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

The Atlanta Journal

Tuesday, June 24, 1913

Judge Names Date After Statement From Reuben R. Arnold, In Which He Said Trial Would Last Two Weeks

DEFENSE TAKES STEPS TO GET STATE’S EVIDENCE

Subpenas Duces Tecum Issued, Demanding Production of Affidavits and Popers [sic] in Possession of Solicitor

Leo M. Frank, accused of the slaying of Mary Phagan, will not be tried before superior court Judge L. S. Roan next Monday. The judge in a conference with attorneys at 2 o’clock Tuesday afternoon formally set the trial for Monday, July 28, and no attempt to reopen the questions of arraignment will be made. Both the prosecution and the defense agreed to this date.

Any attempt made to put Frank on trial on next Monday was silenced when Reuben R. Arnold, speaking for the defense, said flatly that the trial would take at least two weeks. The assurance that the trial would last some time and the fact that it likely would be held in the stuffy little court room in the Thrower building, if scheduled Monday, practically caused the postponement.

Solicitor Dorsey, for the state, and Luther Z. Rosser and Reuben R. Arnold, for the prosecution, were summoned to the court house by Judge Roan at 3 o’clock and a discussion of the matter was opened.

SOLICITOR ANNOUNCED READY.

Solicitor Dorsey announced that he was ready and made the declaration that his witnesses would not take more than two days at the outside. He said if the defense had any he didn’t think they would take any longer.

This remark brought a grunt from Luther Z. Rosser and the Arnold statement that the trial would take two weeks.

“We have the witnesses,” both of the lawyers for the defense asserted.

Both Attorneys Rosser and Arnold told the court that in the event of a postponement of the case for Monday that they desired it to go over until after the week of July 14, when both would be engaged in the trial of Mattie Flanders in Swainsboro. Mr. Rosser represents the defense of Mrs. Flanders and Mr. Arnold the prosecution.

This came when Solicitor Dorsey suggested that the case be tried on July 7.

Judge Roan, in fixing July 28 as a date suitable to all concerned, said that there would be no break in the week, as there would with July 4, that a good court room for the trial could be obtained about July 13, that the jail could be cleared of routine cases by that time and previously made engamenest [sic] would not be interrupted.

All lawyers concerned were in court and the judge asserted that lack of preparation could not be offered as an excuse when the case was called on July 28.

The attorneys for Leo M. Frank Tuesday afternoon secured subpoenas duces tecum to be served on Chief James L. Beavers, Chief N. A. Lanford, Solicitor Hugh M. Dorsey, Assistant Solicitor E. A. Stevens, Hary [sic] Scott, of the Pinkertons; City Detectives John Black, Pat Campbell and J. N. tSarnes [sic], and Secretary of Chief Lanford, G. C. Febuary, calling upon them to produce in court Monday June 30, or any other day that the Frank case might be on trial, all affidavits or statements secured from Jim Conley, the negro sweeper; Monteen Stover and Grace Hix.

Subpoenas declared that the papers are wanted as evidence by the defense in the case of Leo M. Frank.

ALL PAPERS DEMANDED.

The subpoenas duces tecum order those upon whom they are served to produce a certain affidavit or statement sworn to by James Conley in the presence of Detective John Black and Harry Scott, on May 18; also affidavits or statements made by Conley on May 24; also a certain written affida-[…]

(Continued on Page 3, Col. 1)

JULY 28 IS DATE AGREED UPON FOR TRIAL OF FRANK

(Continued from Page 1.)

[…]vit or statement made and signed by Conley on May 28 in the presence of Chief Lanford and Detectives Black and Scott; also an affidavit made by Conley on May 28 in the presence of Lanford and Scott; also an affidavit or statement made by Conley on May 29 in the presence of Chief Lanford and Detectives Campbell and Scott; also “all other statements or affidavits made by James Conley in your power, custody or control, in reference to the murder of Mary Phagan.”

The subpoenas further demand the production of all statements or affidavits made by Newt Lee in reference to the case; also all affidavits or statements made by Monteen Stover; also all statements made by W. M. Mathews; and finally all statements or affidavits made by Grace Hix.

The subpoenas provide that the papers named shall be produced in court on Monday, June 30, or on any other day that the case of the State vs. Leo M. Frank might be on trial.

It is evident by this move of the part of the defense that Mr. Frank’s attorneys propose to lay great stress upon the conflicting statements and affidavits made by the negro Conley as the real murderer of Mary Phagan, and his numerous statements in reference to the case will doubtless be used to show the unreliability of his evidence against Frank.

POINT TO BE CONTESTED.

While Solicitor Dorsey absolutely declined to discuss the demands of the defense for the production of the papers and affidavits secured by the state in its investigation of the Phagan tragedy, it is evident that the papers will not be turned over to the defense without a bitter fight. The papers unquestionably will be brought to court by those who not have them in custody, but before the defense is permitted access to them it is believed that the state will contest the point before the judge. Just how this will be done is not known.

Frank H. Hooper, the attorney who will be associated with the solicitor in the porsecution [sic], was in conference with Solicitor Dorsey and Detectives Starnes, Campbell and Harry Scott for several hours Tuesday morning. The nature of this conference was not known but it is believed that they were going over the evidence in the Phagan case, getting ready for the trial.

WHAT IS THIS EVIDENCE?

There is considerable speculation as to the nature of the statement or affidavit made by W. M. Mathews, which is among the papers demanded by the defense. Both Chief Beavers and Chief Lanford declare that they never heard of Mathews in connection with the Phagan case before. It seems probable, therefore, that Mathews’ statement is part of the evidence secured by Solicitor Dorsey. The only W. M. Mathews whose name is in the city director is a street car motorman living at 449 Lee street.

CONFER WITH RELATIVES.

Detectives working on the Phagan case Monday afternoon held a conference at Chief Lanford’s office with J. W. Coleman, step-father of the slain girl, and W. J. Phagan, the aged grandfather, of Marietta.

The two men visited police headquarters at the request of the detectives and discussed every feature of the case to be brought out at the trial of Leo M. Frank.

It is said the two men went to headquarters for conference following the last attempt on the part of Solicitor Dorsey to gain new information from Jim Conley, the negro witness. Conley, it is said, was quizzed again Monday, but the examination, so officials assert, developed nothing new.

* * *

The Atlanta Journal, June 24th 1913, “July 27 Is Date Agreed Upon for Trial of Frank,” 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 23, 1913

Negro Conley Sticks to Affidavit Story When Again Cross-Examined by Dorsey.

The first official action of the court in preparing for the trial of Leo M. Frank for the murder of Mary Phagan was taken Monday afternoon when Judge L. S. Roan impaneled 72 men, from whom a jury to hear the case will be sought.

June 30 was agreed to by Judge Roan for the opening of the case. If a postponement is desired it will now have to be asked for in open court.

As yet Judge Roan said he had received no intimation from the defense that a delay was wanted. Solicitor General Hugh M. Dorsey said Monday the prosecution was ready for trial.

Trial in Thrower Building.

An extra staff of deputies has been sworn in and subpenas to jurymen impaneled and witnesses are now being served.

No plans for a larger room in which to hear the case have matured, and it is likely that the courtroom of the Superior Court in the Thrower Building will be used at last, despite its size and lack of comfort.

Jim Conley, the negro sweeper, was brought before Solicitor Dorsey Monday morning for another cross-examination. The questions were solely along the lines of the negro’s affidavit charging Frank with the crime. As the Solicitor later said, he had only refreshed Conley’s mind on the points he had made in his statement. The negro told the same story he told before without deviation.

Mr. Dorsey said that he would call all of the principal witnesses for the State and refresh their minds on the part they will play in the trial.

W. J. [sic] Coleman, stepfather of the strangled girl, was summoned by the Solicitor after Conley had been questioned for some time and was brought before the negro. Strict secrecy surrounded the performance, and if anything was gained by confronting the sweeper with Coleman it was not divulged. Mary Phagan’s grandfather accompanied Coleman.

Later Coleman said that he had called particularly to ask the Solicitor if Judge Newt Morris, formerly of the Blue Ridge Circuit, could be brought into the case. Mr. Dorsey informed him that the State had made all arrangements for handling the case, but that if he wanted to have the former Judge represent the family there would be no objection.

Attorney Reuben Arnold, for Frank, announced Monday morning that the defense’s case was complete. Mr. Arnold said that the testimony of twelve witnesses would form the bulk of Frank’s support. He declared that only the inability of one or more of these witnesses to appear at the time set for the trial would cause the defense to ask for a postponement.

Monteen Stover, the young girl who called at the pencil factory office between noon and 12:15 o’clock on the afternoon of the murder, was taken before Jim Conley at the police station Sunday and identified by the negro as the girl he had seen while hiding at the foot of the stairway waiting for Frank’s signal.

Conley Identifies Girl.

Detectives went out to the Stover girl’s home at 171 South Forsyth Street late in the afternoon and asked that she dress as she had on the afternoon of the murder and go to the police station with them.

The girl put on a small yellow hat with a red ribbon about it, enveloped her body in a yellow raincoat and[…]

Continued on Page 2, Column 5.

VENIRE IS DRAWN FOR TRIAL OF LEO M. FRANK

Prosecution and Defense Both Announce They Are Ready—To Start in Fortnight.

Continued From Page 1.

[…]taking an umbrella went with the detectives.

At the police station Conley was waiting in the reception room.

As soon as the Stover girl entered the room he jumped to his feet, exclaiming:

“That’s her, that’s her.” Then the negro surveyed her wearing apparel.

“She’s dressed just as she was that day, only she hasn’t got on her ‘easy walkers.’

