The main question which occupied the attention of both the counsel for defense and for the plaintiff in the $1,000,000 libel suit of Aaron Sapiro against Henry Ford, prior to the opening of the trial on Tuesday, was the attempt of the Ford defense to evade the issue of Ford’s allegation of the existence of a “Jewish conspiracy.” Fords counsel is attempting to limit the case to the cooperative marketing movement and the part of Aaron Sapiro in it.
This view is pursued by Senator James A. Reed of Missouri.
When asked by press representatives here, “Isn’t your position in this case a defense of the anti-Semitism which has characterized Mr. Ford’s public utterances since 1920?” Senator Reed replied:
“Absolutely not. Neither cooperative farming nor the Jewish race is on trial here. We are accused of libeling Mr. Sapiro, and it is his record alone which we are going to test. I’ve never heard that it’s a libel to call a man a Jew or a Gentile, or a Swede, or an Irishman. There are crooks in all creeds and races. But that does not affect the character of the creed or race. It’s not a crime if anybody calls me an Irishman, or a Presbyterian. I’ve known a lot of Irish, good and bad, as I’ve known Dutchmen, good and bad. But I’ve never known that in going after a bad Dutchman or Swede that it libeled the races to call him a Dutchman or Swede.”
On the other hand, William Henry Gallagher, Irish and Roman Catholic, Sapiro’s counsel, stated to newspapermen that he believes that “Senator Reed did not know what he was getting into when he came out here and was ‘tricked into the case.’ I believe that I even convinced Senator Reed during the argument in court last Thursday,” Mr. Gallagher said. “The first pleading which Senator Reed entered in reply to Mr. Sapiro’s declaration of libel contained 400 paragraphs and you could not find the word Jew in any of them.
“After my argument 388 paragraphs were struck out as insufficient and a new pleading of 572 paragraphs was filed in which the word Jew frequently appeared. That leads me to think that even Senator Reed knows now that the Jewish issue is unavoidable.
“Mr. Ford has been talking about the ‘International Jew’. Now the time has come for him to make good his accusation and if he cannot show that the ‘International Jew’ exists then all his talk falls flat.
“Mr. Ford’s articles in the ‘Dearborn Independent’ in 1924 specifically mentioned a conspiracy of Jews of which Mr. Sapiro was alleged to be a leader and alleged that the conspiracy was for the purpose of mulcting the American farmer. These charges were reiterated in all tones and shadings. Now that is the point at issue here: was there or is there any such racial conspiracy?
“That is the point from which Mr. Ford’s army of lawyers is retreating all the time. For two years they have obtained postponements of the trial and in that time they have gone over all the States of the Union, taking depositions of people who have been associated with Mr. Sapiro in organizing farmers’ cooperatives.
“How devious the preliminaries have been these two years,” Mr. Gallagher stated, “is indicated in part by the withdrawal from the case of Federal Judge Arthur J. Tuttle. The circumstances of Judge Tuttle’s withdrawal have never been published. It is in Judge Tuttle’s court room tomorrow that Federal Judge Fred J. Raymond of Grand Rapids will sit to hear the case.
“Mr. Sapiro filed in April, 1924, his declaration alleging libel, citing twenty-one counts, which were based upon 141 excerpts from the ‘Dearborn Independent.’ Mr. Ford’s lawyers, led by Clifford B. Longley, general counsel for the Ford Motor Company, requested postponements to prepare their case. Judge Tuttle said the postponement to September, 1926, would be the last he would grant. That was last year. As the time neared the Ford counsel requested further postponement. Judge Tuttle said:
“I am disposed to make a compromise between you and Mr. Gallagher (appearing for Sapiro). You ask for additional time. Mr. Gallagher wants Mr. Ford to appear as a witness. Now I promise you that if Mr. Gallagher requests to have Mr. Ford I will get him here, however difficult it may be. But I should prefer to have things proceed in a peaceable manner. So if you will agree to have Mr. Ford come here of his own volition I will grant another six months’ extension.’
“There were several hearings after that, but the upshot was that Ford’s counsel were not satisfied with the offer of Judge Tuttle. Finally the additional postponement was granted, but there was a furore in court when an affidavit was offered in which Henry Ford maintained that he could not get a fair trial from Federal Judge Tuttle.
“Under the Michigan law this automatically would disqualify the Judge from trying the case. The newspaper men tried to get the affidavit, or a copy of it, but it was held out of the files by the clerk of the court. Finally Judge Tuttle withdrew from the case of his own will and the affidavit was withdrawn, the records appearing as if it had never been filed.
“In fact, the only thing now to suggest that this ever occurred is a line drawn through an entry on the clerk’s record. There was never any publication of the incident.”
The question whether Henry Ford will appear on the witness stand is unsettled.
Mr. Gallagher said that Henry Ford was served with subpoena at the Ford plant Aug. 6 last. Clifford B. Longley, general counsel for the Ford Motor Company, maintains Mr. Ford was not served and intimates he will not testify.
Several of the nation’s notables will appear either as witnesses or counsel. Besides United States Senator James A. Reed, Ford’s counsel, witnesses who will appear unless it is decided to use their depositions include former Governor Frank Lowden, of Illinois, mentioned as a Republican Presidential possibility, and Bernard M. Baruch, the banker.
The Archive of the Jewish Telegraphic Agency includes articles published from 1923 to 2008. Archive stories reflect the journalistic standards and practices of the time they were published.
