Defense Bitterly Attacks Harris

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

Atlanta Georgian
August 11th, 1913

Battle of Medical Experts Waged in Court

EXPERTS TESTIMONY ON CABBAGE TESTS CALLED WILD GUESS

A bitter arraignment of the professional ethics and fairness of Dr. H. F. Harris, secretary of the State Board of Health, and a through-going attack on his theories and conclusions marked the Frank trial Monday afternoon.

Attorney Reuben Arnold make a scathing criticism of Dr. Harris’ methods during his examination of Dr. Willis Westmoreland, a prominent Atlanta physician and surgeon.

Arnold was asking the medical expert his opinion of the ethics of a chemist or physician who would take the organs and the stomach with its contents from a body, make his examination in absolute secrecy and would leave no material on which the other aide in a legal case might make analysis and examinations.

Solicitor Dorsey objected to the question.

Attorney Arnold said, in justifying his question:

“We wish to show that Dr. Harris has violated all the ethics of his profession, as well as the principles of decency and honesty.”

Dr. Westmoreland said he never had heard of such procedure before.

Continue Reading →

Reporter Makes Denial of Charge That Reports Have Been Flavored

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 10th, 1913

J. M. Minar, a reporter, was put on the stand by the defense after the Epps boy left. By him the defense sought to prove that the boy had talked of Mary Phagan and had not mentioned seeing her on the car.

Before he had finished cross-examining him Attorney F. A. Hooper sought to create the impression on the jury that The Georgian, for which Minar works, had instructed him to discover as much news favorable for Leo Frank as possible, and Mr. Arnold entered an objection at once.

“Did you go to the Epps’ home on Sunday afternoon, the day the dead girl’s body was found?” was Mr. Arnold’s opening question.

“Yes,” replied Minar.

“Did you see George Epps and his sister?”
“Yes.”

“Did you ask them together?”
“Yes.”
“Please state what, if anything, they answered.”

“The sister said she had last seen Mary Phagan on Thursday and the boy told he frequently rode to town with her in the mornings,” replied the witness.

Continue Reading →

Is Defense Planning Telling Blow At Testimony Given by Jim Conley?

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 10th, 1913

Will the defense strive to show by witnesses that the pencil factory elevator was not run on April 26 as told by Jim Conley in his remarkable story?

Since a question put to General Manager Darley by Luther Rosser when Darley was placed on the tand Friday, much speculation has been created in this regard.

Although attorneys for the defense will not discuss the subject, it is the prevalent belief that an effort will be made to show by mechanicians that the elevator was not in operation at any time during that fateful afternoon.

Darley was being questioned about workmen on the third floor who, as was a Saturday afternoon custom, were oiling and repairing the machinery while it was idle during a holiday. He asked if these same workmen did not oil and clean the motor which propels the elevator.

Before the question was answered it apparently was withdrawn as though in an effort to conceal its real purpose and not show an important card in the hand of the defense.

It is rumored that a mechanic, who gave much of his time to oiling and cleaning the elevator motor about the time Conley says he and Frank were lowering Mary Phagan’s body into the basement, is ready to testify that the motor was not in operation at this time or during any time of the afternoon.

If this evidence is produced, as rumored, it will be one of the most significant and telling points submitted by the defense thus far. It will come as near breaking the testimony of the negro Conley as any contradictory evidence yet presented.

* * *

Atlanta Constitution, August 10th 1913, “Is Defense Planning Telling Blow At Testimony Given by Jim Conley?” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

Startling Testimony of Conley Feature of Trial’s Second Week

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 10th, 1913

IMPORTANT WITNESSES HEARD

The resting by the state of the its case against Leo M. Frank, charged with the murder of Mary Phagan, came on Thursday and the defense is at present setting forth its evidence in rebuttal.

Since last Sunday much that is regarded as important has been introduced by both sides and a number of bitter fights have been waged over evidence.

