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

Atlanta Constitution
August 19th, 1913

Numbers of girls and women, either now employed or formerly employed at the National Pencil factory, were placed on the stand Monday by the defense to swear to the good character of Superintendent Leo M. Frank.

The following, 21 in all, declared Frank’s character good: Miss M. E. Fleming, Miss Annie Howell, Miss Lillie May Goodman, Miss Cora Cowan, Miss Jimmy Mayfield, Miss B. D. Smith, Miss Lizzie Ward, Miss Ida Holmes, Miss Willie Hatcher, Miss Mary Hatcher, Miss Olive Johns, Mrs. Georgia Denham, Miss Bessie White, Mrs. Lizzie Florence, Miss Jennie Spivey, Mrs. Minnie Smith, Miss Grace Atherton, Miss Martha McCord, Miss Lena McMurtry, and Mrs. W. R. Johnson.

Mrs. Mary Bolton, Miss Velvie Holland and Miss Ethel Barber declared that they did not know anything about Frank’s character.

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 19th, 1913

When Mrs. J. G. Wardlaw, a bride of three weeks, who was Miss Lula McDonald, recently worked at the National Pencil factory, was on the stand, Solicitor Hugh Dorsey sought to draw from her the statement that she knew that on the Saturday previous to Mary Phagan’s murder that Leo Frank had carried a little girl out on the Hapeville car line and tried to get her to leave the car with him at various stops.

He also tried to get the witness to say that she knew that on his occasion H. M. Baker and Herndon Stanton, the street car men in charge of the car, had noted the man’s actions.

Mrs. Wardlaw declared she had no knowledge of anything like that and she declared that she had never even heard of any immoral or improper actions on the part of Frank. She was then excused.

* * *

Atlanta Constitution, August 19th 1913, “Mrs. Wardlaw Denies Ever Seeing Frank on Car With Little Girl,” 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
August 20th, 1913

Albert McKnight, husband of Minola McKnight, the negro cook for the family of Emil Selig, with whom Leo Frank and his wife made their home, was introduced to the stand following E. H. Pickett.

Mr. Hooper drew from the negro the statement that since the day he stood in the kitchen door and saw Leo Frank’s reflection in the dining room sideboard glass that the sideboard had been moved.

The negro was made to go over a blue print diagram of the Selig home and show what he claimed was the location of the sideboard on the day of the murder and at the time he claims he saw that Frank ate po dinner and remained only a few minutes at the dinner table.

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 21st, 1913

The evidence brought out on Tuesday that Frank had frequently been seen talking to Mary Phagan and that while so doing had placed his hands upon her person, was corroborated by several witnesses on Wednesday.

The first of these corroborative statements came when Miss Ruth Robinson was called to the stand by Dorsey.

She testified that she had worked at the National Pencil factory and knew both Frank and Mary Phagan.

“Have you ever seen Frank talking to Mary Phagan?” asked Dorsey.

“Yes.”

“What did he talk to her about?”

“About her work.”

“When did he talk to her?”

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 21st, 1913

J. M. Gantt, who has been an important figure in the state’s case, was called during the afternoon to testify to the length of time in which he has seen Frank make out the financial sheet and to the inaccuracy of the ‘punch-clock on the second floor.

“Did you ever see Frank make out the financial sheet?” Mr. Dorsey put.

“Yes.”

“How long did it take him to make it?”

“With the data at hand, I have seen him make it out in an hour and a half.”

“About this punch-clock-—was it accurate?”

“No.”

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 21st, 1913

Following the introduction of the telegram Solicitor Hugh Dorsey began another attack on the character of Leo Frank and after a bitter wrangle secured the right to ask factory girls in regard to Frank’s character in his relations to women.

This was argued with the jury excused from the room and was the subject of a bitter fight, the state saying that when Frank on the stand had claimed himself to have always lived a virtuous life, he had opened up the way for the state to prove he was not of a virtuous character.

Judge Roan had already ruled that the state could not introduce witnesses said by the solicitor to be prepared to swear that Frank had made improper proposals to them and that this was about the same thing. Solicitor Dorsey argued that it was not and finally got the ruling in his favor. The defense entered a formal protest and had it go on record.

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 21st, 1913

Solicitor Dorsey makes a persistent effort Wednesday morning to show that the character of Leo Frank is anything but good. Ha laid particular stress upon his character as to his relations with women and girls, and introduced a large number of women who testified that in this respect his character was in their judgment bad.

Among those who testified merely that his character was bad without going into details were:

Mrs. Marion Dunnigan, who stated that she worked at the pencil factory two or three weeks about two years ago. She testified that Frank’s character was bad, but she did not know about the lascivious part of it.