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

The Atlanta Constitution

Sunday, June 22, 1913

Journey Had No Relation to the Phagan Mystery or Dictagraph Incident, He Says.

Colonel T. B. Felder returned Saturday from a six-day trip to Cincinnati. Much speculation was created by his departure for Ohio last Sunday and it was hinted that he had made the journey in interest of his recent connection with the famous dictagraph plot.

It was also reported that he had gone [on] behalf of the Mary Phagan investigation, in which he has been an active figure. His departure within less than twenty-four hours after Solicitor General Hugh Dorsey had left the city gave rise to this suspicion.

He declared to a Constitution reporter last night, however, that the Cincinnati trip had been made solely on personal business and that it had no connection at all with either the Phagan mystery or the dictagraph episode.

Colonel Felder stated that he had received no information from the grand jury regarding his demand that Gentry’s charges be investigated and that he did not know when that body would take up the proposed probe.

A. S. Colyar, a leading actor in the dictagraph case and instigator of the alleged trap, late in the afternoon visited Chief Lanford for a long conference and also had a few words with Chief Beavers.

Colyar says that he will remain in Atlanta for some time.

* * *

The Atlanta Constitution, June 22nd 1913, “Col. Felder Returns From Trip to Ohio,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

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

The Atlanta Constitution

Monday, June 16, 1913

Says Trip Has Nothing to Do With That of Solicitor Dorsey

Following the departure of Solicitor General Hugh M. Dorsey for Atlantic City Saturday afternoon, Col. Thomas B. Felder left Sunday afternoon at 5:10 o’clock for Cincinnati.

He said that his trip had no connection whatever with that of the solicitor general. He would not disclose his object in going to Cincinnati, however, and said only that he would be in the Ohio city for several days. Business was his motive in leaving, he declared, although he would not tell what business he intended to transact.

Colonel Felder declares that the affidavit which an Atlanta paper, on Sunday morning, accredits George Gentry with having made, verifies his own contention.

“It supports me in every particular,” he said. “It corroborates my statement that Gentry is willing to return to Atlanta at any time the grand jury or any other investigating committee needed him; that he is passing under an assumed name in Washington, and that he was striving to keep out of the reach of certain Atlantans who are endeavoring to find him.

“He even admits in this last affidavit that the dictagraph reports were padded. He says that charges were made, although it is intimated that they were immaterial. He acknowledges having signed Miles’ affidavit, and says that it was correct thoroughly. This, in itself, is all the support I would ask of Gentry. The affidavit obtained by Detective Miles is proof positive that the reports were padded—that is an established fact.

“Another thing: Gentry says again that his note book—the original transcription of the Williams House conversations—is in the vault of a prominent and reliable Atlanta attorney, and that they will be produced at time of any investigation. Even though Gentry testified otherwise, we have the notes—they are all that is needed to prove our contention that the published reports were altered.”

Colonel Felder would not talk regarding his trip to Cincinnati.

“I am going there on a matter of business,” was all he would say. “It wouldn’t interest the public in general, and would interfere with my plans if I disclosed my mission. I will return within the next few days.”

* * *

The Atlanta Constitution, June 16th 1913, “Col. Thomas Felder Goes to Cincinnati,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

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

The Atlanta Georgian

Monday, June 16, 1913

A. S. Colyar is in Atlanta again, promising to spring some more sensations.

The investigator who engineered the dictographing of Thomas B. Felder and Mayor Woodward has been in Washington. He sent a letter to Atlanta before him, saying he objected to being made a goat.

It is believed Colyar saw George M. Gentry while in Washington and got from him an affidavit. This is said to be much the same as the one printed admitting that the dictograph records had been padded, as charged in Gentry’s recent affidavit, but that the general charges were upheld.

Promises Story in Letter.

Colyar’s letter, mailed before he left Washington, follows:

“He laughs best who laughs last. When you get tired publishing all of the lies the gang of political crooks are publishing on Lanford and myself I may be able to give you a story that will cause some people to sit up and take notice.

“It’s indeed comforting to think one purchased affidavit can cause a certain man in Atlanta to consider himself vindicated completely. Whitewash is cheap, as we all know.

“Then there is Mayor Woodward. He says ‘Colyar went to Mrs. Gentry’s house and worried her.’ Indeed, where did he learn this? It’s news to me. But we all know the Mayor. He is the same Mayor Hon. R. F. Maddox defeated after he (Woodward) was nominated by his party, and all Atlanta knows why. Let them make a goat out of me and see what I publish in my own defense.

“The crooks got caught. And they sent Miles away to see if he could not fool the people. A. S. COLYAR.”

Felder’s Trip Causes Comment.

Speculation was rife Monday as to the nature of the trip of Colonel Thomas B. Felder, who left Atlanta Sunday afternoon with the statement that he was bound for Cincinnati.

Rumors had it that Colonel Felder in reality is on his way to Washington, for the purpose probably of conferring with George Gentry, the missing stenographer in the recent dictagraph sensation. If this is Colonel Felder’s intention, he kept it to himself.

It has been suggested that Colonel Felder would feel much safer in going to Washington by way of Cincinnati than through the State of South Carolina.