James Conley, the negro sweeper, who makes accusations that Frank told he had struck the girl too hard, and who also told of Frank’s having women in his office for immoral purposes and also swore to alleged habits of degeneracy on the part of the superintendent, was put on the stand Monday, and it was not until during the middle of the day Wednesday that the negro was excused. He had been on the stand something like fifteen hours and had established a record for Georgia courts.

Of the time he was on the stand, he was subjected to about thirteen hours of gruelling cross-examination by Attorney Luther Z. Rosser, but despite every attack, stuck to the principal part of his charges, although he admitted he had previously lied on many occasions.

On Wednesday, also, the court refused finally to strike from the records the negro’s testimony in regard to Frank’s alleged habits and also in regard to his previous actions with women before the Saturday of the murder.

Mrs. J. W. Coleman, mother of the murdered girl, was also recalled to the stand and told of having cooked cabbage for Dr. H. F. Harris to experiment upon. At her departure the physician was again put on the stand and he continued his statement, in which he declared that the girl met death within about 45 minutes after eating the cabbage and bread she is said to have had about 11:30 o’clock Saturday of the murder.

Continue Reading →

Frank A. Hooper Is Proving Big Aid to Solicitor Dorsey

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 10th, 1913

ROSSER CALLS HIM BEAU BRUMMEL OF BAR

By Britt Craig.

He has a kind and genial face that makes you feel he is the friend of everybody in the world, but in the midst of a big trial he might be compared with a Gatling gun, except for the fact that there doubtless are witnesses who would prefer facing the Gatling.

There is a liberal sprinkling of gray in his hair, and Luther Rosser has often truthfully, although sarcastically, referred to him as the Beau Brummel of the bar.

You would never suspect that he was a lawyer. Your first impression would be that he was an author, an actor or lecturer.

That he would work as untiringly and persistently to hang a man as Culumbus worked to find America, would never enter your mind, and you would dispute the word of your most verarious friend on the subject.

Dorsey Secures Hooper.

When Solicitor Hugh Dorsey faced the task of prosecuting Leo M. Frank he set about to find a colleague worthy of the undertaking. He selected Frank Hooper, a well-known corporation attorney.

Continue Reading →

Introduction by Defense of Host Of Character Witnesses Probable

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 10th, 1913

The introduction of character testimony in behalf of Leo Frank at present seems very probable. It is not thought, however, that witnesses of this nature will be put on the stand until the middle of the week.

Attorneys for the defense, as in the past, who have withhold their plans until the exact moment of performance, have refused to discuss whether or not character witnesses will be called. It is the general impression, however, that a wealth of this evidence will be presented—more, in fact, than has been produced in any trial in the state.

At the opening of the case the roll of witnesses named by the defense included some of the city’s foremost business figures, who, it was freely stated, had been called only in defense of the accused man’s character.

The solicitor has never intimated whether or not he has evidence to produce in rebuttal of character testimony in case it is presented. Such evidence, however, can never be produced by the prosecution unless the issue is opened by the defense.

* * *

Atlanta Constitution, August 10th 1913, “Introduction by Defense of Host of Character Witnesses Probable,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

Epps Boy Denies Trying to Avoid Being Called to the Stand Again

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 10th, 1913

C. B. Dalton, who was used by the state to corroborate some of Jim Conley’s testimony against Leo Frank, was the first witness called by the defense Saturday morning. He did not respond and George Epps, the newsboy who claims to have ridden to town with Mary Phagan the day she met death, was next called.

The lad, who could not be found Friday, was present and took the stand. State and defense clashed over the lad as Solicitor Hugh Dorsey stated that Attorney Reuben Arnold had tried to give the impression Friday that he had fled from the court and could not be got to testify for the defense.

“Do you remember the Sunday on which Mary Phagan’s body was found?” Mr. Arnold asked the lad.

“Yes, sir.”

“Did Mr. J. M. Minar, a reporter, come to your house that afternoon?”
“Yes, sir.”

