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

Atlanta Constitution
August 24th, 1913

“What I had to say yesterday,” began Mr. Dorsey at the opening of Saturday morning’s session, “with references to character, I think I have demonstrated by law to any fair-minded man that the defendant is not a man of good character.”

“In failing to cross-examine these twenty young ladies who claim his character was bad, is proof, of itself, that if he had character that was good, no power on earth would have kept him and his counsel from plying countless questions in his behalf.”

“That’s common-sense, gentlemen, a proposition that is as fair and a proposition which I have already shown you by law that they had a perfect right to delve into his character. Also, you have seen their failure to cross-question these witnesses.”

“Whenever any man has evidence in possession and fails to produce it, the strongest presumption arises that it would he hurtful if they did produce it. Failure to present such evidence is a glaring Indictment. You need no law book to tell you that.”

“You know the reason, his able counsel did not ask these ‘hare-brained fanatics’ questions of the evidence they had presented against their client. You know it too well, they know it—they know it better than you. That’s why they did not question.”

“You tell me those good people from Washington Street came and said they never heard anything against Frank. Many a man has gone through life, without even his wife knowing his misfortune. It takes the valley to know a man’s life.”

Bad Character Demonstrated.

“That man has a bad character and it has been ably demonstrated. Often a man uses charitable and religious organizations to cover up his misdealings —sometimes to cover up his conscience—as Leo M. Frank has done by the B’nai B’rith, of which he is president”.

“Many a man has walked high in society and outwardly has appeared spotless, but who was rotten, clean rotten, inside. He has no character, I submit—gentlemen, he has none. His reputation for good – is among the people who do not know his real self”.

“David, of old, was a great character, until he sent Uriah to the front of battle, so that Uriah might be killed and David take his wife. Judah Iscariot, until he planted the betraying kiss upon the lips of the Lord Jesus, was a good character.”

 “Benedict Arnold had the confidence of all the people, until he betrayed his nation. Since that day, his name has been a synonym of infamy and disgrace”.  

Cites Wilde Case.

“Oscar Wilde, literary, brilliant, author of works that will go down for ages, the profoundest of which he wrote while in jail, had the companionship of himself and the son of a Marquis, broken up for criminal practice in which he indulged.”

“Wherever the English language is read the coolness and affrontery of Wilde, while he underwent cross-examination, will be the subject of history and admiration. He was a man of Frank’s type. Wilde will remain forever the type of pervert as is this man, who stands with the murder of Mary Phagan.”

 “Not even Wilde’s wife suspected he was guilty of perversion. He was sent to prison for three long years. He was a scholar, cool, calm. and, collected and his cross-examination is a worthy part of history.”

“Good character! Why, he came to America and lectured throughout the country. It was he who raised this sunflower from a weed. A man of rain, knowledge and physique, courage and bravery, but a sexual pervert.”

“Abe Ruef, of San Francisco, a man of Frank’s race, boss of his town, respected, honored, admired. But he corrupted Schmidt and corrupted everything he put his hand to. He led a life of heinous sin, ruining and debauching girls without end. Eventually his case terminated in the penitentiary.”

“Crime, gentlemen, doesn’t go only with the ignorant and poor. The ignorant like Jim Conley, commit the smaller crimes. A man of high intellect and wonderful, endowments commits the worst of crimes. For instance, look’ at McKuhn, mayor of Charlottesville, who slew his wife in the bathtub because he had tired of her. A jury of Virginia gentlemen sent him to a felon’s grave, his just deserts.”

Richeson Sent to Choir.

“Then, there was Richeson, a Boston preacher, who was engaged to one of the wealthiest and most attractive girls of his city. But, entanglement with a poor little girl who had been weak and pliant in his driving and lust-ridden hands, caused him to so far forget himself, as to put her in a grave.”

“All these cases are of circumstantial evidence, and, after conviction, in hope he would obtain pardon, he confessed, while a Massachusetts governor and jury were brave and dauntless enough to send him to the electric chair. Then, there were others, including Henry Clay Beattie, of Richmond, scion of splendid family, who took his wife, the mother of a 12-month-old baby, to shoot her in the automobile in which they were riding.”

“Yet, that man, gazing upon the blood of his slain mate, was cool and calm enough to joke with the detectives. Slush funds were raised, every effort possible was made to free him, but a courageous and honest jury of Virginia gentlemen sent him to death, thus putting this old Virginia citizenship on a high plane.”

“Beattie never confessed, that is true, but he left a note to be read after his electrocution, which he admitted his guilt.”

“Dr. Crippen, of England, man of worthy standing, killed his wife because of his infatuation for another woman, and put her body away, like this man Leo Frank put away little Mary Phagan’s, hoping it never would be discovered.”

“You, gentlemen, have the opportunity that comes to but few men. Measure up to It. Will you do it?”

“If not, let your conscience say why! Tell me as an honest man, why not?”

Attacks Frank’s Alibi.

“They say Frank has an alibi. Let’s examine It. In section 101 of the Georgia code you’ll find just what is an alibi. It involves the impossibility of the prisoner’s presence at the scene during the time of the crime. The range of evidence must reasonably exclude possibility of his presence”.

“In short, gentlemen, they must show you it was absolutely impossible for Frank to have been on the scene at the time Mary Phagan was killed. The burden is upon them. An alibi, unless properly substantiated, is worthless. I am going to show you why that this alibi is worse than no defense at all”.

“I once read an old darkey’s description of an alibi, and it was this:”

“‘Rastus, what’s an alibi?”

“’An alibi is somethin’ that show you was at the prayer meetin’ where you wasn’t, and not at the crap game where you was.’”         

“Turn around this table a minute—this alleged chronological table of Frank’s actions that day, and then turn it back to the wall where I want it to stay—face against the wall.”

“At 1 p.m. Frank leaves the factory. That’s mighty nice. Now, turn it back to the wall. Let it stay. It’s not sustained by evidence. Not even sustained by the statement of the defendant, himself. His story at police headquarters says he locked the door of the pencil factory at 1:10 o’clock and left the building. There’s your alibi. Punctured by the defendant’s own statement made when he did not know the value of time element in his case.”

“He never realized its importance until he went on the stand, and then he swore it was 1 o’clock when he left the building.”

A Sad Spectacle.

“The little Kern girl–God help her! —swore she saw him at Alabama and Whitehall streets at 1:10 o’clock; yet here’s his own statement that he left the factory at 1:10 o’clock.”

“You talk of sad spectacles, the saddest I’ve ever seen was the bringing of this little Kern girl, the daughter of a man who works for Sig Montag, to help free this red-handed murderer.”

“The jurors have a right to take into consideration the reasonableness of what any witness swears. Any man who looked at that little girl could see the untruth stamped clearly in her story.”

“If Frank had locked the door at 1:10 o’clock, how did she ever see him at Alabama and Whitehall streets at that time of day?”

“Mind you, she had never seen him but once, this daughter of a Montag employee. Yet, she comes here and tells you the unreasonable story she has told.”

“On this time proposition, I want to read this; It’s a speech of a wonderful man, a man to whom even the great and brainy Arnold and the big powerful Rosser would have doffed their hats—Daniel Webster: “

“’Time’s subdivisions,’ he says, ‘are all alike. No man knows one day from another or an hour. Days and hours are not visible to the senses. He who speaks of date or minute or hour of occurrence with nothing to guide him speaks at random.”

Other Discrepancies.

“Now, what else about this alibi”. Old man Sig Montag twisted and warped his words so as to sustain this man. For instance, Frank got down to the building at 8:26 o’clock, according to Holloway and others. Frank says he got there at 8:30. He arrived with a rain coat. They tried to make it appear that he did not have one.”

“I’ll venture the reason he borrowed Ursenbach’s rain coat was because he forgot the coat Jim Conley saw him with.”

“Mattie Smith says he left the building at 9:10 o’clock. Frank says he left at 9:30 o’clock. At 11 o’clock Frank returns to office, says the chronological alibi chart. In his own statement he swears it was 11:05 o’clock.”

“Move it up or down—move it anyway—do anything with it. Gentlemen, we’ve got to have an alibi some way or other.”

“12:12 p.m., says the chart, the time Mary Phagan entered the plant. Frank says Mary came at 10 minutes after Miss Hattie Hall left and she left at 12 o’clock. If persons were as accurate as Frank is in regard to time on the day Mary Phagan was killed, wouldn’t this old world be a glorious one. No trains missed, no appointments missed—no nothing but an entire world accurate on time.”

“Lemmie Quinn arrives, says the chart, from 12:20 to 12:22 o’clock. But Lemmie conflicts with Mrs. Freeman and the other lady who saw him at 11:45 a.m.”

 Here the solicitor was interrupted by Mr. Arnold, who arose saying:

“There is no evidence to that effect, Mr. Dorsey. The girls didn’t see him at the factory.”

“I don’t doubt that anyone didn’t see him,” retorted the solicitor.

Crowd Rules Arnold.

The crowd in the courtroom broke into a laugh that was well-nigh an applause.

Mr. Arnold said to the judge:

“Your honor, we can do without this crowd. If there is another such outbreak, I’ll move to clear the courtroom.”

“Lemmie Quinn was blowing hot and blowing cold” continued Dorsey, “and he was too anxious. I never saw a more eager man in my life. Is Jim Conley telling the truth or a lie? Jim says he saw Lemmie Quinn go up the stairs before Mary Phagan got there.”

“If this be true, why did Frank want to consult with his lawyers before he spoke at police headquarters?”

“Lemmie Quinn is the hardest man to pin down on a proposition I have ever encountered. He is the most anxious man; the most eager I have ever seen, unless it be old man Holloway. Can you tell me that an honest innocent man would first want to consult his lawyers before making his statement?”

“Let me read you what a great judge said, Judge Lochraine:”  

“’I don’t take mere words, even of witnesses. I take their acts.’”

“This table that the defense produces is a fraud on its face. It puts Quinn there from 12:20 to 12:22 o’clock, just the time that will suit the defense and its notorious alibi. Men, they are straining at a gnat.”

The Charges of Perjury.

“Let’s consider for a moment Arnold’s flippant charges of perjury.”

“You saw the witnesses. You heard what they had to say. Do you remember one Iady, who, almost hysterical, wanted to die for Frank? When did you ever hear of an employee who would be enamored of her employer that that she would die for him if the friendship that existed was merely platonic? I know that back of that willingness to put her neck in the noose meant for Frank there was something stronger, something more powerful than platonic love, don’t you? It must be a passion born of something beyond mere friendship. But he is married, and she is single; he is the employer and she is the employee!”­

“Take the little Bauer boy. Before he took that ride in Sig Montag’s automobile to the offices of Arnold and Rosser, he could remember details, but after that he suffered a lapse of memory. Before that, he could remember just where he laid his watch, but after that his mind went blank.”

“It reminds me of the South Georgia instance where everybody was gathered in the church praying for rain. They prayed and prayed, and after a while, the Lord sent a regular trash-mover, a gulley-washer. Then the preacher rubbed his chin a little and said, ‘I guess we must have over done it, just a leetle!”

“Don’t you know that Sig Montag must whispered in that boy’s ear, ‘You’ve overdone it, just a leetle?’”

“Does that look like perjury? Oh, how foolish, foolish, foolish!”

“How about that machinist, Lee?”

“He said he had seen in the possession of Schiff papers that he had signed. Then they brought papers up here written on a typewriter, and his name was not even mentioned in them. That’s the stuff they’re unloading on you!”

Claims Women Were Subborned. 

“Perjury? Let’s go further.”

“I have never seen a case where women have been suborned as in this case.”

“Take the stenographer, Miss Fleming. They put her on the stand, and we took her up on a line she didn’t expect.”

“Oh, we don’t mean to say that Frank tried to seduce or ravish every woman who came to the pencil factory. All of them would not have submitted to it. He knew whom to approach and whom not, until he met Mary Phagan. And she ‘called’ him.”

“How about flirting? She said she never saw or heard of any orders against flirting.”

Dorsey then read Miss Fleming’s account of Frank’s work at the office on Saturday morning.

