Pittsburg Witness Tells of Frank’s Standing in School

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 15th, 1913

John W. Todd, of Pittsburg, PA., purchasing agent for the Crucible Steel company, who was with Frank at Cornell university, followed Mrs. Emil Selig to the stand.

He was asked if he knew the general character of Frank while at college and replied that he did and that it was good. He was let off with no cross-examination and went over and shook hands with the defendant and his wife and mother. He then passed by the press table and shook hands with a newspaper man who formerly worked in Pittsburg. After staying a while and listening to the testimony of other witnesses and making queries about Jim Conley, Mr. Todd left the court room.

* * *

Atlanta Constitution, August 15th 1913, “Pittsburg Witness Tells of Frank’s Standing in School,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

Factory Forewoman Swears Conley Said He Was Drunk on April 26

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 15th, 1913

Miss Rebecca Carson, a forewoman in the pencil factory, who made the startling statement that Jim Conley had admitted to her that he was drunk on the Saturday of the murder was put on the stand.

“Did you see Leo Frank at any time on April 26?”

“Yes, I saw him on Whitehall street near Hunter between 2:20 o’clock and 2:25.”

“Did you speak to him?”
“Yes.”

“Did you come to the factory Monday morning following the murder?”
“Yes.”

“Did you see Frank?”
“Yes.”

“Jim Conley?”
“Yes.”

Continue Reading →

Sister of Mrs. Leo M. Frank Tells Jury About Card Game

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 15th, 1913

Mrs. A. Marcus, a sister of Mrs. Leo Frank, followed Mrs. C. F. Ursenbach, another sister. She was among those who played cards at the Selig home on April 26.

“Did Frank and his wife play cards with the rest?” Mr. Arnold asked.

“No.”

“Where were they?”
“Mr. Frank sat in the hall reading and his wife was in and out of the room.”

“What time did they go to bed?”
“Something after 10 o’clock.”

“Was Frank nervous?”
“No.”

“Anything unusual about him?”
“No.”

“You say Frank sat in the hall reading, did you?” asked Attorney Hooper on cross-examination.

“Yes,” the witness replied.

“He broke up the poker game, didn’t he?”
“No.”

Mrs. Marcus was then excused.

* * *

Atlanta Constitution, August 15th 1913, “Sister of Mrs. Leo M. Frank Tells Jury About Card Game,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

Mother-in-Law of Frank Denies Charges in Cook’s Affidavit

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 15th, 1913

Following the testimony of those who claimed to have played poker at the Emil Selig home on the night of April 26, Mrs. Selig, Leo Frank’s mother-in-law was placed on the stand and asked a number of questions about the happenings at her house on Sunday, April 27. To most of the questions from the state on cross-examination she replied that she had forgotten.

When the witness took the stand, Attorney Arnold called on the state for the affidavit which Minola McKnight, the Selig’s cook, signed at police station and later repudiated.

“Mrs. Selig,” said Mr. Arnold, “I wanted to ask you some questions about statements in this affidavit and find out if they are true.

“Is it true that there was talk in your home about the time of the murder? Leo Frank being caught with a girl at the factory and that the negro cook asked if it was a Jew girl or a Gentile and you or Mrs. Frank said it was a Gentile?”

“It is not true, there was no such conversation that I know of.”

Mrs. Selig was almost crying at this juncture of her testimony.

Continue Reading →

Many Men Swear to Good Character of Superintendent of Pencil Factory

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 15th, 1913

Classmates and Instructors at Cornell Come to Atlanta to Testify to His Clean Life While at College and to Show Their Loyalty to Old College Friend.

DORSEY ASKS REMOVAL OF LEO FRANK’S MOTHER AND WIFE FROM COURT

Judge Warns Them That Another Scene Like That of Wednesday, When Mrs. Rae Frank Denounced Solicitor, Will Result in Barring Them—Leach Proves Good Witness for the State Although Called to Testify by Defense

More witnesses were examined Thursday than on any day since the trial of Leo M. Frank began.

However, there was little adduced from the testimony that was of striking interest or that savored of the dramatic.

