Another in our series of new transcriptions of contemporary articles on the Leo Frank case.
July 31st, 1913
FRANK NOT IN OFFICE JUST AFTER 12 ON DAY OF SLAYING, SAYS GIRL
The deliberate charge that he had been “trapped” by Pinkerton Detective Harry Scott was made by Solicitor Dorsey at the trial of Leo M. Frank Thursday. Scott played a curious part in the trial, being attacked by both sides.
He was given the same fiery baptism that annihilated City Detective Black the day before, but he passed through the ordeal in much better shape than his brother detective. Scott left the stand at 11 o’clock and Miss Monteen Stover was called.
The Stover girl testified that she visited the factory shortly after 12 o’clock, April 26, and that Frank was not in his office.
Scott refused to be cowed by the battering attack of Luther Rosser, chief of Frank’s counsel, and fought back viciously at various times during his cross-examination. He was inclined to argue with both Attorney Rosser and Solicitor Dorsey, and at one time blazed forth angrily when he though that Dorsey was charging him with holding something back.
Defense Discounts Scott’s Story.
Rosser succeeded in impeaching Scott’s testimony to a certain extent by showing that his testimony at the Coroner’s inquest differed in some respects from that given at the trial, and that the testimony at the inquest lacked much that was contained in his testimony just given under the questioning of Solicitor Dorsey, although Scott had sworn at the inquest that he was telling all he knew.
It was evident as soon as the Pinkerton detective was called that a sharp battle was to ensue over his testimony. A lively tilt occurred between Rosser and Dorsey before Scott had been on the stand five minutes. The testimony had progressed only a little further when Dorsey claimed that he had been trapped by the witness into believing that testimony of another sort would be given.
Dorsey demanded the privilege of asking leading questions in order to determine whether Scott’s memory was faulty or if he was purposely holding something back.
Haas Wanted First Reports.
The Solicitor got from his witness the details of his engagement by the National Pencil Company and sought to emphasize that Herbert Haas, one of Frank’s attorneys, had tried to induce Scott to withhold his evidence from the police, but Scott on cross-examination declared that Haas asked only that [t]he evidence be given the pencil factory officials first.
Scott testified that Frank in the first days of the investigation had told him that J. M. Gantt, a discharged factory employee, knew Mary Phagan well and was familiar and intimate with her, the Solicitor by this evidence seeking to show a disposition on the part of Frank to throw suspicion on someone else.
The detective described Frank’s demeanor as extremely nervous at the interview Tuesday night, April 29, between Frank and Lee. Scott said that Frank hung his head, crossed and recrossed his legs, rubbed his face and lips with one hand and then the other, and seemed not know where to put his hands.
Rosser Grills Scott.
Rosser, cross-examining Scott, made the detective admit that he had not told of these circumstances before the Coroner’s inquest and had not stated any of the conversation between Lee and Frank which he had just told to the Solicitor. Going further, he forced Scott to admit that he had said at the inquest that he had heard none of the conversation.
Scott told Dorsey that he had made a thorough search of the first floor of the factory soon after his services were engaged, and that he had found no ribbon, purse, pay envelope or bloody stick, which later was said to have been found near where Jim Conley was hiding, by Pinkerton operatives.
Scott said that he had looked for blood spots, but that most of the evidence of this sort had been chipped up before he entered the case.
Rosser and Scott engaged in a heated argument when Rosser called attention to the fact that the detective had not mentioned at the Coroner’s inquest Frank’s alleged remark in regard to Gantt’s intimacy with the Phagan girl.
Scott gave as his excuse that it was an oversight, or that he possibly had not been questioned on that matter by the Coroner.
“I am not fool enough to give away the whole case in detail at a preliminary hearing, anyway,” added Scott.
R. P. Barrett, the machinist at the pencil factory, who discovered the strand of hair on a lathing machine and spots resembling blood on the floor, was called to the stand at the conclusion of Monteen Stover’s testimony.