“Now,” he continued, “she says that she saw Frank working on the financial sheet. She said that this was Frank’s business in the forenoons of Saturdays. She was questioned on this point time and time again, and was positive that she saw Frank making out the financial sheet.”

“Then Arnold Interrupted her and said. He didn’t have time to make the financial sheet on  Saturday morning, did he?”

“And she caught Arnold. She answered, ‘No.’”

“And was so nervous that he couldn’t let me finish, but he interrupted the witness with a most unfair question, and she took the bait and went under the bank with it.”

“I have read to you how positive she was about having seen Frank working on the financial sheet. Now look. Afterwards when she was about it she said that she had never made any such statement. I asked her whether she had said these things I have read you from the record, she said, ‘No.’”

“I tell you if you are going to turn men loose on such evidence as that, it is time to quit drawing juries in Fulton county.”

Why Frank Was Indicted.

“Why didn’t Rosser, Pat Campbell and Starnes take Newt Lee, Jim Conley, or James Gantt instead of this man? Because the evidence against them was only a film of cobwebs, but about Frank the evidence is composed of cables, and they are bound about him and he can’t break them. The erudite Reuben Rose Arnold and the dynamic Luther Zeigler Rosser, can not break them!”

“Circumstantial evidence is as good as any if it is the right sort. This evidence draws tightly around him and there is not a break in it.”

“Herbert Schiff said that Frank, who was behind with his work, went home and slept instead of making out the financial sheet, because he (Schiff) had not given him the data (pronouncing it ‘dotter,’ as Schiff had pronounced it).”

“Do you think that Leo M. Frank, with such a charming wife as he has, with all his friends; Frank, head of the B’nai B’rith, lover of cards and pleasure; do you think that he would go back to the factory on Saturday afternoon to make out that financial sheet just because he did not have the data in the morning. He made out that financial sheet in the morning.”

“I submit that this man made out that financial sheet on Saturday morning. I give no reasons because I don’t believe them necessary. But even if he made out the sheet on Saturday afternoon, don’t come to that belief because the sheet shows no nervousness.”

Why Frank Was Calm.

“Why, after the crime, he went to his home and in the bosom of his family he showed composure. He read the joke about baseball and laughed about it. He made so merry over it that he disturbed the card game which was in progress.”

“He had been making out financial sheets for six years, and do you mean to tell me that he had to wait for Schiff to tell him what to do before he could make that sheet?”

“He didn’t betray nervousness when he wrote for the police, did he? And right here. His mother identified that writing as that of her son, and yet when they put an expert, who knew Frank’s writing, on the stand to identify it, he was so afraid that he might do something to hurt this man that he wouldn’t identify it. Is that perjury?”

“The frivolity that Frank showed at his home was just the sort of frivolity that Henry Clay Beattle showed beside the automobile in which was the blood of his wife!”

“I’ll tell you something this man did do on Saturday afternoon. You remember how Jim Conley told about Frank’s looking at the ceiling and saying, ‘I have rich relatives in Brooklyn. Why should I hang?’ he wrote that letter to his rich uncle and his people in Brooklyn that afternoon.”

“They say his people in Brooklyn were not rich. His uncle is rich, and he thought that he was in Brooklyn that afternoon when he wrote that letter and said what he did.”

Dorsey picked up the letter.

“Listen to this. ‘How are the dear ones in Brooklyn?’ Does that sound like he thought his uncle was in Brooklyn, or not?”

A Betraying Line.

“Now, here’s a line that if you know anything about the conduct of a guilty conscience, you will know was written in the afternoon when Frank knew the body of Mary Phagan was lying in that basement where he had it put.”

“He wrote: ‘It has been too short a time since you left for anything startling to happen!’ ‘Too short! Too short! Startling!’”

“Do you tell me, honest men, that line did not come from a guilty conscience? What do you think of that, honest men?”

“Now, do you think the rich uncle cared any anything about this line? An eminent authority says that extravagant language is the earmark of fraud.”

“Today was Yondif—holiday— and the thin gray line of veterans is growing thinner each year.’”

“This from Leo M. Frank, the statistician, to a man who cared not for the thin gray, but for the dividends the factory was paying!”

“There’s nothing new in the factory to report,” he writes.

“Ah, but there was something new, but for the dividends the factory was paying!”

“There’s nothing new in the factory to report,” he writes.

“Ah, but there was something new, and there had been time enough for something startling, and there had been enough for something to happen! It had happened in the space of thirty minutes! Oh, me! The time was not too short!”

“Yes, his people lived in Brooklyn and Jim Conley would not have known they lived in Brooklyn unless he had heard Frank say so. They may not be rich, but they have a cold $20,000 lying away on interest! And they have no business worth I don’t know how much!”.

Frank’s Wire to Montag.

“Let’s read that wire Frank sent to Montag.”

“’You may have read,’ it says, ‘of a pencil factory girl found dead—Found dead—in factory? In factory? No! Where? ‘In cellar of factory!’ That’s what he says. Why? He knew where he had put the body of that girl and that picture was in his mind when he sent that wire.”

“He knew he would be arrested unless the police were corrupt, and he didn’t want Montag to be unprepared.”

 “But Pat Campbell was not corrupt! John Black was not corrupt! Rosser was not corrupt! Starnes was not corrupt! And he was arrested!”

“Listen to what Frank said when he wanted to put the rope around the neck of Newt Lee and James Gantt:”

“Police will eventually solve it!”

“Oh, they did solve it!”

“’Assure my uncle,’ he says. ‘I’m all right if he should inquire. Our company has the case well in hand.’”

“Maybe he did think that when he got this follow Scott. There’s an honest man for you! If there was a slush fund in this case—I don’t know that there was—but if there was one, Scott could have got it. But Scott said that he was going to work this case hand-in-hand with the police.” That’s what Frank wanted them. He wanted Scott to work hand-in-hand with the police. He wanted to know what the police wore doing.”

“Then came Herbert Haas—and he’s nobody’s fool—and suggested to Pinkerton detective Harry Scott that he let them have all the evidence he found before he let the police have it. If Harry Scott had fallen for that, things might have been different.”

Recognize Weakness of Case.

“Talk about your expert, Hunter? He’s not nearly so smart as Frank. Leo M. Frank is as smart as either of his lawyers. Frank realized that weakness of his case. He wrote that statement himself, I’ll bet.”

“Frank, in his statement, had to drag in a lot of stuff that was not evidence and he would have dragged in more if we had not stopped him.”

“And do you ‘remember about the blood? The machinist Lee said that Duffy held out his finger and let that blood spurt from it. Why should he have done that. Isn’t the first and most natural thing to grab that finger and tie it up?”

“Miss Rebecca Carson said that she saw Frank and Jim Conley on the fourth floor Tuesday morning before the arrest. That was the morning that Frank said to Jim, ‘Jim, you be a good boy.”

“According to their own witness, Jim and Frank were just where Jim said they were that morning.”

“Mrs. Carson, mother of Rebecca, when asked about seeing blood spots was very particular to ask what blood spots and where. Then she said that she never saw any blood spots on the second floor, because she didn’t want to see anything like that.”

“Miss Small corroborates Conley’s story. She said that she saw Frank and Jim on the fourth floor of the factory about 9 o’clock on that Tuesday morning.”

“Why was Frank there?”

“He wanted to see if Jim was keeping the secret. Arnold said that this is a dirty suggestion. It is dirty. It is more than that; it is infamous. Yet there sits today Leo M. Frank trying to put that rope around the neck of another.

Upholds Detective Department.

“The only thing in this entire case that is at all to the discredit of the police department,” continued Mr. Dorsey, “is that they were afraid on account of the influence and position of Leo Frank to put him in a cell like they did Lee and Gantt. That’s the only thing against them.” 

“If my friend, John Black, over there had gone after Leo Frank like he went after Newt Lee, there would probably, very probably, have been a confession and no necessity for this long and tedious trial.”

“You,” he continued, turning to Frank, “you called for Haas, and you called for Rosser and you called for Arnold, you had to have the very best legal talent that the state afforded, and it took their combined efforts to keep up your nerve.”

“You know I’m telling the truth,” continued Mr. Dorsey, again addressing himself to the jury.”

“There Is only one thing, I tell you, that is to the discredit of the police and that is they were swayed by learned counsel and the glamor of wealth, and treated with too much consideration this man who had snuffed out the life of the poor little girl.”

“I honor, although I had nothing to do with it, I honor the way they went after Minola McKnight and the way in which they got her affidavit. Gentlemen, the getting of evidence in a big murder case like this is no Job for a man with the manners of a dancing master. You’ve got to get on the job like a dog after a ‘possum and you’ve got to tree that ‘possum and keep on barking up that tree until you show he’s there.”

“You know that Albert McKnight, the woman’s husband, would not have told Craven and Pickett any such tale unless it was true.”

“So these detectives knew that, too, and they hung around and they barked up that tree until they got the evidence that was there. Talk about illegally holding that woman. Why they had the habeas corpus if they had wanted. To get her out. That’s what it was made for. I certainly had nothing and could have had nothing to do with freeing her.”

What He Would Have Told Haas.

“If Herbert Haas had come to me on the Tuesday after the murder and told me he wanted me to get Frank out, I would have told him that I was running my office and not the police department. I would have added that the habeas corpus was intended for is that; oh, I don’t know. I wouldn’t have insulted a lawyer like that. He would have known about the habeas corpus.”

“Well, they have taken me to task, too, for the way in which I went early into the case. Well, I mean the memory of the late Charlie Hill; I’m as proud of being his successor in the solicitor’s office as I am that the people elected me to that high office, but I tell you gentlemen, I’m going to pattern myself after no man; I’m going to pattern myself after the dictates of my own conscience.”

“If I’m proud of anything in this case, I’m proud that I went into this case with the detectives when I did and sought with them to find the real murderer of the little girl, and that, too, when your influence was pouring letters into the grand jury in an effort to try and hang an innocent man —negro, even though he was.”

“I’m glad I stuck it out and kept them from indicting that innocent man, and I’m going to stick it out as long as I’m in office and if you don’t like it, the only way to do is to remove me, because I’m doing what I think is right.”

No Evidence of Perjury.

“Now they have talked about perjury. Well, let’s not say that everybody in this case have been liars, when wo have no reason or evidence to accuse everybody of boring liars”.

“Was Jim Conley a liar?”

“Let’s look at some of the things he says and let’s look at the many times the little and apparently unimportant details of his statement are corroborated by other witnesses. Mrs.

Small, time and again, in her testimony, corroborates the things Jim told of as happening that Tuesday morning in the pencil factory. Well, now, let’s take one of their witnesses: Take Mrs. Carson, mother of Rebecca Carson, the forewoman, whom witnesses swear went into the women’s dressing rooms with Frank. Mrs. Carson swore on the stand that she did not go back and look at the spots of blood on the second floor. 

“You know why she swore that? Well, there had been too many of those employees admitting to going back there, and the defense did not want to make it appear that the spots caused any stir up there, so by the time Mrs. Carson came, employees began to say that they had paid no attention to the spots.”

“Well, we asked Mrs. Small If she went to look at them, and she said that she did, and we asked who went with her, and she did say that Mrs. Carson did, and we asked her how she knew, and she said she remembered because she and Mrs. Carson had gone back there after the others had left, and at a time when they could get plenty of time to look at the spots.”

“If this is founded on perjury, if the defense claims it is, then it’s simply a case of pot calling the kettle black, and I haven’t dealt in glittering generalities, either, in making my charges.”

“When evidence or testimony was wanted in any particular phase of this case, there has never been the time when some witnesses or witnesses did not come forward and testify to what was needed, and they’d have you believe those witnesses came willingly, and that there was no slush fund.”

Notes Fix Crime on Frank.

“Now, gentlemen, I want to discuss with you briefly these letters, he continued, taking up the two notes found near the dead girl’s body. If they are not the order of an overruling Providence, then I will agree with the defense that they are naught but folly. The pad and paper usually found in Frank’s office was used, and this man Frank, trying to fasten the crime on another, has indelibly fixed it upon himself.

