Another in our series of new transcriptions of contemporary articles on the Leo Frank case.
Atlanta Georgian (Hearst’s Sunday American)
July 27th, 1913
Old Police Reporter Sees No Cause for Delay
Either Side Asking Postponement Will Reveal Weakness, as Time Has Been Given for Preparation. Conley Is Center of Interest.
Defense Must Break Story of Negro or Face Difficult Situation. State Will Base Case on Chain of Circumstantial Evidence.
By AN OLD POLICE REPORTER.
The defense in the case of Leo Frank would have made a mistake, if current street comment counts for anything, had it decided to move for a continuance of the case to-morrow.
Indeed, the fact that the defense even was suspected of an intent to move for a continuance—righteously or otherwise—has not had a happy effect upon the public, even if it has not, on the other hand, served particularly to prejudice the case.
The people want the Frank case tried. I think there is no mistake about that.
And when it was rumored that it might be postponed, with the consent of the defense, even if not of its own motion, more than one person in Atlanta, even those inclined to be friendly to Frank, began, more or less impatiently, to ask themselves, WHY?
If the State is sure of itself, why delay? If the defense is sure of itself, why delay?
If either is not sure of itself, why, then, it must be because the one not sure of itself has a weak case. Thus reasons the public.
Leo Frank is guilty or he is not guilty.Continue Reading →