Dorsey Quizzes Scott.
Solicitor Dorsey started his questioning of Harry Scott with the query:
Q. What is your business?—A. Pinkerton detective.
Q. Do you know Leo Frank?—A. Yes.
Q. When did you first see Frank?—A. Monday, April 28, at 7 p. m.
Q. Where was that?—A. In Frank’s private office.
Q. What was Frank’s attitude?—A. He was composed.
“Your honor, I want to refresh his memory. I was misinformed as to what the witness would testify.”
Attorney Rosser objected.
“I am surprised at the evidence,” said the Solicitor, “of this witness regarding Frank’s attitude.”
Noted Nothing Unusual.
“What about his breathing?” asked the Solicitor—A. Well, between sentences, occasionally he took a deep breath.
Q. What about the expression of his eyes?—A. I had never seen him before. The expression of his eyes was about as they are now.
Frank, sitting a few feet away, wore the same cool expression he has had since the beginning, his face utterly devoid of emotion. The expression of his unusual eyes was calm. Dorsey resumed his questioning.
Q. What did he say?—A. “I suppose you have heard of the horrible murder in this factory. The directors and I have decided to employ you to find the murderer.”
Frank Said He Was Suspected.
Q. What else did he say?—A. He said he had just come from the police station and that the police, particularly Detective Black, seemed to suspect him.
Q. What else?—A. He related his movements on the day of the murder. He said that the paid the little girl off that day and that when she left he heard voices on the stair. He said that later he let Mrs. White out of the factory at about 1 o’clock. She saw a negro sitting on a box at the foot of the stairway. Frank said he left the factory at 1:10 o’clock and went home for lunch. He said he returned from lunch at about 2 o’clock and went up to his office.
Scott testified as readily as though we were reading a narrative.
Q. Give the jury a description of […]
RED SPOTS ON FACTORY FLOOR SMEARED OVER, SAYS SCOTT
Swears Frank’s Lawyer, Haas, Called for Report Before Police Saw It
DETECTIVE SCOTT PROVES PUZZLING WITNESS BOTH FOR STATE AND DEFENSE
[…] how Frank acted.—A. He acted perfectly natural.
Q. How do you know it was natural if you never saw him before?—A. I just thought it was natural.
Rosser Objects Again.
Dorsey took up the questioning again.
Q. How were his eyes?—A. Large and piercing.
Q. How was his breathing?—A. Very deep.
Q. Didn’t you state to me—
“I object. You can’t ask him that.”
Dorsey replied: “I don’t know whether this witness has trapped me or not. I have it written down.”
Rosser; “I have no doubt you have it written down from Genesis to Revelations, but this witness has already said the defendant was not nervous.”
The objection to the question was sustained.
Dorsey: Q. How did he give you the narrative?—A. Very rapidly and specifically as to time.
Refreshes Scott’s Memory.
Q. How did the defendant state the time when Mary Phagan entered the factory?—A. He said about 12:10.
Q. What did Frank say, if anything, about hearing voices before she came?—A. I don’t recall.
Dorsey addressed Judge Roan: I want to refresh the memory of this witness with the notes he took on the case.”
Q. Mr. Scott, did you furnish a report of this case to the defendant?—A. Yes.
Q. To whom?—A. To S. Montag, Herbert Haas and L. Z. Rosser.
Q. Did you furnish the State a readable copy like you did the defense?—A. I don’t know. I read your complaint.
Rosser objected. “I object to anything like this, Your Honor. It is absolutely immaterial here how or whether he furnished the defense with the reports.”
“Not Sticking to Testimony.”
Dorsey: “I hold, Your Honor, that this witness is not sticking to his previous testimony and I have the right to refer to these reports to refresh his memory.”
Judge Roan: “Put your question, Mr. Dorsey.”
Q. Was it before or after 12 o’clock that Frank said he heard voices?—A. (Scott read from his notes) Frank told me that before 12 o’clock he heard voices outside his office.
