THE LATEST DREYFUS INCIDENT.
NOTHING is more puzzling to the student of French history than the extraordinary part which cowardice, or, to use a less offensive term, nervous- ness, has played in it. That the French are as brave as any people in the world, capable on occasion of displaying both audacity and fortitude in a supreme degree, is a historic certainty, yet it is equally certain that they are influenced to a most unusual degree by fear. They crouch before the strong man armed—when they do not spring at his throat—in a way almost inconsistent with manli- ness. The strong man or the strong government masters them at once, and a massacre like that of St. Bartholomew, or that of December 2nd, 1851, or that which attended the suppression of the Commune, produces at least as much awe as hate. "The Terror" was kept up for months by a minute minority of the nation, and perished under one "whiff of grapeshot " ; and a defeat, great or small, on the soil or in Tonquin, seems instantly to destroy a previously existing reverence. The French people are liable to fall at a moment's notice into a kind of ecstasy of nervousness, during which they are capable of anything, are, in fact, like mobs who fear a charge by regular troops. Now it is the Red Spectre, again it is the Jesuits, and then once more it is "the foreigner" which is the object of apprehension. We have even known a French island—it was Reunion—go perfectly mad with dread of cholera, and risk condemning hundreds of un- offending guests to death by starvation rather than, by feeding them, incur the remotest risk. The spy fever which so frequently breaks out is produced entirely, by terror, and so is the agitation which we describe as the Dreyfus affair. Nobody is afraid of Dreyfus himself, but he is the symbol of a vague danger which no one can exactly describe, but which every one feels. "France is betrayed" to the foreigner, to the Jews, to England, to the Bourbons, to the Socialists, to the Devil, and the whole people, believing the betrayal, plunge into a sort of delirium. We think it perfectly possible that the otherwise astounding evidence of General Mercier at Rennes on Saturday last is substantially true ; that the whole Staff of the Army of France, together with several Ministers, had in 1824 worked themselves up into a belief that the German Emperor would invade France to avenge a personal insult ; and that France, being after all her sacrifices wholly un- ready, would be subjected to unheard-of miseries and humiliations. Under this vague fear they were ready to do anything, and did sanction or tolerate endless inepti- tudes and turpitudes,—among others, the illegal conviction of Dreyfus on secret evidence. We think it also perfectly possible, nay, almost certain, that the chiefs of the Army are aware of this liability of their countrymen, and trust to terror to extricate themselves from their abominable mess. Their appeal to " patriotism " is an appeal to fear. Their whole demeanour towards the Courts looks like this so does the veiled threat of a St. Bartholomew of Dreyfusards, a threat accentuated this week by the at- tempted assassination of Maitre Labori; and, above all, so • does General Mercier's evidence at Rennes. His testi- mony, say the English, who are all bred upon criminal trials, is not evidence. Certainly it is not, the dread of war being no excuse for an illegal and unjust trial ; but then it was not intended to be. It was a speech in defence of his own conduct in trying to convict Dreyfus by handing secret evidence to the Court-Martial, made by a man who understands his countrymen, and reckons, accurately, as we-believe, that to avert invasion France would sacrifice a Dreyfus a day, and that, in any case, she will excuse any- thing a General has done with that object in view. It was a cunning plea, addressed not to judges, but to a military jury peculiarly susceptible to such pleas. That it failed with the audience in the Court at Rennes was due to the fact that, listening to M. Casimir-Perier's denial, they did not believe the danger had existed, and to the other fact that Dreyfus's sudden and unexpected burst of indignation convinced them, perhaps for the first time, of his innocence. The calculated calm which is apt to mark an able Jew, aware at once of his unpopularity and of his own proclivity to rage, for once gave way, and for a moment the spectators saw in Dreyfus a man like themselves, and felt entirely with him. It is not proved that the same impression was made on the officers of the Court-Martial, and even if it were, the scheme was well designed. Any officer on the Tribunal who wishes still to believe in the Staff can now plead that General Mercier expected war, and that on such a subject a General must be wiser than a mere civilian, even if he happened to be President. The grand difficulty now in the way of the defence will be the feeling of the Court that in acquitting Dreyfus they censure General Mercier, who procured his illegal condemnation "from patriotic motives." The attempt to assassinate Maitre Labori was, as we believe, dictated by the same motive. His papers may have been wanted, as is now alleged, but they could have been seized without killing him. The attempted murder, like the threats of a St. Bartholomew, was intended to cow the Dreyfusards by indicating that their opponents will stick at nothing, and we are by no means sure that it will not have that effect. The humane minority in Paris had all muskets, but they never rose upon the Terrorists till a General appeared in command of an artillery force.
But, we shall be asked, what can be the cause of this amazing liability to terror on the part of a nation whose bravery has been proved on a hundred battlefields ? An over-active imagination fed by an ignorance which is endless, and produces an endless credulity. An ignorant Englishman, when told something outside the range of his experience, as a rule stolidly disbelieves it, and, of course, refuses to make it a basis of action. The French- man believes it, and believing, imagines a thousand monstrous things which might be true if only the bases on which he builds them were not inventions. The old Englishwoman who was told of the flying fish remarked that her son was lying. A Frenchman as ignorant, if told the same thing, would have believed it, and immediately have seen clouds of flying fish darkening the air of France, and in their fall and putrefaction producing an epidemic. He would be uncommonly self-controlled if he did not interpellate the Minister of the Interior as to the precautionary measures he had taken for burying the swarm. If anybody thinks that illustration too farcical or exaggerated, let him read General Mercier's evidence as to the money raised to defend Dreyfus. That officer has had some kind of regular training, and has risen to high Staff employ, yet he believes, and accuses General Jamont, the virtual Commander-in-Chief, of believing, that Germany and England sent £1,400,000 to Paris to be expended in bribery for Dreyfus, and drew, of course, the deduction that such sacrifices would only be made for a secret agent. And we may be certain that such a statement having been made on such authority, three Frenchmen in four, not having the faintest idea what a million sterling is, will believe it, and be more satisfied of Dreyfus's guilt than ever. So far from regarding General Mercier as a fool, as M. de Blowitz does, or affects to do, we regard him as a most astute person, who would have made a most effective counsel for criminals of whose guilt he was assured.
That General Mercier was in any way privy to, or per- sonally responsible for, the shooting of Maitre Labori we do not, of course, suggest for a moment. What we do think probable, however, is that the assassination was, as the victim himself has remarked, perpetrated "by order," aud was intended to inspire terror. Nor should we regard the reports that a St. Bartholomew was intended at Rennes as mere figments of diseased imaginations. The French are just in the temper which produced the horrors of September, 1792, and we should hesitate to say of some of their present chiefs that they would never forgive whit Danton, whether he ordered the massacres or not, cer- tainly forgave. The present resolute and able Govern- ment of France obviously believes that the assassination of Dreyfus is intended, taking in consequence elaborate precautions for his safety, and we confess that, recollecting the history of the last two years, considering the immense interest thousands must have in suppressing further inquiry, and observing the temper which has allowed the assailant of Maitre Labori to disappear into that endless wood, the population, we should feel no amazement if the next sensation were the assassination of Dreyfus. At least, we should feel none if we could resist the im- pression that the life of that wretched victim has been protected by a power stronger even than the supreme Staff of the Army of France.
Previous page