* * *

The Atlanta Georgian, June 16th 1913, “Colyar Returns Promising Sensation,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

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

The Atlanta Journal

Sunday, June 15, 1913

“Upon Reading My Notes Before the Court It Will Be Proven That There Is Enough of It There to Justify What Was Written and Sworn to be Me as Being Practically the Gist of What Was Said,” Says Young Stenographer of Dictograph Records Transcribed by Him

“I WAS ALLOWED TO READ PROOF OF WHAT WAS PUBLISHED ABOUT FELDER CONFERENCE,” HE SAYS

“As Far as What The Journal Published, Will Say, as Far as I Can Remember, What They Printed Were the Facts In a General Way, and the Changes Were Immaterial.” Located by The Jounaal’s [sic] Washington Correspondent, Gentry Talks Freely.

By Ralph Smith

WASHINGTON, D. C., June 14.—Living under an assumed name and holding a lucrative position as an expert stenographer, George M. Gentry, of Atlanta, who made the famous dictograph notes, was located in Washington today by the Journal correspondent. He has been here since May 27. He left Atlanta via the Southern railway on the evening of May 26, following the Felder exposure. He claims to have seen no one from Atlanta other than E. O. Miles, and The Journal correspondent, though he is in communication with the members of his immediate family.

Gentry’s real identity is unknown to his employers, and at his request his present address and the place of his employment are withheld by the correspondent. Their publication, he believes, might cause him unnecessary annoyance.

“I left Atlanta because I feared that I might be arrested for perjury,” he said.

Gentry today voluntarily made an affidavit, elaborating and elucidating the statements contained in the affidavit he recently gave to E. O. Miles. This affidavit, made today, was sworn to and subscribed before Isaac Heidenheimer, of 1226 Pennsylvania avenue, notary public, for the District of Columbia. It was witnessed by Senator William Hughes, of New Jersey and Congressman Frank Doremus, of Michigan.

The original and a carbon copy are in the possession of The Journal correspondent, and Gentry himself has a copy. The affidavit was written by Gentry, without suggestion or dictation from anyone.

“Unfortunately I did not go into enough detail in my previous affidavit, hence the necessity of making a further one,” swore Gentry today.

Continuing the affidavit says, “I neglected to mention in same (the Miles affidavit) that I was allowed to read a proof of what The Journal published, in connection with the Felder conference. This conference was transcribed first and printed in Friday’s issue of the Journal. The other conferences, all of which were held Wednesday afternoon and evening, preceding the date of publication, were not published until after the Felder conference was published. I made one or two changes in the proof of the Felder conference, this being the only proof I was allowed to see. As I remember in one instance, I had written the word “intrude” any my notes contained the word “intruding.”

“Further than this I do not remember of any change that I made in same, with the exception of ordinary corrections, such as marking misspelled words, adding periods and commas, and striking them out.”

Gentry swore today that he received absolutely nothing for writing his previous affidavit and that he did not receive one penny for writing the affidavit today.

WHY HE GOT FRIGHTENED.

“I allowed myself to become so frightened because I thought that according to law, if one change was made by me, from what I had in my notes, I had committed perjury and was liable, and as I had myself made several changes during the transcribing of the notes. I felt rather guilty. However, Mr. Febuary assured me that I was writing what had been said as so I accordingly swore that what I had written was what I had heard. I discovered later that I had sworn that what I had written was a true and correct transcription of my notes. I did not realize at the time of signing the affidavit that I had sworn any such thing or I would have not signed the affidavit. The affidavit that I signed in connection with the transcription of my notes, was dictated to me and I signed it before a notary public without reading same in detail. I simply glanced over same to ascertain as to the correctness of the typewriting.

THE JOURNAL’S STORY CORRECT.

“As far as what The Journal published not being correct, will say with the exception cited, as far as I can remember, what they printed were the facts in a general way, and the changes were immaterial with the exception of how they might be considered in law, about which I know very little.

“I have already stated under oath that I did not hear the names of Chief Beavers or Chief Lanford mentioned in the Woodward conference. I desire to modify this to the extent that I did not hear their names mentioned by Mayor Woodward. They may have been mentioned by other parties in the room. In fact, as I remember it, they were:

“In conclusion will say upon the reading of my notes before the court it will be proven that there is enough of it there to justify what was written and sworn to by me as being practically the gist of what was said.

“The Journal’s position in the matter as far as I know is fair, and I believe, although I do not make the positive assertion, that what they published was given to them by Colyar, Febuary and myself.

Gentry declared in his affidavit that when it was found necessary or advisable for him to return to Atlanta he will return, and will read his original notes before the court. He says that they will not be read before any private individuals, and he desires that what he reads shall be taken down and compared with what he wrote.

TELLS WHERE HE HAS BEEN.

In reference to leaving Atlanta, Gentry says in his affidavit:

“I will start by giving an account of my actions since the memorable dictograph affairs. I have already set fourth [sic] my reason for leaving Atlanta, in my affidavit published on June 11, 1913, as aforesaid. My original intention was to go to Baltimore, but upon my arrival at Washington, I did not go any farther, feeling that this city was large enough to get lost in. The day after my arrival here, Wednesday, I went to work as a stenographer, but not under the name of Gentry. My reason for assuming another name was to avoid the attendant annoyance that would follow the knowledge that I was in Washington. I can be reached through Mr. Ralph Smith, The Journal’s correspondent here, whenever it is necessary, who knows my place of employment, and who has further agreed not to divulge it, at my earnest request. Mr. E. O. Miles is also acquainted with both my business and residence address.”

While Gentry makes no reference to the matter in his affidavit, the original note book is now in the possession of a well known Atlanta attorney, whose name is known to The Journal correspondent.

