Character of Frank Good, So Many Witnesses Declare

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 15th, 1913

R. A. Sohn, superintendent of the Jewish Orphans home, was called to testify on Frank’s behalf.

The witness said that his residence was at No. 408 Washington street. He said that he has known Frank a good many years and that his character was good.

He was excused without undergoing cross-examination by Solicitor Dorsey.

Alex Dittler, secretary of the Jewish Alliance and an officer of the Federation of Jewish societies, also testified to Frank’s good character.

The witness said that he has been a resident of Atlanta more than thirty-eight years. He was deputy city marshal under Marshal Humphrey and occupied the position of acting recorder of deeds in the clerk’s office of the superior court many years ago.

I have known Frank since he came to Atlanta and know his character to be good.

Arthur Heyman, a member of the law firm of Dorsey, Brewster, Howell & Heyman, took the stand.

“How long have you known Frank?” asked Attorney Arnold.

“About three years.”

Continue Reading →

Miss Eva May Flowers Did Not See Any Blood on Factory Floor

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 15th, 1913

Miss Eula May Flowers, an employee of the National Pencil factory, was put on the stand following the two Cornell professors.

“Were you at the factory on April 26?” asked Mr. Arnold.

“Yes.”

“What department are you in?”
“The packing department.”

“Who got the data and when from you for the financial sheet made up on April 26?”
“Mr. Schiff got it from me about 6 o’clock Friday afternoon.”

“You say you always turned in your report on Friday afternoons?” asked Attorney Hooper, who took up the cross-examination.

“Yes,” the witness replied, “either on Friday afternoons or early Saturday mornings.”

“Were you there Saturday at all?’
“No.”

“What did you say was your particular department?”
“The packing department.”

“Did you see any blood on the floor following the day of the murder?”
“No.”

Miss Flowers was excused.

* * *

Atlanta Constitution, August 15th 1913, “Miss Eva May Flowers Did Not See Any Blood on Factory Floor,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

Frank Not Nervous on Night Of Murder Says Mrs. Ursenbach

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 15th, 1913

Mrs. Charles F. Ursenbach followed her husband on the stand. During the cross-examination by Attorney Hooper she was asked scores of detailer questions about the words and manner of Leo Frank on the Sunday that the body was found.

“What is your relation to Mrs. Leo Frank?” asked Mr. Arnold.

“I am her sister.”

“Did you hear about the message from Mr. Frank saying he could not go to the ball game with your husband that Saturday?”
“Yes, I got it from the servant.”

“At what time?”

“At about 12:30.”

“Did you see Frank on Sunday?”

“Yes.”

Continue Reading →

Pittsburg Witness Tells of Frank’s Standing in School

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 15th, 1913

John W. Todd, of Pittsburg, PA., purchasing agent for the Crucible Steel company, who was with Frank at Cornell university, followed Mrs. Emil Selig to the stand.

He was asked if he knew the general character of Frank while at college and replied that he did and that it was good. He was let off with no cross-examination and went over and shook hands with the defendant and his wife and mother. He then passed by the press table and shook hands with a newspaper man who formerly worked in Pittsburg. After staying a while and listening to the testimony of other witnesses and making queries about Jim Conley, Mr. Todd left the court room.

* * *

Atlanta Constitution, August 15th 1913, “Pittsburg Witness Tells of Frank’s Standing in School,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

Factory Forewoman Swears Conley Said He Was Drunk on April 26

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 15th, 1913

Miss Rebecca Carson, a forewoman in the pencil factory, who made the startling statement that Jim Conley had admitted to her that he was drunk on the Saturday of the murder was put on the stand.

“Did you see Leo Frank at any time on April 26?”

“Yes, I saw him on Whitehall street near Hunter between 2:20 o’clock and 2:25.”

“Did you speak to him?”
“Yes.”

“Did you come to the factory Monday morning following the murder?”
“Yes.”

“Did you see Frank?”
“Yes.”

“Jim Conley?”
“Yes.”

Continue Reading →

Sister of Mrs. Leo M. Frank Tells Jury About Card Game

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 15th, 1913

Mrs. A. Marcus, a sister of Mrs. Leo Frank, followed Mrs. C. F. Ursenbach, another sister. She was among those who played cards at the Selig home on April 26.

