Editing Dreyfus affair (section)

== Origins of the case and the trial of 1894 ==
{{Main|Investigation and arrest of Alfred Dreyfus}}
[[File:003 Bordereau recto.jpg|thumb|upright|Photograph of the bordereau dated 13 October 1894. The original disappeared in 1940.]]

=== Discovery of the "bordereau" ===
The staff of the Military Intelligence Service (SR) worked around the clock<ref>See especially Reinach, [http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k75082s ''History of the Dreyfus Affair'', Volume 1], pp. 40–42. {{in lang|fr}}</ref> to spy on the German Embassy in Paris. They had managed to get a French housekeeper named "Madame Bastian" hired to work in the building and spy on the Germans. In September 1894, she found a torn-up note<ref>"usual way" jargon of the SR meaning: documents retrieved by the housekeeper of the German Embassy: Thomas, ''The Affair Without Dreyfus'', p. 140 et seq. {{in lang|fr}}</ref> which she handed over to her employers at the Military Intelligence Service. This note later became known as "the bordereau".<ref group=Note>The French word ''bordereau'' {{IPA|fr|bɔʁ.də.ʁo|}} means simply a note or slip of paper and can be applied to any note. In French, many documents in the case were called bordereaux; however, in this translation the term bordereau is used only for this note.</ref> This piece of paper, torn into six large pieces,<ref>Not small pieces. In addition the paper was not wrinkled. Bredin, ''The Affair'', p. 67. {{in lang|fr}}</ref> unsigned and undated, was addressed to the German military attaché stationed at the German Embassy, [[Maximilian von Schwartzkoppen]]. It stated that confidential French military documents regarding the newly developed "hydraulic brake of 120, and the way this gun has worked"<ref>J. Jacobs's entry: "Dreyfus Case" ("L'Affaire Dreyfus"), in [[The Jewish Encyclopedia|"Jewish Encyclopedia.com]]" (originally published  between 1901 and 1906, reprinted in the 1960s by KTAV Publishing House).</ref><ref>The only important information in the document was a note on the 120 C Baquet gun, an artillery piece that represented only 1.4% of modern French artillery in 1914 and 0.6% of all artillery. Doise, ''A well kept secret'', p. 55 et seq. {{in lang|fr}} About the other points: 2) "A note upon the 'troupes de couverture' (some modifications will be carried out)"; 3) "A note concerning a modification in the formations of artillery"; 4) "A note relative to Madagascar" [The War Office was preparing an expedition to conquer that island]; 5) "The proposed 'manual de tir' of field artillery (March 14, 1894)" in J. Jacobs's entry: "Dreyfus Case" (Jewish Encyclopedia.com), already cited.</ref> were about to be sent to a foreign power.

=== The search for the author of the bordereau ===
[[File:Auguste Mercier.jpg|thumbnail|left|upright|General Auguste Mercier, Minister of War in 1894]]

This catch seemed of sufficient importance for the head of the "Statistical Section",<ref>On the Statistics Section, see Bredin, pp. 49–50; Doise, pp. 42–43 and Thomas, ''The Affair Without Dreyfus'', pp. 60–70. {{in lang|fr}}</ref> the Mulhousian<ref>Thomas, ''The Affair Without Dreyfus'', p. 67. {{in lang|fr}} Alfred Dreyfus was also from Mulhouse.</ref> [[Jean Sandherr]], to inform the Minister of War, [[Général|General]] [[Auguste Mercier]]. In fact the SR suspected that there had been leaks since the beginning of 1894 and had been trying to find the perpetrator. The minister had been harshly attacked in the press for his actions, which were deemed incompetent,<ref>"This wimp Mercier" said [[Victor Henri Rochefort, Marquis de Rochefort-Luçay|Rochefort]] [Tr. Note: a much stronger obscenity was used graphically describing a wimp] in ''Intransigeant'', Boussel, ''The Dreyfus Affair and the Press'', pp. 43–44. {{in lang|fr}}</ref> and appears to have sought an opportunity to enhance his image.<ref>Bredin, ''The Affair'', p. 65. {{in lang|fr}}</ref><ref>Reinach, [http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k75082s ''History of the Dreyfus Affair'', Volume 1], p. 39. {{in lang|fr}}</ref> He immediately initiated two secret investigations, one administrative and one judicial. To find the culprit, using simple though crude reasoning,<ref name=Birnbaum40>Birnbaum, ''The Dreyfus Affair'', p. 40. {{in lang|fr}}</ref> the circle of the search was arbitrarily restricted to suspects posted to, or former employees of, the General Staff – necessarily a trainee artillery<ref group="Note">On the indication of Captain Matton, the only artillery officer in the Statistics Section. Three of the documents transmitted concerned short- and long-range artillery.</ref> officer.<ref group="Note">The documents could come from 1st, 2nd, 3rd or 4th offices – only a trainee appeared able to offer such a variety of documents as they passed from one office to another to complete their training. This was the reasoning of Lieutenant-Colonel d'Aboville, which proved fallacious.</ref>