Rosser objected. “I object to his
The objection was sustained.
“Mr. Scott, you can only refresh your memory from the notes,” said the court.
Scott refreshed his memory from his notes, and said:
“I now state that Mr. Frank told me he heard those voices before 12 o’clock.”
Q. Before Mary Phagan came or not?—A. Before.
Q. Where?—A. On the second floor.
Dorsey Misled, He Asserts.
Q. What did Frank say he did at home when he went home at 1:10 o’clock?—A. He said he went home for lunch.
Q. What, if anything, did Frank say in reference to Gantt?—A. He said J. N. [sic] Gantt knew Mary Phagan very well and was intimate with her.
Q. What, if anything, did Frank say about Gantt’s intentions to Mary Phagan?—A. Nothing.
“Your honor,” said Dorsey, “I admit I have been misled.”
Rosser objected. “These sorts of questions fall on me like a false note on a piano.”
“Your honor,” said Dorsey, “it is discretionary with you as to whether I may lead a witness. If there ever was a time when a witness should be led it is now with this detective who was hired by the pencil factory and who has been working with the attorneys for the defense. When I talked with him and he told me things and now he testifies differently I have a right to lead him.”
Charges Scott “Trapped” Him.
“If you mean to say the witness has trapped you, I will permit it,” said Judge Roan.
“I do,” answered Dorsey.
Attorney Rosser objected, and the court recessed until authorities could be looked up.
“He is trying to impeach a witness,” said Rosser.
“If it is meant that I am holding back anything I want to disabuse his mind of that,” interrupted Scott. “I—“
“I am not trying to impeach a witness,” declared Dorsey. “Here is a detective employed by this defendant and he simply has had a lapse of memory.”
Dorsey wanted to submit a memorandum he had taken from Scott, but Rosser objected.
No Reference to Notes.
“He saw me take it,” said Dorsey.
“He saw you write it,” retorted Rosser, “before my friend Dorsey conferred with Hooper. Hooper is a wise man. He charged three times that he had been trapped by the witness.”
Judge Roan ruled: “At this stage of the game I can’t allow you to ask the witness leading questions. He may be allowed to refresh his memory, but if it is on anything that is written, he must have seen it at some other time.”
Dorsey then questioned the witness:
Q. Mr. Scott, in my talk with you at my office last week, did I not make a memorandum of what you would swear? I want to ask this witness if he wrote these notes.
Rosser objected: “That is just exactly what I don’t want.”
Judge Roan ruled: “I don’t think you can lead the witness at this stage of the game.”
Said Gantt and Girl Were Friendly.
Mr. Hooper interrupted: “As I understand it, Mr. Dorsey has the right to ask this witness what he wishes, provided he asks him about the specific question.”
“I hold that,” said Judge Roan.
Dorsey put the question:
Q. Did Frank say anything about the attention of Gantt to Mary Phagan?—A. He said he seemed unusually friendly.
Q. Do you remember when Gantt was arrested?—A. Yes, about the time I was in conference with Frank.
Q. Was there anything said by one of the attorneys for Frank about you suppressing evidence?
Rosser objected. “Why, your honor,” he said, “a client is not even bound by his attorney in a civil case. I demand that that question be withdrawn.”
The objection was sustained.
When Pinkertons Suspected Frank.
Dorsey: “It is a circumstance, your honor.”
Rosser (angrily): “Then I withdraw my objection.”
Scott answered the question: “Sometime in May I, with Superintendent Pierce, of the Pinkerton agency, went to the office of H. J. Haas, in the Third National Bank Building, and told him there was a strong suspicion against Frank. He said he wanted us to give him personally our reports in full before we submitted it to the police. We told him we would withdraw from the case before we would do that.”
Q. Who did the talking and showed you on your walk through the factory?—A. Mr. Darley did most of it; Mr. Frank a little.