“Did Frank and his wife play cards with the rest?” Mr. Arnold asked.

“No.”

“Where were they?”
“Mr. Frank sat in the hall reading and his wife was in and out of the room.”

“What time did they go to bed?”
“Something after 10 o’clock.”

“Was Frank nervous?”
“No.”

“Anything unusual about him?”
“No.”

“You say Frank sat in the hall reading, did you?” asked Attorney Hooper on cross-examination.

“Yes,” the witness replied.

“He broke up the poker game, didn’t he?”
“No.”

Mrs. Marcus was then excused.

* * *

Atlanta Constitution, August 15th 1913, “Sister of Mrs. Leo M. Frank Tells Jury About Card Game,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

Mother-in-Law of Frank Denies Charges in Cook’s Affidavit

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 15th, 1913

Following the testimony of those who claimed to have played poker at the Emil Selig home on the night of April 26, Mrs. Selig, Leo Frank’s mother-in-law was placed on the stand and asked a number of questions about the happenings at her house on Sunday, April 27. To most of the questions from the state on cross-examination she replied that she had forgotten.

When the witness took the stand, Attorney Arnold called on the state for the affidavit which Minola McKnight, the Selig’s cook, signed at police station and later repudiated.

“Mrs. Selig,” said Mr. Arnold, “I wanted to ask you some questions about statements in this affidavit and find out if they are true.

“Is it true that there was talk in your home about the time of the murder? Leo Frank being caught with a girl at the factory and that the negro cook asked if it was a Jew girl or a Gentile and you or Mrs. Frank said it was a Gentile?”

“It is not true, there was no such conversation that I know of.”

Mrs. Selig was almost crying at this juncture of her testimony.

Continue Reading →

Many Men Swear to Good Character of Superintendent of Pencil Factory

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 15th, 1913

Classmates and Instructors at Cornell Come to Atlanta to Testify to His Clean Life While at College and to Show Their Loyalty to Old College Friend.

DORSEY ASKS REMOVAL OF LEO FRANK’S MOTHER AND WIFE FROM COURT

Judge Warns Them That Another Scene Like That of Wednesday, When Mrs. Rae Frank Denounced Solicitor, Will Result in Barring Them—Leach Proves Good Witness for the State Although Called to Testify by Defense

More witnesses were examined Thursday than on any day since the trial of Leo M. Frank began.

However, there was little adduced from the testimony that was of striking interest or that savored of the dramatic.

For the most part the day was taken up with character witnesses—men who have known Frank for years and who have volunteered to swear to his good character.

The only incident of the day that was in any way dramatic came at the morning session, when Solicitor Dorsey asked that Mrs. Rae Frank and Mrs. Leo Frank, mother and wife of the defendant, be removed from the court room. This was the result of the passionate outburst of Mrs. Rae Frank the day previous. Judge Roan gave warning that there must be no more such demonstrations.

Continue Reading →

All Georgia Records Broken by the Frank Trial

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

Atlanta Journal
August 15th, 1913

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Continue Reading →

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


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

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

Atlanta Journal
August 15th, 1913

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

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

ATLANTA GIRL BROUGHT REFORMATORY IN CINCINNATI TO TESTIFY AGAINST FRANK

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

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

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

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

Continue Reading →

Testimony of Girls Help to Leo M. Frank

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

Atlanta Georgian
August 15th, 1913

In the presentation of its alibi for Leo M. Frank, the defense probably accomplished more Thursday than it had in all of previous time since the prosecution rested its case. Frank’s lawyers had promised that they would show where Frank was practically every minute on the day the murder of little Mary Phagan was committed and would demonstrate that it would have been impossible to carry out the disposal of the slain girl’s body and the writing of the notes as the negro, Jim Conley, described them.

