Twelve contentious legal cases serve as definitive markers in the ebb and flow of modern Jewish history. Ranging from the blood libel trials of the late-nineteenth century until the trial of the Holocaust at the beginning of the twenty-first century legal battles have consumed the Jewish community worldwide. Beginning with the infamous Dreyfus affair, continuing through the story of Leo Frank, the trial of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, the capture and trial of Adolf Eichmann, and the lengthy incarceration of Jonathan Pollard, we can view the sweep of modern Jewish history.

Epic Trials in Jewish History

The Path of Modern Jewish History By Gerald Ziedenberg

AuthorHouse

Copyright © 2012 Gerald Ziedenberg
All right reserved.
ISBN: 978-1-4772-7060-8

Contents

Introduction.....................xiChapter 1........................1Chapter 2........................17Chapter 3........................33Chapter 4........................39Chapter 5........................51Chapter 6........................69Chapter 7........................85Chapter 8........................101Chapter 9........................125Chapter 10.......................139Chapter 11.......................157Chapter 12.......................171Conclusion.......................189Bibliography.....................195

Chapter One

The Dreyfus Affair: A Seminal Event in Both French and Jewish History, 1894–1906

The court is impervious to proof. —Franz Kafka, The Trial

Have we enough courage to tell the truth?

There is no such thing as justice in or out of court. —Clarence Darrow, 1936

The Dreyfus trial in France in 1894 was perhaps the most significant political event in modern French history. A Jewish officer, Dreyfus, was a member of the general staff accused of selling secrets to the Germans. The impact of the Dreyfus affair still reverberates through contemporary France.

The Dreyfus affair, which began in 1894 in Paris, can be considered as one of the most important historical events of the modern era for the Jewish people and it has resonated as a seminal event in contemporary French history. The affair proved that even in an enlightened and liberal country like France, bitter anti-Semitism existed. For Theodore Herzl, an eyewitness and foreign correspondent, the trial became the final spark in his thinking to formulate a Jewish state.

For the people of France it became an event which lasted for almost a century. The reverberations of the Dreyfus affair can be found in Vichy France of the Second World War and perhaps even the anti-Semitism in France in the twenty-first century.

The Dreyfus case showed the importance of the freedom of the press and the significance of the rule of law over both the French army and the state.

On January 1, 1893, Alfred Dreyfus began a probationary term with the General Staff of the army, and while he was an artillery officer, he was rotated through various bureaus of the Ministry of War.

In late September 1894, certain documents were intercepted by French intelligence at the German embassy in Paris. A housekeeper who was secretly employed by French intelligence was cleaning out a wastebasket. She found papers which later became known as the Bordeaux. This term refers to secret lists and documents. This official form was addressed to a German officer named Schwartzkoppen. The contents of the file made it clear that the writer was both an artillery specialist and a member of the General Staff and only a person with this detailed and dual knowledge could have written the memorandum.

Handwriting experts and other investigators were called in. The personnel lists of the General Staff were scoured for likely suspects and the name Alfred Dreyfus, an artillery captain and a Jew from Alsace, stood out. Dreyfus's geographic origins implicated him as it was felt that due to the German association with Alsace he would have Germanic sympathies. Despite Dreyfus's intense patriotism and devotion to France, he was not well liked. He was independently wealthy due to a family inheritance and seemed aloof from his fellow officers, but the dislike was primarily because he was Jewish. By October 6, 1894, Dreyfus was under intense suspicion, and on October 15, 1894, he was accused of high treason and arrested. The Dreyfus affair, which was to paralyze the French nation for twelve long years, had begun.

One of the key aspects of the case was the intransigence of the French army. The honour of the French army was sacrosanct; it absolutely had to be held above the state. It can also be said that the French were still suffering the after-effects of their humiliating defeats at the hands of the Germans in 1870, when they lost the province of Alsace.

French Anti-Semitism and Historical Context

Alfred Dreyfus was being charged with treason at a difficult time for Jews. There were several scandals involving Jewish financiers. Following the Suez Canal's success, many investors bought stock in the French Panama canal project of the 1880s and lost all their money. This, of course, was blamed on the Jewish financial leadership of the project. It was revealed that Cornelius Herz and Baron Jacques de Reinach, both Jews, were involved in the instigation of the canal scandal. The economic depression of the 1890s further focused and fortified long standing anti-Semitic prejudices.