Q. Did Mr. Frank offer any suggestions as to how or why it happened?—A. No.
Q. Did you see any white smear over the blood spots?—A. Yes; they were covered with a sort of white smear.
Q. Were you sure it was a smear or a spit?—A. It was a smear.
When Frank Met Her.
Q. Are you willing to tell the jury whether Frank was nervous or composed?
“He answered that question,” interrupted Rosser.
“Did you?” asked Judge Roan of Scott.
A. I said his eyes were piercing and he looked pale.
Judge Roan asked the witness if Frank was composed.
A. He was composed.
Dorsey resumed his questioning.
Q. What happened at the police station Tuesday night?—A. Detective Black and I had a discussion in Frank’s presence about Newt Lee. We had been talking to Lee. Mr. Black told Mr. Frank he didn’t think Newt Lee was telling all he knew. I said about the same thing. We asked him if he would consent to go into a room with Lee and try to get the truth out of him. He agreed to and we left them alone together about ten minutes. When we interrupted, Lee did not seem to have finished his conversation. ‘Mr. Frank,’ said Lee, ‘it’s awful hard for me to be handcuffed to this chair.’ ‘Well, they got me, too,’ said Frank. Frank told me later they did not get anything out of the negro.
Frank’s Head Was Dropped.
Q. What did Frank do?—A. His head was dropped.
Q. What was Frank’s attitude at the police station?—A. He was extremely nervous.
Q. On what do you base that statement?—A. He didn’t know what to do with his hands or feet. He rubbed his face with his hands and was agitated.
Q. How about his eyes?—A. His eyes always appeared to be the same.
Q. What was his attitude at the time of his arrest on Tuesday?—A. His hands were trembling. He was pale and silent.
Q. Did you see Attorney Rosser at the police station?—A. No, I did not.
In Office from 12 to 12:30 p. m.
Q. Did you see Frank at the factory Saturday, May 3?—A. Yes; with Black.
Q. What conversation did you have with him then?—A. I asked him if he was in his office continuously from 12 o’clock noon until 12:30. He answered that he was there in his private office for every minute.
Q. How was it you put the question?—A. “For every minute of the time between 12 and 12:30, were you in your private office?” He replied that he was.
Q. Did you search the area around the elevator shaft and radiator?—A. Yes.
Q. Did you find anything around there in the shape of hair ribbon, bludgeon or purse?—A. No.
Then Rosser took the witness on cross-examination.
Didn’t Order Reports Held.
Q. You sent a report to me?—A. Yes.
Q. Did you report this, “Mr. Pierce and myself went to Haas’ office and he told us to catch the murderer regardless?”—A. Yes.
Q. You didn’t report that other incident to me. Didn’t I say to you—
Dorsey: “I object to anything that was said except what was said to Haas.”
Judge Roan: “Isn’t it competent evidence for these attorneys to show there was not any effort at suppression?”
Dorsey replied: “Your honor, the State can show flight on the part of the defendant, but he can’t show that he stood still.”
Scott interrupted: “Haas never told us not to give the reports to the police, but merely to report to him first.”
Not in Inquest Testimony.
Q. Didn’t you testify before the Coroner’s inquest everything you know?—A. Yes; but not in detail.
Q. Did you say before the Coroner that Frank said that Gantt was familiar with Mary Phagan?—A. I don’t know.
Q. Why didn’t you give it to me in your report?—A. Either I didn’t think Gantt was a suspect or it was an oversight.
Q. Well, why didn’t you tell the Coroner about what Frank said about Gantt and Mary Phagan? Gantt was a suspect then, wasn’t he?—A. It must have been an oversight, if I didn’t do it.
Q. Isn’t it true when at the inquest that you did not say one word about Frank holding his head down when you and Black interrupted his interview with Newt Lee?—A. I don’t recall. I haven’t read the minutes.
Admits Working for Frank.
