Tag Archives: Atlanta Constitution

Leo Frank Takes Stand Again Despite Objection of Dorsey

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 21st, 1913

In concluding the defense’s case Attorney Arnold stated to the court that there were two or three matters which had developed to which he considered the defendant had a right to make a statement in rebuttal.

A protest was made by the solicitor, but was overruled.

Frank took the stand following the judge’s decision. He was more vehement in tone than on the day of his statement, but was brief, concise and straight to the point. Ha occupied the chair only a few moments.

“The statement of the Turner boy,” he said, looking at the jury, “is utterly false. The girls who say they saw me talking to Miss Phagan and that I called her ‘Mary’ are mistaken. It is completely false that I went into a dressing room with Miss Carson. She is a lady of unblemished character so far as I know.”

With which he resumed his seat.

* * *

Atlanta Constitution, August 21st 1913, “Leo Frank Takes Stand Again Despite Objection of Dorsey,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

Railway Employee Swears Car Reached Center of City at 12:03

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 21st, 1913

Several employees of the Georgia Railway and Power company were introduced by the prosecution Wednesday to testify as to the time of the arrival of the English avenue street car at Broad and Marietta streets on the day of the murder and to the fact that cars occasionally did arrive ahead of time.

A witness was also introduced to show that Mary Phagan was not on the English avenue car after it turned into Broad street from Marietta, although the men in charge of the car had testified that she got off the car at Broad and Hunter streets. He stated that the car arrived at Broad and Marietta streets at 12:03 o’clock.

Henry A. Hoffman, an inspector for the Georgia Railway and Power company, testified that while he did not know the time of the arrival of the car that Mary Phagan was on on the day of the murder, he did know that the same car on other occasions had come in ahead of scheduled time.

Motorman Mathews of the English avenue car, hand testified that the car was due to arrive at Broad and Marietta streets at 12:07½. Inspector Hoffman testified that there was no such schedule and that the car was due to arrive at 12:07 sharp.

Continue Reading →

Testimony of Dr. Harris Upheld By Noted Stomach Specialists

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 21st, 1913

Dr. Clarence Johnson, when called to the stand Wednesday morning as the first witness, designated the deductions of Dr. H. T. Harris in regard to the time of Mary Phagan’s death after eating as scientific statements based on scientific facts.

When recalled to the stand Dr. Johnson, who is a noted stomach specialist, and who testified on Tuesday afternoon, was asked the direct question about what he would conclude from conditions such as Dr. Harris had reported finding in Mary Phagan’s body. He said he would say the girl had died within an hour after eating.

It was not until Solicitor Hugh Dorsey had made a bitter fight that Judge L. S. Roan allowed him to ask Dr. Johnson the particular question which bolstered up Dr. Harris, and when the trial judge granted it he stated that it was not a right of the state’s, but that the matter was at his discretion, and that he was giving the solicitor the benefit of it.

The defense claimed that to allow Dr. Johnson to tell what he thought of the Harris deductions would be to open the entire matter, and the solicitor declared that he had the right to reply to the attack the defense had made on Dr. Harris.

Continue Reading →

Testimony of Hollis Assailed by Witness

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 21st, 1913

J. B. Reed, a tilelayer, told of a talk with W. T. Hollis, a conductor, who, he declared, had expressed sorrow at having brought Mary Phagan into town on her last trip, the day she was slain. Hollis, just previously, had denied making such a statement.

“Do you know W. T. Hollis,” the solicitor asked the witness.

“Yes.”

“Ever talk with him about Mary Phagan riding his car into town?”

“Yes, on Monday following the murder. I got on his car at Broad and Hunter streets, and he told me that it made him feel sad to think that he was the last man to bring her into town on the day she was killed. He said a boy named Epps had got on the car and had ridden into town with her.”

He was not put under cross-examination.

HE SAW DALTON ENTER FACTORY WITH WOMEN

A mild sensation was sprung in the courtroom when D. B. Maynard, a salesman for the Swift company, went to the stand, testifying that he had seen C. B. Dalton go into the pencil plant on Saturday afternoons with women.

“When did you see Dalton go into the factory with a woman?” he was asked by Dorsey.

“In July, 1912, on Saturday afternoon,” was his reply.

* * *

Atlanta Constitution, August 21st 1913, “Testimony of Hollis Assailed by Witness,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

Starnes Tells How Affidavit From Negro Cook Was Secured

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 21st, 1913

John Starnes, prosecutor of Leo Frank, was put up to tell about the Minola McKnight affidavit.

