Search JTA's historical archive dating back to 1923

Jewish Issue Emerges at Sapiro-ford Trial As Picking of Jury Begins

March 16, 1927
See Original Daily Bulletin From This Date
Advertisement

(Jewish Daily Bulletin)

With the selection of the jury which began today in the District Court here for the Sapiro-Ford $1,000,000 libel suit it became evident that the Jewish issue will play an important role at the trial, despite the efforts of Ford’s counsel to keep the issue out.

It was made clear after two hours of questioning of prospective talesmen that Ford’s defense, which has contended that it does not recognize the presence of a Jewish question in the case, nevertheless held there was a difference between Jew and non Jew as jury material. Senator Reed strove to draw a commitment from two of the prospective jurors who are Jews in an obvious attempt to disqualify them.

Threats by Sapiro’s counsel of contempt proceedings against Ford if he failed to appear as a witness were held in abeyance pending the selection of the jury. Ford’s counsel continued to maintain that Ford had not been served with a summons, but attorneys for Sapiro declared:

“If Ford doesn’t come out you can bet on it we will demand contempt proceedings and it isn’t a light matter.”

Questions pertaining to the Ku Klux Klan, the Jews, cooperative marketing organizations and farmers’ associations figured conspicuously in the course of the questioning of the prospective jurors, four of whom are women. They were questioned by Judge Raymond on whether or not anything they had read or heard would affect their reaching a fair verdict. Among other things they were asked if they or any of their families belonged to the Ku Klux Klan or any farmers’ organizations.

J. B. Garrison of Jackson, Mich., a postal clerk, admitted on questioning by Senator Reed, counsel for Ford, that he had once belonged to the Ku Klux Klan, but had withdrawn two years ago. He said he had joined because of curiosity and had not attended many of the meetings.

Mr. Garrison said he had never heard anything at any of the meetings that would be prejudicial to the Jewish race, although before joining he had heard the Klan was not favorable to Jewish people.

“Did the question of the Jewish race have anything to do with your joining?” Senator Reed asked.

“None,” was the reply.

Senator Reed then turned his attention to Isaac Greenberg, a retired clothier of Detroit. Mr. Greenberg said he did not believe his loyalty for his race would influence him in reaching a fair decision, and religion would not be taken into consideration by him.

“If you regarded a statement about your race as prejudicial and harmful, would you not also regard it as untrue?” asked Reed.

“If it were untrue I would regard it as harmful,” Greenberg parried.

Reed phrased his question in several different ways in an attempt to obtain a direct answer as to whether a harmful statement would also be regarded as untrue, but Mr. Greenberg usually retorted, “I don’t know.”

Mrs. Helen Girard was the only one to be dismissed before the noon recess. She admitted on questioning that she knew the Ford family personally.

The prospective jurors were asked if they had read any booklets published by the “Dearborn Independent” concerning so-called international Jewry None said he had.

“Have any of you seen any articles in the ‘Dearborn Independent’, or recopied, concerning cooperative marketing or Aaron Sapiro, who brought this suit?” the Judge asked.

One man replied that he had but said he had not formed any opinion and would be able to judge solely on evidence introduced during the trial.

The Judge asked if any were members of societies that taught that Jews were undesirable residents of the country and if any members of their families belong to such societies, but received no reply.

Judge Raymond asked if any were prejudiced against men who had served in the army, navy or with the marines or if they had any antipathy toward farmers’ organizations or marketing associations.

Several admitted having lived on farms, but not in recent years. None of the veniremen belonged to farm or cooperative organizations or had any prejudice against lawyers, the Judge’s questions brought out.

Recommended from JTA

Advertisement