Q. You have stated here you were working in the interest of Frank, the defendant?—A. Yes.
Q. You stated there that you were employed by the National Pencil Company—A. Yes; Frank was the man I talked to. He had to see Mr. Montag before he could employ me.
Q. Didn’t you say before the Coroner’s jury that all you could find out about the conversation between Frank and Lee was from Lee?—A. Yes.
Q. You didn’t say a word about overhearing Lee and Frank in their conversation, and of Frank hanging his head, did you?—A. No; I have refreshed my memory since then.
Scott Gets Angry.
Q. Wasn’t you asked then to tell it all?—A. Yes; but a man would be a fine sister who couldn’t refresh his memory. Do you think a man can remember verbatim everything said a year ago?
Q. Hold on; don’t lose your temper.—A. I’m not losing my temper.
Q. Now, you didn’t say anything before the Coroner about Frank saying that Gantt was intimate with Mary Phagan?—A. No.
Q. You haven’t got the word intimate in your notes here. (Rosser had obtained Scott’s notes from him.)—A. Well, I’ve got my own system about taking notes which may be different from yours. I don’t write out the whole story. Neither was I cross-questioned before the Coroner.
Q. You didn’t say anything about Mr. Frank being nervous before the Coroner?—A. I said I wasn’t cross-questioned.
Q. You detailed your statement to ten pages before the Coroner and you didn’t refer to that?—A. Yes.
Q. When you detailed the statement about the conversation between Lee and Frank you didn’t say anything about his being nervous?—A. I said he hung his head.
Works With Police.
Q. You didn’t say anything about his crossing and recrossing his legs?—A. I don’t think the Coroner asked me.
Q. You didn’t say anything about his putting his hand before his face?—A. No.
Q. You are a trained detective—trained to observe things—and you didn’t bring out these facts?—A. I have too much sense to tell everything I know at preliminary hearing.
Q. Weren’t you telling all you knew?—A. In a general way. I am not fool enough to go into detail with a fine-tooth comb at a Coroner’s inquest.
Rosser: “Your honor, this witness is provoking me.”
Dorsey: “I submit, your honor, that he has a right to answer the question.”
Judge Roan: “Don’t argue with the attorney, Mr. Scott.”
Q. Let’s go back. You work with the police, don’t you?—A. Yes.
Q. You never work against them. You just get in the road with them?—A. Yes.
Q. You will work against your client with the police, won’t you?—A. Some time.
Q. You testified about the blood spots, but nothing about the white stuff over it?—A. Yes, I think that’s right.
Q. That conversation you said about Frank, are you sure that statement didn’t come from Darley?—A. Yes, I am quite sure Frank dictated them in his office.
Q. You are sure you didn’t take these notes during your inspection of the factory?—A. Yes. I only took mental notes and wrote when we got back to the factory.
Q. You are not positive whether on that point?—A. Yes, because it was so dark I could not see in the factory.
Scott Corrects Report.
Q. Mr. Scott, you say now that Mr. Frank told you when the little girl asked him if the metal had come, Mr. Frank replied, “I don’t know?”—A. Yes.
Q. Didn’t you swear before the Coroner that he said, “No?”—A. Yes. I have said about half and half all the time.
Q. Didn’t you say in a report to me he said, “No?”—A. Yes.
Q. Did you mean I don’t know? Don’t you know that the meanings of the words are quite different?—A. It was just a grammatical error. I now swear positively he said, “I don’t know.”
Q. You say now Mr. Frank told you he left the factory about 1:10?—A. Yes.
Q. You told me in this report (he had Scott to identify the report) that he told you he left the factory at 1 o’clock?—A. Yes. It was simply an error in that report to you.
Q. How many mistakes are there in this report?—A. Very few. They are errors of the stenographer I overlooked.
Q. Mr. Scott, Mr. Black and the police always knew the contents of these reports before you made them to me, or Mr. Haas or the owners of the pencil factory?—A. Yes.
Scott Ends Testimony.
