OCR Text |
Show HENHY FORD GRILLED By LAWYER IN LIBELJ1L Admits He Is "Ignorant Idealist," but Afterward After-ward Reverses His Statement in Court. Manufacturer Subjected to Merciless Examination Examina-tion at Hands of Newspaper's Counsel. MOUNT CLEMEN'S, Mich., July 16. Henry Ford, under examination as a witness for the defense during all of today's session of his suit for $1,000,000 libel against the Chicago Tribune, was led through a mazo of questions by the newspaper's attorney, who said he was trying to show that tho alleged libelous editorial was correct in calling the motor mo-tor manufacturer "an ignorant idealist." ideal-ist." Answering the varied interrogations . of Attorney Elliott G. Stevenson, Mr. Ford described an idealist as one who "helped to make people prosperous," an anarchist as one who throws bombs or seeks to overturn government. The witness did not recall the incident of Maior Andre and Benedict Arnold, descrying de-scrying the revolutionary traitor as a writer. At one time Mr. Ford said that he would admit he was an "ignorant idealist," ideal-ist," if that would stop the lino of questioning, but later said tho question would have to be decided by the jury. .Judgo Tucker interposed objection to , carrying the line of inquiry too far outside the case and Attorney Stevenson Steven-son then asked about Mr. Ford's knowledge knowl-edge of governmental relations, assorting assort-ing that as tho witness, as a candidate for senator, has set himself up as an educator of the people ho had a right to prove that Mr. Ford was ignorant. ' ASSUMES RESPONSIBILITY FOR PAMPHLET SAYINGS. : Mr. Ford reiterated that his circulars .against war and preparedness were written by Theodore Delavigne, but that ho was responsible for all tho 1 statements, although ho did not recall all of them. Following are some of the stato- ' ments published by Delavigne and for which Mr. Ford assumed full responsi-f responsi-f bility: "It (war) is the samo old scarecrow talk, by the same old lazy vultures who r make human lives, seldom their own, the stako in their so-called battle of brains." "I feel that this cry for the training I of men to kill other men and for tho i placing of the army and navy'as a bur- , den on the backs of the people, is a false conception of patriotism and treason trea-son to the lite of the people." "The United States has spent more than a billion dollars on a navy and army that, would cope with an invasion that never occurred and never will oc r cur, and yet the very war experts who 1 are responsible for that burdensome- army and navy admit that our army and navy never would have been nblo to meet, with any hope of success, those , pf other so-called powers." FORD'S ATTORNEYS ARE PROMPT WITH OBJECTIONS. I Pressed by Mr. Stevenson as to what he meant by such statements, Mr. Ford I repeatediy remarked that if it was in the book it was true. Tho whole effect of his replies was that by preparedness he meant a preparedness greater than was needed for defense and he regarded the army and navy of 1910 as quite adequate, ade-quate, Tly scarecrows and vultures he meant those who advocated an armv (Continued on Page 2, Column 3.) I I ( HENRY FORO GRILLED I II LIBEL TRIAL ! (Continued from Page One.) and navy greater than thoso of 1916. Throughout the session the air was thick with the objections of the Ford j lawyers, Alfred Luoking and Alfred G. Murphy. In arguing one of them Mr. Lneking' said : "I desire a further objection that counsel has been told by tho witness several times that he hired an expert to write this book, that he gave him his general views, that he told him to be careful of his facts. Questions of this sort, which might be considered expert questions, should go only to the man who wrote it, not to the mfcu who, it j is admitted, had the right to hire a jman to prepare the facts. Ho has told j counsel repeatedly that he did not prepare pre-pare the language." NEWSPAPER COUNSEL JUSTIFIES HIS ATTACK. Mr. Stevenson in reply said: "Tho comments of the Chicago Tribune Trib-une were not based on what Mr. Dela-vigno Dela-vigno did, nor anybody else, but what Mr. Ford gave to the public. They knew nothing about Mr. Delavigne. These articles claim the support of history, his-tory, and history is something Air. Ford knows nothing about." j Mr. Stevenson stated that he regarded regard-ed Mr. Ford as the most important witness wit-ness of the case, and added: "I conceive it to be my right and my duty to examine Mr. Ford thoroughly thor-oughly