Category Archives: Newspaper coverage

Grand Jury Will Probe Affidavits About Dictagraph

Posted on by

Another in our series of new transcriptions of contemporary articles on the Leo Frank case.

The Atlanta Constitution

June 12, 1913

Investigation of Charges and Counter Charges Will Begin at Early Date and Will Be Exhaustive One.

LANFORD SAYS GENTRY WILL DENY AFFIDAVIT

Affidavit Is Made Declaring Dictagraph Instrument Was Secured by Chief Lanford For Use in Phagan Case.

Following close on the heels of the publication of the George M. Gentry affidavit, in which the young stenographer states that his typewritten report of the dictagraph conversation was padded, and says that he left town after he had discovered that he had fallen in with a “crowd of crooks,” comes the assurance that the grand jury will at once make a searching probe of the detective department in an effort to establish the truth regarding the many charges and counter charges that have been afloat since the dictagraph sensation was sprung.

Members of the grand jury take the position that if the Gentry affidavit is true, it constitutes a stinging indictment of the detective department—an indictment which should not be allowed to stand longer than it will take to uncover the facts.

Records True, Says Lanford.

Chief of Detectives Lanford defends his department and his own personal connection with the sensation with the declaration that the dictagraph reports, as published, were absolutely correct, and that reports to the contrary are not only false, but will be proved untrue.

Impeiled by public sentiment the dictagraph incident created, it is authentically stated that the grand jury probe will be made at a very early date, and will be an exhaustive one.

While contradicted by Gentry’s affidavit and statements from the trio of dictagraph “victims”—Mayor Woodward, Colonel Felder and Charles Jones. G. C. Febuary, secretary to Chief Lanford, stoutly maintas that the dictagraph notes were accurate and that there were no discrepancies whatever in the published copies. Continue Reading →

Felder Returns Phagan Fund to Givers

Posted on by

Another in our series of new transcriptions of contemporary articles on the Leo Frank case.

The Atlanta Georgian

June 11, 1913

Attorney Explains Disposition of Money Subscribed to Secure Burns’ Services.

Colonel Thomas B. Felder Wednesday issued an itemized statement of the funds subscribed by Atlanta citizens, to secure the employment of the Burns Detective Agency to investigate the Phagan mystery, to show that these funds had been returned to the donors.

According to Mr. Felder’s statement, but $102 was actually subscribed. This amount was placed in the hands of Curtis N. Anderson, a member and treasurer of the law firm of Felder, Anderson, Dillon & Whitman. In a letetr [sic] to Colonel Felder, dated June 9, Mr. Anderson gives the following disposition of the fund:

“I have received from contributions to the Burns fund $102. Several of the contributions were anonymously made; in the majority of other cases contributors requested that their names be withheld, and in some cases the addresses of the parties making the donations are unknown to me. Under your direction, I am returning to the contributors the several amounts sent in by them, where the names and addresses of the contributors are known, and I am directed by you to return the balance upon their request.

Felder Pays Extra Expense.

“I also desire to say that you have directed me to charge whatever disbursements have been made, which, by the way, are several times over larger than the contributions that have come in, to your personal account. This I have done.”

The following amounts in chronological order were received by Mr. Anderson, according to his report:

May 15—Check, Joseph Hirsch $25
May 15—Check, Anonymous $30
May 16—Check, Anonymous $5
May 16—Check, Anonymous $1
May 17—Check, not authorized to give name $1
May 17—Check, not authorized to give name $1
May 17—Check, not authorized to give name $25
May 17—Check, not authorized to give name $5
May 23—Check, not authorized to give name $1
May 26—Check, not authorized to give name $5
May 26—Check, not authorized to give name $3

Along with Mr. Anderson’s itemized account of the funds, Mr. Felder makes the following statement, which he addresses to the public:

“Mr. Charles I. Ryan, who was designated as custodian of the fund without his knowledge or consent, informs me that he has already returned to the contributors whatever money was paid in to him.”

“The Atlanta Journal, The Atlanta Constitution and The Atlanta Georgian subscribed $100 each, and I am informed that certain subscriptions were made to them. They have not been paid in and are not expected, and the three newspapers are hereby requested to return to the contributors any sums that they have received.”

“In addition to the above and foregoing, permit me to say in conclusion that additional sums aggregating several hundred dollars were subscribed by the public, but were not paid, and payment has not been and will not be requested.”

Mr. Felder further stated that he would ask the Bar Association to pass upon the regularity of his employment in the Phagan case and make a report upon it. He also declared his connection with the controversy as ended.

* * *

The Atlanta Georgian, June 11th, 1913, “Felder Returns Phagan Fund to Givers,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

Plot Exposed, Says Felder, But Lanford Doubts Affidavit

Posted on by

Another in our series of new transcriptions of contemporary articles on the Leo Frank case.

