Tag Archives: Atlanta Journal

Witness, Called by Defense, Testifies Against Frank

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Journal
August 16th, 1913

MISS IRENE JACKSON DECLARES FRANK LOOKED INTO DRESSING ROOM ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS

Daughter of Policeman A. W. Jackson Testifies That Frank Opened the Door of Dressing Room and Looked in While Young Lady Was Dressing and That a Complaint Was Registered With a Forelady, Miss Cleland, About It

NEWSPAPER MAN TELLS OF JIM CONLEY’S PANTOMIME RE-ENACTMENT AT FACTORY

Solicitor Dorsey Attacks the Pinkertons, Charging That They Failed to Report Their “Finds” to Police—Many Young Women Employed at the Factory Testify to Frank’s Good Character—Court Adjourns Until Monday Morning

With Harllee Branch, a reporter for The Journal, on the witness stand where he had just described Conley’s pantomime re-enactment of his alleged part in the disposal of the body of Mary Phagan, witnessed by him as a newspaper man, the trial of Leo M. Frank was adjourned at 1:05 o’clock Saturday afternoon until Monday morning at 9 o’clock. Mr. Branch, summoned by the defense to testify in regard to an interview with Jim Conley at the tower, over the protest of Attorney Luther Z. Rosser, was permitted by the court to describe Conley’s pantomime re-enactment when requested to do so by the solicitor.

Just before court adjourned, Judge Roan addressed a few words to the jury, expressing regret that it was necessary to keep them away from their families another Sunday but stating that he sincerely hopes this would be the last Sunday that they would have to held together.

Unexpected testimony for the state was drawn from Miss Irene Jackson, daughter of Policeman A. W. Jackson, a former employe of the factory, who had been summoned as a defense witness. On cross-examination Solicitor Dorsey developed testimony to the effect that the girls in the factory were somewhat afraid of Frank, that on one occasion Frank had looked into the dressing room while Miss Emily Mayfield was partly dressed and that Miss Mayfield had complained to a forelady, Miss Cleland. She told of other occasions on which the superintendent is alleged to have pushed the door of the dressing room open while the girls were in there dressing. She admitted on cross-examination that the occurrence to which she testified occurred last summer, but that she had […]

when her father made her leave. She also admitted that there had been complaint of the girls flirting through the windows of the dressing room and that Frank had spoken to her forelady about it.

Continue Reading →

All Georgia Records Broken by the Frank Trial

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Journal
August 15th, 1913

Testimony up to Thursday Would Fill 500 Newspaper Columns, Says Official

Mrs. M. Marcus, M. J. Goldstein, I. Strauss, Who Participated in Card Game, Declare Frank Showed No Signs of Excitement When They Saw Him Saturday Evening and That There Were No Scratches on His Face

That all Georgia records for criminal trials already had been broken and that probably there was no southern record approaching it, was the statement of the court stenographer informally Thursday afternoon with regard to the Leo M. Frank murder trial.

The stenographer stated that the records of the trial up to Thursday morning and including none of Thursday’s testimony, were well in excess of 400,000 words.

That is equivalent to more than 500 newspaper columns of solid print, with each line a full one.

That court did not include, of course, the voluminous record of the coroner’s inquest nor any of the other profuse documents which were written in advance of the trial’s beginning.

According to witnesses for the defense Leo M. Frank was not nervous and displayed no signs of extra concern on Saturday night, April 26, just a few hours before the little girl’s body was found by Newt Lee, the negro night watchman. The witnesses testified that they attended the card party at the home of Emil Selig that night and that the accused came in about 8:15 or 8:30 and sat in the hall and read a magazine until after 10 o’clock when he retired.

Mrs. M. Marcus, of 482 Washington street, was the first witness. She told the jury that she attended the Seligs’ card party, saw Frank and noticed nothing unusual in his manner. M. J. Goldstein, also of Washington street, declared that he too attended the card game and noticed nothing unusual about the accused. I. Strauss told the jury that he went to the Selig home about 10 o’clock that night to escort Mrs. Strauss home and that he saw the superintendent who retired shortly after he arrived. John W. Todd, of Pittsburg, Pa., was the only character witness introduced early in the afternoon. He was treasurer of Frank’s class at Cornell and said that the accused had a good reputation in college.

