Unduly stirred by this series of studies, the leading Jews of the United States indicated by their per¬ turbation that the truth in these articles made it impossible to ignore them. Perhaps as many people have been inclined toward agreement with the articles by the attitude of the Jews themselves as by the state¬ ments made in the articles. Jewish defense has been made with great formality and show of authority, but without the hoped-for effect. The Jews of the United States, evidently finding that their own statements have failed to carry, are making a wholesale conscrip¬ tion of Gentiles for purposes of defense. As in Russia, the Gentiles are being pushed into the firing lines.
Mr. Taft was therefore approached with a propo¬ sition. That was some time ago, probably about November first.
Now, according to Mr. TafVs own signed statement made on November 1, he had not even read The Dear¬ born Independent’s articles but was taking the Jewsf word for their character and contents. And yet, on December 23, we find Mr. Taft in Chicago at the La Salle Hotel, delivering an oration before the B'nai B’rith, uttering his statements with all the finality of a man who TAFT ONCE TRIED TO RESIST JEWS-AND FAILED 199 had made a deep study of the Jewish Question and had at last attained a mature conclusion.
On November 1, Mr. Taft wrote to a New York Jew deprecating these articles as “a foolish pronounce¬ ment which I understand has been issued through The Dearborn Independent.” The expression, ‘‘which I understand,” is equivalent in ordinary speech to “which I have heard.” He had not read them. He was taking hearsay on which to base his opinion. There are signs that he had not read them even at the time of his speech in Chicago, for he did not so much as allude to one of the startling parallels which have weighed on the minds of many important men in this country.