For the most part the day was taken up with character witnesses—men who have known Frank for years and who have volunteered to swear to his good character.

The only incident of the day that was in any way dramatic came at the morning session, when Solicitor Dorsey asked that Mrs. Rae Frank and Mrs. Leo Frank, mother and wife of the defendant, be removed from the court room. This was the result of the passionate outburst of Mrs. Rae Frank the day previous. Judge Roan gave warning that there must be no more such demonstrations.

Continue Reading →

Bitter Fight at Morning Session Over Testimony of Dr. Wm. Owen

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 14th, 1913

Dr. William Owen, physician and real estate man, followed Dr. W. S. Kendrick on the stand. By him the defense desired to show that to carry out the movements told of by Jim Conley from the time he alleges Leo Frank called upon him to help move the girl’s body until he left the factory would take much longer than Conley declared he took.

After establishing his identity, Mr. Arnold began the examination of Dr. Owen, which resulted in the argument.

“Dr. Owen, at our request you went to the factory of the National Pencil Company with others and you timed their movements as they enacted the movements as told by Conley, didn’t you?”
“Yes.”

“I object to this, your honor,” interrupted Solicitor Dorsey, “the jury [1 word illegible] how long it took by the evidence introduced and not by this man’s opinion.”

“Mr. Dorsey has not heard the facts which we desire to introduce and when he does he will see that we are not trying to introduce any man’s opinion but the actual results of his timing the moments made by men who took the parts of Mr. Frank and Conley, as Conley described in his testimony before the court,” said Mr. Arnold.

Continue Reading →

Mrs. Rae Frank, Mother of Prisoner, Denounces Solicitor Hugh Dorsey

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 14th, 1913

Mrs. Rae Frank, the mother of the prisoner, startled the courtroom shortly before 4 o’clock, when she denounced Solicitor Dorsey, when he made an attack on the character of her son.

J. Ashley Jones, a local insurance agent, was in the witness chair testifying to the moral character of the accused when the incident occurred. He was asked by Solicitor Dorsey if he had over heard of Frank taking little girls out to Druid Hills, sitting them on his lap and fondling them.

Mrs. Frank glanced furiously at the prosecutor, and rising from her chair, she shrieked.

“No, nor you either—you dog!”

Mrs. Frank Leaves Courtroom.

Deputies rushed over to where Mrs. Frank stood staring at the solicitor Herbert Haas, a relative, passed in between Attorney Rosser and the stenographer and escorted Mrs. Frank from the courtroom to a cab in which she was driven home.

Continue Reading →

More Witnesses Are Called to Blacken Dalton’s Character

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 14th, 1913

Following the putting off of the decision in regard to Dr. William Owen’s testimony, seven Gwinett county citizens were introduced to add to the thick coat of lampblack already smeared over the character of C. Burgess Dalton, the man who accuses Frank of immoral conduct in the office of the National Pencil factory.

All of the men swore that they would not believe the man on oath and only one or two of them were cross-examined by the state.

The men introduced were O. A. Nix, attorney and former member of the legislature; Samuel Craig; Robert Patterson; Robert Craig; Ed Craig; T. L. Ambrose and J. P. Byrd, well-to-do land owners.

By Samuel Craig the solicitor tried to bring out that as far as he knew Dalton’s character had been good since he last knew him, some 12 or 16 years ago, but Mr. Arnold came back at that by a final question.

“Mr. Craig,” said Mr. Arnold, “if Dalton states that he has been in the habit of taking women to a factory basement, would you consider his character good, if he were telling the truth or if he were lying?”
“I would consider it bad in either case,” the witness replied.

* * *

Atlanta Constitution, August 14th 1913, “More Witnesses are Called to Blacken Dalton’s Character,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

Lemmie Quinn is Severely Grilled by Solicitor Dorsey

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 14th, 1913

Bending his efforts to break down the testimony of Lemmie Quinn, foreman of the metal room, Solicitor Dorsey subjected the witness to a severe grilling when court reconvened at 2 o’clock yesterday afternoon.

When Quinn resumed the stand he was still under direct examination by the defense. In answer to Attorney Arnold he declared that he was still an employee of the National Pencil factory.