The ideal culprit was identified: Captain Alfred Dreyfus, a graduate of the [[École polytechnique]] and an artillery officer, of the Jewish faith and of Alsatian origin, coming from the republican meritocracy.<ref>Birnbaum, ''The Dreyfus Affair'', p. 48. {{in lang|fr}}</ref> At the beginning of the case, the emphasis was rather on the Alsatian origins of Dreyfus than on his religion. These origins were not, however, exceptional because these officers were favoured by France for their knowledge of the German language and culture.<ref>Burns, ''a family....'', p. 139. {{in lang|fr}}</ref><ref>Thomas, ''The Affair Without Dreyfus'', p. 260. {{in lang|fr}}</ref> There was also antisemitism in the offices of the General Staff,<ref>Sandherr was a fanatical antisemite. [[Maurice Paléologue]], ''The Dreyfus Affair and the Quai d'Orsay'' {{in lang|fr}}</ref> and it fast became central to the affair by filling in the credibility gaps in the preliminary enquiry.<ref name=Birnbaum40 /> In particular, Dreyfus was at that time the only Jewish officer to be recently passed by the General Staff.

In fact, the reputation<ref>It has been argued in many books that Dreyfus was unemotional and indifferent to his fate: that was ultimately refuted by many testimonies. V. Duclert, ''Biography of Alfred Dreyfus'', p. 115 et seq. {{in lang|fr}}</ref> of Dreyfus as a cold and withdrawn or even haughty character, as well as his "curiosity", worked strongly against him. These traits of character, some false, others natural, made the charges plausible by turning the most ordinary acts of everyday life in the ministry into proof of espionage. From the beginning a biased and one-sided multiplication of errors led the State to a false position. This was present throughout the affair, where irrationality prevailed over the positivism in vogue in that period:<ref>Birnbaum, ''The Dreyfus Affair'', p. 38. {{in lang|fr}}</ref>

{{blockquote|From this first hour the phenomenon occurred that will dominate the whole affair. It is no longer controlled by facts and circumstances carefully examined which will constitute a belief; it is the irresistible cavalier conviction which distorts the facts and beliefs.|[[Joseph Reinach]]}}

=== Expertise in writing ===
[[File:Du Paty de Clam.jpg|thumb|left|upright|[[Armand du Paty de Clam|Major du Paty de Clam]], head of investigation, arrested Captain Dreyfus.]]

To condemn Dreyfus, the writing on the bordereau had to be compared to that of the Captain. There was nobody competent to analyse the writing on the General Staff.<ref>General Mercier to his subordinates: Bredin, ''The Affair'', p. 69. {{in lang|fr}} Also reported elsewhere.</ref> Then [[Armand du Paty de Clam|Major du Paty de Clam]]<ref>On the personalities of Mercier and du Paty de Clam, see: Palaeologue, ''The Dreyfus Affair and the Quai d'Orsay'', pp. 111 et seq. {{in lang|fr}}</ref><ref>Guillemin, ''The enigma Esterházy'', Volume 1, p. 99. {{in lang|fr}}</ref> entered the scene: an eccentric man who prided himself on being an expert in [[graphology]]. On being shown some letters by Dreyfus and the bordereau on 5 October, du Paty concluded immediately who had written the two writings. After a day of additional work he provided a report that, despite some differences, the similarities were sufficient to warrant an investigation. Dreyfus was therefore "the probable author" of the bordereau in the eyes of the General Staff.<ref>Bredin, ''The Affair'', p. 0. {{in lang|fr}}</ref>