The Atlanta Georgian

Wednesday, June 11, 1913

In New Sworn Statement Gentry Declares He Came to Realize He Was Dealing with “Bunch of Crooks”—Charges Lanford and Beavers Names Were Inserted.

That the dictograph conversations in which it was plotted to trap Colonel Thomas B. Felder, Mayor Woodward and C. C. Jones were padded and altered in meaning is the sensational charge brought back to Atlanta in an affidavit sworn to by George M. Gentry, who fled to Washington after the conversations, in their alleged garbled form, had been offered for publication by A. S. Colyar, Jr., and printed.

Gentry’s charges appear to substantiate in a large measure, if not entirely, the repeated statements of Colonel Felder and Mayor Woodward that an attempt had been made to make them the victims of a conspiracy.

Gentry said in making his affidavit: “I came to the realization that I had been dealing with a bunch of crooks, and decided that the best thing for me was to tell the whole story.”

Cleared, Says Felder.

Colonel Felder said that he regarded the affidavit of Gentry as a complete invidication of himself. He declared that he [sic] explanation contained in the sworn statement of Gentry on the face of it showed hat [sic] Colyar and Chief of Detectives Lanford had been in a miserable conspiracy to ruin his (Felder’s) reputation by seeking to prove him guilty of attempted bribery.

Mayor Woodward said that the affidavit bore out his previous statements that he never had mentioned the names of Chief Beavers or Chief Lanford in his conversation in room 33 of Williams House No. 2, where the trap was sprung.

“The whole thing was a frame-up. I was suspicious the moment I entered the room. I knew that something was wrong, and I was on my guard. In spite of that, they twisted and turned my statements around, as the original notes taken by young Gentry will show.”

Chief Lanford said he did not believe Gentry had signed the new affidavit.

Colonel Felder said:

Continue Reading →

Asks Beavers to Investigate Affidavit

Posted on by

Another in our series of new transcriptions of contemporary articles on the Leo Frank case.

The Atlanta Georgian

Wednesday, June 11, 1913

Chief of Detectives Newport Lanford telegraphed Chief of Police Beavers in Washington, D. C., Wednesday morning to investigate the origin of the affidavit bearing the signature of George M. Gentry in connection with the dictograph plot.

The detective chief asked Chief Beavers to find Jeannette Henning, the notary in the national capital who swore Gentry to his statement, and ascertain if the stenographer signed the affidavit which was brought to Atlanta by Detective E. O. Miles. The telegram asked that a minute investigation of the statement be made and the conditions under which it was made be wired to him immediately.

Chief Lanford’s action was taken following his declaration that he did not believe the affidavit genuine. Lanford stated as his belief that the stenographer’s name had either been forged or that Gentry has been coerced into signing the document.

Police officials have also conducted a rigid investigation into the standing of Detective Miles. Miles, the investigation showed, is at the head of the Reed Detective Agency.

Thomas B. Felder was at one time one of the largest stockholders in the agency, Carl Hutcheson being also a stockholder and attorney. He it was who appeared before the Police Commission and urged that body to grant the permit from the agency’s operation in Atlanta.

* * *

The Atlanta Georgian, June 11th 1913, “Asks Beavers to Investigate Affidavit,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

Police Hold Conley By Court’s Order

Posted on by

Another in our series of new transcriptions of contemporary articles on the Leo Frank case.

Atlanta Georgian

Wednesday, June 11th, 1913

Judge Roan Gives Suspect Chance to Show Why He Should Not Be Released.

The Phagan case took a queer turn Wednesday afternoon when Judge Roan, apparently stirred by Luther Z. Rosser’s ar[r]aignment of the way Jim Conley has been “petted” by the police, issued notice to suspects in the mystery that they will be given opportunity Friday to show cause why the negro should not be released from custody as a suspect.

However, the move is strictly legal in character, Conley, through his attorney, W. M. Smith, having signed a written statement to stay in the custody of the police as a principal witness if previous orders are vacated and he is legally freed as a suspect.

Agrees to Remain.

Judge Roan informed Solicitor General Hugh M. Dorsey that he wanted to withdraw his previous order committing Conley to the police station so that the negro’s status could be definitely fixed and so that he could perhaps be sent back to the county jail. Both Conley and his attorney announced that the prisoner wanted to stay at police headquarters.

Smith also came forward with the agreement that Conley would remain in custody of the chief of police.

Sensations Ahead.

Judge Roan then issued what is known as a rule nial, informing Frank, Gordon Bailey, an elevator boy, and Newt Lee, the negro night watchman, that they could be given a chance Friday to show why Conley should not be released.