The girl was wearing leather slippers. Later she said she had worn “easy walkers,” or tennis shoes, when she went to the pencil factory, as the negro had said.

The negro’s identification of the Stover girl proves, apparently, beyond a doubt that he was in the factory building at the time he said in his affidavit. Beyond sustaining that statement, though, no further support to the prosecution’s case against Frank is shown by it.

Solicitor Dorsey returned to Atlanta Sunday afternoon from a week’s vacation in New York. He called a conference with his assistants, E. A. Stephens and F. A. Hooper, at his home Sunday evening. Following it he announced that he would be ready for trial on June 30 and that unless the defense or the trial judge moved to have the trial postponed he would commence at once summoning witnesses and getting ready.

Solicitor Dorsey would not discuss the return to Atlanta of Mrs. Mina [sic] Formby and her announcement that she would go on the stand against Frank. He intimated, however, that he entertained the same opinion as had already been expressed by his assistant, Mr. Hooper, that when the woman left Atlanta she dropped from the case entirely.

Attorney John W. Moore denied emphatically that he had been employed in the case with L. Z. Rosser and Reuben R. Arnold to defend Frank, as was reported by Solicitor Dorsey.

Moore Not Employed.

“I have not been employed in the case and have no other interest in it than that of a citizen. I believe Frank is innocent, and have since he was first drawn into the case, but I am not connected with it in any way. I have never been approached on the subject.”

Solicitor Dorsey opened court in the Thrower building Monday morning for a week of criminal trials to clear the jail docket. He will be in court every day until Saturday, and will have to depend on his assistants to summon witnesses and prepare the Frank case in the event of it being set for the following week.

* * *

The Atlanta Georgian, June 23rd 1913, “Venire of 72 for Frank Jury Is Drawn,” 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

Former Solicitor at Americus Engaged to Assist Solicitor Hugh M. Dorsey

That the trial of Leo M. Frank will be a legal battle as brilliant as any ever fought in Atlanta is assured by Solicitor Dorsey’s announcement that Frank A. Hooper, Atlanta lawyer and former solicitor general of the southwestern superior court circuit, has been retained to assist the prosecution.

With the case of the state in the hands of Solicitor Dorsey and Mr. Hooper and the defense resting with Luther Z. Rosser and Herbert Haas the contest is certain to be replete with the unexpected.

Frank A. Hooper, who is Solicitor Dorsey’s choice to help the fight of the state, is distinguished as a state’s solicitor of twelve years experience. No lawyer at the Atlanta bar has seen a similar service as a prosecuting attorney. For this period he acted as solicitor to the southwestern superior court circuit at Americus. Following his term as prosecutor he practiced law in Americus being recently identified with such criminal trials as the Childers trial in Americus and the Cain trial in Cordele. In each of these cases in which the accused was acquitted Hooper appeared for the defense.

He came to Atlanta four years ago as an associate of the late Governor J. M. Terrell.

Pitted against Solicitor Dorsey and Mr. Hooper will be Luther Z. Rosser sometimes known among his confreres as “the best all-around lawyer in Atlanta;” Herbert Haas, a young but experienced attorney, and possibly others.

The report has been persistent in Atlanta for a week that another prominent Atlanta attorney known as a brilliant criminal lawyer is to be associated with the defense. While this report has not been verified there are those who are confident that the defense will be augmented by his weight before Frank faces a jury in the stuffy little Thrower building court room.

In making his announcement that Mr. Hooper was to assist in the Frank prosecution Solicitor Dorsey said that while Mr. Hooper had been his choice, Mr. and Mrs. J. W. Coleman, parents of the slain girl, had been consulted, and they directed him to employ such counsel as he deemed fit. The solicitor asserted that the Colemans had approved the employment of Mr. Hooper.

* * *

The Atlanta Journal, June 15th 1913, “Frank A. Hooper to Aid State in Frank Trial,” 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

Sunday, June 15, 1913

Solicitor General Hugh Dorsey Announces His Associate in Big Case.

Just before leaving yesterday afternoon for New York, Solicitor General Hugh M. Dorsey announced that Attorney Frank A. Hooper would be associated with him in the prosecution growing out of the murder of Mary Phagan.

Saying that Mr. Hooper was his personal choice, Dorsey also stated that Mr. and Mrs. J. W. Coleman, parents of the victim, had been consulted and had directed him to employ such counsel as he desired and that his choice of Mr. Hooper satisfied the Colemans.

Attorney Hooper has been a well-known figure at the Atlanta bar for four years. Shortly after coming to this city, he was associated with ex-Governor Joseph M. Terrell, with whom he was connected until the governor’s death. He was for twelve years the solicitor general of the southwestern judicial circuit at Americus, Ga.

Among many notable cases with which he played a conspicuous part were the Childers trial in Americus and the famous Cain murder case in Cordele. He was counsel for the defense in each case. He will be in charge of the solicitor’s affairs which relate to the Phagan case during Mr. Dorsey’s absence on his present trip.

* * *

The Atlanta Constitution, June 15th 1913, “Frank Hooper Aids Phagan Prosecution,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

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

Atlanta Constitution

Sunday, May 25^th, 1913

Thomas B. Felder, the Atlanta lawyer who is accused of having offered a bribe for an affidavit of J. W. Coleman, stepfather of Mary Phagan, now in the possession of the police, yesterday issued the following statement: To the People of Atlanta:

The publication of the sensational “story” in The Atlanta Journal on yesterday afternoon relating to myself and my connection with the Phagan case is but the symptom or manifestation of one of the most diabolical conspiracies ever hatched by a venal and corrupt “system” to protect crime in a civilized community.

To be more specific, this conspiracy was formed just after the arrest of Newt Lee and Leo Frank, charged with the murder of Mary Phagan. The controlling genius of it is Newport Lanford, chief of the city detectives; its object is to shield and protect the murderers of this innocent child, and in its wicked ramifications it marks our distinguished (?) chief of detectives as the Lieutenant Becker of our “system,” and renders his co-conspirators as dangerous to the lives, liberty and property and reputation of our citizens as the bloody and deadly Society of the Mafia.

Part Played By Papers.

Pity it is that the press of the city has been and is being made the innocent, if effective, instrument in their hands to further and effectuate the object of this wicked conspiracy by prostituting their potential columns in the exploitation of the mass of forgeries and perjuries which has been given to the public through their columns, for be it known that these papers have tacitly sanctioned the utterances of Colyar by reproducing his affidavits in the face of the fact that the editors and proprietors of all would without hesitation swear that they would not believe him on oath if called upon to do so. Strangely enough, a portion of the criminal record of this man Colyar is reproduced, showing him to be a man steeped in crime and infamy, while in the parallel column is published his defamatory utterances against me.

I would have the good people of this community know that from the day and hour of the arrest of Lee and Frank, charged with the murder of little Mary Phagan, Newport Lanford and his co-conspirators have left “no stone unturned” in their efforts to shield and protect these suspects, and I shall demonstrate later the truth of this statement with so much clearness that “he who runs may read.”

Winked At Forgeries.

In furthering and effectuating this conspiracy they have suborned perjury, winked at forgeries and, in short, employed every agency that low and groveling criminal instincts could contrive and conjure up. In their frantic efforts to shield the murderers of this girl “Lieutenant Becker” Lanford secured the services of A. S. Colyar, Jr., whose criminal record was known to the “lieutenant,” but whose services he willingly availed himself of.

Having promised this much, I shall now address myself to the task of disposing of “Lieutenant” Lanford’s “Man Friday,” A. S. Colyar.

About two and one-half years ago, while I was engaged in a controversy with the criminal and vagabond governor of the state of South Carolina, a prominent citizen of Atlanta, a client and friend of mine, whose name I withhold because he is not now in the city and I have been unable to reach him over the phone, but whose name will be given later, called at my office, and, discussing this controversy, said that he knew a man by the name of A. S. Colyar, Jr., sometimes lawyer, detective, newspaper man, etc., who had spent some time in the state of South Carolina, and who was in possession of valuable information touching that situation.

Brought Colyar To My Office.

He afterwards brought this man Colyar to my office, and after discussing the matter with him at length, I reached the conclusion that he was thoroughly undependable, and the interview closed. Afterwards, he was sent to the state of South Carolina, to obtain the information, and forwarded to me three affidavits which seemed to establish conclusively that the governor of that state had been engaged in criminal practices. Upon a careful examination of these affidavits, I discovered that the jurats attached to the three affidavits were all upon separate sheets, attached to what purported to be the genuine affidavits. This aroused my suspicions, and I sent a trusted clerk from my office to the state of South Carolina to personally interview the affiants, with the result that he was informed by them that this man Colyar had represented to them that they were heirs at law to a considerable estate in Tennessee, and that if they would make an affidavit stating who they were, he would be able to secure for them their respective inheritances without cost, indeed, that he was sent to them for that purpose, whereupon the affidavits were prepared and signed; that afterwards Colyar detached the jurats attached to the genuine affidavits and attached them to the spurious affidavits which he furnished. These affidavits are now in my files and are subject to the inspection of anyone who may be interested. It is needless for me to add that they were never made public in connection with the charges of criminal conduct lodged against the vagabond governor of South Carolina.

Met Colyar in Chattanooga.

Afterwards I met this man Colyar accidentally in the city of Chattanooga, and when I confronted him with the fact that he had forged these affidavits, he freely confessed the forgery to me, and stated that he had been reduced financially to dire extremities, and that he had forged the affidavits in order to get money from the gentleman who had introduced him to me. I respectfully submit that after this experience with this man it does not seem reasonable that I would entertain respect for him, much less repose confidence in him.

