Farmers’ Groups Ruined by Ford’s Anti-jewish Campaign, Sapiro Says

(Jewish Daily Bulletin)

Further testimony by Aaron Sapiro, plaintiff in the $1,000,000 libel suit against Henry Ford, that he, Sapiro, suffered materially as a direct result of the anti-Jewish articles in the “Dearborn Independent,” was presented by him today.

Undergoing the ninth day of cross-examination at the hands of Senator Reed, Ford’s counsel, Sapiro moreover attributed the collapse of the Maine Potato Growers’ Exchange to the articles printed in Ford’s paper.

It was the third loss of income Sapiro had attributed directly to the “Independent’s” articles.

Senator Reed traced the organization of the Maine Potato Growers and Sapiro’s receipt of fees and had passed on to the Minnesota potato growers when he turned back and took up the Maine Cooperative.

“Oh, by the way, that concern lived only about eighteen months or so and then it went into the hands of a receiver, didn’t it?” he asked.

“Oh, no; I am sure it lived longer than that,” Sapiro replied. “I think it lived through 1923 and through 1924, until after the appearance of the first ‘Dearborn Independent’ article against me. Then it collapsed.”

“Do you say that is the reason it collapsed ?”

“Mr. Fassett (G. Herbert Fassett, president of the Maine Potato Growers), so told me and I believe it.”

“Do you say that yourself?” demanded Reed.

“Yes, that’s exactly what I say,” answered Sapiro.

The cross-examination then turned to the Minnesota Potato Growers Exchange, which Sapiro also admitted he understood had failed.

It, like the Maine association, was organized by S. G. Rubinow, with Sapiro as legal counsel, and made a contract with the Federated Fruit and Vegetable Growers, Inc., from which Sapiro previously had testified he had received fees of $20,250, and by which he is still employed.

The Federated was organized by a committee of the Farm Bureau Federation, by which Sapiro was also employed.

Sapiro stated he had been instrumental in having the Maine laws changed to permit the organization of cooperative agencies, and questions concerning fees led into a long argument between Reed and Sapiro’s counsel, William Henry Gallagher, as to the status of Sapiro in entering suit against Ford.

“The character of the service the plaintiff rednered is as much an issue as the fees received,” said Reed.

“He attributes part of his loss of business as an attorney and part as an organizer. If part of his business as an organizer was going before legislative bodies it cannot be separated.”

Personally and as an attorney was the characterization of Sapiro entering suit, said Gallagher, and he did not stand in the guise of an organizer.

Gallagher’s contention was upheld by Judge Fred M. Raymond.