“Did you Investigate the scuttle hole around the elevator? was Dorsey’s first question.

An objection by the defense was overruled.

“See any blood spots there?

“No.”

“Now, tell the jury about the Minola McKnight affidavit.”

Continue Reading →

Swears That Frank Prepared Sheets in Less Than Two Hours

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 21st, 1913

J. M. Gantt, who has been an important figure in the state’s case, was called during the afternoon to testify to the length of time in which he has seen Frank make out the financial sheet and to the inaccuracy of the ‘punch-clock on the second floor.

“Did you ever see Frank make out the financial sheet?” Mr. Dorsey put.

“Yes.”

“How long did it take him to make it?”

“With the data at hand, I have seen him make it out in an hour and a half.”

“About this punch-clock-—was it accurate?”

“No.”

Continue Reading →

Girls Testify to Seeing Frank Enter Dressing Room With Woman

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 21st, 1913

Following the introduction of the telegram Solicitor Hugh Dorsey began another attack on the character of Leo Frank and after a bitter wrangle secured the right to ask factory girls in regard to Frank’s character in his relations to women.

This was argued with the jury excused from the room and was the subject of a bitter fight, the state saying that when Frank on the stand had claimed himself to have always lived a virtuous life, he had opened up the way for the state to prove he was not of a virtuous character.

Judge Roan had already ruled that the state could not introduce witnesses said by the solicitor to be prepared to swear that Frank had made improper proposals to them and that this was about the same thing. Solicitor Dorsey argued that it was not and finally got the ruling in his favor. The defense entered a formal protest and had it go on record.

Continue Reading →

Frank’s Character Bad Declare Many Women and Girls on Stand

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 21st, 1913

Solicitor Dorsey makes a persistent effort Wednesday morning to show that the character of Leo Frank is anything but good. Ha laid particular stress upon his character as to his relations with women and girls, and introduced a large number of women who testified that in this respect his character was in their judgment bad.

Among those who testified merely that his character was bad without going into details were:

Mrs. Marion Dunnigan, who stated that she worked at the pencil factory two or three weeks about two years ago. She testified that Frank’s character was bad, but she did not know about the lascivious part of it.

Continue Reading →

State is Hard Hit by Judge Ruling Barring Evidence Attacking Frank

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 20th, 1913

Court Rules Out All Specific Acts of immorality Charged to Prisoner, Despite Vigorous Fight Made by Solicitor Hugh Dorsey, Who Had Called Many Witnesses to Prove His Character Bad.

DR. SAMUEL BENEDICT COMES TO THE DEFENSE OF DR. ROY F. HARRIS

State Makes Strong Effort to Show, That Minola McKnight Was Not Coerced Into Signing the Statement Which She Afterward Repudiated — Boy Says He Saw Frank With Mary Phagan.

The state was given a big setback Tuesday when Judge Roan ruled out all specific acts of immorality charged to Frank which Solicitor Dorsey was seeking to get before the jury. When the defense placed Frank’s Character to evidence, no one was more gratified than Solicitor Dorsey.

He stated that this was the thing he had hoped for all along and that he would have no difficulty in tearing it to tatters. With this in view the little Hewell girl, who has been in the Home of the Good Shepherd at Cincinnati, was sent for and is now in the city. She was but one of many by whom, he expected to establish certain sets of immorality.

If Solicitor Dorsey cannot manage to get any of this evidence before the Jury, Frank’s character, so far as testimony goes, will go unscathed.

TESTIMONY RULED OUT.

At the afternoon session Miss Nellie Wood who worked at the pencil factory two days, was placed on the stand. Ignore any questions were put to her Solicitor Dorsey stated that he wanted a ruling from Judge Roan as to the class of evidence that he would permit for the record. The jury was sent out and Solicitor Dorsey stated that he wanted to prove by the witness that on the second day she was employed at the pencil factory, Frank had made her an indecent proposal and that she had quit.

Continue Reading →

State Suffers a Severe Blow When Testimony Is Ruled Out

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Constitution
Wednesday, August 20th, 1913

Miss Nellie Wood, a former employee of the National Pencil factory, whom the state claims left there because on the second day she was there when Leo Frank got her into his office and made indecent proposals to her, was put on the stand following the McKnight negro.