Sensational developments may follow Friday if the Frank defense is allowed to present facts against Conley for Attorney Rosser is firmly convinced that the negro is the guilty man and has so announced.

Whether the negro shall be indicted as an accessory after or to the fact, or be continued to be held as a witness, will then be determined.

Napier Analyzes The Phagan Case.

The Georgian publishes the following letter written by George M. Napier, the well-known lawyer, on the Phagan case, as it gives for the first time a legal analysis of the case for and against Frank: Continue Reading →

T. B. Felder Accounts for Subscriptions Received

Posted on by

Another in our series of new transcriptions of contemporary articles on the Leo Frank case.

The Atlanta Journal

June 11, 1913

 Says Only $102 Was Paid Into Fund to Employ Burns Detectives

Attorney Thomas B. Felder Wednesday morning issued a card to the public in which he accounts for the funds subscribed to employ the Burns detectives to work upon the Phagan murder case. He reports that but $102 was collected.

Mr. Felder announces that all subscriptions paid in have been returned to the subscribers and that those who have subscribed but have not yet paid are not expected to do […] submits a letter and detailed statement from C. N. Anderson, the treasurer of his law firm, in which it is stated that the expenses incident to the employment of the Burns detectives have been charged to Mr. Felder’s personal account.

In conclusion Mr. Felder says that his connection with the controversy is ended and that he will in due season ask a committee from the bar association to pass upon the regularity of his employment in the Phagan case.

MR. FELDER’S CARD.

Following is Mr. Felder’s card:

“To the Public:

“I beg to submit a statement of receipts and disbursements in connection with your contributions to the fund that it was proposed to raise for the employment of the Burns agency to investigate the murder of Mary Phagan:

Continue Reading →

Conley’s Status in Phagan Case May Be Changed Wednesday

Posted on by

Another in our series of new transcriptions of contemporary articles on the Leo Frank case.

The Atlanta Journal

June 11, 1913

Petition Will Be Presented to Judge Roan by Solicitor Dorsey but Its Nature Is Not Made Known

ROSSER’S CARD CAUSES ACTIVITY BEHIND SCENES

Negro May Be Put Back in the Tower – Solicitor Dorsey Says: “I Am Trying to Run State’s Case Myself”

The report became current Wednesday afternoon shortly after 3 o’clock that the new development in the Phagan case would be a withdrawal by the state of its petition in court whereunder James Conley, the negro, is held as a material witness.

Shortly before 3 o’clock, William Smith, attorney for the negro, and Solicitor Dorsey appeared at the court house together, for this purpose, it was said.

Attorney Smith does not want the negro confined in the Fulton county jail, where he declares he was menaced during the one night that he spent there after his affidavit became public. There has been no insistence from Attorney Smith. It is said, that any damage whatever be made in the status of the negro.

As the result of the clash between the prosecution and the defense of Leo M. Frank, over James Conely, it is expected that the negro’s legal status will be changed in some way, probably Wednesday afternoon.

It is also barely possible that Conley will be indicted Thursday by the grand jury as an accessory after the fact of Mary Phagan’s murder, but this is not considered probable.

Conley is now at police headquarters, held by authority of an order from Judge L. S. Roan, of the criminal division of the superior court. Conley is held as a material witness in the case against Frank.

The negro sweeper was transferred soon after he made his sensational confession, charging Frank with being the principal in the Phagan murder, from police headquarters to the Tower, where he remained about twenty-four hours.

Then he was transferred again, on a superior court order, to police headquarters, his attorney, William M. Smith, consenting to the move.

The obvious reason for the transfer was to prevent the negro’s talking to interviewers, who are allowed into the jail if the prisoner has no objection to talking to them.

At police headquarters only the detective and sometimes the prisoners lawyer, is allowed to see him.

Conley’s attorney, William M. Smith, stated Wednesday that he would prefer for the negro to be incerated at police headquarters rather than at the tower. Continue Reading →

Dictograph Records Crooked, Says Gentry

Posted on by

Another in our series of new transcriptions of contemporary articles on the Leo Frank case.

The Atlanta Constitution

June 11, 1913

NOTEBOOK WILL PROVE REPORTS WERE ‘PADDED,’ HE SAYS IN AFFIDAVIT

Young Stenographer, Who Made the Report of the Conversation in Room No. 31 Williams House, Voluntarily Makes Statement Before a Notary Public in the City of Washington D. C., Where He Is Employed.

ASSERTS THAT HE LEFT ATLANTA WHEN INFORMED OVER TELEPHONE HE MIGHT BE PUT UNDER ARREST

Swears That A. S. Colyar Has Made Effort to Purchase His Original Notes, Which Are Now in Possession of His Brotheró”Grand Jury Should Make an Investigation” Declares Mayor James G. Woodward.