[[File:Alphonse Bertillon.jpg|thumb|upright|Alphonse Bertillon was not a handwriting expert, but he invented the theory of "autoforgery".]]
General Mercier believed he had the guilty party, but he exaggerated the value of the affair, which took on the status of an affair of state during the week preceding the arrest of Dreyfus. The Minister did consult and inform all the authorities of the State,<ref>The General met with the President of the Republic, [[Jean Casimir-Perier|Casimir-Perier]], to minimize the importance of the documents submitted, this Mercier later denied, which made the two men implacable enemies. See [http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k24250f ''The Trial at Rennes'' Volume 1], pp. 60, 149 and 157 {{in lang|fr}}</ref> yet despite prudent counsel and courageous objections expressed by [[Gabriel Hanotaux]] in the Council of Ministers<ref>Thomas, ''The Affair Without Dreyfus'', p. 141. {{in lang|fr}} Hanotaux did obtain a promise from Mercier to drop the charges if other evidence was not found. This is most likely the origin of the secret file.</ref> he decided to pursue it.<ref>Bredin, ''The Affair'', p. 72. {{in lang|fr}}</ref> Du Paty de Clam was appointed [[Law enforcement in France|Judicial Police Officer]] to lead an official investigation.

Meanwhile, several parallel sources of information were opening up, some on the personality of Dreyfus, others to ensure the truth of the identity of the author of the bordereau. The expert<ref group="Note">Expert in writing from the Bank of France: his honest caution was vilified in the indictment of Major Ormescheville.</ref> Gobert was not convinced and found many differences. He even wrote that "the nature of the writing on the bordereau excludes disguised handwriting".<ref>Reinach, [http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k75082s ''History of the Dreyfus Affair'', Volume 1], p. 92. {{in lang|fr}} Gobert said that the text was written quickly and excluded it from being copied.</ref> Disappointed, Mercier then called in [[Alphonse Bertillon]], the inventor of forensic [[anthropometry]] but no handwriting expert. He was initially no more positive than Gobert but he did not exclude the possibility of its being the writing of Dreyfus.<ref>[http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k24251s ''Trial at Rennes'' Volume 2], p. 322. {{in lang|fr}} An idea supported by the transparency of the paper.</ref> Later, under pressure from the military,<ref>Bredin, ''The Affair'', p. 87. {{in lang|fr}}</ref> he argued that Dreyfus had autocopied it and developed his theory of "autoforgery".

=== The arrest ===
On 13 October 1894, without any tangible evidence and with an empty file, General Mercier summoned Captain Dreyfus for a general inspection in "bourgeois clothing", i.e. in civilian clothes. The purpose of the General Staff was to obtain the perfect proof under French law: a [[Confession (law)|confession]]. That confession was to be obtained by surprise – by dictating a letter based on the bordereau<ref>Reinach, [http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k75082s ''History of the Dreyfus Affair'', Volume 1], p. 107. {{in lang|fr}}</ref><ref>Report of the Supreme Court, Volume 1, p. 127. {{in lang|fr}}</ref> to reveal his guilt.

On the morning of 15 October 1894, Captain Dreyfus underwent this ordeal but admitted nothing. Du Paty even tried to suggest suicide by placing a revolver in front of Dreyfus, but he refused to take his life, saying he "wanted to live to establish his innocence". The hopes of the military were crushed. Nevertheless Du Paty de Clam still arrested the captain,<ref>The arrest order had been signed in advance, v. Thomas, ''The Affair Without Dreyfus'', p. 208. {{in lang|fr}}</ref> accused him of conspiring with the enemy, and told him that he would be brought before a court-martial. Dreyfus was imprisoned at the [[Cherche-Midi prison]] in [[Paris]].<ref>Duclert, ''Biography of Alfred Dreyfus'', p. 118. {{in lang|fr}}</ref>