Dorsey on redirect examination:
Q. When did you report the finding of club to the police?—A. I saw it in a report of Hay 1.
Q. Do you swear what day it was reported to the police?—A. No.
Q. About the police—do you follow the facts, or the theory?—A. I don’t quite understand.
Q. Report in full to the jury what you mean by working with the police?—A. Mr. Black and I worked in partnership and reported to the police.
Q. Detail on this chart the course of your inspection of the factory with Frank and Darley?—A. We went from the office to the machine room, where the hair was found; saw the bloodstains, went down to the basement and were shown where the body [w]as found. We saw where the slipper [w]as found.
“That’s all. Call Miss Monteen Stover.”
Monteen Stover on Stand.
Judge Roan said: “Mr. Sheriff, take the jury out for a few minutes and let them get a little fresh air.”
Solicitor Dorsey began questioning Monteen Stover. She obviously was somewhat overawed, but fairly well composed.
She appeared about the same age as Grace Hix, and, like her, had very light hair. She was dressed in a tan cotton dress with a skirt well above her ankles. She appeared 16 or 17 year of age.
Q. What is your name?—A. Monteen Stover.
Q. Where do you work now?—A. Nowhere.
Q. Where were you working April 26?—A. The day Mary Phagan was killed?
“Yes,” said Dorsey.
Q. Did you ever work for the pencil factory?—A. Yes.
Q. When did you quit?—A. Monday before Mary Phagan was killed.
Q. Did you go to the factory on the Saturday before Mary Phagan was killed?—A. Yes, sir.
Q. What time?—A. 12:05 o’clock.
Q. How long did you stay?—A. Five minutes.
Q. What did you go for?—A. To get my pay.
Q. What floor did you go on?—A. The second.
Q. To where?—A. To Mr. Frank’s office.
Q. Did you see Mr. Frank?—A. No.
Q. Did you see anyone?—A. No.
Q. Did you notice the door in the rear that leads to the women’s dressing room?—A. Yes.
Q. Was it opened or closed?—A. It was closed.
Q. Had you ever noticed it before?—A. Yes.
Q. Wasn’t usually opened or closed?—A. Sometimes opened and sometimes shut.
Q. Did you notice the clock?—A. Yes.
Q. What time was it?—A. 12:05 o’clock when I entered and 12:10 when I left.
Stayed Five Minutes.
Q. What did you have on—what kind of shoes?—A. Tennis.
Q. Did you look at the clock when you went in?—A. Yes. I walked up to it. It was 12:05.
Q. What time was it when you left?—A. 12:10.
Q. Was there any hat or coat or gentleman’s apparel in the office?—A. No.
Q. Had you ever noticed the door before?—A. Yes.
Q. What was the condition of that door?—A. Sometimes closed and sometimes opened.
Q. Your honor, may I repeal this witness’ memory on this point from an affidavit she made?
Rosser—I object, your honor. He can’t show her that.
Judge Roan—Did she read the statement before signing it?
Dorsey—It was read to her.
Rosser—It might have been changed.
Dorsey—I won’t press the matter right now. I will cite some authority on it in a little while.
Mr. Rosser began the cross-examination.
Q. Miss Monteen, where did you start from to go to the factory?—A. From home.
Q. What time?—A. I don’t know.
Q. Did Mr. Frank have one or two offices at the factory?—A. He had two offices.
Q. Did you notice the safe in the office?—A. No sir.
Q. You just walked in, turned around and walked out?—A. Yes.
Q. Did you see any person?—A. No sir.
Q. Did you notice the desk in the office? Did you notice a wardrobe? A. No.
Q. What did you do?—A. I walked in the front office, saw no one, and went and sat down on the bench near the stairs.
Q. Then you got up and went home?—A. No, I went back into the office, looked around and seeing no one, left the building.
Q. You went straight home?—A. Yes.
Q. The factory was still in quiet, when you were there?—A. Yes.
Q. That door to the metal room—you had worked in metal department, and you sometimes saw the door open and sometimes closed?—A. Yes, sir.