The sworn charge that the dictagraph statements, alleged to have been made by Colonel Thomas B. Felder, Mayor James G. Woodward and Charles C. Jones, in Room No 31, Williams house, were “padded” was brought back to Atlanta last night by Ed O. Miles, a private detective, and turned over to Mayor Woodward.

The affidavit was composed and sworn to by George M. Gentry, the stenographer who took the dictagraph conversations. Detective Miles located Gentry in Washington, D. C., where he has been employed during the past two weeks. The affidavit was sworn to before Jeannette Henning, a notary public.

GENTRY WILLING TO RETURN WHENEVER HE IS NEEDED HERE.

“Gentry was willing to come back to Atlanta with me,” Detective Miles said last night. “He has promised to work out the remainder of the month, and has assured me that he will return at the end of that time, or earlier if he is wanted.”

Aside from the charge that his stenographic notes were “padded” by A. S. Colyar, and that he was paid $50 for the part he played in the dictagraph drama, Gentry says that he left Atlanta because he could not bear the humiliation which he knew he would suffer after he learned that his notes had been altered.

His affidavit bears out the statement made by Mayor Woodward, immediately after the publication of the dictagraph scandal, to the effect that he did not mention the names of Chief of Police James L. Beavers or Detective Chief Newport Lanford. Gentry also swears that a reporter called at his home after the publication of the dictagraph statements and informed him that warrants had been issued for the arrest of Colyar, Gay C. Febuary and himself (Gentry), and that he left the city upon being informed that he would not be allowed to give bond. Continue Reading →

Gentry Now Says Dictograph Record Was Tampered With

Posted on by

Another in our series of new transcriptions of contemporary articles on the Leo Frank case.

Atlanta Journal

Wednesday, June 11th, 1913

Detective E. O. Miles Gives Out Affidavit From Young Stenographer Repudiating Transcript He Swore to

AFFIDAVIT OBTAINED IN WASHINGTON D. C.

G. C. Febuary Gives Out a Statement, Telling How Notes Were Transcribed and Affidavits Made

The accuracy of the now famous pictograph records of alleged conversations between Thomas B. Felder, Mayor Woodward, C. C. Jones, E. O. Miles, G. C. Febuary and A. S. Colyar is attacked in an affidavit which E. O. Miles has turned over to Mayor Woodward and which he says he obtained from George M. Gentry, the young stenographer who took down the dictograph conversations.

This affidavit was made in Washington D. C., where Miles, one of the dictographed parties, who is a private detective, says he found Gentry. According to this affidavit, Gentry swears that a number of changes were made in the pictograph records after they were transcribed by him. The only specific change set out in the affdavit, however, is that the names of Police Chief Beavers and Detective Chief N. A. Lanford were written into the record of Mayor Woodward’s conversation by some one other than the stenographer.

In this affidavit Gentry explains his disappearance from the city by declaring that when he compared the published records with his stenographic notes he realized that he had been duped and did not care to face the humiliation which he anticipated would follow.

These dictographed records, duly sworn to by young Gentry and others, were published in The Journal, which declined to print these documents unless they were attested before a notary public. These records and affidavits are still in the possession of The Journal, and this paper has no knowledge concerning the alleged changes.

GENTRY READ PROOFS.

Young Gentry was permitted to use one of The Journal’s typewriters to transcribe his pictograph notes. He and Febuary were left alone in the news department Wednesday night, May 21, to do this work. They left a copy of the records in a desk drawer for The Journal. Early on the morning of May 23 Gentry furnished The Journal with an affidavit attesting the correctness of the records. Later he came to The Journal office with his notebook and read the proofs which compared with this shorthand notes, and in one or two places he made minor changes, as he said, to better conform to the original notes.

He was advised to preserve his notes so that in the event any question was raised as to their accuracy, he would have the stenographic record from which to make answer.

The Journal does not undertake to say whether there are or are not discrepancies in the transcribed records compared to the shorthand notes. It has simply relied upon the sworn records and statements furnished by Gentry and others, which records and statements, as stated above, are still in the possession of The Journal and in exactly the same condition as they were when turned over to this paper by Gentry, February and others. Continue Reading →

Lanford Silent on Rosser’s Card

Posted on by

Another in our series of new transcriptions of contemporary articles on the Leo Frank case.

The Atlanta Constitution

June 11, 1913

Detective Chief Says He Has No Reply to Make to the Charges of Counsel for Leo M. Frank.

Following the public letter written yesterday by Luther Z. Rosser, counsel for Leo Frank, Detective Chief Newport Lanford said that he had no reply to make to the charges and that hereafter he intended to adopt a policy of silence.

