THE TRIAL OF THE THIRTY. T HE farce is at an
end. The thirty scapegoats have been sent into the wilderness, and most of them have returned scatheless. True, three of the lower-class prisoners have been sentenced to varying terms of im- prisonment for crimes in no way relating to Anarchy ; but for the rest there is again freedom and—applause. And the trial has been an interesting specimen of the criminal procedure that obtains across the Channel. Abuse has been bandied between counsel and prisoner, between prisoner and Judge, with a freedom peculiar to France. It is idle to comment on the peculiarities of the French method ; it suffices to describe. If there were three hundred suspects in jail, why bring but thirty into the dock ? If the detained men were to be decimated, why must men of the type of John Wilkes, and men of the type of Jonathan Wild, be placed at random in the same Court ? If the trial was to strike terror into Anarchists of all classes, why allow repartee in which the Government counsel did not show to advantage ? But it is beside the mark to cavil at these things. They are of the essence of French criminal procedure. 11101404.1 We are far, indeed, from a feeling of certainty as to • how " the Anarchist Peril" is to be handled. Flogging, the remedy so convincing to the ordinary mind, is of more than doubtful application in this instance. The assertion that it put down other outbursts of crime,such as garrotting, is now proved to be without foundation, and we see small reason to believe that in this case it would be any more .efficacious. A more subtle and also more sound sugges- tion, is that such offenders should be tried in camera. If there is one feature absolutely common to Anarchists of all grades, it is a craving for notoriety. Even more than the making of bombs, they love a stage upon which they can declaim and attitudinise. To pose as a martyr, to exchange epigrams with counsel for the prosecution, to bandy raillery with the Judge, to have an audience, in a word, this to the Anarchist is heaven. But it is very doubtful how far a secret hearing would be possible. In England there is a, marked feeling against any judicial proceedings being held with closed doors. The traditions of the Bench, as well as the public, are strongly opposed thereto. Even in such a tribunal as the Divorce Court, the Judge will only order proceedings in camera for just so long as the evidence in course of being elicited is quite unfit for publication. It is certainly the best device that has yet been proposed to quell Anarchy ; it is simple, and would bring with it many positive benefits. But it would also entail disadvantages not a few ; it would breed a suspicion of unfairness ; it might detract from the impartiality of the Courts. It was tried during the first day of the recent farce. But the Avocat-G6n6ral, M. Bulot, abandoned it almost at once, as if confessing that he was ashamed of it,—that it was an unfortunate mistake. In fact, this half-measure was of a piece with the other laughable incidents of this strange trial. But whatever methods are to be adopted whereby Anarchy may be suppressed, it is quite certain that they will not be those recently taken by the French executive. To select at haphazard thirty from among the three hun- dred in jail to be put on their trial ; to place them, pell- mell, in the dock, housebreakers and thieves side by side with amiable theorists like Fdricion and Jean Grave, was neither wise nor just. When it is also remembered that fifty-eight distinct charges were made to a jury already dazed by the heavy rhetoric of M. Bulot and the senti- mental eloquence of S6bastien Faure, one can only marvel that they did not in despair acquit the whole thirty without distinction. That they did make this distinction and bring in a verdict against' Ortiz, Chericotti, and Bertani, is as much to their credit as the previous scenes were to the discredit of both Judge and counsel. For though we may have our own opinion of whither the teaching of MM. Grave, BMus, and Bernard ultimately tends, there can be no doubt that in this case the jury were right in their verdict of acquittal. These men, and most of those charged along with them, represent the " academic " side of this interesting creed. They have nothing to do with such amiable productions as Le Pjre Peincerd, or even L'En-Dekors. They are not the con- structors of Anarchist hagiologies with the martyred Ravachol in the place of honour. They do not write in thhaet—arget of Montmartre, or declare with Paul Verlaine
"Louise Michel est tree bleu."