=== The enquiry and the first military court ===
[[File:Dreyfus-in-Prison-1895.jpg|thumb|upright|Cover of ''[[Le Petit Journal (newspaper)|Le Petit Journal]]'', 20 January 1895 (illustration by [[Fortuné Méaulle]] after [[Lionel Royer]])]]
Mrs. Dreyfus was informed of the arrest the same day by a police raid to search their apartment. She was terrorized by Du Paty, who ordered her to keep the arrest of her husband secret and even said, "One word, one single word and it will be a European war!"<ref>Mathieu Dreyfus [http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k24254t ''The Affair that I lived''], p. 20 and s. {{in lang|fr}}</ref> Illegally,<ref>No defendant could be held incommunicado under any law of the time. The risk of leakage was limited by the fact that lawyers are subject to professional secrecy. Supreme Court, ''On Justice in the Dreyfus Affair'', Duclert, p. 51. {{in lang|fr}}</ref> Dreyfus was placed in solitary confinement in prison, where Du Paty interrogated him day and night in order to obtain a confession, which failed. The captain was morally supported by the first Dreyfusard, Major Forzinetti, commandant of the military prisons of Paris.

On 29 October 1894, the affair was revealed in an article in ''[[La Libre Parole]]'', the antisemitic newspaper owned by [[Édouard Drumont]]. This marked the beginning of a very brutal press campaign until the trial. This event put the affair in the field of antisemitism where it remained until its conclusion.<ref>Bredin, ''The Affair'', p. 80. {{in lang|fr}}</ref>

On 1 November 1894, Alfred's brother, Mathieu Dreyfus, became aware of the arrest after being called urgently to Paris. He became the architect of the arduous fight for the liberation of his brother.<ref>Mathieu Dreyfus, [http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k24254t ''The Affair that I lived''] {{in lang|fr}}.</ref> Without hesitation, he began looking for a lawyer, and retained the distinguished criminal lawyer [[Edgar Demange]].<ref>Edgar Demange, winner of a national eloquence competition, obtained the acquittal of [[Pierre Napoleon Bonaparte|Prince Pierre Bonaparte]], who killed the Republican [[Victor Noir]] in 1870. A specialist in criminal law, he was recognized by his peers and elected member of the Council of the Bar from 1888 to 1892. In an historical irony, it was Demange who obtained the acquittal of the [[Marquis de Mores]], assassin of the Jewish Captain Mayer in a duel. Y. Repiquet, president of the bar, in Edgar Demange and Fernand Labori, Supreme Court, ''Justice From the Dreyfus Affair'', p. 274. {{in lang|fr}}</ref>

=== The enquiry ===
On 3 November 1894, General Saussier, the [[Military governor of Paris]], reluctantly<ref>He characterised the report by du Paty as "rantings" (Bredin, ''The Affair'', p. 88.) {{in lang|fr}}</ref> gave the order for an enquiry. He had the power to stop the process but did not, perhaps because of an exaggerated confidence in military justice.<ref>Supreme Court, ''Justice From the Dreyfus Affair'', Duclert, p. 103. {{in lang|fr}}</ref> Major Besson d'Ormescheville, the recorder for the Military Court, wrote an indictment in which "moral elements" of the charge (which gossiped about the habits of Dreyfus and his alleged attendance at "gambling circles", his knowledge of German, and his "remarkable memory") were developed more extensively than the "material elements",<ref group="Note">These are treated in the single penultimate paragraph in one sentence: "The material elements consist of the incriminating letter including review by the majority of experts as well as by us and by the witnesses who have seen it until now except for those who wilfully see differences, showing a complete similarity with the authentic writing of Captain Dreyfus".</ref> which are rarely seen in the charge:

"This is a proof of guilt because Dreyfus made everything disappear".

The complete lack of neutrality of the indictment led to Émile Zola calling it a "monument of bias".<ref>Zola, "[[J'accuse...!]]" {{in lang|fr}}</ref>

After the news broke on Dreyfus' arrest, many journalists flocked to the story and flooded the story with speculations and accusations. The renowned journalist and antisemitic agitator [[Edouard Drumont]] wrote in his publication on November 3, 1894, "What a terrible lesson, this disgraceful treason of the Jew Dreyfus."

