Digest of Public Opinion on Jewish Matters

[The purpose of the Digest is informative. Preference is given to papers not generally accessible to our readers. Quotation does not indicate approval.-Editor.]

No matter what will be the outcome of the libel suit brought by Aaron Sapiro against Henry Ford, declares the “Jewish Tribune” of April 1, “the real issue cannot be obscured by legal technicalities, the police court methods of the chief of defense counsel, or the academic wranglings by both sides.

“The truth is,” the paper explains, “that Sapiro was singled out for attack because he is a Jew, and not because Henry Ford or his hireling thinkers were concerned about the fate of the ‘poor’ American farmer. These attacks were all part of a vicious and malicious policy adopted in 1920 and adhered to with that arrogant asinine stubborness charactertise of ignorant fanatics,-the policy of casting suspicion upon any Jew who has become praiseworthy in America, of putting sinister interpretations upon the acts of such Jews no matter how purely motivated, of denouncing the cooperation of Jews in any field as a ‘conspiracy.’ It is this policy which which should be looked into; it is maintenance of this policy of character-assassination which Ford should be required to explain, for excuse it he cannot! This is the real issue in the present suit, and we feel that the ends of justice will not be served if the issue is evaded.”

The Milwaukee (Wis.) “Journal” (Mar. 23) while agreeing with the ruling of Judge Raymond that technically a race cannot be libelled and the trial is therefore a personal issue between Sapiro and Ford, feels, nevertheless, that “the attempt of Mr. Sapiro’s attorneys to make the whole Jewish race in effect a party to the suit may serve a useful public purpose. We may get to thinking a little more carefully of our mental attitude toward races and groups of all kinds. We could do a deal of clearing up our minds of rubbish growing out of group prejudices. When are we estimating a man on the facts that we know, and how often are we forming judgments not on any facts but on our general opinion about a race or a religion or some other grouping?”

A somewhat agitated view of the Ford accident and the mystery surrounding it is taken by the “Jewish World” of Philadelphia (April 1). Speaking of “the black shadow of the spirit of libel-the angel of evil with green eyes, yellow wings and bloody talons-hovering over Detroit, the residence of Henry Ford’s kingdom of libel”, the paper denounces the insinuating statements of Cameron, editor of the “Independent”, regarding the Ford accident, as an attempt to link the Jews with Ford’s mishap. This the paper likens to a “blood-ritual accusation”, saying: “The Ford investigators could not help themselves and were compelled to publish a denial of the report that Ford was a victim of a plot to kill him. But when did they make this denial ? After a lapse of a day and a night during which the blood-ritual charge had sufficient time to poison the atmosphere in Detroit and throughout the country.”

LONDON “TELEGRAPH” PREDICTS DISTINCT JEWISH DRAMA ON WORLD’S STAGE

The belief that a purely Jewish drama is destined to take a conspicuous place in the world’s literature of the stage, is voiced in the London “Daily Telegraph.” In a series of articles, which began on Mar. 17, on the role of the Jews in the theatre of the nations, the writer L. A. H. Jones, says in part:

“Today most of the French theatres are in the hands of Jewish shareholders, the majority of the actors of Jewish nationality and three-quarters of the dramatic productions the work of Jewish authors.

“The revolution of 1784 enunciating the principle of the equality of all men, gave French Jewry its permit d’entree into the lists of open intellectual competition in France. The coming of Meyerbeer, Halevy and Offenbach and later Saint-Saens–all of them Jews–may be said to have heralded the birth of Jewish influence in the French theatre.

“The most eminent, and one is almost tempted to say, the most disinterested among the present-day Jewish dramatic authors, is unquestionably M. Porto Riche, a Porto Rican Jew. M. Henri Bernstein’s plays are frankly brutal and almost cyclonic in their handling and effect. M. Tristan Bernard exercises a mordant wit.”

The writer then goes on to give a long list of prominent Jewish dramatic authors in France, including M. Edmond See, Fernard Moziere (Weil), M. Francis de Croisset, M. Alfred de Savior (a Jew of Polish origin), M. Henri Kistenmaekers, M. Romain Coulus (President of the French Society of Authors) and Henri de Rothschild, who writes under the names of Andre Pascal and who, the better to control and present his plays is building his own theatre.

Further we read: “The revival of the Jewish national spirit is already contributing a repertory to the world theatre. The latter has for generations been under conspicuous obligation to Jews. Innumerable actors and actresses of first rank have been or are Jews. The modern stage is rich in works of Jewish playwrights. As impressarios, designers, promoters and patrons of dramatic art, the Jews are preeminent. The support of the Jewish population, including many enthusiastic, appreciative, discerning playgoers has assisted materially in the advance of modern theatrical art internationally.

“Inevitably then, a purely Jewish drama seems destined to take a leading place in the literature of the stage. Until lately, however, Jewish authors generally concerned themselves primarily with international general subjects, taking the conventions and conditions of the peoples among whom they found themselves as their artistic stock in trade, rather than themes, characteristics and material of their own nationality. Meanwhile definite Yiddish literature is coming into being, claiming wide international appreciation. With the development of purely Jewish theatres in Russia, Germany and New York, the Yiddish theatre should come into prominence,” the writer states.

Marc Weill, who recently passed away in Chicago, left an estate of about $80,000, with specific legacies aggregating $57,000. The will provided that the balance should be divided between the Alliance Israelite Universelle of Paris, and the Associated Charities and the United Charities of Chicago.