The chief smiled frequently while reading the attorney’s statement, but be positively declined to comment on it.

“Henceforth,” he stated briefly, “It will be the attitude of the detective department to avoid publicity. It should have been done heretofore.”

Lanford declared that Rosser’s card is only an attempt to draw the detective chief into a newspaper controversy, which he intended to avert.

“It is all a scheme—nothing else,” he said, “and I do not propose to be made a victim.”

The statement of Frank’s counsel is a scathing arraignment of Chief Lanford and his department for alleged efforts to prove guilty a white man, against whom prejudice had been created, through the “lying” stories of a negro, against whom all “legitimate” suspicion already was directed.

It follows: Continue Reading →

Indictment of Felder and Fain Asked

Posted on by

Another in our series of new transcriptions of contemporary articles on the Leo Frank case.

The Atlanta Georgian

June 10, 1913

Assistant Solicitor E. A. Stephens virtually admitted this afternoon that Police Commissioner W. P. Fain had been indicted. There was a division of the vote, it was said, but the majority was for indictment.

With blank bills of indictment against Attorney Thomas B. Felder and Police Commissioner W. P. Fain under consideration, the vice probe by the Fulton County Grand Jury took a sensational turn Tuesday.

Two witnesses told of disorder and rowdyism in a house at 40 East Harris Street, in which the Police Commissioner was said to have been involved.

The disorder, they said, occurred first just after the Christmas holidays, and when a call officer went to investigate, the Police Commissioner escaped arrest by getting in telephone communication with the department.

The witnesses said a reputation of the orgies occurred in April, with Commissioner Fain as a participant, and that although the disorder was of an aggravated form, the Commissioner again escaped arrest.

Felder Witness Missing.

When the Grand Jury began consideration of the charge against Colonel Felder for carrying concealed weapons, one witness gave the attorney a clean bill of health and the other and most important one could not be found.

Circumstances on which the bill of indictment was predicated transpired about a week ago in the Grand Jury waiting room, when hot words passed between Colonel Felder and Newport Lanford, chief of detectives. Continue Reading →

Luther Z. Rosser, Attorney for Frank, Trains His Guns on City Detective Chief

Posted on by

Another in our series of new transcriptions of contemporary articles on the Leo Frank case.

The Atlanta Journal

Tuesday, June 10, 1913

SAYS CHIEF LANFORD IS NOT SEEKING FOR TRUTH OF MURDER

He Charges That the Detective Chief Has Banked His Sense and Reputation on Proving Frank Guilty

“WHY HASN’T CONLEY BEEN BEFORE JURY?”

Attorney Declares Evidence All Points to Negro—Says Felder-Lanford Controversy Unfair to His Client

Luther Z. Rosser, chief counsel for Leo M. Frank, the pencil factory superintendent, who is under indictment for the murder of Mary Phagan, Tuesday afternoon broke his persistent silence regarding the case and gave out a statement for publication.

Mr. Rosser gives as a reason for this statement the fact that Thomas B. Felder has publicly charged Detective Chief Lanford with trying to shield Frank and that the detective chief has in turn publicly accused Felder with having been employed in the interest of Frank.

The accuracy of both charges is denied. Mr. Rosser asserts that Chief Lanford has “banked his sense and reputation as both a man and politician on Frank’s guilt,” and that if he had been seeking the murderer of Mary Phagan with an open mind and not seeking to vindicate his announced opinion of Frank’s guilt, the negro Conley would have already told the whole truth.

Mr. Rosser declares that both the actions and statements of the negro Conley bear the marks of guilt. He states that in making his revelations concerning the murder, Conley is handicapped by Lanford’s opinion.

Mr. Rosser inquires why it was the detectives did not present Conley as a witness before the coroner’s jury and why they now prevent him from telling his story to the grand jury, which he says should determine whether the negro should be indicted, and if so on what count.

MR. ROSSER’S STATEMENT.

Following is Mr. Rosser’s statement in full: Continue Reading →

Eyewitness to Phagan Slaying Sought

Posted on by

Another in our series of new transcriptions of contemporary articles on the Leo Frank case.

Atlanta Georgian

Tuesday, June 10th, 1913

Story That Companion of Conley Saw Him Strike Down Girl Opens New Clews.

Jim Conley, whose sensational story has made him an accessory after the fact in the murder of Mary Phagan, is sticking closely to the details he unfolded in his remarkable affidavit, according to his attorney, William M. Smith.

Mr. Smith said Tuesday morning that Conley has varied in no essential particular from the original tale of his part in the disposal of the body of the strangled girl, under the direction of Leo Frank. To Mr. Smith and others who have interviewed the negro in the last few days he has begun at the moment when he says he saw the little form lying limp and inert at the rear of the second floor, until he declares he wrote the mysterious notes at Frank’s dictation in the National Pencil factory office.