Solicitor Dorsey began cross-examination.

“When was it these men bled on the floor of the metal room?”

“About a year ago,” Quinn replied.

“What were their names?”

“I remember that C. P. Gilbert, who lives on Jones street, was one. I don’t remember the name of the other.”

“You noticed the spots on the floor of the dressing room on Monday after the murder?”
“Yes, it looked like blood.”

“What is the difference between those spots and the spots made by Gilbert’s bleeding?”
“The spots by the dressing room were darker.”

“Could gasoline have caused that.”

“I don’t know.”

“Where were you at noon on April 26?”
“At the factory.”

Continue Reading →

Financial Sheets Introduced At Frank Trial in Afternoon

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 14th, 1913

The financial sheets which experts declared required from three to three and a half hours to compile were introduced in evidence after Oscar Pappenheimer, a stockholder in the National Pencil factory was examined.

Mr. Pappenheimer testified that he had been a stockholder in the company since 1910.

“Have you been getting comparative sheets from Frank since 1910?” Attorney Arnold asked.

“Yes, sir.”

“Where have you been in the habit of receiving them?”
“Before deliveries of mail stopped on Sunday I invariably found the report in my mail box on Sunday morning. After that I received it every Monday with the first mail.”

“Did you get a sheet for the week ending April 24 the following Monday morning?”
“Yes, sir.”

“Have you received any reports since April 24?”

“No, sir.”

The defense offered the sheets from January 1912 to April 1912 inclusive and they were admitted over the objection of Solicitor Dorsey.

* * *

Atlanta Constitution, August 14th 1913, “Financial Sheets Introduced at Frank Trial in Afternoon,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

Former Office Boy Saw No Women With Frank on Thanksgiving Day

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 14th, 1913

Frank Paine, formerly an office boy for the National Pencil company and who claims to have been working there on Thanksgiving day of last year, was placed on the stand following the introduction of the three character witnesses.

The lad stated that he and Herbert G. Schiff were at the factory on the morning of Thanksgiving day, and that Schiff sent him to the top floor to help Jim Conley straighten out some boxes, which were cluttered around there. He declared that Conley left about 10:20 and then he left at 11 o’clock or thereabouts.

That he did not see Conley in the hallway when he left was another statement made by the lad who further declared that he had never known Frank to have women in his office or to have liquor there.

“Did you spend your time in the office?” Attorney Frank Hooper asked on cross-examination.

“Yes.”

“Was Schiff in the office all the time?”
“Did you ever see any beer bottles in there?”
“No.”

“Was Frank in there on Thanksgiving day?”
“Yes.”

“Did you see Jim Conley there?”

“Yes.”

“When did you first notice Jim?”
“When he was sweeping.”
“When you left at 11 o’clock, you didn’t come back, did you?”
“No.”

“You don’t know whether Jim was in the basement?”
“No.”

The lad was then excused.

* * *

Atlanta Constitution, August 14th 1913, “Former Office Boy Saw No Women With Frank on Thanksgiving Day,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

Quinn Intimates That Spots May Have Been on Floor for Months

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 14th, 1913

Lemmie Quinn, foreman of the metal department of the National Pencil factory, was put on the stand by the defense following the ex-office boy.

“Aren’t you foreman of the department Mary Phagan worked in?”
“Yes.”

“Do you recall the time R. P. Barrett found the spots on the floor?”
“Yes.”

“Did Barrett ever state to you about his hope of getting a reward?”
“Yes, he asked my opinion.”

“What statement has he made about getting a reward if Frank should be convicted?”

“He asked me if I didn’t think he was entitled to something.”

“Did anybody ever see that blood or the strands of hair before he pointed them out, did they?”
“Not that I know.”

“Did you ever notice any spots on the floor?”
“Yes, quite often.”

Continue Reading →

Lively Tilts Mark the Hearing Of Testimony of Dr. Kendrick

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 14th, 1913

Dr. William S. Kendrick, head of the chair of medicine of the new Atlanta Medical school and for the past thirty eight years a general practitioner of medicine, was the first witness put on the stand Wednesday morning.