Continue Reading →

Leo M. Frank Ready to Tell His Own Story to Jury

Posted on by

When Herbert Lasker, former roommate of Leo M. Frank, came to Atlanta to testify on the previous good character of the man accused of murdering Mary Phagan, he brought with him several photographs of the class of ‘06, of which both he and Frank were members. The two men, and the half-dozen other professors and former fellow-students who made the journey south simply to testify, spent an hour at the court house Thursday noon gazing at the pictures taken in happier days.
The members of the class are scattered over the earth now. One is in France, one in China, another spent two years making geological investigation in Alaska. All who were within reach came to Atlanta in their former classmate’s hour of need. In the accompanying picture ‘Herbert Lasker,’ who has already told of his friend’s character is in the front row on the extreme left. Frank in the [word illegible] front and left in the same row. This picture was taken some eight or nine years ago.

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

Atlanta Journal
August 15th, 1913

TAKES WITNESS STAND SATURDAY MORNING; UNDER LAW CANNOT BE EXAMINED BY THE SOLICITOR

Defense’s Case is Rapidly Nearing Completion, and Indications Are That All Witnesses, Except Frank, Will Have Testified Before Court Adjourns Friday—Forty Atlantians Tell of Accused’s Good Character

ATLANTA GIRL BROUGHT REFORMATORY IN CINCINNATI TO TESTIFY AGAINST FRANK

Miss Dewey Hewell, Sixteen Years Old, Arrived Friday Morning With Matron Bohnefeld—Nature of Her Testimony Is Not Known-Expert in Varnish Department Says Spots in Factory Look Like Varnish

Forty Atlantians took the stand during Friday morning’s session of the Frank trial and testified to the good character of the accused. In only one or two instances did the solicitor cross-question these character witnesses, and then only when the witness related something other than testimony concerning Frank’s character.

The character witnesses testified in the following order: Dr. J. A. Sommerfield, F. G. Schiff, A. D. Greenfield, Joseph Gershon, M. O. Nix, Joseph Stalker, P. D. McCarley, Mrs. M. Y. Meyer, Mrs. David Marx, Mrs. Arthur I. Harris, A. L. Gluckman, M. S. Rice, Mrs. D. Glowsky, Mrs. J. A. Sommerfield, Mrs. L. H. Moss, Mrs. Joseph G. Brown, E. E. Fitzpatrick, Emil Dittler, William Bauer, Miss Helen Loeb, J. C. Matthews, Al Fox, Mrs. Adolf Montag, Mrs. Martin May, Julian Boehm, Mrs. Mollie Rosenberg, M. H. Silverman, Mrs. M. L. Starne, Charles Adler, Mrs. R. A. Sohn, A. J. Jones, Mrs. Dan Klein, Nathan Coplan, Miss Rae Klein, F. F. Hulburn, Lester Einstein, M. J. Bernard, Jacob Fox, Marcus Loeb and Mrs. J. O. Phrmateo [sic].

Leo M. Frank, the accused, will take the stand in his own defense Saturday morning and will relate the story which he told the coroner before his arrest. The law doesn’t require the accused to be sworn, neither does it require him to submit to the cross-examination by the prosecution.

Continue Reading →

Court Stirred by Outburst From Leo Frank’s Mother

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Journal
August 14th, 1913

Defense Character Witness Is Used by Solicitor to Get Suggestions Before Jury

Solicitor Mentions Names of Many Persons, Who Will Probably be Put Up in Rebuttal to Attack Frank’s Conduct as Related to Woman Employes of Factory—Mrs. Rae Frank, Mother of the Accused, Creates a Sensation Shouting at the Solicitor.

Court adjourned at 5:40 until 9 o’clock Thursday morning.

The trial of Leo M. Frank took another sensational turn Wednesday afternoon when Solicitor Dorsey began, through his questions to John Ashley Jones, put up as a character witness by the defense, a vigorous attack upon the character of Frank. The solicitor hurled one sensational question at the witness after the other.