“Did he ask you and your sister when was the last time either of you had seen Mary Phagan?”
“I heard that he asked sister: he didn’t ask me.”
“Didn’t your sister say she hadn’t seen her since the previous Thursday and didn’t you stand there and say the same thing?”
“No, sir; I’d gone to get a wrap for her.”
Mr. Dorsey then took the witness.

“George, did you try to hide from this court?”
“No, sir.”
“You weren’t here yesterday, were you?”
“No, sir; I wasn’t here; I got tired of hanging around here and you told me I could go home and you’d send for me when I was wanted, and yesterday when they came for me I was out playin’ ball.”

“Didn’t you call me up last night and ask if you were wanted?”
“Yes, sir.”

At this point Mr. Arnold objected, saying that these remarks had nothing to do with the case.

“Well, your honr, Mr. Arnold tried to give the impression yesterday that this witness was hiding out rather than testify when the defense wanted him,” said Mr. Dorsey, “and I wanted to show that this was not the case.”

* * *

Atlanta Constitution, August 10th 1913, “Epps Boy Denies Trying to Avoid Being Called to the Stand Again,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

Defense Will Renew Attack Upon Dr. Harris’ Testimony

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 10th, 1913

That the defense in the trial of Leo M. Frank, charged with the murder of Mary Phagan, will continue its attack upon the testimony of Dr. H. F. Harris, who made a postmortem examination of the body and declared the girl must have died at about 12:10 in the afternoon, was the information secured Saturday.

Dr. Willie Westmoreland, Dr. J. N. Ellis and Dr. T. H. Hancok are expected to be the physicians placed upon the stand to refute this declaration made by Dr. Harris. The defense has already made an attack upon the state’s claim that Mary Phagan was already dead at 12:10 o’clock when Monteen Stover says she entered Frank’s office and did not find him there and through the statements of two street car men they sought to show that the girl never left the street car until that minute and must have reached the factory after Miss Stover had come and gone.

Dr. Harris based his statement about the time of death upon the condition of the contents of the girl’s stomach, declaring that the amount of digestion that had taken place in the cabbage there showed that she must have met death within something like 45 minutes from eating the cabbage. Her mother swore that she took this meal at 11:30 or just a few minutes earlier.

Neither side would make any statement last night. Both indicate that they were well pleased with the day in which things are going, but lawyers on both sides declined to make any statement in regard to the future course of action.

That the defense will take the greater part, or all, of this week for the presentation of their side, and even longer should they place Frank’s character on record, has already been known for several days and from present indications the arguments of counsel will begin a week from tomorrow.

When court convenes Monday morning H. G. Schiff, one of Frank’s assistants in the factory, will again go on the stand for further cross-examination by the state. Solicitor Hugh M. Dorsey had started upon this when court adjourned Saturday.

* * *

Alanta Constitution, August 10th 1913, “Defense Will Renew Attack Upon Dr. Harris’ Testimony,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

Playing Practical Jokes on Watchful Bailiffs is Pastime of Frank Jurors

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

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

Atlanta Journal
August 10th, 1913

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

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

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

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

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

Continue Reading →

Schiff Put on Stand to Refute Conley and Dalton Testimony

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 10th, 1913

HIS STATEMENTS HELP DEFENSE

Herbert G. Schiff, assistant to Leo M. Frank at the National Pencil factory, followed J. H. Minar on the stand Saturday. His testimony was used by the defense in an ef[f]ort to refute the stories of Jim Conley and C. B. Dalton to the effect that Frank frequently had women in the office on Saturdays and holidays and he also went into great detail and testified to the complexity of the financial sheet and the large amount of work necessary to complete it.

He was being cross-examined by the state when court adjourned at 12:30 o’clock until 9 o’clock Monday morning. At the time of adjournment the solicitor was trying to show by cross-questions that the witness had exaggerated the amount of work and the time required upon the financial sheet which it is claimed Frank made out on the Saturday before the murder was discovered.