The physician on the stand declared the deductions of Dr. H. F. Harris, secretary of the state board of health, as to the time of Mary Phagan’s death and the alleged violation as nothing more than guesswork.

On cross-examination the solicitor forced Dr. Kendrick to admit that he was no expert on digestion and that he had not read a medical treatise on the subject in ten years or possibly in his life.

Many lively tilts occurred while the physician had the stand and in many instances the solicitor forced the witness to admit his ignorance on points pertaining to the subject.

Reuben Arnold outlined the condition in which it is said that Dr. Harris found the girl’s body and asked the witness if he could tell from that whether or not she had been violated. Dr. Kendrick stated that he could not.

“Would it be merely conjecture or not to make such a deduction?”
“I would call it nothing else.”

“Are you or not a stomach specialist?” Mr. Arnold next asked.

Continue Reading →

Surprise Sprung by Introduction of Character Witnesses by Defense

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 14th, 1913

Alfred L. Lane, who stated that he lives in Brooklyn, and is a merchant of New York city, was the first witness to take the stand to swear to the good character of Leo Frank and so quietly was he introduced that not until the defense had asked him several questions did it become known what was about to take place.

“You came here yesterday afternoon especially to testify about Mr. Frank, did you not?” asked Mr. Arnold after he had established the identity of the witness and drawn from him the statement that he had known Frank for about fifteen years.

“Yes, I came here for that purpose,” Lane replied.

“Where did you first known Mr. Frank and when?” asked Mr. Arnold.

“I knew him when we were in school together from 1898 to 1902 at Pratt Institute, a high school in Brooklyn,” replied the witness.

By this time it had begun to dawn on the spectators and lawyers that the defense was introducing the character of the defendant.

Continue Reading →

Dr. William Owen Tells How Conley’s Story Was Re-enacted

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 14th, 1913

Dr. William D. Owens, a well-known physician and one of the timekeepers in the re-enaction of Conley’s story in the pencil factory was recalled to the stand at the afternoon session.

He was questioned by Mr. Arnold and cross-examined by Mr. Hooper.

“How much time did it require you to go through this performance?” asked Mr. Arnold.

“Eighteen and a half minutes.”

“How rapidly did you go through it?”
“Just as fast as the directions could be read.”

The cross-examination began.

“Where did you start the performance?”

“From the second floor to the basement.”

Continue Reading →

Mother of Frank Denounces Solicitor Dorsey in Court

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 14th, 1913

STIRS COURTROOM WHEN SHE RESENTS QUESTIONS ASKED FRANK’S WITNESS

Solicitor Dorsey Was Cross-Examining Ashley Jones, a Witness Who Had Been Testifying to the Good Character of the Prisoner, and Had Just Asked Him if He Had Not Heard of Frank Taking Liberties With Little Girls Out at Druid Hills Some Time Ago.

TEARS FILLING EYES, WOMAN LEAVES COURT WITH SON’S ATTORNEY

Large Part of Wednesday’s Testimony Was Consumed in an Effort on Part of the State to Break Down the Testimony Given by Lemmie Quinn—Dr. William K. Owen Takes the Stand in Afternoon to Tell How Story of Conley Was Reenacted at National Pencil Company Factory.

There was one brief dramatic moment in the Frank trial Wednesday—so dramatic and full of heart interest that spectators were stirred as they have not been since the trial began.

Solicitor Dorsey was cross-questioning Ashley Jones, a character witness for Frank. He asked him if he had not heard of Frank taking liberties with little girls out at Druid Hills.

“No, and you never did—you dog!” exclaimed Mrs. Rae Frank, mother of the accused young man, as she partially rose from her seat and faced Solicitor Dorsey.

