Category Archives: Newspaper coverage

Dr. Hancock Called by Defense, Assails Dr. Harris’ Testimony

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 12th, 1913

MADE CABBAGE DIGESTION EXPERIMENTS

Dr. T. H. Hancock, a well known Atlanta physician, was the first of three medical experts to be presented in the afternoon in behalf of the defense. Dr. Hancock is official physician of the Georgia Railway and Electric company, and is a man of twenty-two years’ experience.

An astonishing feature of his testimony was the statement he made in answer to a question from Attorney Arnold to the effect that he had treated 14,000 surgery cases, a record hitherto unparelleled [sic] in Georgia history.

He was examined directly by Mr. Arnold.

“What is your occupation, Dr. Hancock?”
“I have been a physician and surgeon for the past twenty-two years?”
“How many cases of surgery have you treated?”
“About 14,000.”

“Have you made a physical examination of Leo M. Frank?”
“Yes.”

“Is he normal?”
“He is perfectly normal.”

Continue Reading →

Guesswork and Not Science Asserts Dr. J. C. Olmstead

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 12th, 1913

Dr. John C. Olmstead followed Dr. Westmoreland to the stand.

He was questioned by Arnold.

“What is your occupation?”
“I have been a physician for thirty-six years, and am a graduate of the University of Virginia and the University of New York.”

“Would you characterize such an opinion as the one you have read of by Dr. Harris as being a guess or a scientific conclusion?”
“As wild a guess as I’ve ever heard.”

Continue Reading →

Schiff Admits He Kept Conley Knowing He Was Worthless

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 12th, 1913

H. G. Schiff, Leo Frank’s assistant in the National Pencil factory, was put on the stand for a conclusion of the state’s cross examination when court convened Monday morning.

“How many books and papers were there that you say had not been worked on Friday night, and that you found completed Monday?” asked Solicitor Hugh Dorsey.

“The financial sheet and those papers I showed you Saturday,” Schiff replied.

[several words illegible] finished Friday?”
“Because when I left the office Friday I had not got up the data for them,” the witness said.

“If Frank had started to work at 8:30 o’clock Saturday morning and had worked until 10:30, then he could have done that work, couldn’t he?” the solicitor asked.

Continue Reading →

Expert Flatly Contradicts The Testimony of Dr. Harris

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 12th, 1913

Professor George Bachman, professor of physiology in the Atlanta College of Physicians and Surgeons, and formerly a demonstrator of physiology in Jefferson Medical college, was put on the stand following Schiff.

By him the defense made a further attack on the deductions of Dr. H. F. Harris. He declared that the statements made by Dr. Harris amounted to guess work, according to his knowledge of the subject.

“What is your nationality, professor?” Mr. Arnold asked.

“I’m a citizen of Atlanta,” replied the witness.

“I mean, where were you born?”

“I was born a Frenchman,” replied Dr. Bachman.

Continue Reading →

Defense Has Best Day Since Trial of Frank Began

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 12th, 1913

AS WILD GUESSES PHYSICIANS TERM TESTIMONY GIVEN BY DR. ROY HARRIS

Assert It Is Impossible to Tell Accurately Just How Long It Takes for the Digestion of Cabbage—One Doctor Tells of Experiments He Had Made on Several Patients to Settle This Point. Doubt Value of Testimony About Violence.

OLD ROW OF DOCTORS BOBS UP IN TESTIMONY OF DR. WESTMORELAND

Declares That He Accused Dr. Harris of Scientific Dishonesty and Then Resigned From Board When It Refused to Discharge the Secretary—Joel Hunter Goes on Stand to Testify as to the Amount of Time Necessary on Frank’s Books.

When Monday’s session of the Leo M. Frank trial came to an end, it was generally conceded that it had been the best day the defense has thus far had.

True, there were no sensational developments and there was nothing particularly startling in the testimony. It was merely the drip, drip of the water on the stone which eventually wears it away—the stone in this case being the story told by Jim Conley and the statement made by Dr. H. F. Harris that Mary Phagan must have met her death within three-quarters of an hour after she had eaten her breakfast of cabbage and bread.

Continue Reading →

Ethics of Dr. H. F. Harris Bitterly Attacked By Reuben Arnold

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Journal
August 12th, 1913

Sensational Charge Hurled By Physician in Testimony Given at Afternoon Session

Dr. Westmoreland, Answering Question of Attorney Reuben R. Arnold, Declares He Never Heard of a Chemist Who Had Made Examination by Himself and Then Destroyed the Organs Without Bringing Them Into Court

Three experts took the stand Monday afternoon at the trial of Leo M. Frank to repudiate the conclusions reached by Dr. H. F. Harris to the effect that the condition of the cabbage in the stomach of Mary Phagan showed that she must have died within an hour after eating, and that the distended blood vessels showed that she had suffered violence of some sort immediately prior to her death.

