The sun., 1919-06-24
ISSUES OF VERACIYY
RAISEDIN FORD CASE
Conflicting Testimony on
Status of Employees Who
Went to the Colors.
GUARDsMEN AT VARIANCE
Motor Maker Repudiated I'm
patriotic Interview Given
by His Vice. President.
sp.cial psspateA to THr sus.

Npec1dt De6poICh 70 IHE sun.
MOUNT CLEMENS, Mich. June 2s.-The
beginning OF the seventh week Of the
trial OF the 81, ooo, 900 libel suit Of Henry
Ford against the Chicago Tribune was
marked to-day by three distinct issues Of
y,racity. One was between P. Whit
comb williams. a newspaper correspond
ent. and Frank L. Klingensmith. vice
president of the Ford Motor Company.
The second between Lieut.. Charles A.
Teeters and Sergeant Jack lie Febvre OF
the Detroit Field Artillery raised In 1915
ssainst Lieut.. J. A Connors OF the same
unit andsthe third, almost serious. was
that between Sergeant lie Lebvre, at
present a Lieutenant in the State Con-
stabulary. and Gerald Buckley OF the
Ford legal department.
Teeters and lie Febvre were called by
the Tribune to meet the testimony OF
James A Connors OF Detroit. then a
Lieutenant. who said he had obtained
assurance by telephone from a Ford
Official two or three days before the
Chicago Tribune editorial that men who
enlisted for border service would be
considered as unavoidably absent. their
Jobs held for them and their fan,Ilies
kept from want during their absence.
Teeters testified that no such announce
ment as Connors mentioned was made
to the organization at any time or was
communicated to him. lie Febvre's testi-
mony was much to the same effect, but
on cross-examination he was confronted
with a paper bearing his signature stat
Ing that In June. 1916, LIE Febvre was
a member OF Battery c, acting as SER
geant. and that an announcement was
made either by Lieut.. Connors or other
oficer that all members of prospective
members Of the battery who were en-
ployees OF the Ford Motor Company In
the event Of the battery going into active
service would have their Jobs back on
their return and that their dependents
would be loked after.
P. W. williams, the Tribune's De-
trolt correspondent. was questioned in
detail as to the method of obtaining
the information published as a despatch
from Detroit in the Chicago Tribune
June 20, 1915, under the head, "Flivver
Patriotism" 1t was this despatch which
formed the basis Of the editorial COM
planned Of in the suit.
Williams identified q copy Of a tele-
gram which he received from the TIT
bune asking him to see Mr.. Ford or
his official mouthpiece" and learn the
company's policy.
Williams called upon r. L. Klinen-
smith and in his telegram resulting
from the interview quoted Kiinensmith
as saying he did not know how many
Guardsmen were in the Ford employ
and would not tell II he did; that no
provision would be made for their de-
pendents, or their pay continued, as II
was considered that they were leaving
for other employment, and that their
Jobs would not be held open for the
same reason.
The witness Identified a teiesraphic
despatch published in the Tribune OF
June rs. three days after the other
publication, quoting Mr.. Ford as saying1
that he would take care of dependents
where needed and would consider his
employees as absent for causes beyond
their control and hold their Jobs open
for them. Mr.. Ford In this despatch
repudiated any statement to the con-
frary.
Mrs. Julia Orion. an investigator for |
the Poor Commission and a volunteer
worker for the Detroit Patriotic Fund. |
testified that she called on the Edu- |
cational Department of the Ford Motor
Company on a date which she fixed
close to July 1. 1915, more than a week
after the mobilization call, and was told
that no provision had been made for |
the wife of a Ford employee who was
modified.