vsl'ffl&Wft'
. r- , . .... ,. ... .
v
M
S,
y
if
i
K
.
6,
l
IF -
K
h.
ia
If
I
VJi
m x
EVENING PUBLIC LEDGER PHILADELPHIA, MONDAY, NQVEMBEJK f 3 1919 "
to
Truth is mighty and prevail
Extract from Former At ty-Gen. LEWIS5 letter:
l
i rg FORSTMANN & HuFFMANN- Co. flW
Julius Forstmann
FTER three weeks of almost continuous study of
the records in this case, Mr. Otis now presents a
report going thoroughly into the evidence, from
which it appears to my satisfaction that, if I had ben able
to give the time personally to an examination of the com
plete record, I should not have approved of the report, as
made by Mr. Becker, in so far as it reflects upon your clients.
Indeed, I am satisfied that if it had not been for pressure by
the War Trade Board for an immediate report, Mr. Becker
would not have made the reflections upon the loyalty and in
tegrity of your clients that appear therein.
"In view of this I have carefully gone over Mr. Otis' report
I am fotced to the conclusion tha the report as made by
Mr. Becker and approved by me contains reflections upon
the 'oyaity and integrity of Mr. Julius Forstmann which are
not warranted by tne evidence. and. I think make the
reflections cast upon him unfair and unjust."
,signed Merton E. Lewis
i he libels against my firm and myself have been repeated so often that
T have accepted the advice of oiir counsel; Mr. Robert H. McCarter of
New Jersey, and Mr. Julius Henry Cohen of New York, to publish the
following letter, from which the above is a part. I am sure our many
good friends will be glad to have this clear statement from former Attor
ney General Lewis to combat the subtle and powerful influences that
have been used against us. . i
JULIUS FORSTMANN ,
President. Forstmann & HufTniaiin Co.
Passaic, New Jersey
, '
.Robert C. Morris
Mertov E Lewis
Martin Saxe
Guthrie B Plants
MORRIS, PLANTE & SAXE
Lav) Off.cei
27 Pine Street, New York City
Tclcfhre Jlkn 6pj
Charles E. Mahont
CHARLES R. MccPARPE!
romevnbe.rry '
paulv. hovler
FrankJ Waldeybr
JULIUS HENRY COHEN, Esq. October 27, 1919.
.111 Broadway, New York City
In re Forstmann & Hoffman Co. and
' , JULIUS rORSTMJNN
My dear Mr. Cohen:
Some weeks ago jou called my attention to a report in the above entitled matter,
dated April 3, 1918, made by Mr. Alfred L. Becker, a Deputy Attorney General
during my term of office, who had clnrge of the investigations conducted by my office
pursuant to the provisions of the Peace and Safety Act, Chapter 595, Laws of 1917.
The report war approved and adopted by me and you lmc asked me to examine the
record and determine whether such approval was justified. As this record is volumin
ous, I requested Mr. Alexander Otis, also a Deputy Attorney General under my
administration, to examine the testimony and documents and prepare a report thereon
for me.
.
After three weeks of almost continuous stud), of the records in this case, Mr. Otis
now presents a report going thoroughly into the evidence, from which it appears to mv
satisfaction that, if I had been able to give the time personally to an examination of the
complete record, I should not have approved of the report, as' made by Mr. Becker,
in so far as it reflects upon iour clients. Indeed, I am satisfied that if it had not been
for pressure by the War Trade Board for an,immcdiale report, Mr. Becker would not
have made the reflections upon the Royalty and integrity of your clients that appear
therein.
I recall distinctly that at one of the hearings at which I was present, I gave to
Mr. Forstmann's representative my assurance that his client would be given full '
opportunity to answer any matters which he might care to explain. Mr. Forstmann
appeared oluntarily and not in response to a subpoena, and without such an appearance
my office would have had no jun die ,on to inquire into his loyalty. During his exam
imtion he was repeatedly requested not to interpose any explanation, but to answer
directly the questions put to him. This was during the examination of March 15th
and 16th, 191 8, at which I was present. 1 did not attend the subsequent hearing held
March 27th, March 29th and April 2nd. It was not until the last hearing that Mr.
Forstmann's defense and explanations were put in. His side of the case covers 175
pages of testimony) and includes many documents and letters, the due consideration
of which required considerable time. This was April 2nd, and the report is dated
April 3rd. On April 6th, as I am advised by Mr. Otis, the minutes of the last
hearing were delivered to Mr. Becker bv the stenographer. It appears, therefore, that
the report was dictated by Mr. Becker without having before him the fninutes of the
proceedings in zvhich Mr. Forstmann's defense was interposed and without the
adiantage of any brief or summary by counsel which might have indicated the value
and significance of the evidence introduced in Mr. Forstmann's behalf.
In view of this I have carefully gone over Mr. Otis' report and have read con
siderable portions of the evidence presented at the hearings which I did not attend.
I am forced to the conclusion that the report as made by Mr. Becker and approved
by me contains reflections upon the loyalty and integrity of Mr. Julius Forstmann
which are not warranted by the evidence. While there were circumstances tending
to create' suspicion, Mr. Forstmann's explanations seem to me satisfactory, and I
think make the reflections cast upon him unfair and unjust.
Any public officer may make a mistake in war times, when quick action is re
quired, but when it appears that an innocent man has suffered with the guilty, I feel it
my duty to say so andexpress my regret.
I hand jou herewith a copy of Mr. Otis' report in this matter, which goes into,
the details at length and you are at liberty to make such use of it as jou may deem
proper. 1 hope Mat it will nave tncettect ol correcting tne injustice mat has been
done to your clients
'Hi-
$-
U '
Iff 1. .1
Sincerely yours,
(Signed) Merton E. Lewis
"
r
7
i&bA
.p
'H. (
-
I
.ssifcrl
-