Dr. Thomas H. Hancock and Dr. Willis Westmoreland both declared that Dr. Harris’ conclusions were not justified. Dr. Hancock said that no physician in the world could have told from the evidence that Dr. Harris had before him how long the cabbage and bread had been in the little girl’s stomach. He exhibited to the jury a number of specimens of cabbage taken from the stomachs of five different people at different periods after it had been eaten to illustrate that very little if anything could be told by an examination of the food.

An attack upon the ethics of Dr. Harris for having made his examination without calling in any other chemist or physician and then having destroyed the stomach, was made by Attorney Arnold. He asked the following question of Dr. Westmoreland:

“Have you ever known a chemist to make an examination of a corpse nine days after death and utterly destroy the organ and not bring it into court to exhibit it to the jury or give it to the other side for investigation and examination?”
Dr. Westmoreland replied in the negative, after Judge Roan had ruled that the question shouldn’t be allowed.

Continue Reading →

C. B. Dalton’s Character Shown Up by Frank Defense; Four Witnesses Swear They Would Not Believe His Oath

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Journal
August 12th, 1913

DALTON ADMITS HE SERVED A CHAINGANG SENTENCE FOR THEFT OF A “SHOP HAMMER”

Miss Hattie Hall Swears She Was In Frank’s Office Between 11 and 12 o’Clock and That Superintendent Did No Work on Finance Sheet During This Hour—Her Testimony Different In This Respect From What She Swore at Inquest

MRS. WHITE’S BROTHER GIVES DIFFERENT VERSION OF STORY ABOUT SEEING NEGRO LURKING IN FACTORY

Solicitor Dorsey Puts Wade Campbell Through Severe Cross Examination, Calling Attention to Discrepancies In His Testimony and Signed Statement Given to the Solicitor, Frank’s Movements on Day of Tragedy to Be Proved

Decidedly the feature of the Tuesday morning session of the trial of Leo M. Frank, charged with the murder of Mary Phagan, was the successful attack made by the defense on the credibility of C. B. Dalton, who had previously testified for the state.

Dalton was recalled to the stand by the defense and by his own admissions, it was shown that he had served a chaingang sentence in Walton county in 1884 for theft; that he was indicted in 1899 for stealing baled cotton, for which he received, to quote his own language, “one-forty-one-eighty;” and that he “hade come clear of stealing corn in Gwinnett county.”

Four witnesses, V. S. Cooper, of Monroe, J. H. Patrick, policeman and justice of the peace Walton county, W. T. Mitchell and I. M. Hamilton, all swore that they would not believe Dalton on oath. Mrs. Laura Atkinson, of 30 Ellis street, testified that she had met Dalton several times but that she had never met him at the Busy Bee cafe. Mrs. Minnie Smith, an employe of the factory, testified that she did not even know Dalton. Both had been mentioned in Dalton’s testimony for the state.

Continue Reading →

People’s Cry for Justice Is Proof Sentiment Still Lives

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Georgian
August 12th, 1913

By L. F. WOODRUFF.

There is as much sentiment in the world to-day as there was in 1861 or 1776 or 1492 or 1066 or any other date that may come to your recollection.

It’s not fashionable to say so, but it’s true. People to-day are too prone to accuse themselves and their neighbors of being worshippers Mammom and declaring that the money-grubbing instinct has crushed out sentiment, patriotism and honesty.

But right now in Atlanta, there is a striking example of the goodness that is man’s to-day, just as much as it has ever been.

Continue Reading →

Attacks on Dr. Harris Give Defense Good Day

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Georgian
August 12th, 1913

The defense had what was probably its best day on Monday. Medical experts were on the witness stand the larger part of the day. The purpose of their testimony was to knock down, one after another, the sensational statements of Dr. H. F. Harris, secretary of the State Board of Health. All of the witnesses joined in ridiculing every important theory or conclusion that was reached by the distinguished chemist and physician.

Experts for Defense.

These are the medical experts called by the defense to combat the testimony of Dr. Harris:

Dr. Willis F. Westmoreland, first president of the Georgia State Board of Health, and president of the Atlanta College of Physicians and Surgeons.