“You’ve never heard L. T. Coursey and Miss Myrtis Cator tell about Frank walking into the dressing room?” shouted the solicitor.

“You never heard how he tried to put his arms around Miss Myrtis Cator?”
“You never heard about his looking at poor little Gordie Jackson?”
“You didn’t hear of what he tried to do to Luis McDonald and Rachel Prater, did you?”
“And you didn’t know about Mrs. Pearl Dodson hitting him with a monkey wrench?”
To all of these questions the witness answered in the negative. The solicitor proceeded with others, asking the witness if he had ever talked to Mrs. G. D. Dunnegan and Marian Dunnegan or to Mrs. Wingard, of 45 Mills street.

It is inferred that the solicitor expects to put up the persons mentioned to testify in rebuttal against Frank’s good character.

Mr. Dorsey drew from Mr. Jones, who is an insurance agent, the admission that he had written to the grand jury, urging an indictment of Jim Conley. Mr. Jones said he did so because his insurance company had written a policy for Frank and before issuing it had made a thorough investigation of his character and found it to be good.

Continue Reading →

Frank’s Story of Before and After Crime Corroborated; Defense’s Motion to Strike Sensational Questions Fails

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Journal
August 14th, 1913

FRANK WAS SEEN BY WITNESSES ON HIS WAY TO AND FROM HOME DAY LITTLE GIRL WAS KILLED

Solicitor Declares That Outburst of Yesterday Should Not Be Allowed and That as There Is Further Unpleasant Testimony to Be Heard, He Suggests That Frank’s Wife and Mother Do Not Hear It—Judge Issues Caution

MOTION OF ATTORNEY ROSSER TO STRIKE OUT SENSATIONAL QUESTIONS IS OVERRULED

Solicitor Dorsey’s Questions Put to John Ashley Jones Will Stand and the Defense Will Be Forced to Disprove Suggestions Given to Jury by Cross-Questioning Witnesses Whom Solicitor Will Summon in Rebuttal

There were three big features in the Thursday morning session of the trial of Leo M. Frank:

First, the request of Solicitor Hugh M. Dorsey that the mother and wife of the accused be excluded from the court room to prevent an interruption similar to that made by Mrs. Rae Frank Wednesday afternoon. Judge Roan did not grant the request but cautioned the ladies that they must contain themselves.

Second, the overruling of a motion made by the defense to strike from the record the sensational questions and answers reflecting on Frank’s character elicited Wednesday afternoon during the examination of John Ashley Jones, a character witness.

Third, a formidable presentation of evidence corroborating Frank’s story in reference to his movements on the day of the tragedy.

Through the witnesses who testified Thursday the defense showed that Frank was on his way home at 1:10 o’clock and that he was on his way back to the factory at 2 o’clock. Previously Emil Selig had testified that Frank reached his home at 68 East Georgia avenue about 1:20 o’clock. The superintendent’s story of where he was and what he did immediately before immediately after the tragedy has, therefore, been very strongly corroborated.

Miss Helen Curran, of 360 Ashby street, stenographer, whose father works for Montag Bros., and who herself is employed by the Bennett Printing company, testified that she saw Frank in front of Jacobs’ Alabama and Whitehall streets store at 1:20 o’clock Saturday afternoon.

Mrs. M. O. Michael, of Athens, aunt of Mrs. Lucile Frank, saw Frank, she testified, in front of her sister’s, Mrs. C. Wolfsheimer’s home, 387 Washington street, Saturday afternoon about 2 o’clock. Frank came over and spoke to her, she said. Jerome Michael, her son, also saw Frank in front of the Wolfsheimer residence. Mrs. A. B. Leavy, of 69 East Georgia avenue, Mrs. Wolfsheimer, Julian Loeb and Miss Rebecca Carson were other witnesses who testified to seeing Frank either on his way home shortly after 1 o’clock or as he returned to the factory about 3 o’clock.