Edward Drumont wrote La France Juive, which was a best-selling polemic against Jews and captured public favour by attacking wealthy Jewish financiers like the Rothschilds, Ephrussis, and Bambergers. According to Drumont, these Jewish financiers had destroyed the traditional French virtues of loyalty, religion, responsibility, work, and thrift. The French Catholic Church reinforced these attacks by stating that the Jews espoused modernity and liberalism, two terrible defects in the eyes of the conservative church. Following the successes of his bestselling book, Drumont published a virulent anti-Semitic daily newspaper, Le Libre Parole.

This newspaper was instrumental in the affair as it persistently agitated the masses with its anti-Semitic diatribes. On November 1, 1894, a headline in Le Libre Parole read, "High Treason Arrest of the Jewish Officer A. Dreyfus." Public excitement, already raised to a high level, reached the boiling point. Popular anti-Semitism now permeated the Dreyfus affair, and the French Catholic Church continued to play a major role in the case. The Jews were depicted as a great challenge to both the Church and the faithful. La Croix, a popular journal of the Assumptionists (a right wing Catholic order), used the Jews as scapegoats for the alleged crimes of socialism, anti-clericalism, and materialism. A popular writer of the time, Maurice Barrès, concluded that Dreyfus was capable of treason because of his race.

Still another factor exacerbating this prevalent anti-Semitism was the large influx of Eastern European Ashkenazi Jews from the Russian empire, fleeing pogroms and other forms of violent anti-Semitism. These Eastern European Jews were alien to the French. For the most part they spoke only Yiddish and were not easily assimilated into the French milieu. Dreyfus's Jewish ancestry and the accusations that he was a traitor all seemed to solidify French anti-Semitic opinion.

Despite Dreyfus's protestations of innocence, he was quickly found guilty of treason in a secret military tribunal. This clandestine court-martial ignored both legal justice and fairness and Dreyfus was not even given the right to examine the evidence against him. While the judges seemed to pause over the evidence, Major Hubert Henry, a party to the conspiracy to pillory Dreyfus, gave the judges a further incriminating file that apparently contained a letter, dated May 1894 from the German military attaché, mentioning, "this scoundrel Dreyfus." To further compound the illegality of the court proceedings, Dreyfus's defence attorney, Edgar Demange, was not made aware of this secret dossier. General Mercier, Major Henry's superior, made every effort to ensure that Dreyfus would be found guilty. The military court was persuaded by the evidence and unanimously pronounced Dreyfus guilty of high treason. A weeping Dreyfus was led from the court still professing his innocence and subsequently condemned to incarceration, deportation, and military degradation.

Degradation and Exile

The scene on January 5, 1895, in the courtyard of the military academy l'Ecole Militaire was a major event. The public was present and constantly shouted, "Death to the Jew." A warrant officer stripped Dreyfus of his badges and buttons and then broke Dreyfus's ceremonial sword over his knee. A nearby officer, Major Picquart, an anti-Semite who later became an important defender of Dreyfus, remarked that the "Alsatian Jew" was probably weighing the cost of his buttons and badges. Amid all of this tumult and vitriolic shouting, a scholarly looking man, a bearded correspondent from an Austrian newspaper, The Neue Freie Press, stood transfixed by the scene. Theodore Herzl would never forget the awful episode. To hear Frenchmen in the most enlightened and liberal country in Europe proclaim, "death to the Jew," felt like a mortal wound to Theodore Herzl.

Although Herzl had been exposed to vehement anti-Semitism in Vienna, the outburst of the French mob surrounding L'École Militaire seemed almost too much to bear. Herzl had previously thought of solutions to the Jewish problems in Europe. He had first projected a mass conversion of Jews to Christianity at St. Stephan's Cathedral in Vienna and he brooded for a long time on the anti-Semitism of Europe and then thought through various solutions. The degradation scene sparked Herzl to his logical conclusion—a Jewish state. Within a year Herzl wrote Der Judenstadt, the Jewish State. This was followed by two other books detailing his ideas about a Jewish state. From 1894 to 1903, Herzl worked himself to death trying to establish a state for Jews. He died prematurely at the age of forty-four. Like a soldier he had given his life for the Jewish people.