If their alibi witnesses are to be believed, the lawyers appear to have fairly well accomplished this. On the credibility of one young witness, pretty Helen Curran, of No. 160 Ashby street, the whole alibi may stand or fall. She could, of course, be proved mistaken in her statement that she saw Frank at 1:10 o’clock standing at Jacobs’ Pharmacy, Whitehall and Alabama streets, awaiting a car home from the factory on the afternoon of the murder, and the remainder of the alibi witnesses remain unimpeached, but it would serve to weaken the alibi materially.

Apparently Disinterested.

She is at once the most important and the most disinterested of the witnesses who have testified to seeing Frank immediately after the State says the crime was committed. If Frank was at Whitehall and Alabama streets at 1:10 o’clock, it would have been almost beyond human possibility for him to have taken part in the disposal of the girl’s body, which Conley said was undertaken at 12:55 and finished about 1:30, together with the writing of the notes in Frank’s office.

Continue Reading →

What ‘They Say’ Won’t Hurt Leo Frank; State Must ‘Prove’ Depravity

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

Atlanta Georgian
August 15th, 1913

By JAMES B. NEVIN.

There is nothing apparently so plain to outside observation as character—just character—and there is, strange to say, nothing so difficult at times to prove.

“They say” and “but” are the two most notorious scandalmongers in the universe—“they say” so and so’ and he or she is all right, “but!”

Character, upon which so much depends in this world, upon which civilization itself and decency and right is founded, is, nevertheless, the most elusive of all things when it comes right down to brass tacks of proving it beyond the shadow of a doubt.

Human nature, too, for some curious and vague reason, seems rather to relish the downfall of character and the undermining of reputation—and that, moreover, the while it is vehemently and rather piously assuring itself that it does nothing of the kind!

Kind words travel on leaden feet—gossip gallops in seven-league boots!

Pessimist?

Not at all—just truthimist, that’s all!

Continue Reading →

Frank Prepares to Take Stand

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

Atlanta Georgian
August 15th, 1913

Defense’s Attorneys Expect to Rest Case To-day

CLIMAX NEAR IN GREAT COURT FIGHT; CROWDS AGAIN FLOCK TO TRIAL

Interest in the trial of Leo M. Frank surged upward magically Friday when it was reported about the courtroom that the defense was nearing the close of its case, and that the defendant himself would be placed on the stand within a short time to make his only statement before his fate was placed in the hands of the twelve jurors.

The rumor spread outside the court house mysteriously and an unusual number sought admittance early in the day, although it was regarded as most unlikely that Frank would go to the stand until afternoon. Luther Rosser said he thought he would call the defendant about the middle of the afternoon. Attorney Arnold announced the defense probably would rest by night.

As the last witnesses were being called by the defense, Frank, his wife and his mother viewed the proceedings with the same calmness that has marked their demeanor since the trial began, with the exception of the outburst of the mother two days before. On Friday she looked steadfastly downward and slightly toward the judge’s bench as though she might be having some difficulty in maintaining her attitude of confidence and calmness.

Continue Reading →

Bitter Fight at Morning Session Over Testimony of Dr. Wm. Owen

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 14th, 1913

Dr. William Owen, physician and real estate man, followed Dr. W. S. Kendrick on the stand. By him the defense desired to show that to carry out the movements told of by Jim Conley from the time he alleges Leo Frank called upon him to help move the girl’s body until he left the factory would take much longer than Conley declared he took.

After establishing his identity, Mr. Arnold began the examination of Dr. Owen, which resulted in the argument.

“Dr. Owen, at our request you went to the factory of the National Pencil Company with others and you timed their movements as they enacted the movements as told by Conley, didn’t you?”
“Yes.”

“I object to this, your honor,” interrupted Solicitor Dorsey, “the jury [1 word illegible] how long it took by the evidence introduced and not by this man’s opinion.”

“Mr. Dorsey has not heard the facts which we desire to introduce and when he does he will see that we are not trying to introduce any man’s opinion but the actual results of his timing the moments made by men who took the parts of Mr. Frank and Conley, as Conley described in his testimony before the court,” said Mr. Arnold.

Continue Reading →

Mrs. Rae Frank, Mother of Prisoner, Denounces Solicitor Hugh Dorsey

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 14th, 1913

Mrs. Rae Frank, the mother of the prisoner, startled the courtroom shortly before 4 o’clock, when she denounced Solicitor Dorsey, when he made an attack on the character of her son.