On Sunday afternoon, while engaged in a conference at my home with parties interested in the Phagan case I received a telephone message, and was informed that the party speaking was A. S. Colyar, Jr. He stated to me that it was important for him to have an interview with me during the afternoon or evening of Sunday. I made an appointment to meet him at my office at 8:15 o’clock. I met him by appointment. Knowing the man’s character, I telephoned Mr. Tobie, of the William, Mr. E. O. Miles, my friend and client, to come to my office.

Sleuths Suppress Evidence.

In my conversation with Colyar, he stated to me that the city detective force was engaged in suppressing evidence in the Phagan case; that they were in a conspiracy with the Pinkertons, who had been employed to investigate this case by Frank, one of the suspects, and that they had entered into a conspiracy to thwart the efforts of the Burns agency and myself in the investigations in progress; that he overheard a conference between Lanford and the Pinkerton agent who was employed in the case by Frank to the effect that it was important to circumvent the efforts of the Burns agency and myself in establishing the guilt of the murderer or murderers; that on the morning of the Sunday evening Lanford had caused an affidavit to be prepared and dated back, and had forced Mr. and Mrs. Coleman to sign it under threats and duress, repudiating my employment; that Lanford had arrested a negro by the name of Connelly [sic], as I remember, and had held him at the police station for two or three weeks, and had forged a confession of the negro to the effect that he himself had killed Mary Phagan, and that Newt Lee and Frank were neither participants in the murder or had knowledge thereof; that in order to discredit the Burns agent, the solicitor’s office and myself, they had framed up affidavits charging the solicitor general, the Burns agent and myself with corruption, and that at the opportune time these would be given to the public through hand bills.

Would Not Accept Statement.

I stated to Colyar that I would not accept his statements even under oath, and that if he had any documentary evidence establishing the fact that these parties were engaged in a conspiracy to suppress evidence, I would like to see it, whereupon he handed me the original Coleman affidavit, what purported to be a copy of the confession of the negro, Connelly, what purported to be an original affidavit in relation to the solicitor general, and also what purported to be an original affidavit that one of the leading newspapers of the city had been bribed by suspects or their friends.

In this conversation he told me that he had original affidavits establishing the immorality of the chief of police and the chief of detectives, and that they were guilty of acts involving moral turpitude, and he specified the acts. It is not necessary to give these to the public at [t]his time, but they will be published later.

Relation to Phagan Case.

I stated to him that I was not interested in the moral and official derelictions of the chief of police and chief of detectives, except in so far as they might relate to the suppression of evidence in the Phagan case. He thereupon asked me if the mayor of the city was interested in obtaining this evidence. I told him that I was not in the confidence of the mayor; that I had not spoken with him for months, but that if he was interested in the exposure of official rottenness in the various city departments, he would be a strange and unnatural official, and that I would bring the matter to his attention, which I afterwards did.

On the following day Colyar called me over the phone and asked me if I would meet him and some friend of his who had knowledge of the facts heretofore adverted to in conference. I stated to him that I was coming into the city on Monday evening, and would meet them at my office. I met Colyar and a young man by the name of Febuary at my office, according to appointment. The interview of Monday evening developed in substance and effect what was developed on Sunday evening, together with the additional fact that young Febuary stated that he had been used so much by the chief of police and chief of detectives in carrying out their projects of corruption that he was sick and tired of the job and would like very much for me to assist him in getting other employment; that if I would assist him he would willingly turn over to me all documents, files, etc., going to show that these parties were engaged in suppressing evidence in the Phagan case, and that while they were ostensibly working for the city and for the interest of the people, that they were really working in conspiracy with the Pinkertons—the employees of Frank—to shield and protect Frank.

Showed Me Affidavits.

He also exhibited to me numerous affidavits, documents, etc., purporting to be evidence of the official corruption of the two chiefs. Among other documents submitted were two lists which he claimed that he prepared for Chief of Police Beavers and Chief of City Detectives Lanford, purporting to contain a list of blind tigers and immoral houses which were under the protection of these departments, and from whom they received monthly payments for this alleged protection. I made it plain to both of these parties that I had no interest whatever in any of these documents except such as might tend to establish the fact that they were suppressing evidence in the Phagan case.

They asked me if Mayor Woodward and other gentlemen in the city, naming them, would be interested in obtaining this evidence.

I stated to them that I thought that not only Mayor Woodward, but every other prominent citizen in the city of Atlanta, such as Mr. Sam Inman, Captain English, Mr. Grant, Mr. Maddox and scores of others would be entirely willing to raise a fund to drive these people from the high places, if they were guilty of the acts of moral turpitude alleged against them.

They asked me if in my judgment they could be indicted and punished if they turned over this evidence to the mayor or his agents. I gave it as my judgment that they could not, and that even if they could they would not be; that I had too much confidence in the mayor of the city of the Atlanta, in the prosecuting attorney of the circuit, of the criminal court and of the governor, as a last resort, to believe that any of these officials would suffer them to be punished if they made of themselves instrumental means of exposing the colossal corruption which they represented existed in the various departments of the city government.

This conference lasted one hour and fifteen minutes. Just before it drew to a close Colyar asked me if I would be willing to pay to him and Febuary $1,000 for this documentary evidence.

Not Willing to Play.

I told him emphatically that I would not. He then asked me if I thought the mayor of the city would be willing to pay to him and Febuary $1,000 for this evidence, and to provide Febuary with as good a position as the one he now held, upon the delivery of the evidence to them. I told him that I entertained no doubt that if they could furnish the mayor with the evidence conclusively establishing the guilt of Beavers and Lanford, the mayor, through the public-spirited citizens of the town, would be willing to raise this sum of money and pay it over to them for the documentary evidence. This ended my interview upon this occasion.

On the following morning I received a telephonic communication from this man Colyar asking me if I would come to his room at the Williams house at 1 o’clock. I told him that I had an engagement. He asked me when it would be convenient for me to meet him. I stated at 3:30, so at the appointed time I called upon him at his room at the Williams hotel. While there I met Febuary. My conference with them lasted perhaps ten minutes, as I was back in my office before 4 o’clock to meet an appointment, having stopped en route for at least ten minutes to receive a treatment from my throat specialist.

I shall demonstrate in an affidavit attached to this card, and made a part thereof, that the alleged dictagraph stuff is manufactured.

In my brief interview with these parties at the Williams house, I stated to them that I would not pay them a cent for the documents that they had in their possession establishing the moral turpitude of the chief of police and Chief Lanford; that I had no interest in this branch of the controversy, and that I had declined employment in this branch of the controversy; but I stated to them that I had talked with the mayor and that I had made an appointment with Mr. Miles, and that I would meet Mr. Miles, who was making some investigations for the mayor, at my office at 4 o’clock, and that I would send him over to them.

When I arrived at my office at 4 o’clock, Mr. Miles and Mr. Tobie, of the Burns National Detective agency, were awaiting me, and I gave Mr. Miles a note of introduction to this man, Colyar, which, I am informed, was presented. On the day after Mr. Miles asked me if I would object to accompanying him to Lakewood for a conference with Colyar and Febuary. I stated to him that I most emphatically declined, and would advise him to do likewise, and he acted upon my advice. I stated to him further that if they had any business with me, they could conduct it at my office, but, as I understood the situation, I had no business with them.

If I had consented to pay money for this evidence I could have paid it either on Sunday or Monday night, and all of the documents would have been turned over to me.

Statement is Absurd.

The statement contained in the affidavits of this man Colyar and of Febuary that I offered them $1,000 for the Coleman affidavit is too absurd to justify a denial. Why would I pay $1,000 for this affidavit when it was within the power of the conspirators to obtain another affidavit within five minutes after the surrender of this affidavit to me? In this connection I desire to state that in my career at the bar, covering a quarter of a century, I have never, directly or indirectly, sought employment in any case—civil or criminal. I have never found it necessary to resort to barratry to keep busy in my profession. It is inconceivable that I, or any other reputable lawyer, would seek employment to prosecute a man for murder.

I was employed in the Phagan case by a committee of citizens residing in the vicinity of the family of the Phagan girl. My contract of employment is in writing, and duly signed by my employers. I do not give in this connection a copy of the contract and the name of the signers, for the very obvious reason that with their names in possession of “Lieutenant Becker” Lanford and his co-conspirators, my clients would immediately become the objects of attack at the hands of the “system.”

The contract above referred to was made with my law firm, Felder, Anderson, Dillon & Whitman, and is in our files and open to the inspection of any decent citizen at any time.

How Felder Was Employed.

In addition to this employment, we were employed by a committee of prominent and distinguished ladies in the city of Atlanta to aid in this investigation. The names of these ladies are withheld from publication for obvious reasons. I have never said, and I do not now say, that I was ever employed either by Mr. or Mrs. Coleman, but I do say that on Friday afternoon—the date I do not remember—but it being the day upon which the coroner’s inquest was to be held at the police barracks, I was called over the phone by one of the gentlemen who employed me in the case and asked to come down to the barracks. I immediately repaired to the barracks and stated to my client that I felt a delicacy in appearing at the coroner’s inquest unless my employment was approved by the parents of the deceased girl. I was thereupon introduced to Mr. Coleman, and explained to him my feelings in the matter. He stated to me that he had no money to employ counsel: that he appreciated the unselfish act of his neighbors in their effort to assist in the prosecution, and so far as he was concerned, my employment met with his approval; but being the stepfather of the young lady, he would prefer not to ratify my employment at that time, but would ask his wife to come to my office on the following day to the end that she would ratify the same. On the following day I left for the city of New York without seeing the mother of Mary Phagan, and was absent from the city for ten days.