on this subject so that the jury may understand just what Mr. Fordfs views were, in" order to determine whether he was what we called him or not." When the question of preparedness was under discussion Mr. Stevenson was pursuing Mr. Ford's characterization of preparedness advocates as murderers. ('I advocated preparedness after we got into the war," said Mr. Ford. i "But you were speaking of 91o and 1916," explained the lawyer. The wit-, ness in an apparent abstraction ig- nored the dates and, following his own train of thought, added: PARTY TO MURDERS, IS FORD'S ADMISSION. "I was a murderer just as well as anybody else." ' ' You were a murderer! ' ' gasped Mr. Stevenson. ''I was a party to it; one of the helpers," said the witness calmly. "Do you mean that in 1917 you were the same kind of a murderer that advocates advo-cates of preparedness were in 19J.5 and 1916?" "No; we were in the war in 1917; in 1910 we were not.' Mr. Ford described an Idealist as one who helps to make people prosperous. An anarchist, he said with conviction, was one who throws bombs and seeks to overturn over-turn government. Ho thought that a "bally-hoo" was a "blackguard." Questioned Ques-tioned further, witness, evidently with Arnold Bennett in mind, hazarded the opinion that the revolutionary traitor, Benedict Arnold, was a writer. He had forgotten what year the "United States organized as a nation, and when asked what the country waa before that event said he "guessed that it waa land." He defined treason as "anything against the government," and said that a traitor, in his opinion, was anyone who advocated overpreparedness or war for aggression. Gives Vague Answers. Having stated that, in his opinion, the army and navy in 1916 were adequate for defense, Mr. Stevenson asked him a number num-ber of questions aa to the size of the army and the disposition of the troops at that time, but witness was able to return re-turn only vague answers or none at all. "Did you ever hear anyone talking about an American army to invade any other country?" asked the Tribune lawyer. law-yer. "Yea, to invade Mexico." "And men who advocated training men to go into Mexico and pacify that country you regarded as traitors?" "Not to ,pacify; to burglarize." An objection cut short this line of Inquiry. In-quiry. Mr. Stevenson asked what were the relations between the United States and Porto Rico. "We keep some of the army there, I guess." Judge Tucker at this point told Mr. Stevenson that the question was far outside out-side the case. "It Is rather an intricate relation to ask the witness to explain to you," said the court. This led to comment on Mr. Ford's recent senatorial campaign. Recalls His Candidacy. "This witness," said Mr. Stevenson, "was a candidate for the United States senate; he was an educator of the people; surely the standard that applies to the average man who does not assume to educate the people or to qualify as a statesman applies to Mr. Ford." Mr. Ford interposed to say that in five minutes, if he wanted to know, he could get a man to tell him all about the Porto Rico relations. "You could not find a man who would fill your place In the United States sen-, ate," snapped Mr. Stevenson. "I never wanted to go to the United States senate," replied the manufacturer. "I might add that the people didn't want him either, but I won't," said Mr. Stevenson. Mr. Lucking declared that the remark was a "dirty slur" and the court cautioned the Tribune attorney. Wilson Speeches Quoted. Much of the session was taken up In i the reading of four of the speeches of i President Wilson in January and Feb- j ruary of 1916 made at Kansas City, Des Moines, Chicago and Cleveland, in which he stated that the country was treading among dangers; that any day might see ! the United States plunged into the Eu- ropean conflict, and that there was urgent need to enlarge the army and navy and ' to take other preparedness measures. 1 The purpose of the recitation was to show that Mr. Ford's strictures on preparedness pre-paredness advocates were made in oppo- . sition to the president. Mr. Ford ad- 1 mitted that the Delavigne booklet and 1 the pact fistic articles. "Humanity and Sanity" and "Concerning Preparedness," 1 in which the futility and waste of war ; were pointed out and the United States urged to take leadership in disarmament, i were published broadcast after the president's presi-dent's speaking tour. Mr. Lucking stated ; that some of the articles In the booklet i were printed in newspapers prior to 1916. Mr. Stevenson quoted the phrase, "Same old scarecrow talk" and asked who was meant. Mr. Ford returned his familiar reply, "Delavigne wrote that." He added that the "scarecrows" were the professional agitators for preparedness. "Your position was that they were advocating ad-vocating preparedness In order to profit by munitions?" "Over-preparedness, yes." "Oh. vou are still talking of 'over-preparedness.' 