Continue Reading →

Frank’s Lawyers Again Threaten Move for Mistrial

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Journal
August 13th, 1913

Questions Asked by Dorsey Of Office Boy at Factory Ruled Out After Argument

Attorney Reuben R. Arnold Declares That Any Further Testimony Along Lines of That Sought by the Solicitor During Examination of Philip Chambers Will Tempt Him to Move for a New Trial in the Case

With the calling of Emil Selig, Frank’s father-in-law, the defense began their endeavor to prove Frank’s statement in reference to his movements on the day of the tragedy.

Mr. Selig’s testimony bore principally upon the time Frank arrived at his home to dinner, the midday meal, and his appearance and actions at that time.

He declared that Frank arrived home about 1:20, that he was unmarked by scratches; that his general appearance and actions were as usual; and that during the evening the accused man had been in his usual spirits and had not been either nervous or excited.

Upon cross-examination, Solicitor Dorsey forced him to admit an uncertainty as to the exact time Frank arrived at the house. Mr. Selig also declared that on the following day the murder was mentioned but not discussed and that he said nothing to Frank about it. He reiterated this statement several times.

Mrs. Selig testified similarly to her husband as to the time Frank came home to dinner and his demeanor during the evening. She was closed questioned by the solicitor, who endeavored to show that while she now claimed Frank had appeared concerned about the little girl’s death, at the coroner’s inquest she had said he was not concerned.

Continue Reading →

Frank’s Character Made Issue by the Defense

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Journal
August 13th, 1913

ACTION A CHALLENGE TO STATE TO PUT UP WITNESSES IN REBUTTAL WHO OTHERWISE COULDN’T TESTIFY

Lemmie Quinn, Foreman In Metal Room, Tells the Jury He Visited Factory on Saturday, April 26, and Found Frank at His Desk Writing at 12:20 o’Clock, the Very Minute Almost That State Claims Mary Phagan Must Have Been Killed

EFFORTS TO SHOW EXPERIMENTS OF WITNESSES WHO RE-ENACTED CONLEY’S STORY BRING FIGHT

Judge Roan Delays Decision Until Both Sides Can Submit Authorities—Dr. W. S. Kendrick Declares Dr. H. F. Harris Was Guessing in Conclusions He Gave About Mary Phagan’s Death—Three School Mate Friends of Frank Tell of His Good Character

The character of Leo M. Frank was put in issue Wednesday morning by his attorneys during the fifteenth day’s session of his trial for the murder of Mary Phagan.

While not unexpected the fact that the defense has thrown down the bars and challenged the state to put a blot on the character of the young factory superintendent was decidedly the feature of the morning session. Generally the defense in important criminal cases does not put the defendant’s character in issue, for few people can stand the searching investigation to which the accused is generally subjected by detectives. Since Frank was first accused of the Phagan murder there have been constant rumors that the detectives have found witnesses who are ready to attack the character of the accused. These witnesses, if the detectives have found them, could never have testified had the defense not paved the way by putting his character in issue and practically challenging the state to its weaknesses. This action on the part of the defense means that Frank’s attorneys are confident that the defendant’s life will stand the white light of investigation.

The direct case of the defense is almost finished. When the noon recess was taken Wednesday, Attorney Luther Z. Rosser and Reuben R. Arnold expected to be through with all except character witnesses in less than a day’s time.

Continue Reading →

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

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Journal
August 12th, 1913

Sensational Charge Hurled By Physician in Testimony Given at Afternoon Session

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

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

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

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

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

Continue Reading →

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

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Journal
August 12th, 1913

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Continue Reading →

Frank Case Mentioned for First Time in House

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Journal
August 11th, 1913

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

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

Instantly Representative Edmondson of Brooks was on his feet.