Following his conviction, Dreyfus was deported in 1895 to part of French Guinea near the equator. This sweltering tropical island was rightly called Devil's Island. To properly visualize Dreyfus' proposed lifetime incarceration, one would have to envision the terrible scenes depicted in the movie Papillion. During his stay on Devil's Island a rumour spread that an attempt would be made to free Dreyfus. Soon Dreyfus was shackled to his pitiful bed and his cell was surrounded by an eight-foot stockade, which blocked most of the light. Dreyfus was fed a meagre diet and his cell was infested with vermin and filth. He lived in these horrible conditions until 1899.

In March 1896 another letter was intercepted in the German embassy. This new document was called "le petit Bleu." Picquart, the French officer present at the Dreyfus humiliation, realized that there was something wrong. If Dreyfus was on Devil's Island, how could the spying continue? Picquart summoned independent handwriting experts who established that the original documents could not have been written by Dreyfus and were forgeries.

Picquart told the General Staff that Dreyfus was innocent. The army and the government bureaucracy were not willing to accept his arguments. Picquart, anti-Semitic but nevertheless still seeking justice, was so vociferous in his pleas about Dreyfus' innocence that he was exiled and sent to a distant French outpost in Tunisia, in North Africa. There was a rebel uprising in French North Africa and the High Command, perhaps secretly, hoped that Picquart would be killed in the ensuing battles.

Hubert Henry, a French Major who was a key conspirator in the affair, put yet another forgery in the file hoping to solidify the case against Dreyfus.

Efforts continued on Dreyfus' behalf. Bernard Lazare, a famous writer, was enlisted by the Dreyfus family to help. As well, Picquart, who was serving in the rebellion in Tunisia, came home to Paris while on leave. In September 1896, a leading liberal French senator named Kestner was engaged by Picquart to help Dreyfus. Then the most famous French novelist and writer of the time, Émile Zola, volunteered to help the Dreyfus side. By this time French public opinion had split into two factions, the Dreyfusards, who supported Dreyfus's cause, and the anti-Dreyfusards, who opposed Dreyfus.

In 1897 two important events captured the attention of the Jewish world and diverted focus from the Dreyfus affair. On August 29, 1897, in Basel, Switzerland, Theodore Herzl convened the first Zionist congress. For the first time the blue and white Star of David flag, ultimately to become the flag of the State of Israel, was unveiled. The flag was sewn from a woman's dress. The Zionist Congress, led by Herzl, made many important decisions which ultimately led to the establishment of the state of Israel. Chief among the programs adopted was the clearly stated intention to establish a home for the Jewish people in Palestine secured under public law.

On October 7, 1897, in Vilna, in what was then part of the Russian Empire, the Bund was established. This Jewish socialist organization ultimately became the basis for half a century of Jewish left wing politics.

In November 1897 the French army began inquiries into Walsin Esterhazy, a Hungarian mercenary who was an artillery officer of the General Staff. Suspicions were directed towards Esterhazy and thoughts that he might be the original spy in the Dreyfus affair surfaced. The army would admit to no wrongdoing and held itself above suspicion. Attempts to implicate Esterhazy were stymied by the army command and General Staff.

The country then became further split between the Dreyfusards and the anti-Dreyfusards. The army, the Church and the right wing monarchists formed the anti-Dreyfusards faction, while the Dreyfusards were supported by the left wing liberal politicians. Newspapers were split along similar lines, but Émile Zola took up the cause of Dreyfus.

Zola, famous for publishing a daily morning newspaper in Paris called L'Aurora (The Dawn), was upset with the entire case especially the cover up concerning Esterhazy. He then published in L'Aurora on January 13, 1898, one of the most famous headlines of all time, "J'Accuse" (I Accuse), which implicated the government and the army in a cover-up of the affair. The newspaper sold 300,000 copies in a single day and threatened to bring down the government.

In the aftermath, Zola was charged with libel and brought to trial in January 1898. He was convicted and sentenced to one year in jail and fined 3000 francs, a weighty sum at the time. Zola fled to exile in London to avoid both the jail sentence and the fine.

In the meantime Esterhazy was brought to trial. The hearing was held in a closed and secret session. Esterhazy was quickly and unanimously acquitted. Ironically, at the same time Picquart was arrested, charged for revealing military secrets, and dismissed from the army. The countrywide turmoil continued.