'over-preparedness.' I think you defined that yesterday as anything in addition to what we had in 1915 or 1916." reminded the lawyer. He then referred to the use of the word "murder" as applied by Mr. Ford to professional soldiers and those who make money out of war. "Well, you were a murderer In 1917," suggested Mr. Stevenson. "Oh, no," replied the witness quickly, "that was during the war." In the course of one of the Delavigne 1 articles, for which Mr. Ford takes full responsibility, re-sponsibility, the term "bally -ho" was used. Mr. Ford, being questioned, hazarded haz-arded the guess that it meant "blackguard." "black-guard." Mr. Stevenson elucidated: "It means a shouter advertising a show or exhibition," he said. "It means a 'barker,' " put in Alfred Lucking, senior counsel for Mr. Ford. "Have it your way, Mr. Lucking," said I Mr. Stevenson. "It's all the same." i "What do you understand by the word 'treason' ?" asked Mr. Stevenson, continuing contin-uing the examination. "Anything against the government," said Mr. Ford. Mr. Stevenson precipitated a torrent of objections by asking the meaning of the word "traitor." In the course of which Mr. Ford Interposed: Admits "Ignorant Idealist." "I'll admit I'm an 'ignorant idealist.' " "Why, Mr. Ford," said Mr. Stevenson, In surprise, "if you admit that. I shall not have to ask you any more questions along that line." "I'll admit It if you will close this talk. It is for the jury to decide, anyway." "But if you admit'it there will be nothing noth-ing for the jury to decide. The admission settles it." Prefatory to this outburst by the witness, wit-ness, who was plainly nettled by the examination, ex-amination, Mr. Stevenson explained to the court: "Your honor, the. alleged libelous editorial edi-torial in the Tribune referred to Mr. Ford as an 'Ignorant idealist.' The questions ques-tions are to show that he is, In fact, Ignorant Ig-norant and if he is an Idealist and doesn't know the meaning of commonly used words, he Is plainly an ignorant idealist." It was at this point that the manufacturer manufac-turer btsrst out with his angry admission, which, despite efforts of his lawyers, he repeated. The Tribune lawyer seemed content with Mr. Ford's declaration and asked him a number of questions as to what he knew of the size, equipment and distribution distribu-tion of the American army in 1915 and 1916, the witness having said yesterday that he considered the force at that time adequate for defense. "Do vou know how many troops were in the Philippines?" Judge Halts Attorney. "No." "In Alska?" "No. "In Porto Rico?" . "No. "By the way, what are the relations between the United States and Porto . Rico?" i Judge Tucker suggested that this line : had been followed far enough. j "But this man sets himself up as an educator and wanted to go to the United States senate." I Mr. Ford interrupted to say: I "I can get a man in five minutes to i tell me those things." i "Could you get one If you were spepk- ! Ing in the senate?" asked Mr. Stevenson. Counsel and the judge became involved in a controversy over side remarks, and the question was not answered. ; Mr. Stevenson started to:'ask about history, his-tory, but was stopped by Judge Tucker, who said that subject had been suffi- ciently covered. ! "All right." said the lawyer. "Now. ' Mr. Ford, soberly, are you not ready to ! admit that you are an 'ignorant idealist'? That Is what the Tribune called you and your counsel declare, that it is a lie." Definition of Idealist. Thls.time Mr. Ford returned a dffferent answer, shaking his head slowly. He explained that his previous affirmative was merelv to stop the examination. "Well, all right, Mr. Ford. Now I'll ask you what an 'idealist' is. Y'ou understand un-derstand it?" The witness thought for a moment and then replied: "One who helps others to make a profit." "One who helps others to make a profit?" echoed Mr. Stevenson, slowly; "is that your definition?" "Yes, that's about it." The lawyer smiled and said: "Well, Mr. Ford, I guess we will let the question of an 'ignorant idealist' rest right here." |