution, he received an appointment on the general staff. On October lo, 1804, Dreyfus was arrested on a charge of having sohl military' secrets to a foreian Power. The titmost secrecy was observed by the War Office in regard to the whole affair. Dreyfus was isolated in prison, and treated with grcit harshness. When he was tried, although he was allowed counsel, the court was a secret one. and he was sentenced to military degrada- tion and solitary confinement on the He du Diable. off the "coast of French Guiana. On January 4, 1805, he vas conducted by a military escort to the courtyard of the Eeole ^lilitaire in Paris, and, in the presence of a great assem- bly of spectators, the stripes were torn from his niiiform, and his sword was broken. On March lOth he was transported to the Tie du DiaWe, where he was treated with severity, on one occa- sion being chained to his pallet for two months. He persistently denied his guilt, and this fact, together with the secrecy of the proceedings and the bitterness of the anti-Semitic agitation, led to a growing conviction in the minds of many that the real culprit had been shielded, and that it had been found convenient to ptit Dreyfus for- ward as a scapegoat. The evidence used against Dreyfus was a memorandum, known as the lordrreau. and the pro.=ecution simply attempted to show that it was in the Captiiin's handwriting. It began, "Without news indicating that .vou wish to see me. I send vou nevertheless, monsieur, some in- portant information." Then followed a num- bered list of documents relating to the frontier forts, artillery instructions to the general staff, etc. Naturally it was never made known how this docvmient was obtained by the War Office, as it woiild have caused complications with a friendly Power: but it was su|)poscd to have come through an Alsatian porter in the service of Colonel von Sclnvarzkoppcn. military attachfi of the tienuan Embassy. In May, ISOii, another paper was brought to the War Ollicc, and fell into the hands of Commandant Picipiarl. It bore the signature of Major EslcrhSzy, au officer of doubtful character, and the hand- writing corresponded exactly with that of the Dreyfus borJcrcuii, while that of Dreyfus did not," Then began a remarkable series of at- tempts to bring to light and to suppress the truth. The most prominent defenders of Drey- fus were his brother Matthieu Dr<>yfus, the novel- ist Emile Zola, and M. Sclicurcr-Kolncr, a meud)er of the French Senate. A large part of the Liberal press also sided with the accused captain, and, during the later phases ot the affair, his cause was adopted by the Socialists as a party issue for the time. Arrayed against him were the anti-Semitic elements of France and the powerful Xationalist infiuejice, mean- ing by the latter all those who regarded the condcnniation of Dreyfus a-, necessary for the vindication of the honor of the army, always dear to the hearts of Frenchmen. The ^^ ar Office mi't the attacks of the friends of Dreyfus simply by asserting that the proceedings against him had been regular in every respect. There was a fixed i)urpose to prevent any discussion of the nature of the evidence or the facts of the case. Commandant Picquart. who showed an honest de- sire to bring out the truth, was made a lieu- tenant-colonel, and sent away on special service. Attempts were then made to compromise him by means of false dispatches, and he was finally removed from the active list of the army. On July 7, 1898, the agitation having ri.sen high, a new" declaration was made in the Chamber of Deputies by M. Cavaignac, ilinister of War. He positively "asserted that Dreyfus had been ju>tly found guilty, and referred io certain documents not hitherto mentioned in the case. Colonel Picquart challenged these proofs and declareil that of the three documents upon which M. Cavaignac based his belief in the guilt of Drey- fus, two were irrelevant, and the third, the only one in which Dreyfus's name occurred, was a forgery. Six weeks later. Colonel Henry, who had l)een connected with the intelligence depart- ment of the War Office, confessed to having com- tnitted this forgery, and committed suiciile. This led to a general readjustment in the organization of the general staff. General dc lioisdclTrc, chief of stair, resigned; Major F^sterhazy and Colo- nel Paty du Clam were removed from the active list, but still the War Office proclaimed its belief in the guilt of Captain Dreyfus. Colonel Picquart was imprisoned on a charge of communicating secret documents, late in Xo- vember. On the 20th of the previous month, however, the Court of Cassation, the highest tribunal in France, had taken up the niattcr of revision, and. after several mouths' delibera- tion, ordered (June 3, 1800), a n-trial by a court-martial. The proceedings against Picquart were subsequently quashed. The court-martial sat at Rennes from August 7 to September 0. 1800. and rendered a decision that Dreyfus was guilty, with extenuating circumstances. He was sentenced to imprisonment for ten .years, from which the period of his previous confinement was to he deducted. The evidence at the trial was of the flimsiest character, as it had bi-en from the. beginning, but the determination to