France célèbré on January 13, 1998 centenaire of the publication, in " the Dawn ", of " I show " of Emile Zola, who required the light on the judgment of the Dreyfus captain. It was the most outstanding episode of the Dreyfus Business, distorts charge of a man who upset and divided the country. LAWSUIT DREYFUS Bill of indictment, lawsuit of 1894. "Mr. Dreyfus captain is shown, in 1894, to have practised machinations or maintained the intelligences with one or more agents of the foreign powers, with an aim of getting the means to them of making hostilities or of undertaking a war against France in their delivering secret documents (...). The base of the charge against the Dreyfus captain is a letter-missive written on India paper, not signed and not dated, establishing that confidential military documents were delivered to the agents of a foreign power (...). Attentive examination of all the writings of the officers employed in the offices of the staff, it arose that the writing of the Dreyfus captain presented a remarkable similarity with the writing of the accused letter-missive." Extract of the letter of Emile ZOLA, addressed to the President of the Republic and published in the newspaper " the Dawn " Thursday January 13, 1898.  I SHOW "I show the lieutenant-colonel of Paty de Clam(1) to have been the diabolic workman of the miscarriage of justice, into unconscious, I have wanted to believe it, and to have then defended his harmful work, for three years, by the most absurd machinations and guiltiest. I show the Mercier General(2) to have made itself guilty, at least by weakness of spirit, one of greatest iniquities of the century. I show the Billot General(3) to have had between the hands the unquestionable evidence of the innocence of Dreyfus and to have choked them, to have made itself guilty of this injure-justice and outrage against humanity, political aim and to save the compromised staff. I show the General of Boisdeffre (4) and the Gonse General (5)to have made itself accessory to the same crime, one undoubtedly by clerical passion, the other perhaps by this spirit of body which makes offices of the war the unattackable holy arch (...). I show the offices of war to have conducted in the press (...) an abominable campaign to mislay the opinion and to cover their fault. I show finally the first consulting of war to have violated the right by condemning an defendant on a part remained secret, and I show the second consulting of war to have covered this illegality by command, by committing in his turn the legal crime to discharge a culprit knowingly." (1) It is him which led the investigation which leads to the arrest of Dreyfus. (2) Minister for the War in 1894. (3) Minister for the War in 1897 at the time when is revealed the role of Esterhazy. (4) Head of the staff. (5) Direct superior of colonel Picquart.  The plaintext of "I show" (According to the site " Cliotexte")  |