In all his story there has been practically no conflict or contradiction with the affidavit to which he swore before the detectives after a half day’s grilling. Mr. Smith said he believed his client was telling the whole truth.

Actual Witness Sought.

Despite the unshakable story of Conley, as he told it after making previous statements admittedly lies, a rumor has been in persistent circulation since last week that the detectives were seeking an actual witness to the crime. It is said such a person exists, and that he is a negro who shot craps with Conley in the basement of the factory on the day of the murder. Continue Reading →

Leo Frank Reported Ready for His Trial

Posted on by

Another in our series of new transcriptions of contemporary articles on the Leo Frank case.

Atlanta Constitution

Tuesday, June 10, 1913

Many Witnesses Are Being Examined Every Day by Attorneys for the Defense

That counsel for Leo Frank is ready for trial was freely reported over the city Monday.

Attorney Luther Z. Rosser, his lawyer, when asked regarding this report, gave the reply that has been characteristic of his attitude during the Phagan case.

“I have nothing to say.” He would in nowise commit himself.

It is understood, however, that Mr. Rosser has informed friends that the defense is ready and that there will be no delay in putting it before the jury, which is to try the pencil factory superintendent. In fact, it is stated Frank’s counsel is desirous of an early trial.

Many witnesses are being examined daily by Frank’s attorneys. Pencil plant employees and character witnesses by scores will assist his counsel. Secrecy is thrown around the nature of all testimony.

Chief Lanford said Monday that he had finished examining Jim Conley, the negro sweeper, and that unless the prisoner called for detectives to make further voluntary admissions, he would not again be questioned.

Detectives Harry Scott and John Black spent the early part of last night searching for the victim’s mesh bag. After hours of hunting on the premises of the pencil plant, they were unable to discover a clew. The bag is wanted to examine the finger prints on it.

* * *

Atlanta Constitution, June 10th 1913, “Leo Frank Reported Ready for His Trial,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

Defense to Make Next Move in Phagan Case

Posted on by

Another in our series of new transcriptions of contemporary articles on the Leo Frank case.

Atlanta Journal

Monday, June 9th, 1913

Apparently Prosecuting Officials Consider Their Investigation Complete

Chief of Detectives Lanford has announced that Jim Conley, the negro sweeper, who is the state’s principal witness in the case against Leo M. Frank, indicted for the murder of Mary Phagan, will not be cross-examined again unless he voluntarily sends for the officers to make a statement.

It is known that no developments have changed the theory of the prosecuting authorities, and it is apparent from the remark of Chief Lanford and other statements that the officials consider the investigation of the Phagan murder as complete, and are now waiting for the big legal fight to be staged before Judge L. S. Roan probably on Monday, June 30.

With the state “resting on its oars,” it is naturally expected that the next move, if there is to be one, will come from the defense of Mr. Frank.

To forecast any “move” which may be made by the defense before the case actually comes before the court, is a difficult proposition since Luther Z. Rosser, the leading counsel, continues silent.

It is known that friends of the accused man have been actively at work in his behalf, but what they have developed remains a matter for conjectures.

Frank spent a quiet day in the tower Sunday and was visited by his wife and quite a number of the friends, who are standing by him in his trouble.

R. P. Barrett, one of the foreman at the National Pencil factory, and the man who found the strands of hair on the lathe in the metal room, has issued a statement giving his reason for sharing the opinion of practically all of the pencil factory employees, that the negro Conley is guilty of the crime with which the factory superintendent is charged.

* * *

Atlanta Journal, June 9th 1913, “Defense to Make Next Move in Phagan Case,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

Foreman Tells Why He Holds Conley Guilty

Posted on by

Another in our series of new transcriptions of contemporary articles on the Leo Frank case.

Atlanta Georgian

Monday, June 9th, 1913

R. P. Barrett, in Letter to Georgian, Gives Reasons for Suspecting Negro of Crime.

R. P. Barrett, foreman of the metal department at the National Pencil Factory, in a letter to The Georgian Monday, gives his reasons for believing that Jim Conley, negro sweeper at the plant, attacked and strangled Mary Phagan.

It was Barrett who found the strands of hair on the lathing machine in his department. This is supposed to be where the girl was thrown against the machine in her struggles.

Later Barrett testified positively that the blood stains in the second floor were not there before the crime. He is certain that the girl was attacked on the second floor and just as certain that Conley, not Frank was the slayer.

The letter reads: Continue Reading →

Rosser Asks Grand Jury Grill for Conley

Posted on by

Another in our series of new transcriptions of contemporary articles on the Leo Frank case.