I entertain the same feeling now that I did then, namely, I feel a delicacy in participating in the case without the approval of the parents of the deceased girl, although I am urgent to do so by my clients and many of the best people in the city of Atlanta. In this connection, I desire to submit for the consideration of the graft-ridden people of this city, the statement that my employment in this case was never brought into question until the criminal investigator of Mr. Burns appeared upon the scene.

On Sunday following his appearance “Lieutenant Becker” Lanford dictated an affidavit to his secretary, Mr. Febuary, not in the presence of either Mr. or Mrs. Coleman, and without knowing what they would be willing to say in relation to the matter, and hurriedly repairing to the home of the Colemans coerced them into signing the same, as I am informed, by threats that if they or either of them ratified the connection of Mr. Burns or myself with the case, they would take no further interest in the matter.

Burns Well Indorsed.

The character of William J. Burns for honesty and courage is too well established in the American union to need indorsement at my hands. The insinuation emanating from the city detective department that he could be hired to betray a trust, and industriously circulated by them, needs no contradiction or refutation at my hands. A sufficient answer to this vile insinuation is that there was no time during the McNamara investigation, if Burns was purchasable, that he could not have received to call off the case a million dollars flat. This fact is known to all men who are familiar with the current events appertaining to that investigation. Moreover, I deem it the work of supererogation to enter a denial in my own behalf to the base insinuation that I have been employed in conjunction with Burns by the Jews of the city to assist in shielding Frank from prosecution. I have never conferred with any Jew upon this subject, and in behalf of the Jews, who constitute a large and most respectable element of our population, I desire to brand the insinuation as a vile, baseless slander, promulgated by the city detectives as a part of the conspiracy to defeat the ends of justice in this case.

The statement that Tobie had an appointment at my office for a conference with Messrs. Hirsch, Meyers and Greenstein is a figment of the disordered and distempered imagination of “Lieutenant Becker” Lanford and his “Man Friday,” A. S. Colyar, Jr.

Mr. Joseph Hirsch needs no defense at my hands from this vile and baseless insinuation. He has lived a long and honored life in this community, and I gravely doubt if there is a man, woman or child in it who would believe any man who stated on oath that Joseph Hirsch would do a dishonorable thing to shield either Jew or Gentile, much less to enter into a conspiracy to bribe and corrupt lawyers and detectives who are engaged in an honest effort to establish the guilt of a murderer. Let me put this question frankly to the people of Atlanta:

Is it not passing strange that the city detective department, whose wages are paid by the taxpayers of this city, should “hob-nob” daily with the Pinkerton Detective Agency, an agency confessedly employed in this investigation to work in behalf of Leo Frank; that they would take this agency into their daily and hourly conference and repose it in their confidence, and co-operate with it in every way possible, and withhold their co-operation from W. J. Burns and his able assistants, who are engaged by the public and for the public in ferreting out this crime.

What Is The Purpose?

What is the purpose of the city detective department in violently assailing me and the Burns agency, if it is not to protect the real criminal in this case? What motives inspired them in their almost superhuman efforts to hinder, circumvent and defeat the efforts of this great agency in locating the criminal or criminals in this case? From the moment that Leo Frank and Newt Lee were placed under arrest the city detectives, or a majority of them (I am advised and believe that there are several good and honest men in the department) have been engaged in a systematic effort to destroy all tangible evidence against the suspect. When they got possession of the note that was found by the body of the dead girl, and which constitutes, or should, the “Rock of Gibraltar” of the evidence in this case, and which should have been promptly placed for safe-keeping in a safety deposit vault, was turned over to a reporter of one of the papers who had the custody of this note for several days, and when it was demanded by the able solicitor general of the circuit, it was only forthcoming after a diligent search.

I was informed by Messrs. Colyar and Febuary that shortly after the murder the city detectives arrested a negro by the name of Connelly and kept him in close confinement for several weeks, and that they extorted from him a written confession that he, and not Frank, was the perpetrator of this crime, and the further confession that the negro had been procured to write the note that was found by the body of the deceased, thereby destroying the effect of any evidence that might be introduced in this case to show that Frank was the author of the note so found.

Thereafter, on the day the grand jury was convened for the purpose of investigating the charges against Frank and Lee, “Lieutenant Becker” Lanford furnished the press of the city an affidavit which he had secured from a woman of questionable veracity and character, containing the recital that between the hours of 6 and 10:30 on the fatal evening Frank called her over the phone several times, importuning her to permit him to bring this girl to her lodging house.

The object and purpose of this affidavit are so obvious that it is needless for me to do more than avert to it, and are as follows: To destroy the state’s theory presented by the medical experts and Mr. Tobie of the Burns agency, that this girl came to her death between the hours of twelve and one on Saturday, and further to establish the fact that the girl was in life between the hours of 6:30 and 10:30 p. m. by positive and conclusive proof an alibi.

Hour by hour, day by day and step by step, has this man Lanford bended all of this energies and efforts to the single purpose of diverting suspicion from the accused in this case and throwing about them the cloak of his protection. I have neither the time or the disposition to discuss at length the affidavits reproduced in the press of the city made by Colyar and Febuary. As to these, I deem it only necessary to say that they are false from beginning to end.

As to the so-called dictagraph, I wish to say that I shall demonstrate that this is either manufactured and fabricated or was so greatly revised and changed by the stenographer who took the notes, if a dictagraph was in fact used, which I doubt, as to greatly impair, if not totally destroy the meaning of what was said on the occasion referred to. To begin with, it is impossible for the conversation imputed to me to have occurred and been transcribed in less than an hour. As I have stated heretofore in this article, I was in the room at the Williams house not more than five or ten minutes, arriving there at 3:30 and reaching my office at 4 p. m., stopping en route to have my throat treated by a throat specialist, which consumed from twelve to fifteen minutes.

I mention this fact as illustrating the impossibility that the so-called dictagraph report could be genuine. The dictagraph is an instrument that records conversations with exactitude and any expert can instantly detect the genuine from the spurious. While this purported conversation is permeated with evidences of its being a frame-up, I think it will be sufficient to call the attention of the public to only two extracts therefrom to illustrate what I have stated.

Colyar is quoted in the alleged dictagraph report as follows: “But I said this young man does not want to lose his position.” I am quoted as answering, “Well, he says, tell him for me that I will give him a position today just as good as the one he has.” It will be observed that my answer, instead of being in the first person, singular number, is in the second person, singular number, thereby clearly establishing that it is a frame-up.

The next illustration: Felder: “Well, you understand I do not want the papers unless they are evidence enough to put Lanford and Beavers out of business.” Colyar made the answer as follows: “Now, Colyar says, you say that you have got the papers that will put them out.” This alleged colloquy, reported from the dictagraph between Colyar and myself, clearly demonstrates that it is a frame-up.

In conclusion, permit me to say that I have written the above and foregoing pages under great difficulties. I have been constantly interrupted during the day by diligent newspaper reporters and by friends throughout the city and state assuring me that they are ready to aid in exposing the conspirators in their efforts to prejudice Burns and myself and to protect the murderer or murderers of Mary Phagan. Owing to the interruptions, I have only been able to cover some features of the case. In a later communication which I will furnish the press for publication, I expect to go into details in respect of the alleged corrupt practice of the heads of the several departments at the police station. Their many acts of moral turpitude are well known to numerous citizens of the city of Atlanta, and to them my recital will be no news.

I pledge the good people of Atlanta to address myself at an early date assiduously to the task of not only fully exposing all of the conspirators, but to bring about their impeachment upon proceedings that I expect to institute looking to this end, and if I am successful in “scourging them from the high places,” I shall regard it as not only a great service rendered to a graft-ridden people, but the greatest achievement of my professional career.

* * *

Atlanta Constitution, May 25th 1913, “Thomas Felder Brands the Charges of Bribery Diabolical Conspiracy,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

George Gentry.

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

Atlanta Constitution

Sunday, May 25^th, 1913

Lanford Declares No Printable Words Can Be Found to Describe Lawyer’s Attack.

“As for Tom Felder’s charges of graft in the police or detective departments,” said Chief Lanford last night, “they are as rotten as we have shown his character to be. There is no printable words that might be used to describe them. All Atlanta knows they are untrue, unfounded and are but the explosions of a distorted brain—a brain deformed by years of treachery, and they call him ‘Colonel’ Felder.

“He directs most of his charges of corruption toward the detective department,” the accused official continued. “There’s a reason. The detective department is responsible for trapping him into the dictagraph [sic] conspiracy. The police department has done but little damage to him and to show him up in his true colors. He should not worry over uniformed men. It’s the detective department that has prodded him.

Police Have Special Squad.

“To anyone who is acquainted with depar[t]mental operations, it is a known fact that the detectives have nothing whatever to do with the enforcement of laws pertaining to disorderly houses. The sleuths could not afford to take a chance in such cases. The police have a special squad to attend to this duty. Felder says he has seen a graft list of the detective department, in which are contained the names of lewd resorts under protection of the detective department.

“How absurd this all is. I gave him credit for having at least brains enough to know something of the workings of the police. The detectives have not the slightest opportunity to graft from disorderly houses in case such a condition was in existence. This alone is sufficient to prove that his charges are without foundation.

“In regard to the Coleman affidavit, which, I understand, he accuses was extorted from Mr. and Mrs. Coleman under our threat to cease working on the Phagan case and leave their daughter’s murder unavenged, all I can say is that is one of the silliest charges of his entire ridiculous card.

“The Colemans are sensible, honest folk, and they have brains enough to realize that they would not have to depend upon the detective alone for the solution of their child’s slaughter. In the first place, I never knew of the affidavit’s existence until it was brought to my office by representatives of the Coleman family. I did not know that it was being made. It was signed voluntarily by Mr. and Mrs. Coleman.