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

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

* * *

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

Sunday Proves Day of Meditation for Four Frank Jurors

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Journal
August 11th, 1913

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

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

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

* * *

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

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

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Journal
August 11th, 1913

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Continue Reading →

Playing Practical Jokes on Watchful Bailiffs is Pastime of Frank Jurors

Posted on by
Anybody who has the mistaken idea that it’s fine to be a juror in a big murder trial has only to see Artist Brewerton’s illustration above, of the way the twelve men who are to decide Leo M. Frank’s fate pass their time these days. On them the commonwealth has placed the responsibility of judging the truth of the evidence placed before them day after day in the court room. They are shut off from all communication with the outside world, except what comes to them in open court as sworn evidence and except also what their families write to them in notes that are censored severely by the sheriff’s deputies who always guard them day and night. The routine begins early in the morning and ends when they return to their rooms at night. There they while away the hours with no company but their own. They sleep, eat, walk, and listen to evidence, in a body of twelve. Should one of them fall ill, serious complications might arise in the Frank trial. Should demonstrations from the populace, such as applause or disapproval in the court room or elsewhere, reach them, other complications might ensue, and the whole trial might be vitiated, leaving all the tedious work to be done again.

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

Atlanta Journal
August 10th, 1913

Court Bailiff Charles F. Huber, Who Guards Body in Hotel at Night, Spends Hours in Search of Mysterious Female Voice Which Disrupts His Peace — Deder Townsend Improves His Time While Shut Off From World by Growing Mustache

There are a few pastimes almost as enjoyable as being a juror—such as spending a short vacation in jail, or floating around on the bosom of the deep blue ocean without an oasis in night, for example. The latter diversions have their advantages. In jail a man usually can receive and talk to any callers that happen to drop in, and on the sea he could talk to them if they were present — which is comforting. But on a jury he can’t do either. He has got to forget his past and his future and his present for the time being and devote himself exclusively to the business of being a juror. His mind is not be burdened with mundane things.

The jurors in the Frank trial are having a harder time than any others previously recruited in Atlanta—about two weeks harder. When they get through they will be the champion marathon jurors of the whole south.

A lot of interesting fiction could be written about the Frank jury. There is a good opening for an enterprising enthusiastic young fiction writer. He could dope out a lot of interesting plots which might be received with acclaim by the magazine-consuming public.

For instance, he could write a story on the Enoch Arden style—only with a happy ending about the return to his home of Juror No. 7. He could have the juror come in, be received joyfully by his good wife after properly identifying himself, go into the bath room, and find his razor all nicked up. Thus the plot would thicken and the story return until it ended by Mrs. Juror No. 7, explaining that little Willie, who was expected shortly after the deputy sheriff served pa with a subpoena to come to court, had grown up during Papa’s absence and used the razor for his first shave.

Continue Reading →

Witness Found Who Saw Mary Phagan on Way to Factory

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Journal
August 10th, 1913

George T. Kendley, Street Car Conductor, Declares He Saw Little Girl About Noon on April 26 as She Stepped From Curb on Forsyth Street Bridge to Cross Alabama Street, Where His Car Was Stopped

BOTH SIDES READY TO GRILL EVERY WITNESSES

Attorneys Think There Is Little Chance of the Trial Ending This Week—Much Testimony Is Expected in Rebuttal and All Indications Saturday Night Were Trial Would Run Into Its Fourth Week

The trial of Leo M. Frank for the murder of Mary Phagan will last from six days to two weeks longer, according to the varying estimates of the attorneys connected with the case.

It is conceded that it will take the defense at least four days this week to complete the presentation of its case. Then will come the introduction of testimony in rebuttal and finally the arguments of the attorneys. It will take several days to get in the rebuttal testimony, and the arguments will last a day, and possibly two days before the case finally goes to the twelve men who will decide Frank’s fate.

The state’s attorneys and counsel for the defense employed a portion of their time on Saturday afternoon, after the adjournment of the court, in getting ready to “go after” witnesses on the opposing side.

Continue Reading →

Conley’s Story is Still Center of Fight in Frank Case

Posted on by
Questions asked witnesses by Attorneys Rosser and Arnold indicate that the defense may attempt to convince the jury that it would have been possible for the little girl to have been killed on the first floor of the factory and her body later disposed of through a chute leading from the first floor to the basement at the rear of the building. According to this theory the girl was met at the foot of the stairs leading from Frank’s office, taken toward the back of the building and killed. Her body was then dragged to the trap door leading to the chute and dropped into the basement. Later, according to the theory, it was taken to the spot where it was found by Newt Lee. The accompanying drawing was made from the model of the factory which is being used by the defense at the trial.