After bitter wrangles with the jury out of the courtroom, Judge Roan ruled that the woman could not tell that Frank had made these proposals to her, but that all she could tell about was what she had heard others say in regard to his character before the day of the murder. It was a severe blow to the state and only came after Solicitor Dorsey and Attorney Hooper bad Invoked every point they knew to fight HH. Mr. Dorsey declared that the court had allowed the defense to ask the factory girls If Frank had ever on any occasion made Improper proposals to them and that now he refused to let the state ask the same question of the witness on the stand.

Continue Reading →

Climax of Trial Reached When Frank Faced Jury

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 19th, 1913

The climax of the Frank trial came at the afternoon session Monday, when Leo M. Frank took the stand to tell of his actions on the day of the murder.

The accused man’s statement was clear, concise and straightforward. He talked in smooth, even tones, punctuating his statement with emphatic gestures of the arms and fingers. He had more the appearance of an at attorney making a fury speech instead of an accused man making a plea for life and liberty.

It was a dramatic story, marked by the straightforward delivery of the prisoner. A hush settled over the room throughout his recital and he was able to talk in an ordinary voice and make himself heard all over the place.

The following is the first verbatim report of his statement to be published: “Now, Mr. Frank,” said Mr. Arnold, “such papers as you want to use you can come down here at any time or from time to time and get them on this table right here.”

“Before you commence your statement,” prompted the judge, “I want to read the law. In criminal procedure, the prisoner will have the right to make to the court and jury such statement in this case as he may deem proper in his defense. It shall not be under oath and shall have such force as the jury shall think right to give it. They may believe it in preference to the sworn testimony in the case. The prisoner shall not be compelled to answer any questions on cross-examination. He should feel free to decline to answer them. Now you can make such statement ns you see fit.”

“Gentlemen of the jury,” the accused man began, “in 1884, the 17th day of April, I was born in Terrell, Texas. At the age of 3 mouths my parents took me to Brooklyn, N. Y. which became my home until I came south, to Atlanta, to make my home here. I attended the public schools of Brooklyn and prepared for college In Pratt institute, Brooklyn, N. Y.”

“In the fall of 1902, I entered Cornell university, where I took the course of mechanical engineering, graduating after four years, in June, 1906. I then accepted a position as draughtsman with the B. F. Sturdevant company, of Hyde Park, Mass. After remaining with this firm for about six months I returned once more to my home In Brooklyn, where I accepted a position as testing engineer and draughtsman with the National Meter company, of Brooklyn, N. Y.

Continue Reading →

Books and Papers Put in Evidence by the Defense

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 19th, 1913

Just before the close of the morning session the defense began putting in evidence various books and papers shown from time to time during the trial. The first first thing put up was the pasteboard model of the National Pencil factory.

No objection was made lo this by the state, and Attorney Reuben Arnold explained that the model needs slight repairs, as during a “discrepancy” between two gentlemen in the anteroom one of them had been knocked through the elevator shaft.

After offering the pasteboard model Mr. Arnold put in evidence without objection from the state the following: all financial shoots of the factory from June, 1912, to April 26, 1913, and the sheets and data from which they are compiled; the letter which it is claimed Leo Frank wrote to his uncle Moses Frank, in Brooklyn on Memorial day; the record of orders received from January 10 to April 24, 1913; twelve requisitions dated April 26, 1913, and said to be In Frank’s handwriting; eight orders dated the same day and identified by H. G. Schiff and Miss Mattie Hall as being written In Frank’s handwriting; ten carbon-copy letters which Miss Hall swore Frank dictated to her on the morning of the day of the murder; page 195 of the cash book of the National Pencil company, dating from April 21 to 24; specimens of cabbage, submitted by Dr. H. T. Hancock; the four affidavits made by Jim Conley, on May 18, 24, 28 and 29 respectively; records of the various convictions against C. B, Dalton, a witness who swore to Frank’s alleged misconduct with women in his office.

Continue Reading →

Mary Phagan’s Grandmother Dies After Dreaming Girl Was Living

Posted on by

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

The Atlanta Constitution
August 18th, 1913

Mrs. A. E. Benton, grandmother of Mary Phagan, who had come to Atlanta to be present at the trial of Leo M. Frank charged with the murder of her little granddaughter, died last night at 9:40 o’clock at the home of her daughter and the dead girl’s mother Mary, J, W, Coleman, of 704 Ashby street. On the second day of the trial, grief and incessant worry over the death of her grand daughter carried Mrs. Benton to her bed, from which she was never able to rise.

During her illness she talked always of Mary and asked eagerly for any word concerning the trial. On Saturday night Mrs. Benton dreamed little dead granddaughter was living again and was in the room with her. Under that delusion she, wakened Sunday morning with words of endearment to the child upon her lips, only to remember once more the bitterness of a broken dream.