“The pad, the paper, the fact that he wanted notes, all that goes to show Frank as the man. Tell me, if you can, that a negro over lived who, after killing and robbing or assaulting a girl, would take time before leaving to write these notes.”

“These notes wore folly! Yes, as Judge Bleckley once said, ‘All crime is a mistake and what proof have we that a man who has made a big mistake will not make little ones in trying to hide the first?’”

“Then, there’s another thing that makes against Frank. He said here that when the little girl asked him if the metal had come, that he told her no; and yet, when he had not had time to think about how it would sound, or when he first talked he said he told her that he did not know.”

“There’s a big difference there, gentlemen. For Frank to have told the little girl that he did not know would have sent her back to the metal room to see for herself, but to have told her no, that it had not come, would have sent her on out of the building. Frank did not want to give us here any reason to suspect that the child ever went back there to that metal room.”

Use of the Word “Chat.”

“Then, another thing: How could Starnes and Campbell, or even Chief Lanford, know that Conley, when he told them about Frank’s saying ‘chat,’ when he referred to taking girls and women to his office, was using the same word that Frank used here in his statement four times in the short period between the time he started speaking and the time the jury went out for a few minutes recreation? You noticed, too, that he didn’t use the word ‘chat’ when he started again.

“I tell you Mr. Arnold is a man of keen foresight, and he knows what a thing sounds like, and he sought to parry the blow before I even started talking that I am now trying to deliver.”

“Tell me, if you will, that Conley, when he finished his evil work on that little girl, would have dragged the body way back to that corner of the basement. It meant nothing to him whereabouts in the basement the body lay.”

“But it was the white man—the superintendent of the factory—who knew that it would never do for that body to be found in the metal room.”

“Again, in these murder notes you find the words, ‘The long, tall, black nigger did it.’ Well, when did Conley ever say ‘did.’ Old Jim was up here on the stand, and every time he used that verb at all he said, ‘I done it,’ or ‘he done it.’ It was never ‘I did it,’ with Conley, but always, ‘I done it.’

“Tell me, if you can, that these letters, which are a ‘plant’ as sure as was the club and the bloody shirt found at Newt Lee’s house, were ever thought out by an ignorant negro like Jim. Conley couldn’t have done it if he’d had Starnes, and Rosser, and Campbell and Black, and even Chief Lanford, to aid him. It was a smarter man than this negro, it was a smarter man than these detectives, who laid this plot which it appeared would free him, but which really inculpated him.”

“You tell me that Conley wrote those words; well, when this man was arrested and when he knew Conley was arrested and that Conley, infamously told to keep quiet, was not telling anything, did he even hint to the police that Jim Conley writes?”

“These notes were written to protect the white superintendent and they were dictated by the man who sent the telegram to Sig Montag in New York, asking him to tell his uncle that a girl had been killed in the factory cellar and that the police would eventually solve the mystery and that he was all right.”

The Statement of a Guilty Man.

“Now, I want to take up that statement of Frank’s, that statement that it was said was strong enough to carry him to acquittal, by proving his innocence. I tell you: that was the statement of a guilty man and a statement that was cunningly constructed to fit around the chain of circumstances that showed up.”

“You notice, Frank never admitted being anywhere except when It was proven on him, “There was nothing he admitted except what he knew could be proved.”

Mr. Dorsey then read a number of authorities on circumstantial evidence and showed where the comparison of circumstantial evidence to a chain, no stronger that the weakest link, had been rejected and the comparison of it to a rope where when all webs are twisted together it will hold and where a  few webs may be weak or break and not despoil the rope of its holding power, had been accepted.”

“Frank’s statement was a brilliant one,” he continued, “and if you believe it and follow it blindly, there is only one thing you can do and that is to turn Frank loose.”

 The solicitor then read the law upon the statements made by defendants In murder cases and made various comments and cited a number of author.

“This man (Frank) says” he continued, “that he sat in his office, checking off the money that was loft from the payroll; he was careful, mind you, not to say he was checking over the cash.”

“Out of the money left from that $1,100 payroll and the amount of cash that was kept for various incidentals, don’t you see there was enough money to make up the amount he offered Jim Conley when he asked him to burn the body and that he afterwards took back when Jim said he would not burn it unless Leo went with him.”

“Jim Conley refused to burn the body by himself. Had Jim Conley started to do that and the black smoke rolled out of that chimney, Leo Frank would have soon been down there with these same detectives and what chance would the negro, have had?”

Another False Statement.

“Old Conley took no chance, he was willing to write the notes to put by the side of the body, but drunk or sober, as you will, he was too wise to go down to the basement by himself and burn that body.”

 “Then again, in his statement, Frank says that no one came into his office that Friday before the murder and asked for their own or anyone else’s pay envelope. Well, here is this little Helen Ferguson, the friend and running mate of little Mary Phagan, who swears to us that she did go there and ask Frank for her own and Mary’s pay envelope and that she did it because she knew Mary did not intend to come down, the next day!”

“Oh, they’ve told about plots and conspiracies; I’ll tell you about one. I’ll show you that in this man’s lustful heart there was a plot to undo this little girl, not a plot to murder her; oh, no, he did not want to take her life, he wanted to use her to satisfy his passion.”

“In March, little Willie Turner, a plain country boy, tells us he saw Frank with his arm around Mary and that she was trying to escape and to leave him and go to work, but that he kept on talking to her and told her he was the superintendent In that factory, thus using his position to coerce her to his own ends.”

“You can’t tell me that a brilliant man like him could pass her machine every day and she as pretty and attractive a little girl as she was and as bright, and then he not learn to know who she was. You can’t tell me that this man with the brain he’s got could have helped make out the pay roll for fifty-two times in a year and then been so little familiar with the name as to have to look on the time book to find out If a girl by the name of Mary Phagan ever worked there. You can’t tell me Wille Turner lied when he said he saw Frank talking to the little girl, and you can’t tell me that little Dewey Hewell, the little girl brought here from the Home of the Good Shepherd in Ohio, who, despite her reputation, probably caused right there in that factory, is of tender years and would hardly make up a story like that, was Iying when she said she saw Frank talking to Mary Phagan.”

“You can’t tell me Gantt was lying when he said Frank knew Mary Phagan, and you want to remember another thing—Frank said to Gantt, ‘You seemed to know this girl pretty well.’ How did Frank know that Gantt knew her pretty well, if Frank did not know her himself?”

Proclaims Belief in Plot.

“I’m prepared, knowing that man’s character as I do, to believe that passion had seized him way back there in March and that he plotted to take advantage of this little factory girl. Mr. Rosser quoted from Burns in his speech, and I can quote from Burns, too, and it will show you something on the case.”

Here the solicitor quoted a passage from Burns, beginning, “There’s no telling what a man will do.”

“You can’t tell me that all these people have lied,” continued the solicitor.

“I would not be at all surprised if Frank did not begin to covet this girl back there in March when she first came to work on this floor. I would not be at all surprised if he did not get worried about this lanky Gantt, this man from the same country place where she had come from, this man who knew her people: and I would not be surprised If he did not discharge Gantt not for the $1 shortage, which Gantt said he would give up his job before he’d pay, but because he thought Gantt would be in the way of his vile purpose.”

“I would not be at all surprised if when Frank and Schiff checked up the pay roll that Friday afternoon and Frank saw that Mary Phagan had not got her money, that he did not slip out and make arrangements with Conley, knowing that the girl would have to come on Saturday morning to get her money.”

“I would not be surprised if he did not deliberately refuse the money to little Helen Ferguson, because he wanted to bring Mary Phagan there on Saturday.”

“Jim Conley tells us that Frank slipped up to where he was on Friday afternoon and told him to come back Saturday morning, and old Conley says, ‘I done it,’ not ‘I did it.’

Looked Far Into Future.

“This thing of passion,” continued the solicitor, “is a great deal like fraud, and libertines look far into the future. It’s probable that the man whose character was torn and whose attorneys feared to cross examine witnesses, who swore against his character, began in March to plot and plan to get this girl in his power, because he could not control the passion that consumed him.”

“You try to tell a jury compared of honest men that you didn’t know Mary Phagan,” continued the solicitor, turning towards Frank, “and do you expect them to believe that?”

“Tell me,” he continued, “that Helen Ferguson lied, that this little girl was suborned by the Atlanta detectives to come here and swear to a lie, and that’s the little girl they called a ‘hare-brained fanatic.’”

Mr. Dorsey then read from Frank’s statement to the jury where he had used the word “chat” in four different places.

“Mr. Arnold says,” he continued, “that negroes regularly pick up the words and phrases of their employers, and certainly Frank must have been associated with Jim Conley a great deal to get this word chat from him.”

“Well, Frank. also says that Miss Hall left when the whistle blew for 12 o’clock. Well, do whistles blow on holidays? I don’t know, I’ll leave that for the jury to decide.

“Then Mrs. White says that when she came up that Frank, who was in his office pulling up some pay envelopes, jumped when he saw her. Why, no wonder he jumped, for that little girl was lying back in the metal room then, and he hadn’t had a chance to dispose of the body. He found out that Mrs. White wanted to see her husband, and this time he did not call for the husband. He sent the woman up to the fourth floor. After a while he goes up there and makes out he’s in a big hurry to get away, and he gets her out. He knows that the men have had their lunch and will be working there the greater part of the afternoon”.

“Well, Mrs. White comes down the steps and passes the office. Is Frank ready to leave? Has he got on his hat and coat? No; he’s not in a hurry then, not at all. He’s got to wait there to get rid of that body.”

Addresses Himself to Frank.

Here, Mr. Hugh M. Dorsey gradually drifted in the use or the second person in his talk and seemed to be addressing himself to Leo M. Frank instead of to the jurors:

“You went tiptoeing right back to see if everything was all right, and then you signaled Conley,” he continued, “and you soon learned, by what Conley said about not seeing a certain girl go back down the steps, that you were given away, and so you sent him back to get the body. ‘There was no blood there where you hid the girl. The blow was not sufficient, and no blood was there until Conley dropped the body and caused, it to spatter out.

“No, you had struck the girl and gagged her and assaulted her and then you went back and got a cord and fixed the little girl, whom you had assaulted, when, thank God, she would not yield to your proposals.”

“You got that cord because you wanted to save your reputation—you had no-character—you wanted to save your reputation among the good people of Rabbi David Marx’s church and among those in the B’nai B’rith, and you wanted to save your reputation among the masses and the Montags.”

“Oh, you knew that dead men tell no tales, you knew it, but you forget that murder will out. Oh, had that little girl lived to tell the assault made on her in that factory, there would have been a thousand men in Atlanta who would have not have feared your wealth, and your power and relatives, rich and poor, but who would have stormed the jail and defied the law in taking vengeance on you. It is not right that it should be so, people ought to wait for fair courts and honest juries to decide these things, but they don’t and you knew it then.”

‘I wouldn’t be a bit surprised that if Frank hadn’t put Mary Phagan’s handbag in the safe it would have turned up just the same as the painted envelope and blood spots the Pinkertons found on the first floor.’

“This cloth that was found around her throat was torn from her own upscale clothing and placed over her mouth for a gag, while Frank tiptoed back to his office for the cord with which to strangle her.”

Describes Death of Girl.

“When she did not yield to his lust that was not like that of other men, he struck her. They scuffled. She fell against the machine. Her brain lapsed into unconsciousness.”

“They say he had no marks on his person—he did not give her time to inflict marks. Durrant had no marks.”

“There never was such a farce as this attempt by Frank’s able counsel to disprove the fact that  the spots found on the second floor were blood stains. They bring in this perjurer Lee. He says it wasn’t. Who is this Lee?”

“You know it was blood and that it was the blood of Mary Phagan, because its location corresponds with the spot where Jim Conley says he dropped the body.”

“Barrett discovered the blood and hair long before any reward was ever offered. The hair was identified by Magnolia Kennedy, their own witness.”

“When it became apparent that too many persons saw Frank go to the elevator box and get the key, old man Holloway, who lied and betrayed us, perjured himself in a story about having opened the box, himself.”