The Atlanta Georgian

June 9, 1913

Luther Z. Rosser, chief of counsel for Leo M. Frank, issued the first public statement Tuesday that he has made since the arrest of the factory superintendent six weeks ago on the suspicion of being the murderer of Mary Phagan.

He took occasion to point out many of the absurdities in the stories of the negro Jim Conley, and paid his respects in a forcible manner both to Chief of Detectives Lanford and Colonel Thomas B. Felder, who have been accusing each other of trying to protect Frank.

Mr. Rosser explained the violation of his invariable custom of maintaining absolute silence in regard to a case in which he was interested by calling attention to the prejudice that had been aroused in the public mind against Frank by the controversy between Lanford and Colonel Felder.

His statement, in full, follows:

Mr. Rosser’s Statement.

Editor, Atlanta Georgian:

Felder and Lanford, in an effort to make progress in their feud, charge each the other with giving aid to Leo Frank, Lanford charges that Felder was employed by Frank and is seeking for that reason to shield him. Felder charges that Lanford and his associates are also seeking, for some reason, to shield and protect Frank.

Both charges are untrue, and, at a time when no harm could come to an innocent man, might well be treated as antidotes to monotony.

Unfortunately, however, the present situation is such that fair-minded citizens may be misled by these counter charges.

Felder does not, nor has he at any time, directly or indirectly, represented Frank. For Lanford to charge the contrary does Frank a serious injustice.

Felder Against Frank.

If Chief Lanford had been in a sane, normal mood, he would have known that every act of Felder has been against Frank. The engagement of the Burns agency ought to have satisfied Lanford. No detective agency of half prudence would have double-crossed the Atlanta department in the Phagan case. Nor did Felder have excuse for suspicion against Lanford. There was reason to suspect his fairness, his accuracy and the soundness of his methods, but not his reckless zeal against Frank.

Had Felder been in a calm mood I am sure he would never have charged the chief and his associates with intention to help Frank.

Lanford at once, as soon as Felder charged him with favoring Frank, settled in his mind the guilt of Frank, and from that monent has bent every energy of his department, not in finding the murderer, but in trying to prove to the public that Felder was wrong in charging him with trying to shield Frank. Continue Reading →

Solicitor Makes No Reply to Mrs. Frank

Posted on by

Another in our series of new transcriptions of contemporary articles on the Leo Frank case.

Atlanta Journal

Sunday, June 8, 1913

Hugh M. Dorsey Has No Comment to Make on Mrs. Frank’s Letter

Solicitor General Hugh M. Dorsey has declined to make any answer to the published statement of Mrs. Leo M. Frank, charging him with allowing the use of “torture” to force people to make false statements against her husband, who is charged by a grand jury indictment with the murder of Mary Phagan.

In her statement, Mrs. Frank flayed the solicitor general, charging that it is evident from his card that he believes that he is perfectly justifiable in using testimony procured from witnesses by torture.

While the statement of the accused man’s wife is directed at the solicitor general, she pays her respects to the city detectives in no uncertain terms, and she speaks often on the “detectives’ torture chamber.”

According to the authorities, there have been no recent developments in the Phagan murder investigation, and the state and the defense are both lending their energies towards preparation for the trial of Frank, which will be fixed for June 30, it is said.

The trial is certain to be a tremendous legal battle, and it is probable that several attorneys will be engaged to assist Luther Z. Rosser and Herbert Haas in the defense and the solicitor general in the prosecution. Both Mr. Dorsey and Mr. Rosser decline to discuss in any way their preparations for the trial.

* * *

Atlanta Journal, June 8th 1913, “Solicitor Makes No Reply to Mrs. Frank,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

Lanford Answers Felder’s Charge

Posted on by

Another in our series of new transcriptions of contemporary articles on the Leo Frank case.

Atlanta Constitution

Sunday, June 8, 1913

Declares That He Has Never Seen Gentry But Once in His Life.

“Tom Felder is a contemptible liar,” blazed Chief Lanford last night when informed of the contents of Colonel Felder’s letter directed to him through The Constitution. “I never saw this Gentry but once in my life, and that was before this dictagraph exposure ever happened. I have never seen him since.

“Gentry telephoned police headquarters Saturday, a week ago, however, and asked for Febuary, my secretary. Febuary happened not to be in at the time. I answered the telephone. Gentry wanted to know if a warrant was out against him. I told him I did not think there was, and that he had done nothing for which a warrant could be issued against him.

“I informed him that if a warrant was served on him, for him to notify me and I would help him out of his trouble. That was the last I heard of him until he left town. I did not have a thing to do with his departure. I have been trying to locate him, and wish I did know his whereabouts. I would bring him back to Atlanta and show by him that the charges that the dictagraph notes were padded is a lie from beginning to end.