On 4 December 1894, Dreyfus was referred to the first Military Court with this dossier. The secrecy was lifted and Demange could access the file for the first time. After reading it the lawyer had absolute confidence, as he saw the emptiness of the prosecution's case.<ref>Bredin, ''The Affair'', p. 89. {{in lang|fr}}</ref> The prosecution rested completely on the writing on a single piece of paper, the bordereau, on which experts disagreed, and on vague indirect testimonies.

=== The trial: "Closed Court or War!" ===
[[File:Dreyfus Petit Journal 1894.jpg|thumb|upright|From ''Le Petit Journal'' (23 December 1894)]]

During the two months before the trial, the press went wild. ''[[La Libre Parole]]'', ''L'Autorité'', ''[[Le Journal]]'', and ''[[Le Temps (Paris)|Le Temps]]'' described the supposed life of Dreyfus through lies and bad fiction.<ref>Mathieu Dreyfus [http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k24254t ''The Affair That I Lived''], p. 24. {{in lang|fr}}</ref>
This was also an opportunity for extreme headlines from ''La Libre Parole'' and ''[[La Croix (newspaper)|La Croix]]'' to justify their previous campaigns against the presence of Jews in the army on the theme "You have been told!"<ref>v. The press, publications on the Dreyfus affair, and Bredin, ''The Affair'', p. 83. {{in lang|fr}}</ref> This long delay above all enabled the General Staff to prepare public opinion and to put indirect pressure on the judges.<ref>Bredin, ''The Affair'', p. 85. {{in lang|fr}}</ref> On 8 November 1894, General Mercier declared Dreyfus guilty in an interview with ''[[Le Figaro]]''.<ref>Boussel, ''The Dreyfus Affair and the Press'', p. 55 {{in lang|fr}}</ref> He repeated himself on 29 November 1894 in an article by [[Arthur Meyer (journalist)|Arthur Meyer]] in ''[[Le Gaulois]]'', which in fact condemned the indictment against Dreyfus and asked, "How much freedom will the military court have to judge the defendant?"<ref>Boussel, ''The Dreyfus Affair and the Press'', p. 58. {{in lang|fr}}</ref>

The jousting of the columnists took place within a broader debate about the issue of a closed court. For Ranc and Cassagnac, who represented the majority of the press, the closed court was a low manoeuvre to enable the acquittal of Dreyfus, "because the minister is a coward". The proof was "that he ''grovels'' before the Prussians" by agreeing to publish the denials of the German ambassador in Paris.<ref>Three denials, very brief and ambiguous, were published by the Havas agency in November and December 1894 in order to clarify the responsibility of the German Embassy. Bredin, ''The Affair'', p. 85. {{in lang|fr}}</ref> In other newspapers, such as ''L'Éclair'' on 13 December 1894: "the closed court is necessary to avoid a ''[[casus belli]]''"; while for Judet in ''[[Le Petit Journal (newspaper)|Le Petit Journal]]'' of 18 December: "the closed court is our impregnable refuge against Germany"; or in ''La Croix'' the same day: it must be "the most absolute closed court".<ref>Boussel, ''The Dreyfus Affair and the Press'', p. 60. {{in lang|fr}}</ref>

The trial opened on 19 December 1894 at one o'clock<ref>On the details of proceedings see: Duclert, ''Biography of Alfred Dreyfus'', p. 147 {{in lang|fr}}</ref> and a [[In camera|closed court]] was immediately pronounced. This closed court was not legally consistent since [[Georges Picquart|Major Picquart]] and Prefect [[Louis Lépine]] were present at certain proceedings in violation of the law. The closed court allowed the military to avoid disclosing the emptiness of their evidence to the public and to stifle debate.<ref>Reinach, [http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k75082s ''History of the Dreyfus Affair'', Volume 1], p. 394. {{in lang|fr}}</ref><ref>Supreme Court, ''Justice From the Dreyfus Affair'', Duclert, p. 107. {{in lang|fr}}</ref> As expected, the emptiness of their case appeared clearly during the hearings. Detailed discussions on the bordereau showed that Captain Dreyfus could not be the author.<ref>Reinach, [http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k75082s ''History of the Dreyfus Affair'', Volume 1], p. 409. {{in lang|fr}}</ref><ref>Doise, ''A well kept secret'' p. 87. {{in lang|fr}}</ref> At the same time the accused himself protested his innocence and defended himself point by point with energy and logic.<ref>Duclert, ''Biography of Alfred Dreyfus'', p. 151. {{in lang|fr}}</ref> Moreover, his statements were supported by a dozen defense witnesses. Finally, the absence of motive for the crime was a serious thorn in the prosecution case. Dreyfus was indeed a very patriotic officer highly rated by his superiors, very rich and with no tangible reason to betray France.<ref>Although he was only a captain, he earned a personal income from his father's legacy and his wife's dowry equivalent to that of a commanding general of a region: Doise, ''A well kept secret'', p. 38. {{in lang|fr}}</ref> The fact of Dreyfus's Jewishness, which was used extensively by the right-wing press, was not openly presented in court.