* * *

The Atlanta Journal, June 15th 1913, “Gentry, Found by Journal, Says Notes Will Show Enough to Justify What Was Sworn To,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

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

The Atlanta Journal

Saturday, June 14, 1913.

Attorney Felder Wants Gentry Affidavit Weighed—Foreman Beck Non-committal

Thomas B. Felder, the attorney, is said to have requested Foreman L. H. Beck, of the Fulton county grand jury, to take up an investigation of an affidavit alleged to have been signed by George W. [sic] Gentry in which it is charged that the famous dictograph records were padded.

Mr. Felder took up the matter with the grand jury foreman by letter, it is said, and stated that he was ready to produce young Gentry whenever the jury needs him. Gentry is said to be in Washington, and Felder states that he is in daily communication with him.

Another figure in the dictograph episode who now is missing from the city is A. S. Colyar. At the Williams house, where he lived in the city, Colyar left no address, but reserved a room, saying that he expected to return to the city.

Chief of Detectives Lanford declares that he does not know the whereabouts of either Colyar or Gentry, although he is conducting a vigorous search in Washington for the latter.

Foreman L. H. Beck of the grand jury has stated again that the term of service of the present body is so short that it is absolutely necessary that it take up the routine business of the solicitor’s office.

The foreman, however, will not make a definite statement relative to the dictograph probe or to the vice probe.

* * *

The Atlanta Journal, June 14th 1913, “Asks Jury to Resume Probe of Dictograph,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

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

The Atlanta Constitution

Saturday, June 14, 1913.

Requests Investigation of the Gentry Affidavit—A. S. Colyar Is Not in Atlanta Now

Colonel Thomas B. Felder yesterday requested that the grand jury make an early investigation of the affidavit submitted by George Gentry in which he declared that the dictagraph records were padded.

On Friday afternoon he forwarded a letter to L. H. Beck, foreman of the jury, in which he asked that body to look into the matter as early as possible. Offering to appear before the jury at any time, Colonel Felder assured Mr. Beck that he could place before the jury evidence which would not only substantiate the statement of the stenographer, but would throw new light on vice conditions in Atlanta.

Gentry Willing to Testify

Colonel Felder also informed the jury foreman that at any moment he could bring George Gentry before that boy to give his testimony. Gentry, he said, was ready and willing to come back to Atlanta. While Colonel Felder stated that he was in daily communication with Mr. Gentry, the detective department is not so fortunate. Chief Lanford, having so far failed to locate the youth in Washington, where he is living under an assumed name and working for a business house there.

Coincident with the proposed investigation of the dictagraph charges is the absence of A. S. Colyar. Colyar could not be found Friday or last night. At the Williams house where he lived while in the city, he was said to have left town with instructions to retain his room for future occupancy.

The clerk of the hotel said that he did not know of the man’s whereabouts or when he was expected to return. Colyar, he said, had not told of his destination upon leaving several days ago. It is reported that he has gone to Washington to locate Gentry the stenographer and ascertain whether or not his sensational affidavit was correct. Another rumor is that he is in Cartersville, Ga., his home to which his wife returned several days previous to his departure.

Where is Colyar?

Chief Lanford, with whom Colyar has been closely associated during the latter’s sensational operations in Atlanta, said that he did not know where Colyar could be located or whether or not he was in or out of the city. Others with whom Colyar has been connected say they do not know of his whereabouts. He was seen as late as Saturday night. Efforts to find him in Washington have been to no avail.

“I will welcome an investigation by the grand jury or any other tribunal,” Chief Lanford said, “and so will all the members of the detective department. We will all be completely exonerated when the charges are given complete airing. Such an investigation will serve only to act as a boomerang for its instigators.

“I am trying daily to find Gentry. So far he has eluded us. If we can find him, I am confident the truth will be ascertained. In the first place, I doubt the genuineness of the affidavit he is purported to sign. In the second, if he did sign such a paper, he was persuaded to do so by some unfair means. Let the investigation proceed. I am as anxious as anyone concerned for it to come.

* * *

The Atlanta Constitution, June 14th 1913, “Col. Felder Asks Early Jury Probe,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

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

The Atlanta Constitution

June 13, 1913

Felder Says He Will Be Produced at the Proper Time. Notary Declares Affidavit Is Genuine.

Miss Jeannette Henning, the notary public whose official seal was attached to the affidavit made recently by George Gentry, has informed The Constitution that she took the document from him last Monday, and that although it is genuine, she does not know its contents. She states that she had never met Gentry prior to the time he made the affidavit.

Chief Beavers, who has for the past several days been attending the convention of national police chiefs in Washington, is conducting a search of that city for the young stenographer. He is assisted by a number of detectives put at his command by Major Sylvester, head of the Washington police department.

Beavers was requested by Detective Chief Lanford to find Gentry, and to ascertain positively whether or not the youth had attested to the startling affidavit. Thursday noon, Lanford received a message from the chief saying that he was unable to locate his man, but that the search would continue as long as Beavers remained in Washington.

Squad of Sleuths at Work.

Lanford is apparently worried over his inability to locate the stenographer. While Beavers is scouring Washington, the detective head has detailed a squad of detectives to try and find Gentry through some local source. While this search is being promoted, Colonel Felder and others concerned in Gentry’s repudiation of the dictagraph reports, said Thursday that Gentry could be brought back to Atlanta at any time they desired.