Professor George Bachman, demonstrator in physiology at the Atlanta College of Physicians and Surgeons; formerly one of the faculty of the Jefferson Medical College, Philadelphia.

Dr. T. H. Hancock, a specialist in surgical practice.

Dr. J. C. Olmstead, a graduate of Columbia University, and a practitioner in Atlanta for 32 years.

Here is a summary of Dr. Harris’ theories on the death of the Mary Phagan and the consensus of the four medical experts’ opinions in regard to the theories:

Continue Reading →

Frank Trial Witness is Sure, At Least, of One Thing—a ‘Good Ragging’

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Georgian
August 12th, 1913

By JAMES B. NEVIN.

Reader, proverbially gentle, if not always so, be glad, be joyful, and be filled with exceeding thankfulness that you have not been summoned, no matter which way, as a witness in the Frank trial!

Of course, there is a large, fat chance that you have been summoned—most everybody has—but be all those nice things aforesaid, if you haven’t.

And even at that, knock on wood.

The trial is young yet—it is not quite three weeks old, three weeks, count ‘em—and there still is time for somebody or other to remember that you may know something or other about something or other that may have something or other to do with the case.

Anyway, if you can’t be glad and all the rest of it, be just as glad and as nearly all the rest of it as you can, while the being is good or in anywise promising.

If you are a witness in the Frank case, you are skating on about the thinnest ice ever—it makes no different whatever whose pond you are skating on.

You are ambrosia and cake to one side and you likewise are gall and wormwood to the other—be very sure of that!

If your wife will have anything at all to do with you, and if the neighbors love you any more, when you get back home, it will be entirely because one side or the other forgot to mention the fact that once upon a time you were a horse thief, or somebody said you were a horse thief, or that you had an uncle who was a horse thief, or some pleasant little thing like that.

Continue Reading →

State Charges Premeditated Crime

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Georgian
August 12th, 1913

Defense Forces Dalton to Admit Jail Record

GIRL DENIES STATE’S VERSION OF FRANK’S WORK ON FATAL DAY

Here are the important developments Tuesday in the trial of Leo M. Frank, charged with the murder of Mary Phagan:

State announces its theory that Frank planned a criminal attack upon Mary Phagan the day before she came to the factory for her money.

The court and chaingang record of C. B. Dalton, the State’s witness who testified that he had seen women in Frank’s office, was shown up by the defense and admitted by Dalton.

Four acquaintances of Dalton testify that they would not believe him under oath and that his reputation for truth and veracity is bad.

C. E. Pollard, expert accountant, testifies that it required him three hours and eleven minutes to compile the financial sheet that the defense claims Frank prepared the afternoon of the murder.

Miss Hattie Hall, stenographer, says that Frank did not work on the financial sheet Saturday morning, the day of the crime.

Continue Reading →

Jurors Have a Great Time Playing Jokes on Deputies

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 11th, 1913

Coats off and collars and ties flung carelessly on bedposts and convenient chairs the twelve jurors in the Frank case and Deputies Foster Hunter and Bob Deavours, in charge of them, were taking a comfortable afternoon rest Sunday when suddenly a woman’s voice in a plaintive key called loudly from the street, “Oh, Bob, Bob Deavours!” The deputy leaped to his feet. He was certain he had heard his wife’s voice, and though the suite of rooms in the Kimball house where the jury is quartered three floors above the street, the voice came from a window.

The deputy rushed to the window and looked in vain. As he turned back to the room the gruff voice of a man repeated the call from the hall door, he rushed over there and flung the door open, only to hear the first voice call him from the other room.

By that time Deavours was thoroughly alarmed and several of the jurymen had leaped to their feet from the beds and cots on which they had been dreamily listening to F. E. Winburn toying with the piano keys.

Continue Reading →

Murder Evidence May Be Concluded by Next Saturday

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 11th, 1913

Trial May Have Reached the Point By End of This Week Where Lawyers Will Begin Their Argument.

FIERCE ATTACK COMING ON HARRIS TESTIMONY

The Defense Will Also Make Every Attempt to Break Down Story Told by Jim Conley, Negro Sweeper.

The main points which the defense in the case of the state against Leo Frank, charged with the murder of Mary Phagan, will place before the jury in rebuttal of the prosecution will be given this week and by Saturday it is expected that the trial will have reached the point where the lawyers will begin their arguments.

What the defense has in view, Attorneys Luther Rosser and Reuben Arnold are naturally silent about, and whether or not they have something hitherto unknown that they will spring suddenly upon the state remains to be seen as the trial progresses.