Making Self Laughing Stock.

“Felder is making himself a laughing stock of the community by charging the detectives with defending Frank by alleged destruction of evidence and the practice of trying to cover up evidence damaging to his case. No one better than the reporters of the city know that we have worked successfully in investigating this crime and that we have plenty of evidence—enough to convict. If he will convincingly show one single incident substantiating his accusation I will eat his hat.

“No one that knows him would take Tom Felder’s charges seriously. They are laughable, instead of dangerous. They amuse me. The realization that I have done a good job in obtaining this attempted bribery evidence against him, mingled with the humor for his charges, give me the combined sensation of elation and amusement. It is a treat, indeed.”

* * *

Atlanta Constitution, May 25th 1913, “Felder’s Charges of Graft Rotten,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

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

Atlanta Journal

Sunday, May 25^th, 1913

Former Tennesseean [sic] in Open Letter Tells Colonel Felder That He Was Never Caught With Goods Until Last Wednesday—Colyar Says He Strayed From the Path He Should Have Followed When He Went to Wash Attorney’s Political Linen in a State in Which Colonel Felder Could Not Set Foot

A. S. Colyar has addressed the following open letter to Colonel Thomas B. Felder:

Colonel Thomas B. Felder.

Sir: Knowing you as I do, I anticipate your promised attack on me in the press of Sunday, as you have announced you intended to make, and were I to attempt to answer you, I would have to resort to the lowest and vilest billingsgate, which I dod not care to do, for to do so would be to prostitute the refinement that I inherited from birth, and place me on a level with such ilk as you. Therefore, it is my purpose to address you this letter and ask you the following questions:

First. Is it not a notorious fact that you are the attorney of every crook, gambler, Mary Magdalene and the whisky ring, provided of course any one of this clan has the price to pay you?

Second. Have you the audacity to ask the people of this city to believe that your intentions were straight to prosecute Leo M. Frank for the paltry sum of $500, and then donate that fee to the Burns Agency to secure the evidence that the chief of detectives had already procured? Is it not a notorious fact that you received a hundred thousand dollars in the famous dispensary cases of South Carolina, a state by the way whenever you start to New York you always buy a ticket by a route that does not touch its border?

Third. Is it not a notorious fact that you have been known far and wide, not only as an attorney but as a astute politician, lobbyist, and pardon broker, and did you not receive one hundred thousand dollars from Charles W. Morse, or his wife, to deliver the goods?

Fourth—It does not make any difference to me, personally, what kind of an attack you may see fit to make upon me with your vile pen, and I note that you state that you can get one thousand men to swear that they would not believe me on oath. I desire to ask you that before you can impeach my onath [sic] does not the law require you to bring forward my neighbors and my acquaintances who know me and who will state that upon their knowledge of me they would not believe me on oath? Or is it your purpose to scour among your clients, principally those who belong to the red light district and the whiskey ring and are ever ready to do your bidding, even the swearing a man’s life or character away, one of whom called upon me this afternoon by the name of McNeil, who professed to live in Nashville, Tenn., some fifteen years ago, and wanted to rake up an old boyhood acquaintance, as his breath smelled like a distillery on legs, so much so that my wife had to leave the room, and knowing that you are in the habit of digging up such people as this when you have got any dirty work to carry out. I was extremely reticent with him, and fortunately I had two gentlemen in the hotel office, of unimpeachable character, who happened to be sitting close enough to me to know that about all Mr. McNeil got out of me was yea and nay.

SAYS FELDER IS SORE.

Fifth—Is it not a fact that you are sore because this city happens to have at the present time a high-toned, honorable Christian gentleman, who is a man of God and tries to practice his belief in the Christian religion, and would not prostitute his oath of office as chief of police by catering to you and your cohorts? And if he had wouldn’t he have been the grandest chief in your poor eyes that are glued by filthy lucre that ever ruled Atlanta’s police department, for there has never been any one who knows you that will doubt the assertion that you have been a worshipper of gold instead of God, and had no conscientious scruples as to how you obtained it.

Sixth—I note that you are going to attack me with an affidavit from one, W. A. Milner, attorney-at-law, of Cartersville, Ga., in which he charges me with the crime of having professed religion in Cartersville and acknowledging that I was an ex-convict. As to this charge, which was made in the Constitution of Saturday, I refer to a telegram printed in this issue of The Journal, exclusively. Is it a crime to profess religion?

It was not considered so in the home that I was raised in under the influence of a sweet Christian mother, which no doubt you yourself had the same kind of a mother, but I fear that you and I both have strayed far away from the early influence of our sweet Christian homes. In fact I am free to confess that I have done so since the time that I helped you wash your dirty, filthy, political linen in South Carolina. And I fear that the gentleman from Cartersville would not know religion if he were to me[e]t it upon the public highway. For religion believes in helping the fallen to rise and not pushing them down. I cannot control things that happened in Cartersville among some people that I did not know forty years ago, but have since beocme [sic] connected with, and I have to pay the price of a poor miserable amlice carried in the fertile brain of Colonel Milner, who belongs to the political clan that you are aligned with.

DOES NOT KNOW HIM.

7. I note that you are attacking me in an affidavit purporting to have been signed by one W. D. Ray, of Nashville, Tenn., who claims to be a neighbor of mine. For your information as well as Mr. Ray, I wish to state that I do not know him, and that I have not been a resident of Nashville, Tenn., since April, 1899, and I never knew any Ray in Nashville, Tenn., and I would appreciate the fact if you would tell me who he is. I also note that you are attacking me with one Atchison of Nashville, who says that I am a moral degeneratel [sic] and pervert. I presume that Mr. Atchison has qualified that he is an expert witness, and has not allowed you to frame up the affidavit for him to sign, as everyone who knows you, know that you are an artist in such matters.

I note that you have brought into your affidavit category your royal flunky, C. W. Tobie, who took occasion to attack me in a sheet published in this city Saturday afternoon. But the ear marks of his article show too plainly that the author of it was Tobie’s master, Felder. What does Tobie know about me? And is it not a fact that you and Tobie are sore because your scheme has been exposed to graft a large amount of money out of the citizens of Atlanta. And don’t you know it to be a fact that Tobie is ready to sign any affidavit pertaining to any subject that you might suggest? And don’t’ you also know that when you and Tobie attempt to slur the Atlanta police department and the Pinkerton Detective agency and charge me with being a tool in their hands to break you and the Burns’ agency down, that it is only a makeshift to divert the public mind from the real issue that you, a member of the Atlanta bar and a former member of the legislation from Fulton county, and a poser as a statesman, and a great lawyer, would forget your high profession and stoop so low as to attempt to bribe a poor, honest young man, struggling to get a foothold in life, to rob his chief and superior officer of certain valuable papers in the Phagan case for $1,000? Before you call me a moral degenerate and pervert think of the enormity of your attempted crime in trying to brand this young man as a thief the balance of his life.

DID GIVE INTROUDCTION.

Ninth—Now, colonel, I did not intend to write such a lengthy letter when I started, but I desire to call your attention to another matter. You have stated in one of your many newspaper interviews, where you had a chance to get free advertising, which is part of your egotistical nature to feast and fatten upon, that you refused to give an introduction to one E. O. Miles. To refresh your memory, I refer you to that card of introduction with your signature attached to it, reproduced in this issue of The Journal, and I hope that you have not become such a moral pervert since we parted company as to denounce the signature a forgery. But, yet, if you found yourself hemmed in, and saw no other escape, I dare say that you would not hesitate to denounce it as such.

In conclusion, permit me to say frankly and candidly that I have strayed away from the path I should have followed in life in some instances, but the difference between you and I, Colonel, is simply this: I have been caught in times gone by, and you have never been caught with the goods on you until you walked into room No. 31 in the Williams [h]ouse No. 2, like a lamb for the slaughter, and allowed yourself to be taken by the dictograph, and it is natural you are sore. I do not blame you. Any farmer will tell you that when a pig gets caught in a sty he will squeal. I note that the people of Bellwood as well as the Colemans have repudiated you.

“The ox knoweth its owner and the ass knoweth his master’s crib, but my people do not know me, O Israel.”

It is sad to think when a gentleman of your ability and standing at the bar; who controlled governors, and judges, solicitor generals, and last but not least great mayors, and started out to gain a great reputation in the Phagan case, alas! has come to a sorrowful end because he could not induce a poor, young struggling stenographer to commit the crime of larceny for the paltry sum of $1,000. [G]ood-bye, Colonel, I am going [to] try to live honest in the future, and I know that I can do so if I will only be guarded in the associations that I form than I have been in the past.

A. S. COLYAR.

Atlanta, Ga., May 24, 1913.

P.S. I note I was arrested Saturday afternoon on a frame up of four years standing in my native state, brought against me by a member of the Red Light District, among whom you have so many clients.

A. S. C.

At the request of A. S. Colyar, Jr., The Journal publishes a facsimile of a note of introduction to E. O. Miles given to Colyar by Colonel T. B. Felder. The note was given prior to the dictographed conferences. The facsimile follows:

* * *

Atlanta Journal, May 25th 1913, “‘You Went to Williams Like a Lamb to the Slaughter,’ Colyar Tells Felder in Letter,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

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

Atlanta Journal

Sunday, May 25^th, 1913

Denies That Police Have Suppressed Evidence in the Phagan Mystery

Chief of Detectives Newport Lanford when apprised of Colonel Felder’s statement as issued Saturday afternoon to the effect that the police had plotted to protect and shield the slayers of Mary Phagan, pronounced the charges as absurd as they were false.