He will remain in Washington for ten more days, it is said. He was given a position as stenographer with a business firm which would last for 30 days, after which he intended returning to Atlanta and resume his connection with the General Fire Extinguisher company, with whom he has been employed for considerable time.

His residence in Washington, it is stated, is obscure. He is passing under an assumed name so as to avoid newspaper reporters and notoriety. He is seen but very little on the streets, detectives aver who have talked with him, and each afternoon upon leaving his place of work, he walks hurriedly to his boarding place, remaining therein throughout the night.

Located by Burns.

Before he was located in Washington, every agency of the Burns detective agency on the continent was flooded with descriptions of him in the effort to apprehend him and verify the statement that the dictagraph reports were “padded.” Less than two weeks ago a Burns operative of the Washington office, who had studied the missing stenographer’s picture, saw and recognized young Gentry as he walked home on the way from work.

He was shadowed to his address. The operative wired Atlanta. Detective Miles, who is at the head of the Miles Investigating Bureau, an Atlanta concern, was sent immediately to Washington, with the result that he found Gentry at the boarding place, managed an interview with the youth, and obtained the affidavit which created a city-wide sensation following its exclusive publication Wednesday morning in The Constitution.

Unusual interest is being centered in arrangements being made by the Fulton grand jury to investigate the affidavit and charges “frames-up” from both sides—the detective department and the men who claim they were victimized by the dictagraph plot. Immediate action is assured by officials promoting the investigation as is the assurance that the probe will be deep and thorough.

Beavers Doubts Affidavit.

“Even without evidence of the records made with aid of the dictagraph,” Chief Beavers told a Constitution reporter in Washington Thursday afternoon, “we have the testimony of Secretary Febuary, who was in the same room with the men during the famous conversations.”

The chief appeared to doubt the affidavit’s genuineness. He declined to express any opinion about it’s [sic] authenticity, or whether or not Gentry bad signed it. Also, he seemed in doubt that the “George M. Gentry,” whose name was signed to the document, was the young stenographer who noted the dictagraph incident.

A humorous incident relative to the chief’s connection with the dictagraph episode, occurred Thursday afternoon, when the chief, in company with The Constitution’s reporter, walked past the Raleigh hotel, in which the national chiefs are holding their annual convention. The chief was with a genial party of friends. As they hove into view of the hotel, one of the group chanced to remark:

“You’re considerably in the limelight this day and time, chief,—won a centipede race, disrupted a tenderlion and became the south’s chief promoter of civic morals. This little instrument also contributed much to your fame, didn’t it?”

With which the chief’s companion laughingly pointed to a sign conspicuously displayed in a window of the fashionable hotel:

“Be sure to see the dictagraph test within.”

Miss Henning, who took Gentry’s affidavit, when seen by the Constitution’s Washington representative Thursday, explained her connection with the sensational document. She told of having been called over the telephone Monday and being asked to come to room 802 Westery building, which is occupied by the Louisville and Nashville railway offices. She was wanted to witness a legal paper.

“I met two men in room 802,” she said, “and, after going through the usual formalities, attached my seal to the document a Mr. Gentry signed in my presence. I accepted the usual fee of 25 cents, although the men wanted to give me fifty.

“I did not know the man, Mr. Gentry. Neither did I know the contents of the affidavit. I did not have time to read it. Immediately after affixing my seal I left the party in room 802. They seemed pretty well acquainted all round. Had I known at the time that the paper was as important as it has proved to be, I would have taken time to read it thoroughly.”

Miss Henning is a law clerk.

* * *

The Atlanta Constitution, June 13th 1913, “Beavers Trying to Find Gentry,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

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

The Atlanta Journal

June 12, 1913

He Wires Chief Lanford That Young Stenographer Can’t Be Found

All efforts on the part of Detective Chief Lanford to locate George M. Gentry, the stenographer who wrote the famous dictograph records, have failed.

Following the publication Wednesday of an affidavit from Gentry made in Washington, D. C., in which the young stenographer charged that the dictograp [sic] records were padded after he had written them. Chief Lanford wired to Police Chief James L. Beavers, who is attending the police chief’s convention in that city, to locate Gentry.

Thursday afternoon, Chief Lanford received the following telegram from Chief Beavers:

“Washington, D. C.,
“June 12, 1913.

“N. A. Lanford,
“Chief Detectives.
“Atlanta, Ga.
“Have been unable to locate Gentry.

“JAMES L. BEAVERS.”

Chief Lanford takes for granted that Chief Beavers enlisted the aid of the Washington police and detectives in his search for Gentry and their future [sic] to find him indicates that he is not now in Washington.

Members of Gentry’s family state that they have no idea where he is, and E. O. Miles, the private detective, who brought back the Washington affidavit, refuses to divulge the young man’s address.

* * *

The Atlanta Journal, June 12th 1913, “Chief Beavers Unable to Locate Gentry,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

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

The Atlanta Constitution

June 12, 1913

Investigation of Charges and Counter Charges Will Begin at Early Date and Will Be Exhaustive One.

LANFORD SAYS GENTRY WILL DENY AFFIDAVIT

Affidavit Is Made Declaring Dictagraph Instrument Was Secured by Chief Lanford For Use in Phagan Case.

Following close on the heels of the publication of the George M. Gentry affidavit, in which the young stenographer states that his typewritten report of the dictagraph conversation was padded, and says that he left town after he had discovered that he had fallen in with a “crowd of crooks,” comes the assurance that the grand jury will at once make a searching probe of the detective department in an effort to establish the truth regarding the many charges and counter charges that have been afloat since the dictagraph sensation was sprung.