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

Atlanta Journal
August 10th, 1913

After Two Weeks of Testimony Only Evidence Directly Linking Frank With the Crime is the Sensational Statement Made on the Stand by Negro Sweeper-Summary of Developments in Trial to Date

STATE HAS INTRODUCED 34 WITNESSES, DEFENSE 10

A Synopsis of the Evidence Presented by Both Sides Shows Just What the State Has Sought to Prove and How the Defense Has Begun to Fight to Convince Jury of Frank’s Innocence

For two long and tedious weeks Leo M. Frank, indicted for the murder of Mary Phagan, has been on trial for his life. During those two weeks forty-eight witnesses have testified, innumerable exhibits, documents, books, diagrams, photographs and illustrative contrivances have been displayed to the jury.

Only the remarkable story of James Conley, the negro sweeper, directly connects the defendant with the crime, and even in this ingenious narrative the negro did not say that he actually saw Frank do the deed.

Time and again while under the merciless gruelling of Attorneys Rosser and Arnold, Conley frankly and complacently confessed that he had lied and lied frequently in his many statements and affidavits to the detectives. However, he clung fast to his story as related upon the witness stand Monday, Tuesday and part of Wednesday. He had every circumstance and feature of this story clear in his mind and not once during the sixteen and a half hours that he was in the witness chair did he admit that any portion of it was false — notwithstanding the terrific bombardment of questions hurled at him on cross-examination by Attorney Rosser.

Continue Reading →

State Confronts Watchman Holloway With Previous Affidavit

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Journal
August 9th, 1913

Solicitor Dorsey Fiercely Attacks Evidence Given by the Witness For Defense Afternoon Session

He Also Implies That Watchman Was Trying to Fix Crime on Conley to Get Reward. Holloway Admits Signing Statement Produced by the Prosecutor—Other Witnesses for Defense Heard

After Solicitor Dorsey riddled E. F. Holloway, day watchman at the National Pencil factory, with volleys of questions regarding former statements made by the witness and which he could not explain or make coincide with his testimony Friday afternoon, court adjourned at 6:45 o’clock until 9 o’clock Saturday.

The solicitor also trapped the watchman and the witness for the defense. The solicitor also made the sensational implication that the bloody stick found by Pinkertons in the factory was planted by Holloway himself. The solicitor further implied that Holloway was working for a reward and had turned up Conley for that purpose.

After Holloway had declared that Daisy Hopkins’ character was good as far as he knew, the solicitor asked him about a paper he had signed previously stating the contrary. He admitted that he signed the paper. The solicitor asked the witness if he hadn’t told the detectives to return to the factory on a certain day and he was sure they would find something. The witness denied this.

Continue Reading →

Schiff Refutes Jim Conley and Dalton

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Journal
August 9th, 1913

WITNESS IN MOST OF DORSEY’S GRILLING WHEN COURT ADJOURNS UNTIL NINE O’CLOCK ON MONDAY

Assistant Factory Superintendent Refutes Testimony of C. B. Dalton and Jim Conley That Frank Frequently Had Women Callers In His Office on Saturday Afternoons and During Holidays—He Says He Never Saw Conley There Saturday Afternoons

DECLARES THAT WIFE OF THE ACCUSED FREQUENTLY CALLED ON HUSBAND AT HIS OFFICE ON SATURDAYS

Attorney Arnold Registers Another Objection Against Laughter of Spectators in the Court Room—Solicitor Draws From Schiff Change of Answers Made to Several Previous Statements of His While on the Witness Stand

The second week of the trial of Leo M. Frank, charged with the murder of Mary Phagan ended at 12:30 o’clock Saturday when court adjourned until 9 o’clock Monday morning. Herbert Schiff, assistant superintendent of the National Pencil factory was on the stand for the defense at the hour of adjournment and will resume under cross-examination by Solicitor Hugh M. Dorsey on Monday. During the cross-questioning of Schiff, he and the solicitor had many tilts regarding the system of the factory office and were frequently interrupted by objections from Attorney Arnold for the defense. The solicitor put Frank’s assistant through a grilling examination during the course of which he caused the witness to change several answers he had previously made to the jury.