In replying to Colonel Felder’s assertion that Chief Lanofor[d] and some of the men on the detective force hda [sic] leagued themselves with the Pinkertons to suppress evidence in the Phagan case the minute Leo M. Frank and Newt Lee were placed under arrest, Chief Lanford said:

“The people of Atlanta themselves can judge just how much evidence we have suppressed on Frank and Lee from the result of the Phagan investigation thus far. Our efforts have been to find the slayer of Mary Phagan at any event and we believe that we have succeeded.

“The mere fact that my men worked with the Pinkertons spells nothing sinister. The Pinkertons are employed by the National Pencil company, it is true, but they are obligated only to find the murderer of Mary Phagan. Like the city detective department the Pinkertons believe they have succeeded.

“At any event, no matter what Tom Felder may charge against this or any other department of the police, future developments in the Phagan case will vindicate utterly the position of the police.

THE COLEMAN AFFIDAVIT.

On Colonel Felder’s accusation that the affidavit of J. W. Coleman, imputed to repudiate Felder’s employment in the case, was forced from Coleman by Chief Lanford, the head of the detectives said:

“I know absolutely nothing of the Coleman affidavit until it came to my office duly signed. Even then I objected to the fact that it was sworn to by G. C. Febuary, a police stenographer, who happens also to be a notary. As a result, I made my men take it back and have it attested by a notary who had no police connections.

“That is the full story of the Coleman statement. It was pmade [sic] voluntarily.”

“As for any attempt on my part or the part of any of my men to hurt the case of the state against Leo M. Frank at this late hour, as charged by Colonel Felder, I have only this to say:

“When Colonel Felder intimates that Mr. Formby, who made an affidavit to the effect that Frank ‘phoned for a room for himself and a girl on the afternoon of the murder, was dug up by the detective department to kill the state’s theory that the murder occurred in the afternoon, he knows it is untrue.

“I was informed by a friend that Mrs. Formby was in possession of valuable information relating to the Phagan case. I sent Detectives Norris and Chewning to see her and they reported that she asserted Frank had called her on the phone Saturday, April 26, at 6 o’clock, asked for a room for himself and a girl.

“I went to see Mrs. Fomby [sic] and she told me the same story. I asked her if she objected to coming to police headquarters the following morning and putting her statement in legal form. She said she would.

“As a result, Mrs. Fromby [sic] came to police headquarters and made the affidavit.”

A VOLUNTARY CONFESSION.

Chief Lanford then said that the confession of Conley relative to the notes found in the pencil factory was made by the negro voluntarily.

“Saturday morning,” he said, “Conley sent for Detective John Black, saying that he had something he wanted to tell Black when [sic] down to the cell and the negro opened up. He told Black that he had written the notes at Frank’s dictation and also that Frank, the day before the latter was arrested, had passed the negro in the hall at the pencil factory and whispered to him ‘to be a good boy and everything would come out all right.’

“The police never claimed that Conley had confessed to the killing: he merely talked of the notes.

“It is easy for anyone to see that there is no police plot to protect Frank or Lee, or both, or anyone, for that matter. Colonel Felder’s statement is absurd, but he had to say something.”

* * *

Atlanta Journal, May 25th 1913, “Chief Lanford Calls Felder’s Charges False,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

Colonel Thomas B. Felder in an earnest attitude, as he denies charges of attempted bribery and s[c]ourges Atlanta’s police officials.

Atlanta Georgian

Sunday, May 25^th, 1913

Colonel Thomas B. Felder Saturday night issued an exhaustive statement denying once more that he had offered a bribe of $1,000 to Chief Lanford’s clerk, G. C. February [sic], for evidence involving his superiors; charging that the dictograph records of his conversations with February and A. S. Colyar were padded; denouncing Colyar as a proved crook and ex-convict, and charging wholesale corruption in the police department, particularly against Beavers and Lanford. He said he would furnish positive proof of this corruption later.

Here is Colonel Felder’s statement, in full:

To the People of Atlanta:

The publication of the sensational “story” relating to myself and my connection with the Phagan case is but the symptom of manifestation of one of the most diabolical conspiracies ever hatched by a venal and corrupt “system” to protect crime in a civilized community.

To be more specific, this conspiracy was formed just after the arrest of Newt Lee and Leo Frank, charged with the murder of Mary Phagan. The controlling genius of it is Newport Lanford, chief of the city detectives. Its object is to shield and protect the murderers of this innocent child, and in its wicked ramifications it marks our distinguished (?) chief of detectives as the Lieutenant Becker of our “system,” and renders his co-conspirators as dangerous to the lives, liberty, property and reputation of our citizens as the bloody and deadly Society of the Mafia.

Pity it is that the press of the city has been and is being made the innocent, if effective, instrument in their hands to further and effectuate the object of this wicked conspiracy by prostituting their potential columns to the exploitation of the mass of forgeries, and perjuries which has been given to the public through their columns, for it is known that these papers have tacitly sanctioned the utterances of Colyar by reproducing his affidavits in the face of the fact that [t]he editors and proprietors of all would, without hesitation, swear that they would not believe him on oath if called upon to do so.

Says Police Shielded Frank.

Strangely enough, a portion of the criminal record of this man Colyar is reproduced, showing him to be a man steeped in crime and infamy, while in the parallel columns is published his defamatory utterances against me.

I would have the good people of this community know that from the day and hour of the arrest of Lee and Frank, charged with the murder of little Mary Phagan, Newport Lanford and his co-conspirators have left “no stone unturned” in their efforts to shield and protect these suspects, and I shall demonstrate later on the truth of this statement with so much clearness that “he who runs may read.”

In furthering and effectuating this conspiracy, they have suborned perjury, winked at forgeries and, in short, employed every agency that low and grovelling criminal instincts could contrive and conjure up. In their frantic efforts to shield the murderers of this girl, “Lieutenant Becker” Lanford secured the services of A. S. Colyar, Jr., whose criminal record was known to the “Lieutenant,” but whose services he willingly availed himself of.

Recalls Meeting Colyar.

Having premised this much, I shall now address myself to the task of disposing of “Lieutenant” Lanford’s “Man Friday,” A. S. Colyar.

About two and one-half years ago, while I was engaged in a controversy with the criminal and vagabond Governor of the State of South Carolina, a prominent citizen of Atlanta, a client and friend of mine, whose name I withhold because he is not now in the city and I have been unable to reach him over the phone, but whose name will be given later, called at my office, and, discussing this controversy said that he knew a man by the name of A. S. Colyar, Junior, sometimes lawyer, detective, newspaper man, etc., who had spent some time in the State of South Carolina, and who was in possession of valuable information touching that situation.

He afterwards brought this man Colyar to my office, and after discussing the matter with him at length, I reached the conclusion that he was thoroughly undependable, and the interview closed.

Afterwards he was sent to the State of South Carolina to obtain the information, and forwarded to me three affidavits which seemed to establish conclusively that the Governor of that State had been engaged in criminal practices.

Found Affidavits Forged.

Upon a careful examination of these affidavits I discovered that the juratas attached to the three affidavits all were upon a separate sheet, attached to what purported to be the genuine affidavits.

This aroused my suspicions and I sent a trusted clerk from my office to the State of South Carolina personally to interview the affiants, with the result that he was informed by them that this man Colyar had represented to them that they were heirs at law to a considerable estate in Tennessee, and that if they would make an affidavit stating who they were, he would be able to secure for them their respective inheritances without cost—indeed, that he was sent to them for that purpose, whereupon the affidavits were prepared and signed; that afterwards Colyar detached the jurata attached to the genuine affidavits and attached them to the spurious affidavits which he furnished.

These affidavits are now in my files and are subject to the inspection of any one who may be interested. It is needless for me to add that they were never made public in connection with the charges of criminal conduct lodged against the vagabond Governor of South Carolina.

Colyar Confessed Forgery.

Afterwards I met this man Colyar accidentally in the city of Chattanooga, and when I confronted him with the fact that he had forged those affidavits, he freely confessed the forgery to me, and stated that he had been reduced financially to dire extremities, and that he had forged the affidavits in order to get money from the gentleman who had introduced him to me.

I respectfully submit that after this experience with this man it does not seem reasonable that I would entertain respect for him, much less repose confidence in him.

On Sunday afternoon, while engaged in a conference at my home with parties interested in the Phagan case I received a telephone message and was informed that the party speaking was A. S. Colyar, Jr. He stated to me that it was important for him to have an interview with me during the afternoon or evening of Sunday. I made an appointment to meet him at my office at 8:15 o’clock. I met him by appointment.

Knowing the man’s character, I telephoned Mr. Tobie, of the William J. Burns National Detective Agency, and Mr. E. O. Miles, my friend and client, to come to my office.

In my conversation with Colyar, he stated to me that the city detective force was engaged in suppressing evidence in the Phagan case, that they were in a conspiracy with the Pinkertons, who had been employed to investigate this case by Frank, one of the suspects and that they had entered into a conspiracy to thwart the efforts of the Burns agency and myself in the investigations in progress; that he overheard a conference between Lanford and the Pinkerton agent, who was employed in the case by Frank, to the effect that it was important to circumvent the efforts of the Burns agency and myself in establishing the guilt of the murderer or murderers, that on the morning of the Sunday evening Lanford had caused an affidavit to be prepared and dated back and had forced Mr. and Mrs. Coleman to sign it, under threats and duress, repudiating my employment, that Lanford had arrested a negro by the name of Connelly [sic], as I remember, and had held him at the police station for two or three weeks, and had forged a confession of the negro to the effect that he himself had killed Mary Phagan, and that Newt Lee and Frank were neither participants in the murder nor had knowledge thereof, that in order to discredit the Burns agent, the Solicitor’s office and myself had framed up affidavits charging the Solicitor General, the Burns agent and myself with corruption; and that at the opportune time these would be given to the public through hand bills.