Says Holloway Perjured Himself.

“Holloway perjured himself either to obtain acquittal of his boss or to get the reward for the conviction of Jim Conley, ‘his nigger.’ I say that Barrett stands as an oasis in a mighty desert for truth and veracity, although, his own job be in jeopardy. Barrett told the truth. If there is a man in town who rightfully deserves a reward, it is that poor employee of the pencil factory who had courage to tell the truth.”

“Compare him with Holloway.”

“Neither did Barrett make his discoveries on May 16. His find has no resemblance whatever to a plant.”

“But you could wipe Barrett completely out of the case and have an abundance of ground on which to convict.”

“Mrs. Jefferson saw the blood and so did Mel Stanford. It was not there Friday, because Stanford swept the floor and is positive he did not see It.”

“Jim Conley saw Mary Phagan go up and never come down. She was killed where Jim Conley found her and her body was put where Frank wrote in his telegram: ‘In the cellar.’”

“Darley and Quinn saw the blood spots. Sometimes, you know, we have to go into the camp of the enemy for ammunition. The handsome Darley was tied up by an affidavit. It was a hard pill for him, but he had it to swallow, and he admitted having seen the blood that so glaringly accused his boss.”

“To cap it all, Dr. Claude Smith saw the blood, and, upon analyzing it, found there were blood corpuscles disporting the argument of the defense that it was paint.”

“Their own witnesses, Herbert Schiff, Magnolia Kennedy and Wade Campbell all saw this blood and admit having seen it.”

New Richmond in Field.

“Frank and his friends found that Harry Scott didn’t manipulate to suit them. They got some new Richmonds and put them in the field. Where are they now, these men who found the club and blood spots and planted envelope?”

“Where is Pierce, the Pinkerton head? Echo answers “Where?”

“Where is McWorth, who helped find them? Echo answers ‘Where?’”

“All detectives, Starnes, Black, Campbell, Rosser, Scott every one of whom searched in vicinity of the scuttle hole, say they could see no blood spots nor club nor envelope.”

“Don’t you know that if they had not been planted and had been there after the murder. Holloway and others of his ilk would have been only too glad to have reported It to their superintendent in prison.”

“Why, only a few days after the murder, a general clean-up was or ordered by insurance authorities. None of the cleaners found the blood nor the club nor the envelope on the first floor. Why? Because they weren’t there.”

Evidence All Planted.

“The club and spots and envelope are purely in keeping with the planting of Newt Lee’s bloody shirt.”

“Boots Rogers saw Frank take out the clock slip that morning and say that it was accurate. But, later, when the shirt was planted, this graduate of Cornell, this man so quick of figures, saw that Newt Lee wouldn’t have had time to go home and change his shirt, so he accordingly changed his figures and altered his statement.”

“But, the man who planted the shirt did his job too well—he got a shirt too clean and smeared blood on both sides.”

“And, more about this club—Dr. Harris and Dr. Hurt both say that the wound in Mary Phagan’s head could not have been inflicted by this planted club. It was too large, too round.”

“They harp on this Minola McKnight business. Isn’t it strange that Minola, herself, should tell such a story to her husband, then corroborate it in a sworn and written statement.”

“Are we going to swallow all this stuff of Mrs. Selig’s without knowledge of human nature?”

“Minola, in presence of her counsel, made that statement and swore to it. Gordon would not have been worthy of the name of lawyer had the story not been true and he had not said:”

“’Minola, don’t put your name to that story unless it be true.’”

“If the statement wasn’t true, Gordon, her lawyer, would not have sat there without raising a hand, knowing, well knowing, that his client could be sent to the penitentiary for false swearing.”

“The reason Minola made that affidavit was because it was the embodiment of the truth, the pure truth.”   

It was at this point that Judge Roan recessed until Monday, on account of the exhausted condition of Mr. Dorsey.

* * *

Atlanta Constitution, August 24th 1913, “Solicitor Reasserts His Conviction of Bad Character and Guilt of Frank,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

Atlanta Constitution
August 25th, 1913

Solicitor Dorsey Is Expected to Complete His Address to Jury During Morning Session of Court

MANY FRIENDS VISIT FRANK IN THE TOWER

Judge Has Intimated That He Will Be Ready to Receive Verdict at Any Time of Day or Night

By 11 o’clock this morning—and perhaps earlier—Solicitor Hugh Dorsey will have finished his address in the case of Leo M. Frank, charged with the murder of Mary Phagan, and Judge Roan ‘will’ begin charging the jury.

In a talk with a Constitution reporter last night, Mr. Dorsey intimated that the final summing up of his argument would not take two hours, and that it probably would not last much longer than one. He intimated that by 11 o’clock the judge would be well under way in his charge.

With two more hours added to the already record-breaking speech of the solicitor, it will establish a mark that many declare will not be excelled in years to come. Mr. Dorsey has already spoken over six hours.

Because of exhaustion, resulting from his speech of over four hours Saturday afternoon, the solicitor spent a quiet Sunday, getting ready for the end of his argument today.

Rosser at Warm Springs.

Luther Z. Rosser, senior attorney for the defense, spent Sunday and Sunday night in Warm Springs and Woodbury, which he visited with his wife. At Warm Springs during the day, he was besieged by a host of admirers.

Leo Frank spent a typical Sunday in jail. Throughout the day his cell was a mecca for callers. His wife and mother came late in the afternoon, remaining with him for considerable while. On these trips, he is permitted to see them in the jailer’s dining room on the first floor.

He read the papers bearing on the progress of his trial, and, according to attaches of the prison, appeared unaffected by the terrific strain of the trial. Frank, his jailers say, has not suffered a single day of illness since his Imprisonment.

It is predicted that the jury will retire this afternoon between 3 and 4 o’clock. The regular noon recess will be observed. The judge will charge the jury on the law in the case, and then there will be no developments until a verdict is reached.

When Will Verdict Be!

It is a matter of wide speculation over the time in which the jury will require to render a verdict. Many predict it will not be returned tonight, while others expect it as early as midnight, if not before.

Following the. charge the twelve men retire to the jury room in the courthouse. A hat ballot is cast, each man indicating his decision of “guilt,” “innocent” or “doubt.” Then a foreman is elected.

A foreman selected, the jurymen begin their arguments. Each man is permitted to present his individual views of the case. If much time is required the foreman, from time to time, will be called into the courtroom to announce to the court the progress of his body.

Judge Roan has already announced that he will be in readiness to receive the verdict at any time it is reached.

Quiet Day for Jurors.

Sunday was a quiet day for the jurors. An extra detachment of bailiffs and deputies stood guard over their quarters in the Kimball house and no outsider was permitted within hearing distance. 

At 8 o’clock the twelve men were taken on their daily constitutional through side streets of the uptown district, returning shortly before 9 o’clock.  

Police reserves from both the headquarters and county departments will be detailed to the courthouse today.

* * *

Atlanta Constitution, August 25th 1913, “Leo Frank’s Fate May Be Decided by Monday Night,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

Atlanta Constitution
August 26th, 1913

As the big bell in the Catholic church tolled the hour of 12 o’clock Solicitor Dorsey concluded his remarkable plea for the conviction of Leo Frank with the dreadful words— “Guilty, guilty, guilty!”

It was just at this hour, more than four months ago that little Mary Phagan entered the pencil factory to draw her pittance of $1.20.

The tolling of the bell and the dread sound of the words cut like a chill to the hearts of many who shivered involuntarily.

It was the conclusion of the most remarkable speech which has ever been delivered in the Fulton County courthouse—a speech which will go down in history stamping Hugh Dorsey as one of the greatest prosecuting attorneys of this age.

Arnold Makes Protest.

Only after Attorney Reuben R. Arnold had registered a vigorous protest against the action of the spectators, who clapped their hands in tumultuous applause as Solicitor Hugh Dorsey entered the courtroom. Monday morning the solicitor was allowed to continue his speech, which was interrupted by adjournment Saturday.

When court convened at 9 o’clock, there were more people outside of the courthouse unable to gain admission, than there were inside, and about two minutes before the hour of opening court, a roar of cheers told the spectators inside that the solicitor general was coming. His entrance was the signal for the outbreak of approval of his wonderful effort Saturday.

Mr. Rube Arnold immediately protested and declared that “such outbreaks had no place in a court of justice. “

“Mr. Sheriff,” said Judge Roan from the bench when order had been restored, “I see that there is a large crowd in here and that many of them do not seem to understand what is required of them in a courtroom. If there Is the least disturbance after the jury comes in, I want you to clear the room of all but officials.”

“We don’t want to spoil the work of four weeks by any unseemly actions at this time and we are not going to allow such disturbance.”

The jury was then brought in and the solicitor took up his speech. Mr. Dorsey’s voice was hoarse when he started and it seemed as though he had received no refreshment from the rest over Sunday. Like a long distance runner who has kept a hard pace during the race and who at the finish, is staggering toward the goal line and “running on his nerve,” the solicitor renewed his attack on the defense.

As he went on his throat seemed to get better and his vocal cords appeared to loosen up. He was continually harassed during the morning, however, by Attorneys Arnold and Rosser, who declared he was making false statements and that parts of his speech were “improper and insulting”.

“Gentlemen of the jury,” began the solicitor, “I am even more exhausted this morning than I was Saturday. My throat is in such shape that I fear I cannot finish this case or do Justice to it.

“Had we, not an adjournment Saturday, I might have finished and his honor might have charged you, no that you might have brought In your verdict this morning and been free.”

Renews Attack on Statement.

“When I was compelled to stop Saturday, I was. in the midst of a brief analysis of the statement of this defendant. I am not going into an exhaustive analysis of that, because it is not necessary and It would inconvenience you uselessly, and two, I haven’t the strength to carry it out.”

“There are, however, certain parts of the defendant’s statement that merit consideration. He stated to you, after his honor had ruled out our evidence, that his wife visited him at police headquarters and that after he consulted with Rabbi Marx that he decided it would be best not to have his dear wife run the line of snapshooters, interviews of reporters and quizzing of detectives.”

“Well, Frank tells you his wife actually came there and that he would not let her come there again. He says she was brought by her two brothers-in-law and Rabbi Marx. Yet, Frank makes no attempt, to prove by them, that his wife was there. He wants you to believe it, from his own, unsupported statement.” 

“There is no evidence anywhere that she ever went to see her husband at the station house, and I tell you, gentlemen of the jury, that a true wife ever lived who would refuse to go to see her husband when he was in such trouble as that, provided she believed him innocent. No wife, believing her husband innocent, would hesitate to face snapshotters, interviewers, or detectives to get to see her husband.”

Defense Attorneys Object.

“Your honor,” interrupted Mr. Arnold, “we have sat here and listened to one of the most unfair speeches I have ever heard and we have kept silent, but we do object to this unwarranted attack on the defendant’s wife.”

“Solicitor Dorsey submitted that part of Frank’s statement to the jury where he claimed that his wife did visit him at the police station, then he submitted that the defense had not tried to prove it by other witnesses, and declared that he was making no attack on the wife, but merely stating why she had not visited her husband,” Judge Roan allowed him to go on.

“Let the galled jade wince, we-—” began the solicitor in a powerful voice, which he apparently did not have when he began his argument.”

“Now, your honor, I do object to that,” interrupted Mr. Arnold, “when we make a legal objection to the solicitor’s statements, he has no right to say, ‘Let the galled jade wince.’”

Attorney Rosser also registered an objection.

The solicitor was allowed to go on with his speech and the defense made a formal objection to the court against that part of it.

Mr. Dorsey then took up another feature of Frank’s statement.

“Frank said that Conley could write and he adds, ‘I have received too many notes from him asking to borrow money for me not to know that.’ Frank also corroborates Conley’s statement in regard to the watch which Conley was buying on the installment plan and Frank says he gave the information to the police that Conley could write and the police and detectives have told you that he did not and Harry Scott, Mr. Franks’ own detective, has told you that Frank never gave him this Information.”

“If Frank knew, as he says he did, that Conley could write, why didn’t he tell the police that? Scott declares to you that Frank never mentioned the subject.”