“Do you have anything to do with keeping the books and getting up the financial statement?” Mr. Arnold began.

“Yes, I do.”

“Who went to work for the factory first, you or Mr. Frank?”
“Mr. Frank.”

“What sort of work did you first do?”
“I assisted in the office work of the factory and early in January was promoted and went on the road, then the office force got short and I offered my services in the office again and returned to help Mr. Frank.”

Continue Reading →

Schiff Testimony Contradicts That Given by Dalton and Negro Conley

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 10th, 1913

Saturday by Far the Best Day for the Defense Since Start of the Frank Trial Two Weeks Ago.

SAYS WOMEN DID NOT VISIT FRANK’S OFFICE

Lawyers for State and Defense in Frequent Clashes During the Testimony of Frank’s Assistant at the Factory.

By far the best day the defense in the Frank trial has had came to a close Saturday afternoon at 12:30 o’clock when a recess was taken until 9 o’clock Monday morning, at which time Herert Schiff, assistant to Leo M. Frank, will again be on the stand to undergo a thorough cross-examination at the hands of Solicitor Dorsey.

Schiff’s direct testimony Saturday was of a convincing nature and the defense will largely bank on it to disprove the idea that Frank could have committed the murder and afterward done the intricate mathematical work he claims to have done during the afternoon of Memorial day. Just how Schiff’s testimony will stand up under the cross fire of Solicitor Dorsey is a question which Monday alone will answer. Thus far his testimony has been the most convincing of any that has been introduced by the defense. He is an extremely bright young man, ready with his answers and he possesses a good memory. When court adjourned Saturday Solicitor Dorsey had failed to shake him on any material testimony or point.

Continue Reading →

Witness Found Who Saw Mary Phagan on Way to Factory

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

Atlanta Journal
August 10th, 1913

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

BOTH SIDES READY TO GRILL EVERY WITNESSES

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

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

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

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

Continue Reading →

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

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

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

Atlanta Journal
August 10th, 1913

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

STATE HAS INTRODUCED 34 WITNESSES, DEFENSE 10

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

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

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

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

Continue Reading →

One Glance at Conley Boosts Darwin Theory

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

Atlanta Georgian
August 10th, 1913

Frank’s Accuser Is Not the Type of Negro White Men Consider Their Friend.

By TARLETON COLLIER.

Jim Conley is a low-browed, thick-lipped, anthropoidal sort of negro. You look at him and your faith in Mr. Darwin’s theory goes up like cotton after a boll-weevil scare.

Here is a burly, short-necked black man. On his upper lip is a scanty mustache of the kind that most negroes fondle with the vain hope that it will grow into a bushy thickness. Conley is the most common African type as to physique.

Never a flash of brightness, never a gleam of wit, never the sparkle of unconscious humor came during the three days Conley was on the stand. Newt Lee made the courtroom laugh. Conley didn’t. He was always deadly earnest.

Continue Reading →

Mary Phagan’s Mother to be Spared at Trial

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

Atlanta Georgian
August 10th, 1913

A spectator at the trial of Leo M. Frank for the murder of little Mary Phagan remarked:

“I wonder what the mother of the little girl who was so brutally killed thinks of all this?”
Mrs. J. W. Coleman, the mother, was the first witness called at the beginnig [sic] of the case, now two weeks gone. She was dressed in deep black with a heavy veil about her face. As she pulled back the veil to speak to the jury the expression was calm without a sign of bitterness. And she answered in even tones.

When the Solicitor opened a little suit case and placed before her the clothes of her little girl.

There was a stifled cry. Those who looked saw a face covered with a handkerchief. That was enough. Solicitor Dorsey put no more questions.

For ten days the grind of the court went on. The mother was forgotten for more immediate things.

Friday she was recalled in the midst of expert testimony on the effect of digestion on cabbage. She came and indifferently told how she had cooked the cabbage that made the last meal of little Mary Phagan. Then she said:

“Mr. Dorsey, will you need me any more? I’m so tired. I want to go.”