Continue Reading →

Many Witnesses Take the Stand to Refute Points of Prosecution

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 13th, 1913

Defense Calls Twenty-Two Men, Women and Boys to Give Evidence Favorable to Frank—Mr. and Mrs. Emil Selig, Parents of Frank’s Wife, Declare That There Was Nothing Unusual in Conduct of the Prisoner on Day of Murder

CHARACTER OF DALTON IS DECLARED TO BE BAD BY DEFENSE WITNESSES

Called to Stand, He Admits Having Been Sent to Gang for Stealing Once and Having to Pay Fine on Another Occasion—Bitter Fight Is Waged Between Attorneys Over a Question Asked of Frank’s Office Boy by Solicitor Dorsey, and Threat of Motion for Mistrial Is Made

Calling upon a total of twenty two witnesses on Tuesday and making a record for the Leo M. Frank case, and possibly for any other in Georgia, the defense yesterday made at tacks on a number of points made by the prosecution earlier in the trial of the man charged with the murder of Mary Phagan.

The day was spent in all but one or two instances in a steady hammering at the prosecution or to change the simple to a ceaseless stirring up of new points so as to muddy the entire case and make the points of the state unrecognizable.

When Solicitor Hugh Dorsey, on cross examination, asked Philip Chambers, Frank’s former office boy, if the superintendent had not made improper advances to him and threatened him to fire him if he did not yield, a bitter fight was started.

Continue Reading →

Frank’s Financial Sheet Would Take 3 Hours Work to Finish — Joel Hunter

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 12th, 1913

Joel Hunter, an expert accountant, was put on the stand to testify to the amount of work required in the compilation of the financial sheet upon which the defense declares Leo Frank worked during the afternoon Mary Phagan was murdered.

“What is your occupation?” he was asked by Mr. Arnold.

“I am a public accountant.”

“Do you hold a position with the state board?”

“Yes, I belong to the board of examiners.”

“Did you examine Leo Frank’s financial sheet?”
“Yes.”

“Did his assistant, Schiff, acquaint you with the data contained in the report?”

“Yes.”

“Did you go through all the work required to make the report?”
“Yes; but I did not make a new sheet. I only made the calculations and verifications.”

“Did you find them correct?”
“All except one item.”

The witness explained thoroughly to the jury the tedious process of compiling the financial sheet.

“What time does it take to make out this sheet?”
“I would judge about 150 to 170 minutes, and, even within that length of time it would take a man with a superior knowledge of that process of compilation.”

Mr. Hooper took the witness from cross-examination.

“You couldn’t calculate on the exact length of time, could you, inasmuch as you’re not familiar with the work yourself?”
“Not exactly.”

“You say it took you more than three hours to make this report?”
“Yes.”

“If it was made in the afternoon, then, it would take all the afternoon, wouldn’t it?”
“Yes, practically so.”

“It would hardly give time for the man who was working upon it to attend a game or baseball, would it?”
“I would not think so. I didn’t study that phase of it, however.”

“It would take all afternoon with no time to do anything else, wouldn’t it?”
“I would certainly think so.”

* * *

Atlanta Constitution, August 12th 1913, “Frank’s Financial Sheet Would Take 3 Hours Work to Finish — Joel Hunter,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

As the Very Wildest of Guessing Dr. Westmoreland Characterizes Testimony Given by Dr. Harris

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 12th, 1913

Dr. Willis Westmoreland, former head of the state board of health, who resigned some time ago after the board gave a clean bill to Dr. H. F. Harris, the secretary, whom he had accused of “scientific dishonesty,” followed Dr. Hancock on the stand.

He also made an examination of Leo Frank, stating in answer to Mr. Arnold’s question that he had found the accused man to be normal.

He was questioned by Arnold.

“What is your calling?”

“I am a physician of twenty-right years’ experience.”

“What is your main practice?”
“General medicine and surgery.”

“Have you occupied any chairs of prominence during your career?”

Former Head of State Board.

“I formerly occupied the chair of surgery in the Atlanta College of Surgery and, at one time, was president of the state board of health.”

A number of questions of the same nature of those put to Dr. Hancock pertaining to Dr. Harris’ testimony of his opinion of the time of death and of his belief that violence had been inflicted were asked Dr. Westmoreland. His replies were substantiation of Dr. Hancock.

“Could you determine how long this wheatbread and cabbage had been in the girl’s stomach?” he was asked.

Continue Reading →

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

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 12th, 1913

MADE CABBAGE DIGESTION EXPERIMENTS

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

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

He was examined directly by Mr. Arnold.

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

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

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

Continue Reading →