That Jim Conley, the negro sweeper who accuses Frank, feared the crowd gathered in front of the pencil factory following the murder of Mary Phagan and that the negro declared that he would give a million dollars if he had a white skin, was the declaration of Schiff, earlier during his testimony. Schiff also declared that the financial sheet made out in Frank’s handwriting on April 26 was accurate and the handwriting of the accused superintendent was normal. Schiff works with Leo M. Frank in the office and assists in making up the weekly financial sheets.

Continue Reading →

Defense Begins Introduction of Evidence

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Journal
August 8th, 1913

Afternoon Session of Frank’s Trial Thursday Is Without Any Interesting Development

Pinkerton Detective Harry Scott Testifies That Conley Never Told Him New Features of Story—Dr. Leroy Childs Testifies in Effort to Break Dr. Harris’ Story

When court adjourned Thursday afternoon at 5:10 o’clock Detective Scott, called by the defense to impeach Jim Conley, had just concluded his examination by the solicitor. Scott had been put through a long series of questions by Attorney Rosser, the purpose of which was to show the discrepancies between what Conley told Scott and what he swore on the witness stand.

Harry Scott, of the Pinkertons, was called as the second witness for the defense of Leo M. Frank Thursday afternoon when Dr. Leroy Childs left the stand. Scott testified that he informed the detectives immediately upon learning that Mrs. White had seen a negro sitting on a box at the foot of the second floor stairs. The state has contended that this information was withheld from the city detectives until May 7 or 8, and that Scott learned it from Frank on April 28.

Dr. Childs while under the examination of Attorney Arnold characterized testimony similar to some of that given by Drs. Hurt and Harris as remarkable guess work. When the wound on Mary Phagan’s head was described to the physician by Attorney Arnold, Dr. Childs declared that it would be guess work to say that the wound would have caused unconsciousness; when the wound was described to him by Solicitor Dorsey he declared that it would not have caused death. He declared that the conditions upon which Dr. Harris based his opinion that violence had been done the girl, might have been caused by the examination made by Dr. Hurt prior to Dr. Harris’ examination and by the process of embalming.

At 2 o’clock the trial resumed, with Dr. L. W. Childs still on the stand under direct examination by Attorney Arnold.

Continue Reading →

Defense Attacks State’s Case From Many Angles

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Journal
August 8th, 1913

MOTORMAN AND CONDUCTOR SAY NEWSBOY EPPS WAS NOT ON CAR THAT BROUGHT MARY TO CITY

They Swear That She Left Car at Broad and Hunter Streets at 12:10, the Very Hour Monteen Stover Claims to Have Left Factory—Daisy Hopkins Swears She Never Visited Factory With Dalton and That She Did Not Know Frank

NEW THEORY OF HOW CRIME MIGHT HAVE BEEN COMMITTED INTIMATED BY ENGINEER’S TESTIMONY

Albert Kauffman Describes Passageway on First Floor Leading to Chute, Through Which He Declares Human Body Could Easily Have Passed—Spots, Said to Be Blood, Found in Passageway

A new theory of the Mary Phagan murder was hinted at by the defense at the trial of Leo M. Frank Friday while Albert Kauffman, a civil engineer, was under examination. From questions asked by Attorney Arnold, Mr. Kauffman testified that there was a chute in the rear of the National Pencil factory building leading from the first floor down into the basement and that the trap door to this chute was large enough to slide a human body through, in fact, he said it was large enough to slide several bodies through at the same moment.

He told of a dark and narrow hallway leading from the front of the building by the stairway back to the rear by the trap door. Many questions were asked concerning this hallway and chute and trial observers believe that the defense is preparing a way for introduction of other testimony possibly bearing out the theory that the child was murdered just as she went to leave the building, was dragged back along this dark hallway and dropped through the chute into the basement. Questions were asked the engineer about a vat in the metal room. He declared that it was plenty large enough to hold the body of a girl who measured five feet and three inches tall.