Continue Reading →

That Pinkertons Double-Crossed Police, Dorsey Tries to Prove

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 17th, 1913

With the introduction of W.D. MacWorth, the Pinkerton detective who discovered the blood spots on the first floor near the trap door and the bloody club and pay envelope nearby, came the verification of a rumor that the prosecution would try to show an attempt on the part of the Pinkertons in the employee of the National Pencil factory to double-cross the police. This came when Dorsey sought to prove that the Pinkertons had tried to conceal from the police the fact of the discovery of the club, piece of buggy whip and the pay envelope.

He was examined by Mr. Rosser.

“What is your business?”

“I am an operative with the Pinkerton Detective Agency.”

“Did you work on the Phagan case?”

“Yes, I made several searches of the factory premises.”

“Did you search the ground floor on the 15th of May? What did you find?”

“I found seven stains that resembled blood near the trap door by the elevator. Upon searching behind the radiator, I also found a piece of wrapping cord that looked as though it had been freshly cut at one end. The radiator on the side against the wall was packed with rubbish and trash. There were papers in the trash dated as early as January 13, 1913, which indicated that it had been there only a short while.”

“About six or eight inches away, I found a rolled and crumpled piece of paper. It was a pay envelope, numbered and with the letters ‘M. P.’ written on the face. In almost the same spot I found a heavy club spotted with dim stains. It was Iying in a doorway with several iron pipes”.

Not Positive About Blood.

Cross examination by Dorsey.

“Did you ever see this stick before?” He held to view a heavy butt-end of on buggy whip.”

“Yes, it was behind the front door.”

Continue Reading →

Prisoner’s Mother Questioned As to Wealth of Frank Family

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 17th, 1913

Mrs. Rae Frank, mother of Leo Frank, resumed the stand at the opening of the morning session Saturday. Under cross-examination by Solicitor Dorsey, she was forced to tell much of her business interests In Brooklyn, her home, and that of many of her relatives.

She was questioned first on direct examination by Mr. Rosser.

“Has your son, Leo Frank, any rich relatives In Brooklyn?”

“No.”

“When you opened this letter which he wrote to his uncle, where there any other papers in the envelope?”

“Yes.”

“Did you recognize the handwriting of your son?”

“Yes.”

Cross-examination by Dorsey.

“What kind of papers were in the envelope?”

Continue Reading →

Dorsey Asks Bauer Where He Spent the Dinner Recess

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 16th, 1913

R. V. Bauer, the ex-student who was on the stand undergoing cross-examination at the adjournment of the morning session took the stand at the opening of the afternoon session.

“Who have you talked with since dinner?” he was asked by the solicitor.

“Mr. Montag, Sig Gottheimer, Mr. Rosser and Mr. Arnold.”

“Where?”
“In Mr. Arnold’s office.”

“How long did you talk with him?”
“Two or three minutes.”

“What did they ask you?”
“Nothing but the facts I’ve already told you.”

“On the third Saturday in January, who did you see at the pencil factory?”
“Nobody except those I’ve been accustomed to seeing.”

“Did you see Frank?”
“Yes, he was at work at his desk.”

“Was anybody with him?”

“I don’t remember.”

“Who did you see on the fourth Saturday?”
“I don’t remember.”

“Did you see Frank?”
“Yes, he was working at his desk at usual.”

* * *

Atlanta Constitution, August 16th 1913, “Dorsey Asks Bauer Where He Spent the Dinner Recess,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

Says Frank Broke Baseball Date Shortly After Girl Was Killed

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 16th, 1913

Annie Hicks, a maid in the home of Charles Ersenbach, testified to having received a telephone call from Frank to Ersenbach, breaking a ball game engagement for the afternoon of April 26.

“Do you recall Memorial day?”
“Yes, sir.”

“Did you get a telephone message from Mr. Frank?”
“Yes, he called at 1 o’clock and said tell Charles Ersenbach that he couldn’t go to the ball game that afternoon. He stopped for a minute and said, to somebody beside him, ‘Hush, honey,’ and I supposed he was talking to his wife.”

Dorsey on cross-examination.

“How long have you been working at the Ersenbach home?”
“For two years.”

“Frank and his wife came over to the Ersenbach residence the Sunday morning after the murder?”
“Yes, sir—he came into the dining room where I was and asked me if I could get him a drink of cool water.”