He told her she could go. And it is very probable she will not appear at this trial again.

* * *

Atlanta Georgian, August 10th 1913, “Mary Phagan’s Mother to be Spared at Trial,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

Dalton Sticks Firmly To Story Told on Stand

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

Atlanta Georgian
August 10th, 1913

C. B. Dalton, prominent as a witness in the Frank trial, stuck firmly to the story he told in court when he was confronted Saturday by the letter of Miss Laura Atkinson, No. 30 Ella street, one of the young women mentioned in his sensational testimony. She branded his statement concerning her as false.

He maintained that all he said as a witness was true—that he met her, as he had other girls of the pencil factory, and walked home with her from a restaurant near the plant on Forsyth street.

Dalton was emphatic in his reiteration of every detail of the testimony delivered by him from the witness stand.

Here is Miss Atkinson’s statement, in full, denying Dalton’s testimony:

“Editor The Sunday American: Will you please allow me space to correct a statement made by Mr. C. B. Dalton in his testimony at the Frank trial, and published in your paper yesterday? In answer to a question from Mr. Rosser as to whether he ever went to the pencil factory with any one except Miss Daisy Hopkins, he said yes, he used to go to the Busy Bee and wait for the factory to close to walk home with the girls, and gave my name as one of the girls.

“His statement, as I read it in your paper, impressed me as being intended to convey to the minds of those who heard it, and, of course, all who read it, the idea that I was working at the factory at the time he says he went there, and that he was in the habit of walking home with me. I have no desire to make any derogatory remarks about Mr. Dalton, but in justice to myself and my good name, I certainly do feel it my duty to say that his statement concerning me is false, and he had not the slightest ground whatever for making it and no right to use my name in any way in his testimony.

“I have known him only about six months, and have never been in his company but three times. On two occasions I was at church with a gentleman friend who was also a friend of his and he walked with us from the church to my home, less than three blocks, and one afternoon while out walking met him and he walked with me a distance of about four blocks. That, and a few conversations over the telephone, probably three or four, mark the extent of my acquaintance with him. I worked at the pencil factory exactly two days the second week in July (last month) and did not even see Mr. Dalton on either one of those days. I had never worked there before nor been there, and have not since.

“Will you please state these facts in your paper and clear up any false impression that may have been made on people’s minds concerning me, and the slur I feel has been case on my good name by having him make such a false statement where it would be published broadcast over the country? I will appreciate it and thank you very much if you will correct the statement. Sincerely,

“LAURA ATKINSON.

“No. 30 Ella Street.”

* * *

Atlanta Georgian, August 10th 1913, “Dalton Sticks Firmly To Story Told on Stand,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

Phagan Trial Makes Eleven “Widows” But Jurors’ Wives Are Peeresses Also

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

Atlanta Georgian
August 10th, 1913

By L. F. WOODRUFF

Eleven widows were made in Atlanta in a day without the assistance of the Grim Reaper, a trip to Reno, pallbearers or affinity stories in the newspapers.

And there is but one drop of consolation in their cup. When they were made widows they automatically became peeresses, for which privilege many American girls have caused their fathers large sums of good American money and themselves heartache and their pictures to be printed between the story of the rabbit that chased the boa constrictor and the life narrative of Sophie, the Shop Girl, who in a night became a stage star.

They also had the satisfaction of having their husbands officially proclaimed good men and true, which they may have questioned when the pay envelope was brought home with $10 missing and unaccounted for, just as all wives have questioned.

They’ll Be Brides Again.

If there is any balm in it, the widows know that it will not be long before they can doff their weeds and once more don their bridal gowns. Their husbands will return to them just as soon as they have decided whether or not Leo Frank is guilty of the murder of Mary Phagan.