Told Colyar of Mistrust.

I stated to Colyar that I would not accept his statements even under oath, and that if he hid any documentary evidence establishing the fact that these parties were engaged in a conspiracy to suppress evidence I would like to see it; whereupon he handed me the original Coleman affidavit, what purported to be a copy of the confession of the negro Connelly; what purported to be an original affidavit in relation to the Solicitor General, and also what purported to be an original affidavit that one of the leading newspapers of the city had been bribed by the suspects of their friends.

In this conversation he told me that he had original affidavits, establishing the immorality of the chief of police and the chief of detectives and that they were guilty of acts involving moral turpitude and he specified the acts.

It is not necessary to give these to the public at this time, but they will be published later.

I stated to him that I was not interested in the moral and official dereliction of the chief of police and chief of detectives except in so far as they might relate to the suppression of evidence in the Phagan case. He thereupon asked me if the Mayor of the city was interested in obtaining this evidence. I told him that I was not in the confidence of the Mayor; that I had not spoken with him for months, but that if he were not interested in the exposure of official rottenness in the various city departments, he would be a strange and unnatural official, and that I would bring the matter to his attention, which I afterward did.

On the following day Colyar called me over the phone and asked me if I would meet him and some friends of his who had knowledge of the facts heretofore adverted to in conference. I stated to him that I was coming into the city on Monday evening, and would meet them at my office.

Tells of Meeting Pair.

I met Colyar and a young man by the name of February at my office, according to appointment.

The interview of Monday evening developed in substance and effect what was developed on Sunday evening, together with the additional fact that young February stated that he had been used so much by the chief of police and chief of detectives in carrying out their projects of corruptions that he was sick and tired of the job and would like very much for me to assist him in getting other employment; that if I would assist him, he would willingly turn over to me all documents, files, etc., going to show that these parties were engaged in suppressing evidence in the Phagan case, and that while they were ostensibly working for the city and in the interests of the people, that they were really working in conspiracy with the Pinkertons—the employees of Frank—to shield and protect Frank.

He also exhibited to me numerous affidavits, documents, etc., purporting to be evidence of the official corruption of the two chiefs. Among other documents submitted were two lists which he claimed that he prepared for Chief of Police Beavers and Chief of City Detectives Lanford, purporting to contain a list of blind tigers and immoral houses which were under the protection of these departments and from whom they received monthly payments for this alleged protection.

Denies He Offered Bribe.

I made it plain to both of these parties that I had no interest whatever in any of these documents except such as might tend to establish the fact that they were suppressing evidence in the Phagan case. They asked me if Mayor Woodward and other gentlemen in the city, naming them, would be interested in obtaining this evidence. I stated to them that I thought that not only Mayor Woodward, but every other prominent citizen in the city of Atlanta, such as Mr. Sam Inman, Captain English, Mr. Grant, Mr. Maddox and scores of others would be, in my judgment, entirely willing to raise a fund to drive these people from the high places, if they were guilty of the acts of moral turpitude alleged against them.

They asked me if, in my judgment, they could be indicted and punished if they turned over this evidence to the Mayor or his agents. I gave it as my judgment that they could not, and that even if they could, they would not lie; that I had too much confidence in the Mayor of the city of Atlanta, in the Prosecuting Attorney of the circuit of the Criminal Court and of the Governor as a last resort, to believe that any of these officials would suffer them to be punished if they made of themselves instrumental means of exposing the colossal corruption which they represented existed in the various departments of the city government.

This conference lasted one hour and fifteen minutes. Just before it drew to a close Colyar asked me if I would be willing to pay to him and February $1,000 for this documentary evidence. I told him emphatically that I would not. He then asked me if I thought the Mayor of the city would be willing to pay to him and February $1,000 for this evidence and to provide February with as good a position as the one he now held upon the delivery of the evidence to them.

Again Called by Colyar.

I told him that I entertained no doubt that if they could furnish the Mayor with evidence conclusively establishing the guilt of Beavers and Lanford, the Mayor, through the public-spirited citizens of the town, would be willing to raise this sum of money and pay it over to them for the documentary evidence. This ended my interview upon this occasion.

On the following morning I received a telephonic communication from this man Colyar asking me if I would come to his room at the Williams House at 1 o’clock. I told him that I had an engagement. He asked me when it would be convenient for me to meet him; I state at 3:30 o’clock, so at the appointed time I called upon him at his room at the Williams Hotel. While there I met February. My conference with them lasted perhaps ten minutes, as I was back in my office before 4 o’clock to meet an appointment, and having stopped en route for at least ten minutes to receive a treatment from my throat specialist.

I shall demonstrate in an affidavit at[t]ached to this card, and made a part thereof, that the alleged dictograph stuff is manufactured.

In my brief interview with these parties at the Williams House, I stated that I would not pay them a cent for the documents that they had in their possession establishing the moral turpitude of the Chief of Police and Chief Lanford; that I had no interest in this branch of the controversy, and that I had declined employment in this branch of the conversy [sic]; but I stated to them that I had talked with the Mayor, and that I had made an appointment with Mr. Miles, and that I would meet Mr. Miles, who was making some investigations for the Mayor, at my office at 4 o’clock, and that I would send him over to them.

When I arrived at my office at 4 o’clock Mr. Miles and Mr. Tobie, of the Burns National Detective Agency, were awaiting me, and I gave Mr. Miles a note of introduction to this man Colyar, which, I am informed, was presented. On the day after Mr. Miles asked me if I would object to accompanying him to Lakewood for a conference with Colyar and February. I stated to him that I most emphatically declined, and would advise him to do likewise, and he acted upon my advice.

Could Have Obtained Documents.

I stated to him further that if they had any business with me, they could conduct it at my office, but as I understood the situation, I had no business with them.

If I had consented to pay money for this evidence I could have paid it either on Sunday or Monday night, and all of the documents would have been turned over to me.

The statement contained in the affidavits of this man Colyar and of February that I offered them $1,000 for the Coleman affidavit is too absurd to justify a denial. Why would I pay $1,000 for this affidavit when it was within the power of the conspirators to obtain another affidavit within five minutes after the surrender of this affidavit to me?

In this connection I desire to state that in my career at the bar, covering a quarter of a century, I have never directly or indirectly sought employment in any case—civil or criminal. I have never found it necessary to resort to barratry to keep busy in my profession. It is inconceivable that I or any other reputable lawyer would seek employment to prosecute a man for murder.

Employed by Citizens.

I was employed in the Phagan case by a committee of citizens residing in the vicinity of the family of the Phagan girl. My contract of employment is in writing and duly signed by my employers. I do not give in this connection a copy of the contract and the names of the signers, for the very obvious reason that with their names in possession of “Lieutenant Becker” Lanford and his co-conspirators, my clients immediately would become the objects of attack at the hands of the “system.” The contract above referred to was made with my law firm, Felder, Anderson, Dillon & Whitman, and is in our files and open to the inspection of any decent citizen at any time.

In addition to this employment, we were employed by a committee of prominent and distinguished ladies in the city of Atlanta to aid in this investigation. The names of these ladies are withheld from publication for obvious reasons.

I have never said, and I do not now say, that I was ever employed either by Mr. or Mrs. Coleman, but I do say that Friday afternoon—the date I do not remember, but it was the day upon which the Coroner’s inquest was to be held at police barracks.

I was called over the phone by one of the gentlemen who employed me in the case and asked to come down to the barracks.

I immediately repaired to the barracks and stated to my client that I felt a delicacy in appearing at the Coroner’s inquest unless my employment was approved by the parents of the deceased girl. I was thereupon introduced to Mr. Coleman, and explained to him my feelings in the matter. He stated to me that he had no money to employ counsel; that he appreciated the unselfish act of his neighbors in their effort to assist in the prosecution, and so far as he was concerned, my employment met with his approval; but being the stepfather of the young lady, he would prefer not to ratify my employment at that time, but would ask his wife to come to my office on the following day to the end that she would ratify the same. On the following day I left for the city of New York without seeing the mother of Mary Phagan, and was absent from the city for ten days.

Charges Threats to Police.

I entertain the same feeling now that I did then: namely, I feel a delicacy in participating in the case without the approval of the parents of the deceased girl, although I am urged to do so by my clients and many of the best people in the city of Atlanta.

In this connection I desire to submit for the consideration of the graft-riden people of this city the statement that my employment in this case was never brought into question until the criminal investigator of Mr. Burns appeared upon the scene.

On Sunday following his appearance “Lieutenant Becker” Lanford dictated an affidavit to his secretary, Mr. February, not in the presence of either Mr. or Mrs. Coleman, and without knowing what they would be willing to say in relation to the matter, and hurriedly repairing to the home of the Colemans coerced them into signing the same as I am informed, by threats that if they or either of them ratified the connection of Mr. Burns or myself with the case, they would take no further interest in the matter.

The character of William J. Burns for honesty and courage is too well established in the American Union to need indorsement at my hands. The insinuation emanating from the city detective department, that he could be hired to betray a trust and industriously circulated by them, needs no contradiction or refutation at my hands.

A sufficient answer to this vile insinuation is that there was no time during the McNamara investigation, if Burns was purchasable, that he could not have received to call of the case a million dollars flat. This fact is known to all men who are familiar with the current events appertaining to that investigation.

Denies Jews Employed Him.

Moreover, I deem it the work of supererogation to enter a denial in my own behalf to the base insinuation that I have been employed in conjunction with Burns by the Jews of the city to assist in shielding Frank from prosecution.