At present there are three things that it is practically agreed that the defense will attempt during the next few days.

Attack on Dr. Harris.

The testimony of Dr. H. F. Harris, who placed the time of the girl’s death by the condition of the contents of her stomach, the damaging story of Jim Conley, whose testimony is the only direct evidence against the defendant, and the vital issue of the time of murder, will certainly receive the fiercest attack of any other phases of the state’s case.

There are many other features of the state’s case that will be fought and there are many points for the defense which are expected to be placed before the jury between Monday and Saturday, but it is known that the defense has made extensive preparations to break down the three points above named.

Continue Reading →

Frank Case Mentioned for First Time in House

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Journal
August 11th, 1913

For the first time this session, mention of the case of Leo M. Frank, on trial for his life for the murder of fourteen-year-old Mary Phagan, was made today in the house of representatives.

Representative Slater of Bryan was speaking in favor of the senate resolution of Mr. Irwin of the Thirty-fourth, calling for the appointment of a commissioner of competent lawyers to revive and improve the method of civil and criminal procedure in the state and report to the next session of the legislature, and made reference to the long drawn out proceedings of the Frank trial.

Instantly Representative Edmondson of Brooks was on his feet.

“Mr. Speaker,” he said, “I object to the Frank case being dragged into the proceedings of the Georgia legislature.”

Mr. Slater replied that he used the case only as an example to make clear his position, and the incident was closed.

* * *

Atlanta Journal, August 11th 1913, “Frank Case Mentioned for First Time in House,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

Sunday Proves Day of Meditation for Four Frank Jurors

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Journal
August 11th, 1913

Sunday apparently brought reflection and repentance to one aspiring member of the Frank juror, while three others after due consideration of the heat and other things, spent a part of their $2 per day.

Juror Townsend, who has been carefully cultivating a most aspiring and sprouting young mustache, had the first opportunity in seven days to inspect it. After deliberating over its ultimate destiny for the greater part of Sunday, he evidently repented, for when he appeared in the court room Monday morning the thin, dark cloud topping his lips was gone.

Three other jurors grew tired of living without expenditure and drawing $2 a day for the task, and seeing some extremely neat looking white suits marked down, purchased a number. This happened last week, but they wished to wear the suits a day in order to become accustomed to them before they appeared in public, so the first formal appearance was made Monday morning. None of the new suits was of the “side slit” variety.

* * *

Atlanta Journal, August 11th 1913, “Sunday Proves Day of Meditation for Four Frank Jurors,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

Many Experts Called by Defense to Answer Dr. H. F. Harris

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Journal
August 11th, 1913

DR. GEORGE BACHMAN GIVES TESTIMONY TO SHOW HARRIS SIMPLY HAZARDED A GUESS

Professor of Physiology at Atlanta College of Physicians and Surgeons Declares Dr. Harris Is the Only Doctor He Knows Who Would Undertake to Express the Opinion That Dr. Harris Did in Reference to Mary Phagan’s Death

FRANK A NORMAL MAN, SAYS DR. T. H. HANCOCK WHO TOOK WITNESS STAND MONDAY AFTERNOON

Herbert G. Schiff, Frank’s Young Assistant, Was Under Cross-Examination Several Hours Monday—He Said He Had Never Heard Complaint That Factory Clock Ran Five Minutes Fast and Denied That Frank Had Objected to His Firing Conley

Only two witnesses were examined at the Monday morning session of the trial of Leo M. Frank, charged with the murder of Mary Phagan. They were Herbert G. Schiff, assistant superintendent of the factory, who was under cross-examination the greater part of the morning, and Dr. George Bachman, professor of physiology in the Atlanta College of Physicians and Surgeons.

Dr. Bachman declared that Dr. H. F. Harris was the only physician he ever heard of who would express such an opinion as Dr. Harris had given from the witness stand previously. He said that an opinion as to the length of time that food had been in the stomach under most any circumstances would be but a hazardous guess, and that it would be utterly impossible to determine how long since food had been eaten by a post-mortem examination made nine or ten days after death of a body that had been embalmed. The embalming fluid, he declared, would add seriously to the difficulties of forming a correct opinion. The sum and substance of Dr. Bachman’s testimony was that it was impossible to fix the time of little Mary Phagan’s death by any analysis or examination of the food that was found in her stomach.

Dr. Bachman was not asked to testify in reference to Dr. Harris’ declaration that Mary Phagan had suffered violence prior to her death, but it is probable that some of the experts who follow him will be asked in reference to this feature of the case.