Q. How many times has Solicitor Dorsey talked to you about this case?—A. Once. I went down to his office and made an affidavit.
Q. No matter what an affidavit might say, you know you sometimes saw that door open and sometimes closed?—A. Yes.
Q. If you made such an affidavit, you were mistaken?—A. I don’t know. I sometimes got there first and it was closed. Then I have passed it and seen it open.
Q. You do know that you saw it both open and closed?—A. Yes.
Judge here ruled that [t]he Stover girl could look at the affidavit to refresh her memory.
Solicitor Dorsey handed it to the witness and she slowly read it.
Door Opened and Closed.
Then Dorsey questioned the witness:
Q. Having refreshed your memory, Miss Monteen, state whether that back door usually was open or closed?
A. Sometimes it was open and sometimes it was closed.
Q. When the factory was not running, was it open or closed?—A. Closed.
Q. All the time?
Attorney Rosser objected: “You are leading the witness.”
The objection was sustained.
Q. What door are you referring to?
A. The door right back from Mr. Frank’s office.
Rosser then took the witness on the recross-examination.
Q. Was Mr. Dorsey present when you heard that affidavit read?—A. No.
Lawyers Clash Again.
“Your honor, Mr. Dorsey said it was read to her,” said Mr. Rosser. “How did he know?”
“She said it was read to her,” retorted Dorsey.
“No, she didn’t,” said Rosser.
“I call for a reading of the records,” said Dorsey.
“It is not of enough importance,” returned Rosser.
Then Monteen Stover was excused, and R. P. Barrett, a machinist at the National Pencil Factory, who found the hair on the lathing machine, was called to the stand.
Solicitor Dorsey questioned him.
Q. What is your business?—A. Machinist at the National Pencil Company.
Found Blood Spot.
Q. What did you see near the water cooler in Mary Phagan’s dressing room?—A. A peculiar spot I have never seen before.
Q. Were you in the factory Saturday?—A. Yes.
Q. Was it there then?—A. No.
Q. How large was it?—A. About 5 or 6 inches in diameter with lots of little dots around it.
Q. Was there anything else?—A. Yes; some white substance smeared over it by the side of the big spot that was not covered up.
Q. What was it?—A. Blood.
Q. What did it look like that had been used in putting the white stuff on it?—A. A broom.
Q. Did you see the broom?—A. Yes; one was nearby.
Q. Was anything on the broom?—A. Yes, lots of dirt.
Found Hair on Lathe.
Q. Did you find any hair there?—A. Yes, on the bench lathe.
Q. Describe to the jury how the lathe was shaped.—A. It was “L” shaped and made of iron.
Q. Did anyone else see this hair?—A. Yes, L. Stanford and Magnolia Kennedy.
Q. Did Magnolia Kennedy identify the hair?
Rosser objected: “It would be only hearsay. Only the God of the Uni- […]
MACHINIST’S UNEXPECTED TESTIMONY AT TRIAL OF LEO M. FRANK
“I found the strands of hair on the handle of the lathing machine in the National Pencil Factory Monday morning. I also found the blood spots on the second floor by the water cooler at the ladies’ dressing room. I know they were blood. The same day I found the spots of blood, I found the pay envelope under the machine at which Mary Phagan worked. The lathe on which I found the hair was about 20 feet away from where I found the pay envelope. The hair was not there Friday, for I worked on the lathe up to 5:30 o’clock, quitting time.
[…] verse could identify the hair.”
The objection was sustained.
Rosser began cross-examination.
Q. How far was it from the machine where the hair was found to where the girls combed their hair?—A. About 10 feet.
Q. How do you know that hair was not on that machine Friday?—A. I worked at the machine until 5 o’clock Friday afternoon.
Q. Did any girls work there Saturday?—A. No.
Q. How far was it from where you found the blood spots to where you found the hair?—A. About 8 feet.
Pay Envelope Also.