“Gentlemen, it was only when the detectives, after laborious effort and despite Frank’s silence, found out that the negro, who was denying he could write, could really do so, that they obtained from him his first affidavit in which he told part of the things that happened that day.”

“Frank says to you that he knew Conley could write. Then why did he not tell the police of that fact, when he knew that the murder notes were believed to be the key that would unlock this mystery?”

Dorsey Turns to Frank.

“By your own statement,” continued the solicitor, addressing, Frank, “you saw the notes at the station house that Sunday morning, April 27, when the body was found, and you said not a word about knowing that Conley could write; you never said it then and you never did tell it to the police authorities, and yet you knew that the notes tried to place the blame on a negro.”

“Well, I won’t discuss that further, it’s not necessary,” continued the solicitor. He then took up another phase of the statement made by the defendant.”

“Frank tells you in regard to that visit Conley made to the jail with the police, when Conley wanted to confront him that he did not see Conley because he wanted first to get permission of his attorney, Mr. Luther Z. Rosser, who was trying a case at Tallulah Falls that day, and he says that if he could have got Mr. Rosser’s permission, that he would have seen Conley or anybody else that day, but I tell you, gentlemen, that Mr. Rosser got back from Tallulah in a few hours, and yet Frank never did see Conley.”

“I tell you, gentlemen of the jury, that if you have got sense enough to get out of a shower of rain, you know that never in the history of the Anglo-Saxon race and never in the history of the African race in this country, did a negro accuse a white man and that white man, with Anglo-Saxon blood in his veins and claiming innocence, refuse to confront him.”

“I’ll tell you something else, no lawyer, astute as is Mr. Rosser, would refuse to let his client confront an accuser like that if he knew in his heart that his client was innocent.”

“WINS BIG CASE – SOLICITOR HUGH M. DORSEY”

“If a negro ever accuses me, I tell you that I will confront him and there’s no lawyer who can stop me, and even if I would wait for my lawyer’s return, I would confront my accused, as soon as he did get back.”

Rosser Again Interrupts.

“You say you never knew until you came to court, what Conley had sworn against you,” continued the solicitor, turning to Frank, “but you could have known if you had wanted to confront your accuser.”

Mr. Rosser entered an objection here, making the statement that Conley had made so many affidavits that Frank would not have known what he would swear to the courtroom, even if he had talked to him.

“Oh, well,” retorted Mr. Dorsey, “you can object all you want to, but I am going to put it up to the jury and they can decide about It. You can object all you want to.”

“He’s outside the rule, your honor,” shouted Mr. Rosser.

“I’m not outside the rule and they (the defense) see the force they think they can make by such objections.”

“Well, that’s out of order,” retorted, Mr. Rosser.

“Well, if they (pointing to the defense) don’t see the force of it all, they (pointing to the jury) do.”

“Well, now, your honor, I submit he’s out of order and he ought to be ruled out,” said Mr. Rosser.

Judge Roan allowed the solicitor to go on.

“This man, Frank, a white man, a graduate of Cornell, a man of a brilliant mind and of refined feeling, on the flimsy pretext that his counsel was out of town, refused to meet Conley and when his counsel came back he would not allow it.”

“Would you tell me, gentlemen of the jury, that you would let a man of black skin accuse you and yet were Innocent, that you would let Rosser or anybody else keep you from confronting him and nailing the lie?”

“No lawyer ever lived who would keep me, if I were wrongfully accused, from confronting my accuser, be he black or white!”

Again Turns On Frank.

“Then you,” (he pointed to Frank) “went and interviewed Newt Lee at 12 o’clock that April 29 and what did you do? Did you act like a man who did not know the truth and who wanted to learn it? Did you go into the room and take up the questioning of the negro in a way to get something out of him, out of him, the man you would have hung in order to save your reputation on Washington Street and in the B’nai B’rith?”

“According to Lee, you never questioned him, but you hung your head and told him that if he kept telling the story that he told then, and later told on the stand, that he and you would both go to hell. Now, you try to fix that up by saying that your detective Harry Scott and old John Black told you to do that and concocted against you and lied on you that Tuesday night.”

Adding to His Crime.

“The reason Frank never questioned Newt Lee, continued the solicitor, turning to the jury, “was because Frank knew who was guilty and he knew that he was already adding to the infamous assault and murder of the girl, an attempt to send this negro to the gallows in order to save his own neck.”

“Listen to this and note how smoothly that statement of Frank’s was fixed up, so that when we came back to rebut it that the technical laws would stop us. Frank told you that the detectives stressed the point that couples must have been allowed to go into the building by Newt Lee at night.”

“Now, Newt Lee was only there three weeks before the murder and the detectives really stressed the point that couples might have been let in there at night and they did not confine the time to the short time Lee was there as nightwatchman, as Frank said they did, and thus saved himself from impeachment.”

Mr. Dorsey then read Frank’s statement in regard to the spots found on the second floor by Christopher Columbus Barrett and said to have been blood spots, and the solicitor stressed that part, where Frank said that accidents were frequent there and that many of them were never even reported, and that the girls often carried buckets of red varnish by that place and that it frequently applied there.

No Chemists Introduced.

“If you claim that the spots were not of blood, in the name of fair play and decency, why didn’t you bring one chemist here to sustain your claim?” 

“’That was blood and the white haskoline substance had been smeared over it!’

“Important! There is no more important thing in this case to you, than to show that there was no blood on the second floor, but that the spots were only of red varnish, with haskoline over them.”

“The Gentlemen of the jury, are you going to believe this one statement when they could get no chemist to come here and stultify himself and when Dr. Claude Smith, city bacteriologist, tells you from his chemical analysis that it was blood and when scores of employees say that it was.

“This defense has no defense,” shouted the solicitor, “they have resorted to abuse, and they have fluttered around, but never alighted anywhere!”

“In this particular instance, they grab at varnish, they grab at cat’s blood, rat’s blood and mouse blood, and at blood from finger cuts.”

The solicitor then took up Frank’s statement about the possibility of the girl having been pushed down the chute in the rear of the building or thrown down the scuttle hole in the part formerly occupied by the Clarke Wooden Ware company.

Some Improbable Things.

“Why would that negro Conley, even if he had murdered the girl with that bloody club they claim to have found there, why would he have tied the cord around her neck and why would he have tied the clothing around her neck?”

“Why did old man Holloway say, ‘That’s my nigger,’ when he saw Conley ‘washing a shirt, and why was it that after fifteen days when the second squad of Pinkertons were searching the factory, that blood was found near the elevator shaft, more blood than it has been shown the girl lost?”

“Why was it that when Frank read in the morning paper that Barrett had discovered the blood spots on the second floor, that he, the superintendent, who had been anxious to solve the mystery had telephoned three times for Schiff to hire the Pinkertons, did not go back to see those spots until Lemmie Quinn came after him.

“That was a strange way for an innocent superintendent to do. And there is no evidence to show that Frank ever did go back there and look at those spots. Why? I’ll tell you why; if there was any spot on earth where this man did not want it to be known that blood had been found, it was on the second floor, where, according to his own statement, he was working at the time the girl was killed.”

“Frank also tells us that he visited the morgue twice on the day the body was found and if he went there and saw the body that morning and it tore him up as he says it did, why, except for the answer I’m going to give you, did he go back that afternoon and look at the body.”

“He didn’t see the body the first time.”

“That statement is a misstatement of facts. All the witnesses said they did not know whether or not Frank saw the body,” interrupted Reuben Arnold.

“Well, I’ll not quibble over the matter, retorted the solicitor. “If Frank did look at the body, and there’s no evidence to show he did, he gave it just a glance as the light was flashed on and then he turned and went into another room.”

Reference to Record.

“He never went into another room: the evidence don’t show that,” objected Mr. Rosser.

“It certainly does” replied the solicitor, “you look and see if it don’t”.

“Well, gentlemen,” said Judge Roan, “look the matter up and decide it.”

The defense made no motion to do so in order to sustain their claim and the solicitor, took advantage of that at once.

“Look it up: I challenge you to look it up!” Dorsey shouted.

“Well, we don’t have to look It up, even if he does challenge us to,” said Mr. Arnold in a quiet tone.

“Gentlemen, I’ll look It up myself, said Judge Roan who then turned and requested Leonard Haas, partner of one of Frank’s lawyers, to favor him by looking the matter up.”

“I tell you that there is no evidence that Frank ever looked at the girl that morning and that if he did look at her, as the defense claims, it was just a glance, and not sufficient to allow him to identity her as the girl he had paid off the day before,” Mr. Dorsey continued.

“The real reason why Frank went back to the morgue that Sunday afternoon was because he wanted to put his ear to the ground and learn if there was a whisper of his guilt going around.”

“The witnesses say Frank was nervous that morning and Frank says so, too, and declares that the auto ride and the sight of the dead girl caused it, and yet he goes back like a hog to his wallow. I tell you, and you know it, that Frank went back there that Sunday afternoon to learn if there was a hint anywhere of his guilt.”

At this point, Attorney Rosser interrupted and declared that on cross-examination “Boots” Rogers had testified that Frank went towards the curtains across the hall, but that he only surmised that he went into the room beyond them.

“Well, the proposition is,” replied Mr. Dorsey, “that Frank gave a glance at the girl’s body and turned away. He wanted to get out of the sight of the officers.”

“The evidence does not show that,” replied Mr. Rosser.

“Well, I won’t quibble with you; I’ll throw you that sop,” flung back the solicitor, and turned to discuss another part of Frank’s statement.

The Actions of a Guilty Man.

“Gentlemen,’” he said, “I tell you that on that Saturday night, after he had murdered the little girl, Frank’s actions in trying to break up the card party, were the actions of a guilty man. That laughter when he went into the room and showed the guests a funny story was the laughter of a guilty man.”

“If Frank, too, was so quiet and composed in the Selig home where the murder was a matter of indifference, why was he so nervous before the officers? Why was he so nervous when he tried to run the elevator that Sunday morning?”

“Frank says,” continued Mr. Dorsey, “’ I went to the office and looked on the payroll and saw that a girl named Mary Phagan really did work there and that she was due to have been paid $1.20,’ and Frank might have added, ‘I followed her back into the metal room when she came for that money and when she refused my proposals, I struck her and then I choked her with that cord to save my reputation.’”

Mr. Dorsey then gave a minute description of the blackened and dirt-covered condition of the girl’s face and body and declared that Frank in the casual glance he gave her that Sunday morning could never have identified her as the girl he had paid off the day before.

Did Detectives Lie?

“Do you believe that Rogers and Black, who have no interest in this case, other than to see justice done, would have perjured themselves in order to hang this man?” he asked the jury.

“Do you believe that Starnes has perjured himself, too? Well, Starnes tells you that when he called up Frank and told him he was sending an auto for him that Frank asked if there had been a fire, or if Newt Lee had reported anything wrong, but that nothing was about a tragedy. When Black and Rogers met Frank at his house they tell us he asked right away if there had been a tragedy, and we know that later he tried to claim that Starnes had mentioned this in the talk over the telephone. It was merely Frank’s guilty knowledge that made him mention tragedy.”

“Then Lee says that when Frank called him up that Saturday night, a thing he had never done before, Frank did not ask if Gantt had gone and did not mention Gantt’s name, but asked if anything had happened at the factory—if anything had happened.”

“Frank tells us that he asked about Gantt’s being there.”

“You can’t tell me, gentlemen of the jury, that with all these things piled up against this man, that there is nothing but prejudice and perjury in this case.”

“You remember that Frank made Lee go upstairs with Gantt that Saturday afternoon, and even Lee would not let Gantt into the factory, until Frank consented. Lee was true to his orders.”

“Now, why did Frank want to keep Gantt out of that factory, unless it was that he did not want Gantt around where he might talk to Mary Phagan at the time when he was plotting her downfall?”

“Would you convict this man on this and on that? No, but you can weave a rope out of all these strands that will send him to the gallows. No one of these strands would do that, but all together they make such a strong case that there is no room for reasonable doubt; no room for any doubt.”