Members of the grand jury take the position that if the Gentry affidavit is true, it constitutes a stinging indictment of the detective department—an indictment which should not be allowed to stand longer than it will take to uncover the facts.

Records True, Says Lanford.

Chief of Detectives Lanford defends his department and his own personal connection with the sensation with the declaration that the dictagraph reports, as published, were absolutely correct, and that reports to the contrary are not only false, but will be proved untrue.

Impeiled by public sentiment the dictagraph incident created, it is authentically stated that the grand jury probe will be made at a very early date, and will be an exhaustive one.

While contradicted by Gentry’s affidavit and statements from the trio of dictagraph “victims”—Mayor Woodward, Colonel Felder and Charles Jones. G. C. Febuary, secretary to Chief Lanford, stoutly maintas that the dictagraph notes were accurate and that there were no discrepancies whatever in the published copies.

Probing Gentry’s Departure.

Developments were many Wednesday as a result of the stenographer’s testimony. Chief Lanford declared to reporters that he was investigating Gentry’s departure from the city with a view to substantiating his theory that the youth was lured to Washington by Ed Miles, acting for people “higher up.”

An affidavit setting forth the statement that Lanford obtained the dictagraph instrument on the pretense of using it only to corroborate evidence in the Mary Phagan mystery, has been attested to by L. O. Suries, who is attached to the Southern Bell Telephone company, and who is local representative of the dictagraph concern.

L. O. Series Makes Affidavit.

It follows:

Georgia, Fulton County—Personally appeared before the undersigned, an officer authorized by Surles, who, first being duly and legally sworn, deposeth and saith: That he is an employee of the Southern Bell Telephone and Telegraph Company, and heretofore represented, as agent, the General Acoustics company.

Deponent further says on oath that on Wednesday, the 31st day of May, 1913, Newport Lanford, chief of detectives, called him over the phone, requesting that he install a dictagraph in an important case, and that it must be done by 10:30 on the same morning Deponent thereupon at the office of Chief Lanford, who stated that he desired the dictagraph to corroborate important evidence in the Phagan murder mystery, whereupon deponent consented to install the dictagraph, upon the understanding that his name would not be used in connection with said installation. Chief Lanford assured deponent that he would comply with said request. Deponent was directed to certain rooms in the Williams house, where the dictagraph was installed under direction of one Febuary and one Colyar, who were understood by deponent to be representatives of Chief Lanford’s office, the installation being completed about 1 p.m. on Wednesday, the 21st day of May, 1913. After the installation deponent left the premises, and was called to remove the instrument on the following day. The removal was made about 5:30 p.m. on Thursday, the 22nd day of May, 1913.

Deponent further states on oath that at no time during the interview with Chief Lanford, during the installation of said dictagraph or thereafter, was there any intimation that the instrument was to be used for corroborating evidence in the Phagan murder mystery.

Deponent further states on oath that this affidavit was dictated by him personally and voluntarily, in order to clearly state his position in any controversy arising over his connection with said installation.

L. O. Surles

Sworn to and subscribed before me, this 9th day of June, 1913.

D. O. Chestnut

Notary public, Fulton County, Georgia.

Felder Parallels Statements.

This affidavit has inspired Colonel Felder to draw a parallel of extracts from one of his statements recently published and from a reply made by Chief Lanford. He accuses the detectives of having lied regarding the negotiations with Surles prior to the installation of the dictagraph.

The first extract is from a card addressed by Colonel Felder to Chief Lanford. It follows:

“You lied to Surles, of the Southern Bell Telephone and Telegraph company, to induce him to install the so-called dictagraph; you lied to turn him in promising him not to use his name—you disclosed it in an effort to give respectability to the conspiracy by publishing: ‘The instrument used in dictagraphing Felder was installed by Surles, electrician of the Southern Bell Telephone company.'”

The extract from Lanford’s answer is:

“He says I promised Surles that I would not use his name. Here, again, he lies. All I said to Surles while negotiating with him to install the dictagraph was that I intended to use it in the interest of justice.”

Detectives Want Gentry.

That every effort will be made by the detective department to return Gentry to Atlanta, was a statement made by Lanford. If any legal means can be found, he said, and the stenographer refuses to come back to Georgia, he will be brought back under charges of perjury.

Chief Beavers, who is in Washington attending the annual convention of national police heads, has been wired by the detective chief to find Gentry and investigate his affidavit. No reply was received from him up to late last night. He was also asked to persuade Gentry to return with him to Atlanta.

“If Gentry had made this affidavit in Atlanta,” Chief Lanford said, “I would take instant action against him for perjury. We can do nothing with him as long as the deed was committed in Washington. He had better be glad, however, that he was that far away. That is, considering, of course, that he attested to the paper. I doubt its genuineness myself. I think it’s a forgery.”

“If Gentry comes back, he’ll tell the truth, and prove our assertions that the affidavit is false and that the dictagraph records were absolutely correct. He will come shortly. I have detailed men to investigate the cause of his departure, and it is my theory that he was got out of the city by this Miles, who was acting under instructions of influence ‘higher up.'”

Believes in Gentry.

“I do not believe Gentry is the kind of man to swear to one affidavit and then make another contradicting his first. He impresses me as being a clean-cut, honest youth, who will act according to the dictates of his conscience, matter not what be the circumstances.”