BLOOD IN DARK PASSAGEWAY?

It is known that the defense had found dark red spots, presumed to be blood, on a door leading to the dark passageway, which goes to the rear of the building and to the chute, to which so much attention was paid by the attorneys. The dark spots on the door have been chipped off and an analysis, the result of which is not known, has been made for the defense.

Continue Reading →

Judge Roan Decides Conley’s Testimony Must Stand

Posted on by

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

Attorney William M. Smith, who clashed in the court room Tuesday with Attorneys for Leo M. Frank, who didn’t want him to consult with client until Conley had finished his testimony.

Atlanta Journal
August 7th, 1913

Defense Asks Mistrial When Crowd in the Court Applauds Announcement of the Decision

Judge Roan, However, Refuses to Stop Trial—Dr. Harris on Stand During Afternoon and Again Asserts that Mary Phagan Suffered Violence Just Before Death—Dalton Called to Corroborate Conley But Court Adjourns Before He Testifies

Dr. H. F. Harris, secretary of the state board of health, was the first witness called for the Wednesday afternoon session after the jury was called into the room. The direct examination under Solicitor Dorsey was resumed.

Dr. Harris again asserted very positively that Mary Phagan had suffered violence of some kind immediately preceding her death, and explained in detail his reasons for reaching this conclusion.

The secretary of the state board of health was excused from the witness stand at 5 o’clock before his cross-examination had been finished. He was very weak, he said in response to the court’s inquiry, and was permitted to stop his testimony, which was resumed Thursday. Mrs. J. W. Coleman, mother of Mary Phagan, was the last witness examined before adjournment.

C. B. Dalton, mentioned by Conley, as having visited the factory in company with two women, was called just before court adjourned but did not testify.

Great excitement prevailed in the court room Wednesday afternoon when Judge L. S. Roan announced his decision to reverse himself on his ruling of Tuesday, striking out parts of Conley’s testimony. From the spectators gallery the crowd cheered the decision, but quieted down after Attorney Arnold, for the defense, made a motion to clear the room. Judge Roan refused to clear the court of spectators but warned the spectators not to repeat the demonstration. Attorney Arnold then moved for a mistrial, in this he was also overruled by the judge.

Judge Roan, in his ruling, held that all of Conley’s testimony would remain in the record of the case and that Solicitor Dorsey would be allowed to introduce witnesses to corroborate the negro’s charges against Frank’s conduct in his presence. As to allowing the Epps boy to testify as to what Mary Phagan told him regarding her fears of Frank, the judge held that inadmissible and the newsie will not be recalled.

When court reconvened at 2 o’clock, Solicitor Dorsey resumed his argument. The solicitor renewed his contention, citing authorities to back it up, that as a general rule failure to make objection to incompetent evidence at the time of introduction is a waiver of that right.

In this instance, said he, the court should hold that the defense had waived the right to object. In case of doubt as to the relevancy of evidence, said he, it should be left to the jury for that body to determined its weight.

The solicitor said that he cited several Georgia cases, among them some very old decisions. The solicitor stated that no fixed rule can be observed regarding the introduction of evidence of acts similar to the crime charged. The law says simply, says he, there must be some logical connection which proves or tends to prove the other. It must be one of a system of mutually dependent crimes, said he.

“I intend to show,” said he, “that this crime was one of a system of mutually dependent crimes.”

The solicitor contended that he had the right to introduce evidence of transactions which serve to illustrate the state of mind of the defendant or his intention or purpose.

“The fact,” he said, “that they are simply crimes, does not make them inadmissible.”

DORSEY QUOTES AUTHORITIES.

The solicitor asked if he should proceed with argument on his second proposition—involving his right to enter testimony corroborative of Conley’s. Judge Roan told him to proceed with that argument.

While the solicitor argued Attorney Rosser sat in the witness’ chair, lolling back, with his legs crossed, rubbing his head.

Continue Reading →