Continue Reading →

Interest in Trial Now Centers in Story of Mincey

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

Atlanta Georgian
August 10th, 1913

Question of Time Considered of Paramount Importance in Defense Theory of Frank Case

EVERY EFFORT WILL BE MADE TO ACCOUNT FOR ALL HIS MOVEMENTS

As all interest centered in the dramatic story of Jim Conley while the case of the prosecution in the Frank trial was being presented, so the public now is awaiting with the keenest expectancy the tale that W. H. Mincey, pedagogue and insurance solicitor, will relate when he is called this week by the attorneys for Leo M. Frank.

Conley swore as glibly as though he were telling of an inconsequential incident in one of his crap games that Frank had confessed to him the killing of Mary Phagan. Then the negro went on in elaborate detail to tell the horrible story of the disposal of the girl’s body.

Mincey will tell a similar story, except that Conley will be named as the man confessing the crime and there will be none of the grewsome descriptions of carrying the limp body from second floor to basement in a piece of crocus bagging.

The coming week of the trial will have other witnesses galore. Some of them may be of much more importance than Mincey. Some of them may contribute in a much greater degree to the strength of the defense’s case. But the appearance, on the stand of no person is being awaited with higher interest than that of Mincey.

Continue Reading →

Conley, Unconcerned, Asks Nothing of Trial

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

Atlanta Georgian
August 10th, 1913

Despite the attacks of the defense in the trial of Leo Frank has made upon his story, Jim Conley—from whose lips fell the most damning and abhorrent testimony a Georgia jury has ever heard—sits calmly in his cell at the Tower, inscrutable and unconcerned.

The negro, for weeks the greatest puzzle in the criminal annals of the State, has become an even greater puzzle since he told his story and was taken back to the gloominess of the jail. The fact that he is an admitted accessory after the fact in the murder of little Mary Phagan does not apparently weigh upon his mind.

He asks no questions about the trial or whether the defense has succeeded in breaking down his remarkable tale, and whenever information is vouchsafd to him he receives it with the same cunning smile that baffled Frank’s attorneys and that has baffled students of criminology since the negro became connected with the Phagan case.

* * *

Atlanta Georgian, August 10th 1913, “Conley, Unconcerned, Asks Nothing of Trial,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

Case Never is Discussed by Frank Jurors

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

Atlanta Georgian
August 10th, 1913

Every Man on Panel Has Nickname and Formality Has Been Cast Out.

No member of the jury that is to decide Leo M. Frank’s guilt or innocence had expressed an opinion on the case or even one witness’ testimony when the second week of the trial ended yesterday afternoon, according to the deputies who have them in charge.

In the court it is an attentive jury. No bit of evidence gets by unnoticed, no wrangle occurs between the attorneys that is not given their undivided attention, and when a person testifies they catch every word—knowing the formal charge that will come from the judge. “You are to believe all of it, or any part of it, or if you see fit so to do take the word of the defendant, who is not under oath.”
Out of the court it is altogether a different kind of a jury. Probably it is that its members hear enough of the case during “business hours” and are glad to discuss topics that do not bring in the possibility of weighing a man’s life. But not one member of the jury has at any time expressed any opinion. If there is one, it is carefully guarded, but those who have watched the faces during the two weeks said yesterday that it was a jury that was still open to conviction.

The formal “good-morning, Mr. —,” has been abandoned for the more jovial “howdy-do,” and every member has a nickname. Friday morning each member came from the hotel with a tiny white flower on his coat. They were the gift from the wife of a newlywed, who would not be on the jury if Judge Roan had listened to his excuses.

Saturday afternoon and Sunday are the days that are really tiresome. They are allowed to communicate with no one, and, save a morning and afternoon unconstitutional, are not permitted to venture from the three rooms assigned them. Last week the attorneys consented for them to purchase magazines, or any reading matter, to be censored by the Sheriff, and, with exception of this diversion, a juryman on a two or three week trial has anything but the finest position in Atlanta.

* * *

Atlanta Georgian, August 10th 1913, “Case Never is Discussed by Frank Jurors,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)