“Well, gentlemen, for all men who have hearts, these letters have
greater weight than all the declarations of a M. Lebrun-Renault.
“There is in the law an article of which there has been no mention
here,--Article 377 of the code of criminal examination. It provides
that in capital cases (and is not this of the nature of a capital case,
when they condemn a man to an exile so absolute that his wife cannot
even see his handwriting?)--it provides that those who are condemned to
death can have until the last moment to make confession. The article
says. ‘If the condemned man wishes to make a declaration, it shall
be received by one of the judges at the place of execution, in the
presence of a clerk.’
“Well, why were not such forms observed, if the confessions were to
have a value?”
The Judge.--“M. Labori, you know that this article applies only to
those who are condemned to death.”
M. Labori.--“Agreed, _Monsieur le Président_. I have not finished, and
I am glad of your interruption, for you will see that I have an answer.
It is certain, at any rate, that the law has made such a provision in
capital cases, because people condemned to death are the only ones
who cannot come back. As for others, their confessions cannot be used
against them, unless they have been submitted to them and signed. To
these the question can always be put: ‘Do you admit that you have made
confessions?’ Put this question to Dreyfus, and you will see what reply
he will make. He will be asked this question during the revision that
is sure to come, and we shall hear his answer.
“There has been no case, gentlemen, where greater efforts were made
to obtain confessions from an accused man,--a new proof that they
had no evidence against him, for, when evidence is overwhelming,
confessions are not solicited. But, when the evidence against a man
is made up of things as ridiculous as the scene of the dictation
from the _bordereau_, they will go to the point of fraud to extract
a confession. I say that, if they had had the good fortune to obtain
serious confessions, they would not have failed to get the prisoner’s
signature thereto. I have in my hands some fragments of the examination
to which Dreyfus was submitted at the last hour before the prosecution.
Well, gentlemen, listen; and listen also any jurists, any magistrates,
who may be here. On October 29, 1894, Major du Paty de Clam appeared in
Dreyfus’s cell, and asked him these questions.
“Do you admit that what you have just written strangely resembles the
writing of the _bordereau_?”
Captain Dreyfus.--“Yes, there are similarities in the details; but,
as a whole, there is no resemblance. I declare that I never wrote it.
I now understand very well how this document could have given rise to
the suspicions of which I am the object. But on this subject I should
like to be heard by the minister of war.”
“On October 30 Major du Paty de Clam appeared again.
“You asked, during your last examination, to be heard by the minister
of war, in order that you might propose to him that you be sent away
for a year, no matter where, under the eye of the police, while a
thorough investigation should be carried on in the war department.”
Captain Dreyfus.--“Yes.”
Major du Paty de Clam.--“I show you the reports of experts who declare
that the incriminated document is in your hand. What have you to
answer?”
Captain Dreyfus.--“I again declare that I never wrote it.”
“And now, gentlemen, pay all your attention to this:
Major du Paty de Clam.--“The minister is ready to receive you, if you
have anything to say in the direction of confession.”
Captain Dreyfus.--“I tell you again that I am innocent, and that I
have nothing to confess. It is impossible for me within the four walls
of a prison to arrive at an explanation of this frightful enigma. But,
if I may be allowed to work with the police, all my fortune and all my
life shall be devoted to the unravelling of this mystery.”
“Well, that is what they did to get confessions. I say boldly that
they went to the point of fraud, for they said to this man, after
reminding him of his last words: ‘You ask to be sent away under police
supervision; you wish to explain yourself to the minister; he will
receive you if you confess.’ That meant: ‘Perhaps he will comply
with your request.’ It was a trap. Dreyfus met it by repeating his
declaration: ‘I will not confess; I have nothing to confess, though I
should not see the minister.’ And this is the man against whom they
would produce today confessions said to have been received by Captain
Lebrun-Renault,--confessions whose exactness I dispute. The president
of the cabinet is a prudent man, when he says that these confessions,
if published, would be debated, because everything is debated in this
affair,--and, I add, because everything in this affair is debatable. Of
such material is the edifice constructed that we have to bear on our
shoulders,--an edifice of hypocrisy on the part of those highest in
place, who are the most guilty. Let them remember that, in history, the
most humiliating name on the pillory is that of Pontius Pilate.”
The usual hour of adjournment having arrived, the conclusion of M.
Labori’s argument was postponed until the following day.