Dr. T. H. Hancock, of the Atlanta hospital and part owner of that infirmary, was called by the defense as its first witness after the resumption of court Monday afternoon.

Dr. Hancock testified regarding a thorough physical examination which he made of Leo M. Frank, the accused, certifying that in every way so far as he could determine Frank is like other men in his physique.

Continue Reading →

Interest Unabated as Dramatic Frank Trial Enters Third Week

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Georgian
August 11th, 1913

By JAMES B. NEVIN.

The third week of the most remarkable murder trial ever known in Georgia opened to-day with no apparent lessening of the acute interest and grim appeal heretofore attaching to it.

The public has come to realize thoroughly and completely that the issue is a battle not only between the State and the defendant, Leo Frank, but between Leo Frank and the negro Jim Conley.

Presumably, the defense will take the entire week rounding out its case and perfecting its undermining of Conley’s story.

If it does get through within the week, it will have employed approximately the same amount of time in telling its story that the State employed in telling the other side.

The first powerful and bewildering shock of Conley’s tale, unanticipated in its full sinister detail, has passed away in a measure, it seems.

It is but the simple truth to say that the day of and the day following Conley’s awful charge, in addition to the one of murder, marked the climax of the State’s case and the zenith of feeling against Frank.

Continue Reading →

Grief-Stricken Mother Shows No Vengefulness

Posted on by

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

August 11th, 1913
Atlanta Georgian

By TARLETON COLLIER.

That black-clad woman in the corner of the courtroom—nobody has noticed her much. Things have happened so swiftly in the Frank trial that all eyes are on the rush of events, waiting for a quiver on the face of Leo Frank, watching with morbid gaze the brave faces of Frank’s wife and his mother, studying the passing show that the numerous witnesses present.

And the woman is so unobtrusive, so plainly out of it all. The tears, whose traces are evident on her face, were not shed as a result of this trial. The lines under her eyes are older than two weeks. Her sorrow—and it is plain that she has undergone sorrow—came some time ago. Now, the first poignant pain of it has passed and only a dull ache remains.

All that is plain as she sits in the courtroom in an attitude which bespeaks much of listlessness and resignation. The thoughts that pass in her mind are revealed in that attitude and in her placid face. And the sum of them is this:

No matter what happens, the dull ache will always be there at her heart.

Continue Reading →

Deputy Hunting Scalp Of Juror-Ventiloquist

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Georgian
August 11th, 1913

Big Bob Deavors, Deputy Sheriff in charge of the Frank trial jury, marched to the courtroom Monday morning with an aching head and a grim determination to get even with Juror A. H. Henslee, whose elusive voice piloted him against a bedpost late Sunday evening.

Henslee is a ventriloquist of no mean ability, and when the jury has been locked up Sunday his talent has afforded the principal pastime. Yesterday he worked on Deavors, the deputy. He had Bob’s wife calling to him from the street, the hall door and finally from the door leading into another room. It was through this last door that Deavors broke and encountered the head of a bed with the full weight of his big frame.

An impromptu piano concert Sunday afternoon by Juror F. E. Winburn, a stroll under guard late Sunday evening and the feats of ventriloquism broke the monotony of what would have been a listless day.

* * *

Atlanta Georgian, August 11th 1913, “Deputy Hunting Scalp of Juror-Ventriloquist,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

Defense Bitterly Attacks Harris

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Georgian
August 11th, 1913

Battle of Medical Experts Waged in Court

EXPERTS TESTIMONY ON CABBAGE TESTS CALLED WILD GUESS

A bitter arraignment of the professional ethics and fairness of Dr. H. F. Harris, secretary of the State Board of Health, and a through-going attack on his theories and conclusions marked the Frank trial Monday afternoon.

Attorney Reuben Arnold make a scathing criticism of Dr. Harris’ methods during his examination of Dr. Willis Westmoreland, a prominent Atlanta physician and surgeon.

Arnold was asking the medical expert his opinion of the ethics of a chemist or physician who would take the organs and the stomach with its contents from a body, make his examination in absolute secrecy and would leave no material on which the other aide in a legal case might make analysis and examinations.

Solicitor Dorsey objected to the question.

Attorney Arnold said, in justifying his question:

“We wish to show that Dr. Harris has violated all the ethics of his profession, as well as the principles of decency and honesty.”

Dr. Westmoreland said he never had heard of such procedure before.

Continue Reading →