Q. Did you find anything around Mary Phagan’s machine?—A. Yes, I found a part of a pay envelope.
Q. Describe how you found it.—A. The latter part of the week I was standing about 15 feet from her machine when I saw a paper under her machine and I went over and picked it up. It was a part of a pay envelope with the letter “P” or “F” on it.
Q. What day and date was that?—A. The same day I found the spot of blood between the 28 and 30.
Q. What did you find under the machine?—A. Nothing but filings.
Q. What did you do with the pay envelope?—A. Turned it over to that man (pointing out a deputy).
Solicitor Dorsey here had the witness to identify the paper and it was then shown to the attorneys for the defense.
Examined Factory Closely.
Q. Did you examine the factory?—A. Yes, very closely.
Q. Did you find anything like a baseball bat around the first floor?—A. No.
Q. Did you find any part of a pay envelope?—A. No.
Q. Did you search closely?—A. Very closely.
Q. You say you found blood?—A. Yes.
Q. You don’t know that it was blood—it just looked like blood?—A. No, sir, I know it was blood.
Q. What time was it when you noticed the strand of hair?—A. A few minutes later.
Q. Were they long strands or knotted?—A. They were around my fingers when I noticed them.
Strands of Hair Foot Long.
Q. How long were they?—A. About a foot long.
Q. You didn’t see them when you took hold of the handle and the first you saw of them was when they were wound around your fingers?—A. Yes.
Q. You say this envelope was found under her machine?—A. Yes.
Q. Then the lathe the hair was on was 20 feet away?—A. Yes, 20 or 25 feet away.
Q. The pay envelope you found had no name or number on it—only this little loop?—A. Yes.
Attorney Rosser here walked over to the jury and showed them the loop marked on the envelope.
Told of Find Same Day.
Then Mr. Rosser called the witness closer to the jury.
Q. It is the same sort of envelope they always have used at the factory?—A. Yes.
Q. There is nothing to identify it unless this little loop be a part of a name?—A. Yes, sir, the top of the envelope was torn off. All the writing on it was a loop that looked like the lower part of a “G.”
Dorsey here took up the re-direct examination.
Q. When did you tell Schiff about this?—A. The same day.
Barrett was excused.
Mell Stanford, who had not figured in the case up to this time, was called. Stanford also is an employee of the pencil factory.
The witness stated that he had worked at the pencil factory for two years and was at work there Friday, April 25.
Spot Not There Friday.
Q. What did you do this Friday?—A. I swept the whole floor of the metal room.
Q. Did you see anything there Monday?—A. I saw some white compound smeared over something.
Q. Was it there Friday?—A. No.
Q. What kind of a broom did you use?—A. A little broom.
Q. Do you know anything about a big cane broom?—A. Yes.
Q. Where was this broom Monday?—A. About 8 feet from the spot.
Q. What was under the white substance?—A. Some spots.
Q. Was it blood?—A. I don’t know.
Q. Could you tell whether the broom used was big cane or a little broom?—A. A big one.
The witness was then turned over to the defense for cross-examination.
Court then adjourned until 2 o’clock.
Attorney Reuben Arnold took up the cross-examination of Mel Stanford when court resumed after the recess.
Just before court opened Leonard Haas, friend of Leo Frank, leaned across the table to Attorney F. A. Hooper, Dorsey’s assistant, and said:
“Mr. Cooper, I want to congratulate you on the very gentlemanly manner with which you have conducted yourself.”
He said nothing to Solicitor Dorsey, who was sitting beside him. Dorsey was unmindful if any slight was intended.
J. M. Gantt was recalled a moment at the beginning of the morning session Thursday to tell of the time he was arrested and the time he was released. Scott then was called as a witness and it was expected that he would be on the stand most of the day.
The courtroom was crowded as on every other day of the trial. There was a noticeable increase in the number of women present. The seats all were taken half an hour before the time set for the beginning of the trial.