Febuary stated to a reporter that he will swear to the accuracy of the published dictagraph reports, and that if Gentry persists in his purported story, he will personally take action against the stenographer for alleged perjury. He says the affidavit is the result of a frame-up of the ‘ring,’ who were affected by the dictagraph incident.

“Gentry’s affidavit bears out my contention that the entire matter was a frame-up on the part of Lanford and his hirelings,” said Colonel Felder. “It is complete vindication. Everyone now agrees with me that I was the innocent victim of a conspiracy.”

“As far as I personally am concerned, the incident is closed, Gentry will return to Atlanta within the next ten days and will something additional to say. It is reported that I possess the key to vault in which are contained Gentry’s original notes. This is erroneous. They are safe in the hands of a responsible attorney.”

Grand Jury Probe Needed.

“The grand jury will do Atlanta a real service by investigating this vile dictagraph business.” Mayor Woodward declared Wednesday afternoon. “The sooner it is taken up and the deeper the grand jury goes into it, the better pleased I’ll be.”

“The whole business, on its face, looks like a plot against me. If I am guilty of anything, I want the grand jury to expose me. If I have been victimized I feel that it is the duty of the grand jury to vindicate me, and if those who tried to frame up on me are guilty of unbecoming conduct I think it is the duty of the grand jury to say so.”

“I am satisfied that the people of Atlanta now know the truth. Gentry’s affidavit has vindicated me. But it has placed the police department in a bad light in the eyes of the people of Atlanta. If the mayor of the city is not safe from underhand attacks such as this dictagraph plot has been shown to be, God help our citizens.”

“And right here let me say that the police commission can do a whole lot to restore public confidence by making an investigation of its own accord.”

George Gentry’s mother, when seen by a Constitution reporter at her home last night, would not discuss the report that she had sworn to an affidavit, which stated that her son, shortly before his departure from the city, had told her of the dictagraph ‘padding,’ and had given as the reason for his flight the fear of being arrested on a rumored warrant.

Mrs. Gentry said that she did not care to tell the date on which she expected the stenographer’s return. She explained that it was his affair, not his family’s, and that this was the reason why they were maintaining silence.

* * *

The Atlanta Constitution, June 12th, 1913, “Grand Jury Will Probe Affidavits About Dictagraph,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

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

The Atlanta Georgian

Wednesday, June 11, 1913

In New Sworn Statement Gentry Declares He Came to Realize He Was Dealing with “Bunch of Crooks”—Charges Lanford and Beavers Names Were Inserted.

That the dictograph conversations in which it was plotted to trap Colonel Thomas B. Felder, Mayor Woodward and C. C. Jones were padded and altered in meaning is the sensational charge brought back to Atlanta in an affidavit sworn to by George M. Gentry, who fled to Washington after the conversations, in their alleged garbled form, had been offered for publication by A. S. Colyar, Jr., and printed.

Gentry’s charges appear to substantiate in a large measure, if not entirely, the repeated statements of Colonel Felder and Mayor Woodward that an attempt had been made to make them the victims of a conspiracy.

Gentry said in making his affidavit: “I came to the realization that I had been dealing with a bunch of crooks, and decided that the best thing for me was to tell the whole story.”

Cleared, Says Felder.

Colonel Felder said that he regarded the affidavit of Gentry as a complete invidication of himself. He declared that he [sic] explanation contained in the sworn statement of Gentry on the face of it showed hat [sic] Colyar and Chief of Detectives Lanford had been in a miserable conspiracy to ruin his (Felder’s) reputation by seeking to prove him guilty of attempted bribery.

Mayor Woodward said that the affidavit bore out his previous statements that he never had mentioned the names of Chief Beavers or Chief Lanford in his conversation in room 33 of Williams House No. 2, where the trap was sprung.

“The whole thing was a frame-up. I was suspicious the moment I entered the room. I knew that something was wrong, and I was on my guard. In spite of that, they twisted and turned my statements around, as the original notes taken by young Gentry will show.”

Chief Lanford said he did not believe Gentry had signed the new affidavit.

Colonel Felder said:

A Dirty Plot.

“Gentry’s affidavit is a complete vindication. It bears out my statement that the whole thing was a frame-up on the part of Newport Lanford and his hirelings. Everyone agrees with me now that I was the innocent victim of a dirty, contemptible plot.

“The notebook is not in the hands of Gentry’s brother. It was at the time he left Atlanta, but it is now in a safe deposit vault and I have the key.

“I have given Mayor Woodward a copy of the affidavit, and I expect he will ask the Grand Jury to look into the matter.

Incident Closed.

“So far as I am personally concerned, the incident is closed with this vindication, Gentry will return to Atlanta within the next week or ten days, and he may have something additional to say

“As to the Grand Jury scouring the country for witnesses to find out whether I was carrying a concealed weapon on the day Lanford attempted to assault me, the matter could have been facilitated by them calling on me. I am a truthful man and would have told them.

“As a matter of fact, instead of seeking to indict me the jury should have been imprisoning Lanford for contempt of court. Never before since the early colonial days has a man assaulted or attempted to assault, a witness before the Grand Jury without that body taking some decisive action.

Lanford Angry.

Chief Lanford was angered at the developments and said that he did not believe that Gentry signed the affidavit.