[[Alphonse Bertillon]], an eccentric [[Criminology|criminologist]] who was not an expert in handwriting, was presented as a scholar of the first importance. He advanced the theory of "autoforgery" during the trial and accused Dreyfus of imitating his own handwriting, explaining the differences in writing by using extracts of writing from his brother Matthieu and his wife Lucie. This theory, although later regarded as bizarre and astonishing, seems to have had some effect on the judges.<ref>See the demonstrations of Meyer, Giry, Henri Poincaré, Appel, and Darboux, handwriting experts and mathematicians, during their testimony at the second review in 1904. They destroyed forever the Bertillon system. Thomas, ''The Affair Without Dreyfus'', p. 189. {{in lang|fr}}</ref> In addition, Major [[Hubert-Joseph Henry]], deputy head of the SR and discoverer of the ''bordereau'', made a theatrical statement in open court.<ref>Picquart ''Revisions'' 1898–1899, Instruction, Volume I, p. 129. {{in lang|fr}}</ref> He argued that leaks betraying the General Staff had been suspected to exist since February 1894 and that "a respectable person" accused Captain Dreyfus. He swore on oath that the traitor was Dreyfus, pointing to the crucifix hanging on the wall of the court.<ref>Reinach, [http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k75082s ''History of the Dreyfus Affair'', Volume 1], p. 411. {{in lang|fr}} The crucifix had disappeared from civil courtrooms during the government of [[Jules Ferry]], but not from military tribunals.</ref> Dreyfus was apoplectic with rage and demanded to be confronted with his anonymous accuser, which was rejected by the General Staff. The incident had an undeniable effect on the court, which was composed of seven officers who were both judges and jury. However, the outcome of the trial remained uncertain. The conviction of the judges had been shaken by the firm and logical answers of the accused.<ref>Duclert, ''Biography of Alfred Dreyfus'', p. 164. {{in lang|fr}}</ref> The judges took leave to deliberate, but the General Staff still had a card in hand to tip the balance decisively against Dreyfus.

=== Transmission of a secret dossier to the judges ===
[[File:Schwartzkoppen3.jpg|thumb|left|upright|[[Max von Schwartzkoppen]] always claimed never to have known Dreyfus.]]

Military witnesses at the trial alerted high command about the risk of acquittal. For this eventuality the Statistics Section had prepared a file containing, in principle, four "absolute" proofs of the guilt of Captain Dreyfus accompanied by an explanatory note. The contents of this secret file remained uncertain until 2013, when they were released by the [[Ministry of Armed Forces (France)|French Ministry of Defence]].<ref>{{cite web|title=Secret military file – Digitized|url=http://www.affairedreyfus.com/p/dossier-secret-accueil-site-du-dossier.html|website=L'Affaire Dreyfus|access-date=17 January 2017}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/07/world/europe/files-on-dreyfus-affair-released-online.html|title=French Ministry Posts Online Full File on 'Dreyfus Affair' |date=7 March 2013|website=The New York Times}}</ref> Recent research indicates the existence of numbering which suggests the presence of a dozen documents. Among these letters were some of an erotic homosexual nature (the Davignon letter among others) raising the question of the tainted methods of the Statistics Section and the objective of their choice of documents.<ref>Pierre Gervais, Romain Huret and Pauline Peretz, "A review of the 'secret file': homosexuality and antisemitism in the Dreyfus Affair", ''Journal of Modern History'', Editions Berlin, Vol. 55, No. 1, pp. 125–160. {{in lang|fr}}</ref>