Finally, in June 1899, the court of appeals overturned the original Dreyfus verdict of 1894. Dreyfus was to be returned from Devil's Island and re-tried. At the same time, Zola returned from his exile in England and Picquart returned from jail and exile in Tunisia. The cast of characters slowly began to assemble.

A new trial was ordered at Rennes, chosen instead of Paris in order not to further inflame the Parisian population, which already was in complete turmoil.

The second trial of Alfred Dreyfus was held in Rennes in August 1899. During this trial an attempt was made to assassinate Labori, one of Dreyfus's lawyers. Astonishingly, despite all of the evidence, Dreyfus was found guilty. The government and the army continued their cover-up and under no circumstances would any of the establishment admit guilt or complicity in the injustice against him. Dreyfus was sentenced to only ten years' imprisonment because of extenuating circumstances. This verdict caused an enormous uproar.

In the meantime, one of the key conspirators against Dreyfus, Major Hubert Henry, was found to have forged incriminating documents and put them in the Dreyfus file. Henry was arrested and put into jail, and while he was awaiting trial and sentencing he committed suicide.

On July 18, 1899, Esterhazy revealed in an interview in Le Matin, a leading Parisian newspaper, that he had written the initial "Bordeaux" document. Esterhazy claimed that he wrote the documents which had entrapped Dreyfus under duress and orders from his superiors.

Demonstrations both for and against Dreyfus continued to sweep through France. Finally, on September 19, 1899, a new French government ordered Dreyfus pardoned. Dreyfus, having been found guilty three times and having spent five years in solitary confinement, fought the pardon and pleaded for complete exoneration. He accepted the pardon with the proviso that he could continue to fight for his innocence. By this time Dreyfus was exhausted, both mentally and physically, after the years of gruelling imprisonment. His supporters urged him not to accept the pardon and continue the battle, but Dreyfus wanted to leave confinement so he compromised. The presiding Minister of War, General de Galliffet, proclaimed in a military order that "the incident is over."

On March 1, 1900, a bill was introduced in the French senate calling for amnesty for all concerned with the case. The Chamber of Deputies passed the law and all infractions of the law and lawsuits concerning the Dreyfus affair were dismissed. On April 15, 1900, the Universal Exposition marking the new century was opening in Paris. The world's fair that opened in Paris that April exhibited for the first time talking pictures as well as escalators, a new mode of transportation. For a short time, despite the cultural clashes that the Dreyfus affair caused, the Exposition overshadowed the acrimony with its theme and style of Art Nouveau.

Alfred Dreyfus continued the battle for his innocence. Although he was free through pardon and amnesty, Dreyfus wanted a retrial of his second conviction at Rennes.

A year later, Émile Zola died of supposed accidental carbon monoxide poisoning in his home, but there were suspicions of murder. Jean Jaures, a French Socialist leader and a champion of justice, also called for a retrial of the Rennes verdict. He made the claim that numerous forgeries were used to convict Dreyfus and that he was not guilty.

It took numerous appeals by the Dreyfusards, but finally, in March 1904, the Criminal Chamber of Cassation, a high court, granted Dreyfus a re-investigation of his case, and in November of that same year the investigation ended and the verdict appeared to be favourable for Dreyfus.

On November 28, 1904, the Criminal Chamber found Dreyfus innocent, and the Supreme Court of Appeals confirmed that Alfred Dreyfus was finally innocent and completely exonerated. Dreyfus was not only a free man; moreover, he was above reproach.

In July 1906 Dreyfus was awarded the Legion of Honour and there was a ceremony in the courtyard of the L'École Militaire. Dreyfus, in an almost bizarre reversal of the degradation of 1895, regained his epaulettes, buttons, badges, and ceremonial sword, and he was now a lieutenant colonel in the French army. Dreyfus retired from army life in 1907.

Epilogue and Aftermath

When World War I began in 1914, Dreyfus was fifty-five years old. Nevertheless he re-enlisted. Initially he served in the rear areas of the conflict, but due to heavy French losses he was later posted to the front lines where he served as an artillery specialist. He died in 1935 after spending his remaining years quietly with his family.

(Continues...)

Excerpted from Epic Trials in Jewish Historyby Gerald Ziedenberg Copyright © 2012 by Gerald Ziedenberg. Excerpted by permission of AuthorHouse. All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.