The affidavit was brought to Atlanta Tuesday night by E. O. Miles, a private detective, and given to Mayor Woodward. It was sworn to in Washington before Jeannette Henning, a notary public. Gentry said that he had fled to Washington on being informed that his arrest was imminent and that he would not be allowed to make bond.

Miles said that Gentry was willing to return to Atlanta and that he promised to complete the month at his work in Washington and then come back voluntarily.

Besides charging that the dictograph conversations were padded and altered in meaning, Gentry alleged that Colyar had made an endeavor to buy the original notes.

Gentry’s affidavit in full, as given out, follows:

District of Columbia, City of Washington—Personally appeared before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public, of the District of Columbia, George M. Gentry, who on oath states that:

On Wednesday, May 21, 1913, at or about 10 o’clock in the morning, Mr. Gay C. February called me over the telephtone [sic] and desired to know if I would do some stenographic work for him. I told him I would, but that I couldn’t get off until noon. He said that they were in a hurry for it and he would like for me to come at once, so I arranged to get off and went down to his office, and the chief told me he wanted me to take down some testimony, and he asked me if I could write very fast. Mr. Febuary asslred [sic] Chief Lanford that I was a good stenographer and could do the work all right. The chief then told me that the work he wanted done required somebody that could be trusted all right, and I assured him that I always treated all stenographic work I did as confidential. Chief Lanford told me then that what he wanted me to do was to take down a conversation that would take place in a hotel, and he asked me if I thought I could take it over a dictophone. (Mr. Surles coming in at that time with a satchel, which he opened and which contained wires and other paraphernalia in connection with a dictograph outfit.)

Watched Dictograph Installation.

After a few minutes, during which time Mr. Febuary was absent, we went over to the Williams house No. 2, on North Forsyth street, Atlanta, Fulton county, Georgia (Mr. Febuary and I), and I was instructed to go into Room No. 21 of this hotel. Mr. Surles and Mr. Colyar were there, and they probably had to make arrangements for adjoining rooms, as Mr. Surles commented to me that they hadn’t decided[…]

VINDICATED, SAY WOODWARD AND COL. FELDER

Both Assert Gentry’s New Sworn Statement Fully Proves the Existence of Dirty Plot.

Continued From Page 1.

[…]just what to do with the dictographs. After a time Colyar came in and instructed Surles to follow him, and gave me instructions to await his wishes. Later on Mr. Febuary came in, and I told him that if I had to wait much longer by myself I was going back to the office. I was then allowed to come into the room, where they were installing the dictographs (one on each end of the bottom board of the bureau just under the bottom drawer on the back of the board), and the wires being run through the keyhole of the door between Room 31 and Room 32. The bureau was then screwed against the door facing. At about 12:30 I started getting accustomed to Febuary’s and Colyar’s voice[s].

Went Through Rehearsal.

At first I could not hear at all, but gradually I was able to hear more distinctly and after an hour or two of diligent practices I was able to use the dictograph and to distinguish voices very clearly. Right at the beginning I found that I would not be able to hear anything with the windows up. When they were closed it became rather stuffy and this, coupled with the strain I was under, added to the distraction. I stopped particing [sic] at 2:45 that afternoon and went downstairs to the office of the hotel, where I awaited Mr. Felder’s arrival. I saw him cross Forsyth street, and after he, Febuary and Colyar went upstairs, or were just about at the top of the stairs, I started up and saw the three enter Room 31 of the Williams house, located as mentioned previously. I then immediately went into room 32 and closed the door, partly, but did not lock it. The windows were down and so I went directly to the table and placed the receiver over my head and started writing what I heard. I took down all the conferences that took place. At somewhere around 5 that afternoon I left the hotel and went to Mr. R. B. Bliss’ house and took some dictation. From there I went home and changed my collar.

I returned to the office of the General Fire Extinguisher company, 376 Marietta street, where I wrote the dictation he had given me, signed his letters and then met Mr. Febuary there at the office. We went to the Candler restaurant to supper and from there we returned to the Williams house to keep an appointment with Colyar at about 7:30. At about 8 o’clock Mr. Miles and Mr. C. C. Jones and Colyar went up to the “conference room” and Mr. Febuary and I to the “information reception room.”

Conference Lasted Half Hour.

I placed the retriever over my head, and in order to be sure that I would hear everything, Mr. Febuary stood behind me and held them pressed tightly to my ears. This conference lasted about thirty minutes. Between 8:30 and 9:15 Wednesday night Mr. Febuary loafed about town, as we had an appointment with Mr. Branch and Mr. Paschal at 9:30 at the Williams house, and as they were not in The Journal office, we had to kill time until they showed up. I left Mr. Febuary and Mr. Colyar at The Journal office at 9:15 and went over to the Williams house to wait for the arrival of The Journal reporters mentioned above. They came in shortly and we went over to The Journal office and all of us (Colyar, Febuary, Branch, Paschal and myself) went up to the editorial department, where a machine was selected and I then went to work transcribing what I had heard.

Right at the start I made Colyar angry because when I did not hear what was said I put dashes and so I allowed him to dictate several answers and questions, which do not appear in my notebook and which I am not positive that I heard. I did not hear Mayor Woodward mention Chief Beavers or Chief Lanford during the whole conversation, nor did I write it in the transcription of my notes, these names being evidently added by other parties. At 4:30 Thursday morning, May 22, I finished transcribing my notes and turned the papers over to Mr. Febuary. Later on during the morning he came down to the office, bringing an affidavit which I had written for me to sign before a notary public. He told me that they had made only a few minor changes in the transcription, and that all I had to do was to sign the affidavit which I did. However, I noticed that some interlineations had been made in my copy, or rather in Chief Lanford’s copy, as I had no copy.