The secret file was illegally submitted at the beginning of the deliberations by the President of the Military Court, Colonel Émilien Maurel, by order of the Minister of War, General Mercier.<ref>In French military law at the time, all the evidence of guilt must be available to the defence in order to be subject to examination. This was not required for ordinary justice. Doise, ''A well kept secret'', p. 132. {{in lang|fr}}</ref> Later at the Rennes trial of 1899, General Mercier explained (falsely) the nature of the prohibited disclosure of the documents submitted in the courtroom. This file contained, in addition to letters without much interest, some of which were falsified, a piece known as the "Scoundrel D&nbsp;...".<ref>Birnbaum, ''The Dreyfus Affair'', p. 43. {{in lang|fr}}</ref>

It was a letter from the German military attaché, [[Maximilian von Schwartzkoppen]], to the Italian military attaché, Lieutenant Colonel Alessandro Panizzardi, intercepted by the SR. The letter was supposed to accuse Dreyfus definitively since, according to his accusers, it was signed with the initial of his name.<ref>It was actually a man named Dubois who had already been identified by the Statistics Section for a year. See also Pierre Milza, "The Dreyfus Affair nelle relazioni Franco-Italiane", in: Comune di Forlì – Comune di Roma, ''Dreyfus. The Affair e la Parigi fin de siècle nelle carta di un diplomatico italiano'', Edizioni Lavoro, Roma 1994, pp. 23–36. (It)</ref> In reality, the Statistics Section knew that the letter could not be attributed to Dreyfus and if it was, it was with criminal intent.<ref>Supreme Court, ''Justice in the Dreyfus Affair'', Duclert, p. 92. {{in lang|fr}}</ref> Colonel Maurel confirmed in the second Dreyfus trial that the secret documents were not used to win the support of the judges of the Military Court. He contradicted himself, however, by saying that he read only one document, "which was enough".<ref>[http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k24251s ''Trial at Rennes'' Volume 2] p. 191 et seq. It especially aggravated his case in not admitting that the transmission of a secret file was a criminal manoeuvre.</ref>

=== Conviction, degradation, and deportation ===
[[File:Galons arrachés à Alfred Dreyfus le jour de sa dégradation.jpg|thumb|upright|Dreyfus's officer stripes, ripped off as a symbol of treason – [[Musée d'Art et d'Histoire du Judaïsme|Museum of Jewish Art and History]]]]

On 22 December 1894, after several hours of deliberation, the verdict was reached. Seven judges unanimously convicted Alfred Dreyfus of collusion with a foreign power, to the maximum penalty under section 76 of the Criminal Code: ''permanent exile in a walled fortification'' ([[prison]]), the cancellation of his army rank and military degradation, also known as [[cashiering]]. Dreyfus was not [[Capital punishment in France|sentenced to death]], as it had been abolished for [[political crime]]s [[French Constitution of 1848|since 1848]].

For the authorities, the press and the public, doubts had been dispelled by the trial and his guilt was certain. Right and left regretted the abolition of the death penalty for such a crime. Antisemitism peaked in the press and occurred in areas so far spared.<ref>Reinach, [http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k75082s ''History of the Dreyfus Affair'', Volume 1], p. 468. {{in lang|fr}}</ref> Socialist leader [[Jean Jaurès]] regretted the lightness of the sentence in an address to the [[Chamber of Deputies (France)|Chamber of Deputies]] and wrote, "A soldier has been sentenced to death and executed for throwing a button in the face of his corporal. So why leave this miserable traitor alive?" Radical Republican [[Georges Clemenceau]] in ''La'' ''Justice'' made a similar comment.<ref>Clemenceau wrote on 25 December 1894, in ''La Justice'': "Without doubt, I am also more firmly than ever the enemy of the death penalty. But it can never be understood by the public that the state a few weeks ago has shot an unfortunate child 20 years old who was guilty of throwing a button of his tunic at the head of the President of a Military Court, while the traitor Dreyfus will soon leave for l'île de Nou (sic) [[New Caledonia]], where he will wait in the garden of [[Candide]] (sic)." Quoted by Michel Winock, Clemenceau, ed. Perrin, 2007, chap. XV, "''The Start of the Affair''", p. 244. {{in lang|fr}}</ref>