“Felder’s row is hoed—he’s at his rope’s end. Give him rope enough and he’ll hang himself. He’s doing it now.”

* * *

Atlanta Constitution, June 8th 1913, “Lanford Answers Felder’s Charge,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

Scathing Replies Made to Letters Attacking Them

Posted on by

Another in our series of new transcriptions of contemporary articles on the Leo Frank case.

Atlanta Journal

Sunday, June 8th, 1913

Colyar Addresses Felder as “Dictograph Tommy” and “My Dear Co-conspirator in Crime”

SEND HIM TO CREMATORY, SAYS DETECTIVE CHIEF

J. R. Gray Said: “I Have No Comment to Make—Mr. Felder’s Controversy Is With A. S. Colyar”

Replying to the open letters of Thomas B. Felder, attacking them, A. S. Colyar and Chief of Detectives N. A. Lanford last night gave to The Journal statements, denouncing Mr. Felder in unmeasured terms. Chief of Police James L. Beavers, who was also the subject of attack, was out of the city and, therefore, could not be given the opportunity to reply.

James R. Gray, when shown Mr. Felder’s communication, addressed to him, said:

“I have no comment to make on Mr. Felder’s letter. His controversy is with A. S. Colyar. I suppose Mr. Colyar will wish to reply.”

The statements of A. S. Colyar and Chief Lanford follow below in full:

COLYAR’S REPLY.

T. B. Felder Esq., alias Dictograph Tommy.

Sir: As you let last Sunday go by without attempting to prostitute the Sunday press with some more of your hot air and denials, I had thought that perhaps some good friend of yours had given you a hint that even a braying ass can sometimes kill himself and that you had probably decided to withdraw from it newspaper controversy. In my last letter that I wrote to you I offered you what I have been told by many good citizens was a fair proposition, viz: To let fiver honorable gentlemen decide who had lied in the controversy at issue, and you declined to accept the proposition. I will make you a second proposition: I do not know a single member of the honorable supreme court of Georgia, but I am willing to let the chief justice of that honorable court appoint a committee of five honorable citizens, non-residents of the city of Atlanta, and let this committee decide whether you are guilty of unprofessional conduct and a violator of the criminal laws of Georgia, by offering a bribe of $1,000 to G. C. Febuary to steal the papers for you out of the safe, in the Phagan case, and I will only have one request to make of the honorable chief justice when he appoints the committee, and that is that he appoint men in no way connected with the whisky interests and the immoral classes, among whom you have so many clients. I was satisfied when I made you the last proposition that you would not accept it, although I made it in good faith, and I repeat, that you may eliminate me entirely as a witness before the committee, and I have the witnesses of unimpeachable character that will brand you before this committee as a bribe giver, a lobbyist and a grafter. I believe that the people of this fair city are familiar with your record, as it was exposed from the pulpit by the Rev. Len G. Broughton in the Baptist Tabernacle in this city, who publicly denounced you as a lobbyist and a grafter. I have read your letter written this afternoon and addressed to the Hon. James R. Gray, editor and proprietor of The Journal. The clear purpose of that letter is a scurrilous attack upon me, although you have addressed Mr. Gray. I am no saint as I have told you before; I have done wrong in my youth had strayed far away from the teachings and training of a Christian mother and a refined home, and when I first met you I was trying to lead an honorable life, although I was down, and had you had as tenth of the instinct of the gentleman in you that James R. Gray has, you would have tried to help me along life’s pathway in an honorable way and not heed me to go to South Carolina to help you and your co-conspirators frame up against Governor Blease.

HAS THE RECORDS.

I have records in my possession that will show that a certain stool pigeon of yours furnished the money that you sent to me in South Carolina, because you did not have the moral courage to do it yourself. Even though you have stated in me of your first articles that knowing my character that you refused to hire me to go to South Carolina for you—to refresh your memory didn’t you and one of your detectives to Charleston, S. C., with a letter of introduction to me, signed by you, written on the letter head of your then law firm, “Anderson, Felder, Rountree & Wilson?” And furthermore, when I left South Carolina on the 5th day of July, 1911, I drew a draft on your friend for $30, which was endorsed by Rev. B. Lacy Hoge, pastor of the First Baptist church of Charleston, S. C., and after you were through with me, your friend protested this draft and sent it back with the statement that I had no authority to draw the same, although I had drawn, by authority, several hundred dollars’ worth of similar drafts, which Dr. Hoge had cashed, and is it not a matter of fact, that several weeks later the Rev. Dr. Hoge visited Atlanta from South Carolina and threatened to expose you and your friend if you didn’t pay this draft and didn’t you have it paid? Continue Reading →