Refused Gentry Copy.

Colyar and the reporters, just before I started to transcribe my notes, argued as to the number of copies that should be made. They agreed that one copy should be made for the chief, one for Colyar and one for The Journal, and that no more should be made. This kept me from having a copy. I had my notebook, however, and it was the comparison on my notes with the published articles that lead to my discovery that in addition to the several answers and questions which Colyar had personally dictated, other changes had been made, namely that insertion of the names of Chief Beavers and Chief Lanford, in the conference with Mayor Woodward, also many other variations occurred, changing the sense of the statement, and since they had my affidavit attached to the papers I felt that I had been duped.

As to the remuneration of my services, will say that The Journal reporters, Branch and Paschal, agreed to pay me $5 to get the work written Wednesday night, so it could be published in Thursday’s paper. Saturday morning, after the appearance of the article in Friday’s Journal, The Georgian’s reporter came to the office and offered me either $25 or $45, I do not recollect which, for a copy of the conference with Mayor Woodward, February, Miles and Colyar, and Miles, Jones and Colyar’s conference. I declined the offer. I then went to see The Journal’s reporters and told them that The Georgian had offered me money for a copy of the conference, and they agreed to pay me $50 to hold my notebook from Saturday until Monday. I turned my notebook over to Mr. Brice, who gave it to his stenographer to keep until Monday. Later during the day the reporters told me that The Georgian had gotten a copy, and so I was too late. I then went down to Mr. Brice’s office and asked Miss M.—, Mr. Brice’s stenographer, for my notebook, and I took it home and locked it up. Monday, when I went up to see Major Cohen about the $50 he went down to look for Mr. Brice, whom he was unable to find. Later we went back upstairs together and Branch and Paschal explained to him their promise to pay me $50 for allowing The Journal to retain my notebook. However some argument arose over the fact that I took my notebook out of The Journal’s office Saturday night. I told them that they had agreed to give me $50 not to make a copy for The Georgian, and that I had not made the copy for The Georgian, and had, therefore, carried out my part of the compact. They then told be to come back later on and see Mr. Brice about it. I returned after awhile, I believe it was around 1 o’clock, and Mr. Brice paid me the amount in currency and took my receipt.

Lanford Hasn’t Paid.

Chief Lanford has not as yet paid me for my services, from the fact that I have not rendered a bill.

Saturday morning, before the publication of the Woodward conference, held at 4 o’clock Wednesday, May 21, as previously mentioned, and the Jones conference, held at 8 o’clock the same night, I went to the editorial department of The Journal and requested a proof of what they were going to print. Colyar, who had one reading it, declined to allow me to have a proof, and so I left The Journal building, suspicious.

Saturday afternoon I went down to the office, carrying with me my original notebook, and a copy of Friday’s and Saturday’s Journal. I compared them all the way through and upon seeing the many variations in what was printed and what I had in my notes, I realized that my transcriptions had been tampered with, and that I had just cause for the suspicions which were aroused by their refusal to allow me to read the proofs Saturday morning.

Fears Arrest When Tricked.

Having signed the affidavits, at Mr. Febuary’s request, in which I swore to what I had heard, and seeing something entirely different published, I became very nervous and uneasy. Saturday night when I went home, a reporter called up and said he was one of The Journal reporters and wanted to see me a few minutes. I told him to come over. He came in and introduced himself to me as Mr. Starr, The Journal. My other and aunt recognized his voice as that of a reporter who had called shortly before I came home, and said he was from The Georgian. They both rushed into the sitting room and told me that he was not with The Journal, but was the same fellow that came a few minutes ago, and said he was from The Georgian. He denied that he had said he was from The Journal, although he had told both myself and my grandfather, who went to answer the door bell, that he was from The Journal. Just before he left he informed me that a warrant had been sworn out for Febuary’s, Colyar’s and my arrest, and upon my directing him as to where the door out could be found, he departed, saying that he had got the information he wanted.

Sunday afternoon, at the office, someone called me up and informed me that I would probably be arrested Monday, I did not recognize the voice, and so am unable to say who it was. They also informed me that I would have to make bond in order to be released. I asked who it was, and they hung up or were cut off.

Effort to Obtain Notes.

Monday morning Colyar requested that I turn my notebook over to The Journal and said he would give me $5 if I would show him a receipt from The Journal for the notebook. I came near allowing The Journal to have the notebook, but instead gave it to my brother to take home and instructed him to allow no one to have it.

Developments later showed me the character of some of the people connected with this transaction and it made me so ashamed of my connection with it that I was afraid I could not face the humiliation that I thought would naturally onsite, and also the fact that they had changed my transcription showed to me very clearly that I was mixed up with a bunch of crooks.

I am prepared to read my notes whenever it becomes necessary. These notes will show exactly what I heard.

The foregoing affidavit is made by me voluntarily, unsolicited, and no money or the promise of any remuneration whatever was offered to me for making it, my sole motive being to give the straight history of my connection with the now ‘infamous’ dictograph affair.

GEORGE M. GENTRY.

JEANNETTE HENNING, Notary Public, District of Columbia.

* * *

The Atlanta Georgian, June 11th 1913, “Plot Exposed, Says Felder, But Lanford Doubts Affidavit,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)