“Did you hear him talk any?”
“Yes, they all talked and laughed.”

“Was he nervous?”

“No, I’ve been knowing him for a long time and I never have seen him nervous.”

“Weren’t they laughing about the little girl being murdered?”

“I don’t know.”

“You and Minola McKnight are great friends?”
“Yes, sir.”

“Has Minola ever talked to you about this affair?”
“No, I just asked her why they locked her up and she said she didn’t know.”

“When was the last time you saw Minola?”
“This morning at Mrs. Selig’s where I had dinner.”

* * *

Atlanta Constitution, August 16th 1913, “Says Frank Broke Baseball Date Shortly After Girl Was Killed,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

Still Another Office Boy Swears He Never Saw Women With Frank

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 16th, 1913

B. J. Nix, of Marietta, an office boy for Leo Frank from April to October, 1912 was the first witness, outside of those testifying to character, who was put on the stand Friday. The lad who gave his age as 19 swore that he had never seen Frank having women in his office. He stated that he left the office at 1 o’clock every other Saturday during the summer months.

“Were you ever an office boy for the National Pencil company?” was Mr. Arnold’s first question.

“Yes, sir.”

“When?”
“From April to October of last year.”

“Did you have any agreement about getting off on Saturdays?” Mr. Arnold continued.

“Yes, sir, on every other Saturday I got off at 1 o’clock and on the Saturdays between I stayed to 4 o’clock and sometimes as late as 6 o’clock.

“Were you sent out of the office much?”
“No.”

“Did you ever see Mr. Frank have women in his office?”

“No, sir.”

“Ever see him have beer in his office?”
“Yes, sir.”

Mr. Dorsey took up the cross-examination.

“Most of the Saturdays on which you did not get off at 1 o’clock you got off at 4 o’clock, didn’t you?”
“Yes, sir, most of the time.”

“You don’t undertake to say do you that that on the days you were off that Frank did not have women and beer in his office?”
“No, I can’t say that.”

“That’s all,” said the solicitor.

The witness was then excused.

* * *

Atlanta Constitution, August 16th 1913, “Still Another Office Boy Swears He Never Saw Women With Frank,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

Frank as Innocent as Angels Conley Told Her, Says Witness

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 16th, 1913

Miss Julia Fuss, a girl about 16 years old, and an employee at the National Pencil factory took the stand to testify as to Frank’s character. She not only testified that she believed the defendant’s character to be good, but that she had heard Jim Conley declare that Mr. Frank was as innocent as the angels in heaven.

Mr. Arnold asked Miss Fuss whether she had ever been in Frank’s office when anything immoral took place.

She replied that she had not.

“Do you know Jim Conley?”
“Yes.”

“Did you talk with him after the murder?”
“Yes. On Tuesday and Wednesday.”

“What conversation took place between you and Jim Conley?”

Wanted to See Newspaper.

Jim asked me to let him see a newspaper which I had there. I asked him what he thought about the case but before he answered or saw the paper he was called by Mr. Darley or somebody. On the next day he came to me again and asked me let him see the paper. This time I asked him again, ‘Jim, what do you think about the case? Do you think Frank did it?’ He said Mr. Frank is as innocent as the angels in heaven.”

Continue Reading →

Maid in Schiff Home Tells of Phone Message From Frank

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 16th, 1913

Emma Hill, a maid in the Schiff home was called to tell of a telephone message for Herbert Schiff, made by Frank on the morning of the tragedy.

“Do you remember anybody trying to call Schiff on the 26th of April?”

“Yes, sir. Somebody who sounded like a boy, rang the phone and said tell Mr. Schiff that Mr. Frank wanted him at the office to do some work.”

“What time was it?”

“It was about 11 o’clock. I woke Mr. Schiff and he said tell whoever it was at the phone that he would be there when he got up. He went back to sleep.”

Cross-examination by Mr. Dorsey.

“How long have you been at the Schiff home?”

“Seven years.”

“Why do you remember this especial Saturday?”
“Because it was Memorial day—everybody knows Memorial day.”

“Who did you first tell about this phone conversation?”
“I don’t remember.”

“Who first saw you about it?”
“Nobody but the lawyer.”

“What lawyer?”
“Herbert Haas.”

“And you never mentioned a word of it to a soul before that?”
“No, sir.”

“What did Haas say to you?”
“Nothing. He just gave me the subpoena to court.”

* * *

Atlanta Constitution, August 16th 1913, “Maid in Schiff Home Tells of Phone Message From Frank,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)