“Frank says in his first affidavit that he stayed in his office during certain hours that Saturday. He did not know the time that his own detective, Harry Scott, had found little Monteen Stover and been told by the girl that she had gone into the office at 12:05, and found no one there.”

“Then Frank, seeing the importance, declared that he might have stepped out of the office for some little errand and then forgotten about it.”

Pays Tribute to Scott.

Mr. Dorsey turned aside here to pay a tribute to Harry Scott, and in it, he was careful to pay no tribute to the other Pinkertons. A moment later he accused the others of “running with the hare instead of the hounds.”

“Scott asked Frank if he was in his office from the time he came back until Mary Phagan came, and he said yes, and then Scott asked if he was there from 12 o’clock until Mary Phagan came, and he  declared he was, and then Scott asked him if he was in his office all the time from the occasion when he went upstairs after Mrs. White, until he left for lunch, and again he answered yes.”

“It was only when Frank realized that the little Stover girl had come up there and he was not there, that he tried to hedge by declaring that he might have gone out for a moment and not remembered it afterward.”

“Not until be recognized the wonderful truth and ability in Scott and his adherence to duty did Frank shut him out from his councils.”

“Gentlemen, you have the power to find a guilty man, innocent or guilty. No potentate is more powerful than the American jury. In the secrecy of the jury room, you can write a verdict that outrages humanity, but your consciences will control you, and only by doing your duty can you ever afterward have your own self-respect.”

The Testimony of Kelley.

 “The defense has already talked about the time element and tried to break down little George Epps because he did not have a watch, and they tried to impeach George Kenley, the motorman, because he knew the little girl, and felt down in his heart that he knew who killed her.”

“There is one state’s witness, however, against whom there has been no breath of suspicion, and he is Mr. Kelly, a street car man, who rode with Mathews that day, and who knows him, and knew the girl, and he declares that she never rode around to Hunter street as Mathews claims.”

“Mr. Rosser says he doesn’t care about the cabbage and the statements made about it. I tell you, and I don’t go back on my raising when I do, that cabbage is good food and that there is no better food than cabbage, cornbread and buttermilk.”

“It would not surprise me” he added, “if these astute gentlemen on the defense did not go out and bring in all these general practitioners they used, solely because they happened to be the family physicians of some of the jurors, and for the effect they thought it would have on you.”

Defense Makes Objection.

“That’s grossly unfair and improper,” interrupted Mr. Arnold in an appeal to Judge Roan.“

“And it’s insulting,” added Mr. Rosser; “insulting to us and to the jury.”

“I want your honor to rule that out and to reprimand the solicitor,” continued Mr. Arnold.“

“I did not say that it was a fact, but I said that it might be so and would not surprise me if it was and I’ve got a right to say that,” answered Mr. Dorsey. “The fact that they went out and got general practitioners instead of getting experts goes to show that.”

“You may state that you think such was the case, Mr. Dorsey, but not that it is,” ruled Judge Roan.

“I thought so!” shouted Solicitor Dorsey to the jury.

“Now, your honor, he’s got no right to shout, ‘I thought so.’” Mr. Arnold declared heatedly.

Judge Roan upheld the solicitor; however, ruling that he had a right to say that he had thought that he would be upheld in the former argument.

“I can’t see any other reason in the world,” continued the solicitor, “for their going out and dragging in a lot of general practitioners and surgeons instead of experts competent to testify, unless they were seeking for the effect that the testimony of their family physicians might have on some of the jurors”.

Mr. Arnold here had the court stenographer enter on the record his formal objection to the statement and the solicitor went on.

“You can’t tell me that Childs, a general practitioner, this man from Michigan, with only seven years’ experience, can put his opinion up against that of Dr. Harris, the eminent secretary of the state board of health.”

“Before you or anybody can set aside the evidence of this man, Dr. Harris, and take the opinion of the man from Michigan, or of the pathologist from Alsace-Lorraine, who did not know the name of the first step in the digestive process, you’ve got to have better evidence than was shown here.”

Attack on Hancock.

“You can’t tell me that Dr. Hancock, who saws bones for the Georgia Railway and Power company, knows more than Dr. Harris does.”  

“You can’t tell me that Olmstead, a general practitioner, knows more than does this expert in the service of the state.”

“You can’t tell me that Dr. Kendrick, popular as he is, and who tells you he has not opened a book on the subject in ten years, should be taken in preference to Dr. Harris.”

 “You can’t tell me that these men can stand up before Dr. Harris, or before Dr. Clarence Johnson, the eminent stomach specialist, who backs him up; or before Dr. George M. Niles, another stomach specialist, who also agrees with him. They can’t stand against Dr. John Funke, expert pathologist, who agrees with Dr. Harris.”

“Why, gentlemen of the jury, Hancock Is so gangrened with prejudice that when I showed him this book (The American Medical Journal) he declared it a book made up by quacks.”

“Why, Dr. Willis Westmoreland was so bitter and so prejudiced against Dr. Harris that he told us that the board of health had found him guilty of scientific dishonesty, and the records showed that they had not done any such thing, and that Dr. Westmoreland had got mad because he could not run the board and had resigned.

Nervousness Not Natural.

“Well, I want to take up the question of Frank’s nervousness again. You remember that on that afternoon of Memorial Day that Newt Lee, who had been told to come early, came back like the dutiful darky he was, and found Leo Frank washing his hands. Frank was waiting there then for Jim Conley to come and burn the body and Frank did not want Newt around, so he made Newt go out into town, and that when Newt told him he was sleepy and wanted to find a comfortable corner anywhere in the building.”

“Frank wanted to get Lee away so that when Conley came back, as he had promised he would do, they could burn the body and the police might never solve that Phagan mystery; and might never know that the girl had ever entered the factory that day.”

“You remember, too, that when Frank was going out later that he almost ran into Gantt at the door and that Lee says Frank jumped and Gantt says he was nervous. Gantt said he wanted to go up and get a pair of shoes that he had left there and Frank told him that he had seen a boy sweeping out a pair and Gantt had replied that he had left two pair and would go up and see if he could not get the other pair. You remember also that Gantt went up there and found both pair of shoes and that this very fact showed that Frank was merely making up something to keep the man from going Into the building if possible.”

“And, when Frank sent for Attorney Rosser, he wanted him because his conscience needed somebody to sustain it. He got Haas and Darley for the same reason.”

“Now, we went into the camp of the enemy to get Darley, who has told openly of Frank’s nervousness. Darley says Frank trembled like an aspen leaf. He told me when he made his affidavit that Frank was completely unstrung, but, when he got on the witness stand, he changed It to ‘almost.’”

“Frank’s nervousness was produced by one cause only, the consciousness of his infamous crime. Old man Newt Lee says that when he went back that afternoon, he found the inside door locked, something he had never found before. Newt also says that night when he went down into the basement, he found the light flickering low. Do you think for a minute that Jim Conley would have turned down that light? No. But, I tell you that Frank did it when he found Conley was not coming back to burn the body.”

“He didn’t want anyone to discover the body until he found time to dispose of It.”

“It was fear pulling at his heartstrings, fear and remorse. Spectral shadows flitted before him—shades of the body, the prison, this trial, the gallows, a murderer’s grave.”

Leaving Conley Out.

“You may leave Jim Conley entirely out of this case and you still have a course of conduct that shows this man’s guilt.” 

“Is Dalton a low-down character? If so, isn’t he then just the kind of man a person like Frank would consort with when his dual character was predominant.”

“I tell you that today he is a man of utter integrity, although he may, at times, be tempted to step aside with a woman who has fallen as low as Daisy Hopkins.”

“We sustained him by scores of witnesses, good and substantial men. We corroborated the statement that he had been seen to go into the factory with women. We corroborated Dalton almost in whole.”

“Lawyer Rosser says he would give so much to know who dressed up Jim Conley. If you, Mr. Rosser, had wanted to know half so much about Jim Conley being dressed up as you did to find faults with Dalton’s past, you could have learned very easily.”

Why Conley Was in Jail.

“Let’s see something about what William Smith, Jim Conley’s attorney, has set up about the rule which Judge Roan gave in regard to Conley’s imprisonment. The police, be it understood, may be no better than the sheriff of our county, but they are just as good.”

“Smith says that Conley, in the police station, is perfectly safe from a standpoint of physical welfare, and that, under such imprisonment, is far safer. No one has been allowed to see him. He has been protected from physical harm and false claims. He says that plans have been laid detrimental to the carrying out of justice so far as Conley is concerned.”

“Sufficient inside guards were not provided in the Tower. Only one man was paid to guard the entire five stories which contain twenty cell blocks. Friends of Frank were allowed to pour into the jail in a steady stream, many of whom were admitted indiscriminately into Conley’s cell. Newspaper men and others say, Smith, was admitted constantly in Conley’s cell. One man offered sandwiches and liquor to the negro.”

“Our proof of general bad character sustains Jim Conley. Our proof of general bad character as to lasciviousness sustains Jim Conley.”

“Their failure to cross-examine our character witnesses sustains him. Frank’s relations with Rebecca Carson sustains him. Your own witness, Miss Jackson, sustains him. Miss Kitchens, of the fourth floor, sustains him.”

“Lemmie Quinn, their dear Lemmie, sustains him. Daisy Hopkins and Dalton sustain him. The blood spots, the statement of Holloway and Boots Rogers relative to the open elevator box sustain him. Albert McKnight and Minola McKnight’s repudiated affidavit sustain him.”

“The existence of the notes sustains him. No negro in history of the negro race ever wrote a note or letter to cover up his crime.”

“The diction of the notes in ‘did’ and ‘done’ sustain him.”

Attorney Rosser entered an objection to this statement, arguing that in many places Conley had used the word ‘did’ in his statement.

“I have heard Conley’s whole statement and I say the jury has heard that every time it was put to him, he used the word ‘done’ instead of ‘did.’ I want to see the physiognomy of the man who took these notes. I also want his original notes.”

Judge Harvey J. Parry, the expert stenographer who had taken most of Conley’s statement, stated that the character for “did” is so different from that “done.” That it would have been impossible for the stenographer to have made a mistake.

“Very well, then,” said the solicitor, “you have said in your own argument Mr. Rosser that one thing a negro would do under any circumstances would be to absorb the words and expressions of a white man.”

“Jim Conley is sustained by Frank’s statement relating to his relatives in Brooklyn.”

“When Jim was on the stand, Rosser questioned him about Mincey. Where is this Mincey?  Echo answers: ‘Where?’ These men knew his perjuring, trying was so diabolical. It would have sickened the jury’s mind. The absence of Mincey is a powerful support of Jim Conley’s story.”

“Every circumstance in this case that this man killed this girl! Extraordinary? Yes! But as true as the fact that Mary Phagan is dead.”

“She died a noble death. Without a splotch or blemish upon her, a martyr to the virtue she protected the extent of death in saving it from her employer.”

“Your honor, I have done my duty — I have no apologies to make. There will be but one verdict, guilty, guilty, guilty.”

There was a melodious blast of noon whistles. The courtroom was still. The whistles rang out over a working city at the exact. hour Mary Phagan several weeks ago stepped into the pencil factory to her death. The solicitor’s speech was done.

* * *

Atlanta Constitution, August 26th 1913, “As Bells Tolled, Dorsey Closed Magnificent Argument Which Fastened Crime on Frank,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

Atlanta Constitution
August 26th, 1913

WAITS WITH WIFE IN TOWER FOR NEWS FROM COURTROOM; FRIENDS TELL HIM VERDICT

“I Am as Innocent Today as I Was One Year Ago,” He Cries—“The Jury Has Been Influenced by Mob Law”— “I Am Stunned by News,” Declares ‘Rabbi Marx, One of Prisoner’s Closest Friends—Defense Plans to Carry Case to Supreme Court in Order to Secure New Trial—Judge Roan Will Defer Sentence For a Few Days.