No ; these are men who write (or rather wrote) for La Rdvolte, who spin abstract theories of an Anarchist mil- lennium, and who use as classic French as any member of the Sorbonne. They are the true disciples of Bakounine, Kropotkin, Most, and whomsoever else that made for respectability in this mad. propaganda. They are, some of them, followers of the Symbolist school,—Fdneon, in- deed, excused himself for living among a circle of Anar- chists on the ground that he was interested in Symbolistic literature ; and it is an interesting fact that M. Stdphane MallarmS, a man not over given to contact with the vulgar, came forward as a witness to F6n6on's good character and discretion. But most of them are precise, pedantic, very often dull, and if Anarchist writings were no more violent than the productions of these men, society would have very little to fear. On the whole, Jean Grave, and others like him, are careful to abstain from advocating any- thing like open attacks on life or property. There is little in what they have written or said that could connect them directly with such men as Valliant or Pauwels. Their journal, La Rivolte, has been characterised in the more thorough-going International as a" rag," and among " serious comrades " they are looked on as but lukewarm in the great cause. Unless the mere expression of opinion was to be made a criminal offence, it was im- possible to condemn such men. They were but exercising their right to freedom of speech. At the same time, while believing as we do that the jury acted rightly in acquitting these men, we must remember that the gulf between them and their brethren of the "active propaganda" is narrow and easily crossed. It is a significant fact that B6bastien Faure, whose address to the jury was so eloquent and so irrelevant (for did. he not say " there are two women praying in tears that you may give a verdict of justice which will be a verdict of mercy " ? ), that Sebastien Faure was in communication with Pauwels and other " serious fellows," that Paul Bernard was in Barcelona at the very time of the explosion, and that even Jean Grave had asserted that a man who commits suicide in the midst of shops overflowing with plenty is no better than an idiot. On the facts of the case these men were entitled. to an acquittal, but as for the secondary, the ultimate, results of their words and writings, there is little to choose between them and their more courageous comrades of Le Pere Peinard.
And when we come to look at the details of this trial, we shall be still more amazed at the ever-present flavour of the stage pervading the Court of Justice. The Avocat- General, M. Bulot, after proclaiming that this was not a rosecution for opinions, but a trial of common criminals, marked. : " It is time to return to serious matters. I will not allow the fearful drama that has so long disturbed the country to be turned into opera-bouffe." But if the trial was filled with incidents better fitted for an opera-bouffe than for a Law-court, as it certainly was, it can hardly be said that the examinations by either Judge or counsel were calculated to make it more serious. The latter had previously examined Math a, and had posed him with the highly irrelevant question as to what were his reasons for returning to Paris in 1892. " I could not stay in London for ever," was the Anarchist's answer. And when the Government counsel proceeded to remark that Matha's appearance in Paris was suspiciously coincident with the Cafe Terminus explosion, " That is mere trifling," was the only reply that could be obtained from the accused. It may be mere insular prejudice, but certainly neither of these mots would be accepted over here for a moment. Then there were the mercury and the tubes found in the possession of Fenton, and the attempt to explain that they were really the property of Emile Henry. The latter had identified the mercury-flask as his. " That," struck in Feneon, " would be quite in keeping with Henry's love of bravado." Nor were there wanting touches of delightfully unconscious humour. A certain M. Frantz Jourdain, called in to testify to Grave's good character, remarked that he had heard such high praise of Grave at the Conservative clubs, that he had seriously thought of asking him to dinner ! We have culled one phrase from the address of M. Bulot to the jury ; it contains other features of interest. In commending Ledot to the tender mercies of the jury, he remarked that under his guidance La Mvolte had become even more violent than under Grave. As that paper is now suppressed, this was an easy thing to say ; but in point of fact, as we mentioned before, La Bervolte was neither violent nor incendiary. Passing to Fenton, the most interesting, and perhaps also the least objectionable figure in the dock, he commented on the description he had given of himself as merely an ardent student." " It would be curious," the counsel went on, " to know what this refined psychologist thought of the state of mind of Ortiz, the accomplished burglar, or of Emile Henry, when planning to avenge Valliant." Finally, he classed Grave, Faure, and Ortiz together as men for whom there must be no mercy. " You are wretches," he cried, " and I call down upon your heads all the severities of the law."
We leave such forensic eloquence to speak for itself. We know that compared with what happens at many trials in France, it is mild and urbane. But it is none the less that blunder which is worse than a crime. If these are the first-fruits of the new law, they are cer- tainly not encouraging. What can result from such a trial but that the hands of Anarchy will be strengthened, those of society weakened, for the coming struggle P It has been throughout a melodramatic farce, a sorry travesty.
Previous page
