The Juan Luna Case

One Paris newspaper accounts of the Luna case -- L'Affare Luna

In the last week of September 1892, the Paris press was all abuzz, reporting on the sensational case of Juan Luna, a well-known figure in the Hispanic artistic community of Paris, who in a fit of jealous rage and marital dispute, shot and killed his wife and mother-in-law. The case was given different labels as newspapers came up with their own rhetoric of sensationalism, such as "la tragédie de la rue Pergolèse" and "L'affaire Luna," among others. Regional and provincial papers picked up the story, and in the succeeding weeks, it spread throughout France. Spanish papers, owing to Juan Luna's stature, also began their series of reports about the case. Later, one more enterprising Spanish journal would publish Antonio Luna's letter to a friend, sharing his brother's side of the story. The Luna case was arguably one of the most sensational events reported about a Filipino in the 19th century, and it unfolded on the center stage of the world at the time—Paris.

What was particularly intriguing, as reported by several Parisian newspapers, in the trial, Juan Luna claimed that he received anonymous letters alleging that his wife, Paz Pardo de Tavera, was engaged in an affair with a certain Maurice Dussaq, a French businessman from Bordeaux, was based in Havana, Cuba, and had once served as the President of the French Consultative Commerce Committee of Havana. According to Luna, this alleged romantic involvement began when Paz, prompted by her son Luling's health issues, spent some time with the child in a spa, in Mont Dore, the French Alps. They were accompanied by their English nanny during this period. It was Mont Dore that Mrs. Luna purportedly first crossed paths with Monsieur Dussaq. Upon Paz's return, Luna claimed to have observed significant changes in his wife's demeanor.

Juan Luna then began following his wife's movements, even to the extent of personally tracking her in the streets of Paris. He even had face-to-face encounter with Dussaq during one of his surveillance, in a building where his wife was supposed to have gone—a chance meeting that raised questions about Paz's infidelity.

Finally, according to his testimony in court, Luna claimed to have obtained a signed document from Paz, in which she admitted to her infidelity. (It's possible that she signed it under duress.)

Juan Luna

However, the trial also unveiled many previously unseen and undiscussed aspects of societal norms in 19th-century society, particularly concerning the issue of multiracial unions. Luna's trial also became entangled with racial issues, to the extent that even the final decision was influenced by Luna's racial and ethnic background.

During the trial, Luna was asked by the presiding judge about the tensions arising from such a multiethnic marriage, in this case between a mestiza and an Indio. According to one newspaper account Luna responded in a low tone and a very pronounced Spanish accent:

"Yes, and that is the misfortune of the Philippine Islands. The mestizos considers themselves the masters. They never miss an opportunity to make what they call their superiority felt... However, when I got married, I had not seen these prejudices manifest in the family I was entering. It was only after my misfortunes that I understood that they had a lot to do with what had happened."

Juan Luna also added that things were becoming clearer, that he was being pushed out of the marriage through a conspiracy involving his in-laws, as Paz was seeking separation and custody of their child.

In the trial, a letter written by Luna's mother-in-law Julianna Gorricho Pardo de Tavera to his son Trinidad was read, detailing the abusive nature of Juan Luna towards his wife. This move could have been orchestrated by the Tavera's lawyer, Felix Decori, with the clear intention of highlighting the dark side of Juan Luna. However, when the letter was read, Luna reacted vehemently, exclaiming, 'It's not true!... it's not true!'

It's important to note that this case garnered significant public attention, evolving into a contest for winning public opinion. Right from the outset of the trial, Luna's defense strategy was focused on not only convincing the jury but also swaying public sentiment. Albert Danet, Luna's lawyer, executed this strategy skillfully.

Remarkably, it was M. Dupont, the owner of the house rented by the Luna-Tavera family, at Villas Dupont, 28 rue Pergolèse, presented by the defense, who was perhaps tasked to introduced the racial dimension into the proceedings. He testified that he knew the painter as a good man but has his defects being Malay.

Towards the conclusion of the trial, Luna's defense even called upon reputable Filipino friends of Luna, such as Felix Ressurrecion Hidalgo, to testify on his behalf. As a result, the courtroom was filled with people who were supportive of Luna. Albert Danet's strategy, though somewhat ironic, proved to be have the winning formula. Perhaps the most peculiar aspect of it all was the attempt to label Luna as a 'sauvage,' suggesting that he was capable of irrational behavior or what was termed then as "fureur malaise" when agitated simply because he belonged to the Malay race.

In the end, sympathy seemed to be on the side of the beleaguered artist, who had entered into this marriage as an inferior compared to his semi-Castilian wife, who was considered part of a higher caste of society. But by virtue of the confession signed by Paz, Juan Luna perhaps was able to substantiate her adulterous actions.

According to one account, after the jury's deliberation, the sentence in favor of Luna was announced, there was cheering throughout the entire trial court. This prompted the presiding judge to threaten to clear the room.

The Napoleonic Code. Article 324

Actually, right from the very beginning of the procedure against Luna, the Tavera women would have no case because the very essence of the Napoleonic Code or "Civil des Français" (particularly that 1810 French Penal Code Article 324) and the prevailing norm of the society that time was "anti-women". It gives leniency to the so-called "honor killings". It permitted the murders of an unfaithful wife and her lover at the hand of her husband. In Luna's case, proving his innocence was simply secondary, right from the start of the trial the nature of the law is on his side.

The preliminary page -- French Penal Code of 1810

The Napoleonic code- was established by Napoleon Bonaparte in 1804, its core purpose was to uproot the existing feudal law. But like all laws, it must have had its own loopholes. The Penal Code Article 324 which was actually implemented in 1810, also greatly influenced if not reinforced the existing laws and traditions of many Middle East countries. It was only in 1975 that France repealed Article 324.

Reading some accounts of the trial, I couldn't help but wonder who was behind the anonymous letters perhaps even imploring: "Follow her on the streets of Paris!" One Paris paper suggested it might have been Miss Basley, the Luna family's English nanny.

Murder is murder, and while Juan Luna may have escaped the French justice system by paying a mere franc, he couldn't evade ultimate justice, whatever that might entail.

POSTSCRIPT

Albert Danet (1846-1909) -- The brilliant and popular lawyer representing Luna, who focused the defense on the argument that Luna belonged to the Malay race and was therefore susceptible to irrational acts when threatened or cornered-- What was defined then as "fureur malaise." The eloquent lawyer portrayed his client as a simple, loving, and devoted husband whose trust had been unworthily deceived, ultimately leading him to commit a crime. 

Felix Decori (1860-1915) -The lawyer who represented the Pardo de Tavera family, depicted Luna as an ungrateful and violent individual. He argued that despite receiving financial support from his in-laws, Luna still engaged in abusive behavior towards his wife, implying that he was a wife beater.