I have never conferred with any Jew upon this subject, and in behalf of the Jews who constitute a large and most respectable element of our population. I desire to brand the insinuation as a vile, baseless slander, promulgated by the city detectives as a part of the conspiracy to defeat the ends of justice in this case.

The statement that Tobie had an appointment at my office for a conference with Messrs. Hirsch, Meyers and Greenstein is a figment of the disordered and distempered imagination of “Lieutenant Becker” Lanford and his “Man Friday,” A. S. Colyar, Jr.

Mr. Joseph Hirsch needs no defense at my hands from this vile and baseless insinuation. He has lived a long and honored life in this community, and I gravely doubt if there is a man, woman or child in it who would believe any man who stated on oath that Joseph Hirsch would do a dishonorable thing to shield either Jew or Gentile, much less to enter into a conspiracy to bribe and corrupt lawyers and detectives who are engaged in an honest effort to establish the guilt of a murderer.

Let me put this question frankly to the people of Atlanta. Is it not passing strange that the city detective department, whose wages are paid by the taxpayers of this city, should “hobnob” daily with the Pinkerton Detective Agency, an agency confessedly employed in the investigation to work in behalf of Leo Frank; that they would take this agency into their daily and hourly conference and repose it in their confidence, and co-operate with it in every way possible, and withhold their co-operation from W. J. Burns and his able assistants who are engaged by the public and for the public in ferreting out this crime?

Questions Police’s Motives.

What is the purpose of the city detective department in violently assailing me and the Burns agency, if it is not to protect the real criminal in this case? What motives inspired them in their almost superhuman efforts to hinder, circumvent and defeat the efforts of this great agency in locating the criminal or criminals in this case? From the moment that Leo Frank and Newt Lee were placed under arrest the city detectives, or a majority of them (I am advised and believe that there are several good and honest men in the department), have been engaged in a systematic effort to destroy all tangible evidence against the suspect.

When they got possession of the note that was found by the body of the dead girl, and which constitutes, or should, the “Rock of Gibraltar” of the evidence in this case, and which should have been promptly placed for safe-keeping in a safety deposit vault, it was turned over to a reporter of one of the papers, who had the custody of this note for several days, and when it was demanded by the able Solicitor General of the circuit, it was only forthcoming after a diligent search.

Tells of Fake Confession.

I was informed by Messrs. Colyar and February that shortly after the murder the city detectives arrested a negro by the name of Connelly and kept him in close confinement for several weeks, and that they extorted from him a written confession that he, and not Frank, was the perpetrator of this crime, and the further confession that the negro had been procured to write the note that was found beside the body of the deceased, thereby destroying the effect of any evidence that might be introduced in this case to show that Frank was author of the note so found.

Thereafter, on the day the Grand Jury was convened for the purpose of investigating, the charges against Frank and Lee, “Lieutenant Becker” Lanford furnished the press of the city an affidavit which he had secured from a woman of questionable veracity and character, containing the recital that between the hours of 6 and 10:30 o’clock on the fatal evening Frank called her over the phone several times, importuning her to permit him to bring this girl to her lodging house.

The object and purpose of this affidavit are so obvious that it is needless for me to do more than advert to it, and are as follows: To destroy the State’s theory presented by the medical experts and Mr. Tobie of the Burns agency that this girl came to her death between the hours of 12 and 1 on Saturday, and further to establish the fact that the girl was in life between the hours of 6:30 and 10:30 p. m., thus enabling Frank to establish, by positive and conclusive proof, an alibi.

Hour by hour, day by day, step by step has this man Lanford bended all of his energies and efforts to the single purpose of diverting suspicion from the accused in this case and throwing about them the cloak of his protection.

Calls Affidavits False.

I have neither the time nor the disposition to discuss at length the affidavits reproduced in the press of the city made by Colyar and February. As to these, I deem it only necessary to say that they are false from beginning to end.

As to the so-called dictograph, I wish to say that I shall demonstrate that this is either manufactured and fabricated or was so greatly revised and changed by the stenographer who took the notes, if a dictograph was in fact used, which I doubt, as to impair greatly, if not totally destroy, the meaning of what was said on the occasion referred to.

To begin with, it is impossible for the conversation imputed to me, to have occurred and been transcribed in less than an hour. As I have stated heretofore in this article, I was in the room at the Williams House not more than five or ten minutes, arriving there at 3:30 and reaching my office at 4 p. m., stopping en route to have my throat treated by a throat specialist, which consumed from twelve to fifteen minutes.

I mention this fact as illustrating the impossibility that the so-called dictograph report could be genuine. The dictograph is an instrument that records conversations with exactitude, and any expert can instantly detect the genuine from the spurious. While this purported conversation is permeated with evidences of its being a frame-up, I think it will be sufficient to call the attention of the public to only two extracts therefrom to illustrate what I have stated.

Colyar is quoted in the alleged dictograph report as follows: “But I said this young man does not want to lose his position.” I am quoted as answering: “Well, he says, tell him for me that I will give him a position to-day just as good as the one he has.”

Cites Errors in Report.

It will be observed that my answer, instead of being in the first person, singular number, is in the second person, singular number, thereby clearly establishing that it is a frame-up.

The next illustration: Felder—“Well, you understand I do not want the papers unless they are evidence enough to put Lanford and Beavers out of business.” Colyar made the answer as follows: “Now, Colyar says, you say that you have got the papers that will put them out.”

This alleged colloquy, reported from the dictograph between Colyar and myself clearly demonstrates that it is a frame-up.

In conclusion, permit me to say that I have written the above and foregoing pages under great difficulties. I have been constantly interrupted during the day by diligent newspaper reporters and by friends throughout the city and State assuring me that they are ready to aid in exposing, the conspirators in their efforts to prejudice Burns and myself and to protect the murderer or murderers of Mary Phagan.

Owing to the interruptions, I have only been able to cover some features of the case. In a later communication which I will furnish the press for publication, I expect to go into details in respect of the alleged corrupt practices of the heads of the several departments at the police station. Their many acts of moral turpitude are well known to numerous citizens of the city of Atlanta, and to them my recital will be no news.

I pledge the good people of Atlanta to address myself at an early date assiduously to the task of not only fully exposing all of the conspirators, but to bring about their impeachment upon proceedings that I expect to institute looking to this end, and if I am successful in scourging them from the high places, I shall regard it as not only a great service rendered to a graft-ridden people, but the greatest achievement of my professional career.

* * *

Atlanta Georgian, May 25th 1913, “Attorney, in Long Statement, Claims Dictograph Records Against Him Padded,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

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

Atlanta Journal

Saturday, May 24^th, 1913

Certain residents of Bellwood, the part of Atlanta where live Mr. and Mrs. J. W. Coleman, the parents of little Mary Phagan, wish The Journal to put them publicly on record in denouncing as absolutely untrue certain published reports to the effect that a subscription has been collected from them to employ Attorney Thomas B. Felder or any other lawyer, to assist in the prosecution of the alleged slayer.

Saturday morning, J. W. Hammond, of 161 Bellwood avenue, delivered the following statement to The Journal:

“There is absolutely no truth in the report that a subscription has been started by the residents of Bellwood to employ Thomas B. Felder to assist in the prosecution of the slayer or little Mary Phagan. I have lived out there for a long time, and certainly would have been approached had such a move been started.

“When I heard of the list, and yet did not see it, I could not understand why the persons circulating it had not been to me.

“I began to inquire around, and soon became convinced that no such move had been started.

“The people out here know of no such thing having been attempted, and certainly all of us would have been more than willing to give—had we wanted Mr. Felder.

“He simply ‘butted in.’”

J. M. Redd, proprietor of a drug store at 195 Bellwood avenue, declared to The Journal, with Mr. Hammond, that he had never been approached for funds and had heard of no such list being circulated.

George C. Barron, of 151 Wheeler street, how is conducting a series of revival meetings in Bellwood, was another who desired to be quoted. He said that he had heard nothing of the subscription being gotten up.

H. C. McCall, an employe of the Georgia Railway and Power company, whose father runs a grocery store in Bellwood, asked The Journal to report that a man giving his name as Bowen had called at the store with a petition already drawn up for subscriptions to employ the law firm of which Mr. Felder is a member. The man asked to see Mr. Coleman, he said, but the child’s father could not be found at his home on Lindsay street.

WOULDN’T COST A CENT.

“This fellow, who gave his name as Bowen,” said McCall, “then left the paper at the store, telling me that I could employ Mr. Felder, and that it would not cost a cent. I told him that I did not want to do any such thing, as Mr. Coleman had said already that he had not decided on the matter of getting an attorney.

“Bowen insisted on taking me to the office of Mr. Felder, and we went there together. The latter told me that he thought I was right, that it would be best for me not to do anything without the sanction of Mr. Coleman.

“None of the Bellwood people knew anything about why the petition was brought out there by Bowen from Mr. Felder’s office, and we did not pay any attention to it.

“My father saw it lying in a show case one day and signed his name to it along with three others.

“It has never been outside of the store, and not one person has been asked to subscribe.

“I was with Mr. Coleman at the inquest the day that the man approached him and offered the services of Mr. Felder free.

“Mr. Coleman said that he did not want him, but the man insisted that he at least have a talk with Mr. Felder. Mr. Coleman said that he was perfectly willing to talk with the lawyer, but that it would make no difference in his position. They went away together, and if they saw Mr. Felder I know nothing of it. As near as I can remember, this occurred on Monday.”

* * *

Atlanta Journal, May 24th 1913, “Residents of Bellwood Ask The Journal to Say That Mr. Felder Was Not Employed by Them,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)