On 5 January 1895, the ceremony of degradation took place in the Morlan Court of the [[École militaire|Military School]] in Paris. While the drums rolled, Dreyfus was accompanied by four artillery officers, who brought him before an officer of the state who read the judgment. A Republican Guard adjutant tore off his badges, thin strips of gold, his stripes, cuffs and sleeves of his jacket. As he was paraded throughout the streets, the crowd chanted "Death to Judas, death to the Jew." Witnesses report the dignity of Dreyfus, who continued to maintain his innocence while raising his arms: "Innocent, Innocent! Long live France! Long live the army". The Adjutant broke his sword on his knee and then the condemned Dreyfus marched at a slow pace in front of his former companions.<ref>Méhana Mouhou, ''Dreyfus Affair: conspiracy in the Républic'', Éd. L'Harmattan, 2006, p. 40. {{in lang|fr}}</ref> An event known as "the legend of the confession" took place before the degradation. In the van that brought him to the military school, Dreyfus is said to have confided his treachery to Captain Lebrun-Renault.<ref>Bredin, ''The Affair'', p. 107. {{in lang|fr}}</ref><ref>It seems that the correct spelling is Captain Lebrun Renaud, but all of the historical literature takes the form of the text, and it is therefore the most common. See the testimony from [http://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k242524 ''Trial at Rennes'' Volume 3], p. 73. {{in lang|fr}}</ref> It appears that this was merely self-promotion by the captain of the Republican Guard, and that in reality Dreyfus had made no admission. Due to the affair's being related to national security, the prisoner was then held in solitary confinement in a cell awaiting transfer. On 17 January 1895, he was transferred to the prison on [[Île de Ré]] where he was held for over a month. He had the right to see his wife twice a week in a long room, each of them at one end, with the director of the prison in the middle.<ref>Bredin, ''The Affair'', p. 103. {{in lang|fr}}</ref>
[[File:Hutte von Dreyfus.jpg|thumb|left|Dreyfus's Hut on Devil's Island in French Guiana]]
At the last minute, at the initiative of General Mercier, a law was passed on 9 February 1895, restoring the [[Îles du Salut]] in [[French Guiana]], as a place of fortified deportation so that Dreyfus was not sent to Ducos, [[New Caledonia]].{{citation needed|date=February 2021}} Indeed, during the deportation of Adjutant Lucien Châtelain, sentenced for conspiring with the enemy in 1888, the facilities did not provide the required conditions of confinement and detention conditions were considered too soft. On 21 February 1895, Dreyfus embarked on the ship Ville de Saint-Nazaire. The next day the ship sailed for [[French Guiana]].

[[File:Dreyfus Ile du diable 96.jpg|thumb|upright|''Le Petit Journal'' (27 September 1896)]]
On 12 March 1895, after a difficult voyage of fifteen days, the ship anchored off the Îles du Salut. Dreyfus stayed one month in prison on [[Île Royale]] and was transferred to [[Devil's Island]] on 14 April 1895. Apart from his guards, he was the only inhabitant of the island and he stayed in a stone hut {{convert|4|×|4|m|ft}}.<ref>Bredin, ''The Affair'', p. 125. {{in lang|fr}}</ref> Haunted by the risk of escape, the commandant of the prison sentenced him to a hellish life, even though living conditions were already very painful. The temperature reached 45&nbsp;°C, he was underfed or fed contaminated food and hardly had any treatment for his many tropical diseases. Dreyfus became sick and shaken by fevers that got worse every year.<ref>Alfred Dreyfus, ''Five Years of my life''. {{in lang|fr}}</ref>

Dreyfus was allowed to write on paper numbered and signed. He underwent censorship by the commandant even when he received mail from his wife Lucie, whereby they encouraged each other. On 6 September 1896, the conditions of life for Dreyfus worsened again; he was chained ''double looped'', forcing him to stay in bed motionless with his ankles shackled. This measure was the result of false information of his escape revealed by a British newspaper. For two long months, Dreyfus was plunged into deep despair, convinced that his life would end on this remote island.<ref>Bredin, ''The Affair'', p. 132. {{in lang|fr}}</ref>{{Tone inline|date=June 2022}}