OVATION FOR JURY AND SOLICITOR GIVEN BY CROWD WAITING ON STREET

Judge Roan Thanks Jurymen for Services During Four Long, Hard Weeks, and Tells Members He Hopes They Will Find Their Families Well—Courtroom Was Cleared by Order of Judge Before Jury Was Brought in to Give Its Verdict—“’I’m Sorry for Frank’s Wife and His Mother,” Says Solicitor Dorsey.

 Leo M. Frank, superintendent of the National Pencil factory; president of the B’nai B’rith, graduate of Cornell university, student of literature, and until recently regarded as a man of unblemished character and reputation, and a leader among his people, has been declared guilty of the murder of Mary Phagan, a 13-year-old employee of the factory which Frank is the head.

At 4 minutes to 5 o’clock, a jury of his peers filed slowly into the courtroom, which for four weeks has been the scene of the greatest legal battle in the history of the state.

The room had been cleared of the morbidly curious who for days have listened to the fierce fight for and against the young man. Only the newspaper men, Sheriff Mangum, his deputies, Solicitor Dorsey and Frank Hooper, a few lawyers and some close personal friends of the defendant were in the room.

VERDICT WAS EASY TO READ.

On the face of each juror was the drawn look of men who had been compelled, through duty, to do an awful thing—to consign a fellow creature to the gallows. There was no mistaking that look. The strongest of the men shook as if some strange ailment had stricken them.

It took no student of human nature to read that the verdict was the ultimate one of guilt.

A hush fell over the courtroom. The scraping of a chair across the floor, the rustle of a fan, the shuffling of a foot would have been welcome sounds. The silence was fearsome.

Slowly, with voice that trembled, Fred Winburn, foreman of the jury, read the verdict.

Immediately there was the hustle and bustle of reporters and strident voices calling out “guilty” over the telephones to Atlanta’s three newspapers.

The sound reached the street below and a shout went up from the waiting mob outside.

The end had come to the longest criminal trial on record in this state.

JUDGE THANKS THE JURY.

Just after the ballot was polled Judge Roan said:

“Gentlemen, I am now taking leave of you. You have been here for a month, and it has been a hard and trying time for all of us.

“Gentlemen, I want to thank you for your faithful service and consideration of all details in this most arduous case.”

The judge’s voice broke at this point, but bravely collecting his composure, he continued:

“Gentlemen, I hope you find your families well.”

Leo M. Frank was not in the courtroom.

Luther Rosser, Reuben Arnold or Herbert Haas, attorneys for the defense, were not present when the verdict was read. Lunch was in his residence, recuperating from the weeks of terrific strain undergone in their masterful fight. They were represented by Stiles Hopkins, a member of Rosser’s firm, and Luther Z. Rosser, Jr., son of the attorney.

The verdict was reached at 3:39 o’clock and was read in court at 4:56 o’clock.

FRANK HEARS FATE IN TOWER.

Over in the Tower, oblivious of his fate, sat Leo M. Frank, his arm around his faithful wife. His presence in court had been waived.

When, some three-quarters of an hour later, he learned the news, he bore up with fortitude. To a friend he said:

“My God! Even the jury was influenced by mob law.”

“I am as innocent as I was one year ago.”

His wife swooned away when she heard the awful news.

Judge Roan, will not pass the death sentence on Frank for some days. He has not definitely decided when.

Attorneys Arnold and Rosser will make a motion for a new trial on statutory grounds, and prior to the making of this motion, sentence will be passed.

Judge Roan stated that he would not pronounce sentence until public feeling was more calm.

While the jury was out nearly four hours and each and every member was pledged to secrecy, it is definitely known that only two ballot were taken and that the verdict was reached in a comparatively short time.

BIG CROWD ON STREETS WAITS FOR THE VERDICT.

When the crowd that filled the courtroom was driven out Monday afternoon on the order of Judge Roan, it flowed to the streets to await the verdict, increasing in size as the minutes passed.

A veritable honeycomb of humanity spread over the section from Whitehall to Central avenue, on Hunter street, and from Alabama to Mitchell on Pryor. Men and women clung to the walls of buildings and sat in doorways.

Windows were crowded with women and girls and children. It was as though a street audience had gathered to watch an eventful procession. The shrill orders of the mounted policemen arose over the hum of the crowd.

A knot of men clustered around the pressroom, the windows of which front Hunter street, just opposite the new courthouse building. As the reporters at the telephone shouted the verdict to their offices, the word came through the windows. It was received with a shout.

The cry of guilty took winged flight from lip to lip. It traveled like the rattle of musketry. Then came a combined shout that rose to the sky. Pandemonium reigned. Hats went into the air. Women wept and shouted by turns.  

GREAT OVATION ACCORDED SOLICITOR GENERAL DORSEY.

As Solicitor General Hugh Dorsey appeared in the doorway of the courthouse, while the crowd yelled its reception of the Frank verdict, there came a mighty roar.

As expressed by one aged man, whose wrinkled face and empty sleeve proclaimed service in the days of civil strife, and who had stood in the mob to hear the verdict, “It was kinder like ‘Dixie’ ringing out in a place where you ain’t known.”

The solicitor reached no further than the sidewalk. While mounted men rode like Cossacks through the human swarm, three muscular men slung Mr. Dorsey on their shoulders and passed him over the heads of the crowd across the street to his office.

With hat raised and tears coursing down his cheeks, the victor in Georgia’s most noted criminal battle was tumbled over a shrieking throng that wildly proclaimed its admiration. Few will live to see another such demonstration.

Mr. Dorsey was carried in the elevator to his office, where he dropped limply in a seat, exhausted, worn completely out by strain and exertion. Friends besieged him. The stairway leading to the floor on which his office is situated was lined with men and women.

A Constitution reporter asked a statement.

“I feel sorry for his wife and mother,” were his only words. He had nothing to say about the outcome, about the bitter fight that had been waged, nothing about the prospects of a new trial. His sympathy was for the two women who had been dealt a blow as mortal as the courts had dealt their son and husband.”

MOTION FOR A NEW TRIAL WILL BE MADE VERY SOON,

It will probably be tomorrow—at the earliest—before sentence is passed upon Leo Frank. Judge Roan stated last night that he would give time, for feeling to diminish, before calling the convicted man to court.

That the defense will make immediate appeal for new trial was stated by Attorney Luther Z. Rosser to a Constitution reporter last night, He would make no other statement regarding the verdict. Statutory grounds will be the basis for the plea. Excerpts from the evidence and decisions of Judge Roan, stated the attorney, would be the grounds. 

Judge Roan will be notified of this appeal, this morning. It will be promptly carried before the supreme court for consideration. It is legal for Judge Roan to grant the new trial. It is said, however, that the request will not be made of his court.

Attorney Frank Arthur Hooper, colleague of the solicitor in Frank’s prosecution, declared Monday afternoon that he did not believe that the supreme court would either grant a new trial or reverse the jury’s verdict. It has been a fair and impartial trial, he declared, and there will be no substantial grounds on which to base such a plea. Solicitor Dorsey would not commit himself. Both Mr. Rosser and Mr. Arnold, however, seemed confident that the supreme court would act favorably upon their plea.

The sentence will be imposed in the same courtroom In which the case was tried.

* * *

Atlanta Constitution, August 26th 1913, “Frank Convicted, Asserts Innocence,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 26th, 1913

“I could not begin to tell you how glad and relieved I feel, now that it is all over.” said Mrs. J. W. Coleman, mother of Mary Phagan, talking to a Constitution reporter last night.

“For weeks I have felt that I just could not sleep another wink for thinking of that man Frank, and the possibility that he might escape the consequences of his crime. I have felt satisfied all the time that he was guilty, and the verdict of the jury is no surprise to me. They are good, noble men, and should be commended by all for doing their duty as they have done. I do not see how anyone who has read all the evidence could possibly think there is the smallest doubt as to Frank’s guilt.”

“I have not been well for the last week, and my mother also has been sick, so you see I could not attend all the sessions of the court, but I have gone as often as possible, and I have read every line regarding the progress of the trial published in the papers. I hope that they will not be hard on that Conley negro. Although he lied a great deal at first, he did turn round and tell the whole truth at last, and in my opinion, he should be let off with a light sentence.”

“The only real regret I feel about the entire trial is that I was unable to attend court this afternoon, and shake hands with each member of the Jury and with Judge Roan, I will take the first opportunity of seeing every one of them and thanking them for the patient, careful consideration they have shown to everything connected with the trial any way.”

* * *

Atlanta Constitution, August 26th 1913, “Glad and Relieved Trial is Over; No Doubt of Leo Frank’s Guilt,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

Atlanta Constitution
August 26th, 1913

LEO FRANK’S LIFE HISTORY.

The following chronological history of the life of Leo Max Frank is taken from his statement to the jury, made Monday, August 18, 1913:

April 17, 1884, born in Paris, Texas.

July, 1884, taken by parents to live in Brooklyn, New York.

June, 1902, graduated from Pratt Institute, a Brooklyn high school.

September, 1902, entered Cornell university, Ithaca, New York. 

June, 1906, graduated from Cornell.   

July, 1906, accepted position as draftsman with B. F. Sturtevant company, of High Park, Mass.

January, 1907, became testing engineer and draftsman for the National Meter company, of Brooklyn.

October, 1907, came to Atlanta to confer with friends here about establishment of a pencil company.

December, 1907, went to Europe to study the pencil business.

August, 1908, returned from Germany and came directly to Atlanta, where he has remained ever since, as superintendent of the National Pencil factory.

November, 1910, married to Miss Lucille Selig, daughter of Mr. and Mrs. Emil Selig, and went to live with his wife’s parents at 68 East Georgia avenue.

April 26, 1913, paid off Mary Phagan at the factory office,

April 27, 1913, notified early in the morning by officers to come to his factory. Visited morgue and saw the girl’s body and then went to factory.

April 28, 1913, gives first statement to detectives at police station.   

April 29, 1913, arrested on suspicion of the crime.

May 8, 1913, bound over by the coroner’s jury on charge of murder of Mary Phagan and taken to the Tower.

May 24, 1913, indicted by the Fulton grand Jury for the murder.

July 28, 1913, his trial begins.

August 18, 1913, makes statement to jury.

August 25, 1918, found guilty.

* * *

Atlanta Constitution, August 26th 1913, “Guilty, Declares Jury,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 26th, 1913

To those who sat with pent-up excitement in the court room Monday on the last day of the Leo Frank trial, the various events called the Jury and began his charge. The various events flashed by with kaleidoscopic regularity. At the time it seemed a long wall between each picture as it flashed on the screen, but looking back on it, the spectator feels that one came after the other in much short order that the real significance of each had not been taken in before the next event was past.

Solicitor General Hugh Dorsey entered the court room promptly at 9 o’clock amid a storm of cheers on the outside and tumultuous hand-clapping in the courtroom. He began his speech and then things went on with regularity until the verdict came.

Chronological Order.

The following table shows the chronological order of the events of the Monday, up to the moment when the word reached the anxious crowd outside whose wild cheering almost drowned the voice of the solicitor as he went through the formality of polling the jury.

9 a.m.—Dorsey renewed his speech.

12 noon—Dorsey concluded.

12:05 p.m.—Attorney Arnold requested that the jury leave the room, and then made a motion for a mistrial on account of the popular demonstration from time to time. Judge Roan, after the Jury had left the room, announced this would be taken up after he bad charged the jury. He then recalled the jury and began his charge.

12:48 p.m.—Judge Roan ends his charge. Jury goes to dinner.

1 p.m.—Judge Roan denies motion for mistrial.

2 p.m.—Jury goes to room to deliberate.

2:35 p.m.—Documents In case are brought to jury and actual deliberation starts.

3:35 p.m.—Jury reaches verdict, and sends deputy to notify Judge Roan.

Confers With Attorneys.

4 p.m.—Judge Roan returns from lunch and retires to anteroom where he confers with Attorneys Hooper and Stephens, of the prosecution.

4:30 p.m.—Sheriff Mangum from the bench orders court room cleared of all but officials and newspaper men.

4:45 p.m.—The last spectator leaves and the doors are locked. The sheriff then warns those remaining that no demonstration will be allowed.

4:50 p.m.—Judge Roan enters the room and takes his seat on the bench.

4:55 p.m.—Solicitor Hugh Dorsey enters.

4:58 p.m.—Jury enters.

5 p.m.— Foreman F.E. Winburn reads verdict—”Guilty.”

5:05 p.m.—In a voice through which sobs are breaking, the solicitor begins the formal polling of the jury.

* * *

Atlanta Constitution, August 26th 1913, “Here is the Chronological Order of Final Day of Frank’s Trial,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 26th, 1913

Chief Newport Lanford made the following statement Monday night in talking with a Constitution reporter:

“It is very gratifying to the members of my department that the jury, after their undoubtedly careful deliberation, found Frank guilty. I am not in the least surprised, nor do I think are any of the detectives, who have been associated with me in this case.”

“Frank was given one of the fairest trials it has ever been my lot to figure in. A body of twelve honorable gentlemen of high standing in the community have found him guilty, as charged, of the murder of Mary Phagan, and I am of the opinion that nearly everyone who is familiar with the case believes him guilty.”

“We, the other detectives and myself, have worked very hard on the case and have been untiring in our efforts to get at the truth regarding this terrible crime. We have been severely condemned by a few persons, most of whom are unfamiliar with the case, and with police methods of obtaining evidence, for the manner in which the city detectives have handled the Frank case, but the verdict rendered by the jury comes as a complete vindication of our department. In my opinion, and we feel that we have received the greatest reward possible, namely, the conviction of the man responsible for the little Phagan girl’s death.”

* * *

Atlanta Constitution, August 26th 1913, “Leo Frank Received Fair Trial Declares Chief Newport Lanford,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

Atlanta Constitution
August 27th, 1913

Motion for New Trial Made and Hearing Set for October 4, 1913, Thus Making It Certain Prisoner Will Get Delay.

NEWT LEE IS RELEASED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

Leo Frank Tells Judge That He Is Innocent, but That His Case Is in the Hands of Counsel.

Leo M. Frank is sentenced to be hanged on Friday, October 10, 1913. This was the date set yesterday morning by Judge Leonard Strickland Roan, when the man convicted of the murder of little Mary Phagan was brought before him to be sentenced on Tuesday, August 26. The fact that the man’s attorneys immediately made motion for a new trial and that Judge Roan set this hearing for October 4 makes it certain that Frank will not hang on the date set.

Should Judge Roan, after a hearing, grant a new trial, the execution would be postponed; should he refuse it, the execution would be postponed while the matter went through the higher courts.

With the sentencing of Frank came a court order, secured by Attorneys Graham and Chappell, giving freedom to Newt Lee, negro nightwatchman for the National Pencil factory, of which Leo Frank was superintendent. The negro had been in custody since 3 o’clock on the morning of Sunday, April 27 when officers came at his call and found the dead girl’s body in the factory basement.

Conley Still in Tower.

James Conley, the negro sweeper, who testified that he aided Frank in disposing of the body and whose story the jury believed, is still in jail, as an accessory after the fact by his own confession. The maximum punishment for Conley is three years, and it is expected that he will be indicted in short order, and enter a formal plea of guilty. It is believed that he will be given less than the maximum, as is often done where a person turns state’s witness.

When Frank was called upon Tuesday morning by the sentencing judge for any reason why a sentence of death should not be pronounced upon him, he reaffirmed his statement of innocence.

“Your honor, I say now, as I have always said, that I am innocent; further than that my case is in the hands of counsel.” These were the words the man spoke and he looked directly at the judge as he spoke.

Very few persons were present when the sentence was passed. Judge Roan sat in his regular courtroom in the Thrower building, instead of in the civil division of the courthouse, where the trial was held, and not over 50 people were present as spectators.

Mrs. Lucille Frank Not Present.

Not even the convicted man’s wife was present. She had heard of the fact that sentence was to be pronounced and was rushing to the courthouse when the words were pronounced by the judge.

As the prisoner in the custody of Deputy Sheriffs John H. Owen, George Brodnax and T.A. Burdette, was being taken back to the Tower, Mrs. Frank, the wife, came up in an automobile. The two met in front of the Thrower building. The wife greeted her husband with a smile and then followed him to the jail, where she threw her arms around him and kissed him repeatedly.

Solicitor General Hugh M. Dorsey was not present at the sentencing, and neither was Frank A. Hooper, special attorney who aided him in the trial. The state was represented by E. A. Stephens, assistant to the solicitor. All three of the defendant’s attorneys were present and had a conference with Judge Roan in his chambers shortly before the sentencing. It was then that the judge was given informal notice of the motion for a new trial.

Attorneys Luther Z. Rosser, Reuben R. Arnold and Herbert Haas are all confident that Frank will get a new trial.

Statutory Grounds Given.

In making their motion for a new trial, attorneys for Leo Frank set forth statutory grounds and at an early date will file the real motion as at amendment to the present one.

The motion as filed Tuesday sets forth: that the verdict of guilty was contrary in the evidence; that the verdict was contrary to the law; that it was contrary to the weight of law, and that the court, after overruling motion of the defense, allowed certain testimony, which was relative to other crimes not mentioned in the bill of indictment.

The last mentioned part of the motion will be the principal one on which the amended motion will be made. It refers to the testimony of Conley in which he charged perversion on the part of the young superintendent and also declared that on many previous occasions he had acted as “lookout” for him at the factory.

Leo Frank’s cell was a mecca for visitors yesterday.  Friends came to the jail in crowds, appearing as early as daybreak and as late as 10 o’clock at night. Even when he went to the courthouse to receive the sentence of death, he was accompanied by friends.

Both his mother and wife came to the Tower during the morning. He seemed cheerful. The wife plainly slowed the effect of the terrible strain which she had undergone during the latter days of the trial.

When the trio emerged from the room, both women kissed the prisoner goodbye and left the Tower. They were accompanied by friends and neighbors who left with them. Frank was sent back to his cage and locked in. He occupies an entire cell block in ward 3.

Statement by Defense.

Reuben Arnold and family left for the ford Springs, where they go to spend a month’s vacation.

Shortly before leaving the city, Mr. Arnold conferred with Attorney Luther Z. Rosser. The result was a short statement given out to the newspapers in which the counsel for the defense declared it would have taken a jury of Stoics to have given Frank, a fair and impartial trial.

The statement was:

“We deem it not amiss to make a short statement at the attorneys of Leo M. Frank to the public:

“The trial which has just occurred and which has resulted in Mr. Frank’s conviction was a farce and not in any way a trial. In saying this we do not make the least criticism of Judge Roan, who presided. Judge Roan is one of the best men In Georgia and is an able and conscientious judge.

“The temper of the public mind was such that it invaded the courtroom and invaded the streets and made itself manifest at every turn the jury made; and it was just as impossible for this jury to escape the effects of this public feeling as if they had been turned loose and had been permitted to mingle with the people.”

“In doing this we are making no criticism of the jury. They were only men and unconsciously, this prejudice rendered any other verdict impossible.”

“It would have required a jury of Stoics, a jury of Spartans, to have withstood this situation.”

“The time ought to come when this man will get a fair trial and we profoundly believe it will.” 

“The final judgment of the American people is a fair one. It is sometimes delayed in coming, but it comes.”

“We entered into this case with the profound conviction of Mr. Frank’s innocence. The result has not changed our opinion. Every step of the trial has intensified and fortified our profound conviction of his innocence.”

Signed,

“REUBEN ROSE ARNOLD,” and “LUTHER ZEIGLER ROSSER.”

* * *

Atlanta Constitution, August 27th 1913, “Frank Sentenced on Murder Charge to Hang Oct. 10,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 27th, 1913

By Sidney Ormond

The Frank trial is a matter of history. Solicitor General Hugh Manson Dorsey and his wonderful speech, which brought the case to a close, form the subject matter for countless discussions among all classes of folk in all sorts of places—on the street corners, in clubs, newspaper offices, at the courthouse and wherever two lawyers chance to get together for an exchange of words.

Beyond all doubt, Hugh Dorsey is the most talked-of man in the state of Georgia today. The widespread interest in the Frank case caused all eyes from Rabun Gap to Tybee Light to be centered on this young man, who, up to a few months ago, was little heard of outside of the county of Fulton.

The Frank case has been to Atlanta and the state—in fact, several adjacent states—what the Becker case was to New York and the country at large.

Made Thorough Probe.

When Herman Rosenthal was killed by a gang of gunmen at the Hotel Metropole, District Attorney Whitman was unheard of outside of New York. Today he is a national figure. The same thing holds true of Solicitor Hugh Dorsey, in a lesser degree.

Incidentally, there is another point of comparison. When Rosenthal was murdered, Whitman plunged into the case and personally directed the investigation which led up to the arrest and subsequent conviction of the murderers. No one criticized him for his activity in the case. Hugh Dorsey did the same thing. The Frank case was one of far too much importance to be bungled. It was worthy of the best efforts of every court official sworn to uphold the enforcement of the law.

The city was in a state of mental stress. Lines were closely drawn. It was no time for mistakes of judgment. Dorsey knew this. He felt the responsibility of his position and he entered into the work of clearing up the awful mystery with but one end in view—that justice should prevail.  Unlike Whitman, he met criticism in some quarters—a criticism which was unmerited. He did what he felt to be his duty, that and nothing more; and it is certain that, had he felt Frank innocent, he never would have sought his indictment by the grand jury.

During the progress of the Frank trial, a close friend of the unfortunate young man said, in a tone that expressed some surprise:

“I actually believe Hugh Dorsey thinks Frank guilty.”

Thought Him Guilty.

And he was right. Anyone who knows Hugh Dorsey has never for one instant doubted that all along he has been firmly convinced of Frank’s guilt. Hugh Dorsey is no head-hunter—no savage thirsting for the blood of innocent men. He is human, with human sympathies—tender as a woman at times, but stern as a Spartan when duty calls.

It was the call of duty that caused him to probe the murder of little Mary Phagan; it was the same call which caused him to prosecute the man he thought guilty of the murder.

Don’t think for one instant that Hugh Dorsey did not suffer during the progress of the trial. He suffered as seldom a man is called upon to suffer. It is hard enough to call upon a jury to convict a man of murder; it is doubly hard to do so in the presence of the man’s wife and mother. During the last half hour of his speech it was nothing short of torture for him to face these faithful, devoted women and ask that the law which condemns men to death, be invoked.  

When he said afterward that he felt for the wife and mother, he meant every word. He is not a man given to the parody of emotion—men who feel deeply seldom are.

But back to the trial of the case. If it is given to one, to view the case without prejudice—and there are many such in Atlanta—the heroic task which Hugh Dorsey had before him is apparent.

First, Luther Rosser was employed. Then Rube Arnold entered the lists for the defense. No more formidable array of legal counsel could have been found in the south. Extremes in method, manner and temperament, equally well versed in the law and experienced in its practice, they formed a bulwark that few men would care to attack.

The knowing ones said:

“Well, Hugh Dorsey will get his. They’ll chew him up and spit him out!”

Did they? Not so you could notice it. For once Luther Zeigler Rosser met his match. For once Reuben Rose Arnold crossed swords with a man who caused him to break ground.

Fought Them Every Step.

They tried all sorts of tactics. They used sarcasm; they interrupted, they hammered and they hauled, but it was to no purpose. Dorsey met them at every turn, countering here, slamming heads there. He fought them any fashion they pleased to try but his speech was the thing that proved him master. It was a masterpiece. No such speech has ever been heard in the Fulton County courthouse, and the words are measured, as they are written. It was, as Burton Smith expressed it, worthy of Bob Toombs in the first-flush of vigorous manhood. It was clean-cut, convincing, forceful. It carried conviction with every sentence. It proved, if proof were needed, that Hugh Dorsey is a lawyer of whom any man need have fear. The speech will live long in the memory of those who heard it, no matter what opinion may be entertained of the guilt or innocence of Leo M. Frank.

* * *

Atlanta Constitution, August 27th 1913, “Hugh Dorsey’s Great Speech Feature of the Trial,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)