J. Ashley Jones, a local insurance agent, was in the witness chair testifying to the moral character of the accused when the incident occurred. He was asked by Solicitor Dorsey if he had over heard of Frank taking little girls out to Druid Hills, sitting them on his lap and fondling them.

Mrs. Frank glanced furiously at the prosecutor, and rising from her chair, she shrieked.

“No, nor you either—you dog!”

Mrs. Frank Leaves Courtroom.

Deputies rushed over to where Mrs. Frank stood staring at the solicitor Herbert Haas, a relative, passed in between Attorney Rosser and the stenographer and escorted Mrs. Frank from the courtroom to a cab in which she was driven home.

Continue Reading →

More Witnesses Are Called to Blacken Dalton’s Character

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 14th, 1913

Following the putting off of the decision in regard to Dr. William Owen’s testimony, seven Gwinett county citizens were introduced to add to the thick coat of lampblack already smeared over the character of C. Burgess Dalton, the man who accuses Frank of immoral conduct in the office of the National Pencil factory.

All of the men swore that they would not believe the man on oath and only one or two of them were cross-examined by the state.

The men introduced were O. A. Nix, attorney and former member of the legislature; Samuel Craig; Robert Patterson; Robert Craig; Ed Craig; T. L. Ambrose and J. P. Byrd, well-to-do land owners.

By Samuel Craig the solicitor tried to bring out that as far as he knew Dalton’s character had been good since he last knew him, some 12 or 16 years ago, but Mr. Arnold came back at that by a final question.

“Mr. Craig,” said Mr. Arnold, “if Dalton states that he has been in the habit of taking women to a factory basement, would you consider his character good, if he were telling the truth or if he were lying?”
“I would consider it bad in either case,” the witness replied.

* * *

Atlanta Constitution, August 14th 1913, “More Witnesses are Called to Blacken Dalton’s Character,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

Lemmie Quinn is Severely Grilled by Solicitor Dorsey

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 14th, 1913

Bending his efforts to break down the testimony of Lemmie Quinn, foreman of the metal room, Solicitor Dorsey subjected the witness to a severe grilling when court reconvened at 2 o’clock yesterday afternoon.

When Quinn resumed the stand he was still under direct examination by the defense. In answer to Attorney Arnold he declared that he was still an employee of the National Pencil factory.

Solicitor Dorsey began cross-examination.

“When was it these men bled on the floor of the metal room?”

“About a year ago,” Quinn replied.

“What were their names?”

“I remember that C. P. Gilbert, who lives on Jones street, was one. I don’t remember the name of the other.”

“You noticed the spots on the floor of the dressing room on Monday after the murder?”
“Yes, it looked like blood.”

“What is the difference between those spots and the spots made by Gilbert’s bleeding?”
“The spots by the dressing room were darker.”

“Could gasoline have caused that.”

“I don’t know.”

“Where were you at noon on April 26?”
“At the factory.”

Continue Reading →

Financial Sheets Introduced At Frank Trial in Afternoon

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 14th, 1913

The financial sheets which experts declared required from three to three and a half hours to compile were introduced in evidence after Oscar Pappenheimer, a stockholder in the National Pencil factory was examined.

Mr. Pappenheimer testified that he had been a stockholder in the company since 1910.

“Have you been getting comparative sheets from Frank since 1910?” Attorney Arnold asked.

“Yes, sir.”

“Where have you been in the habit of receiving them?”
“Before deliveries of mail stopped on Sunday I invariably found the report in my mail box on Sunday morning. After that I received it every Monday with the first mail.”

“Did you get a sheet for the week ending April 24 the following Monday morning?”
“Yes, sir.”

“Have you received any reports since April 24?”

“No, sir.”

The defense offered the sheets from January 1912 to April 1912 inclusive and they were admitted over the objection of Solicitor Dorsey.

* * *

Atlanta Constitution, August 14th 1913, “Financial Sheets Introduced at Frank Trial in Afternoon,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

Former Office Boy Saw No Women With Frank on Thanksgiving Day

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 14th, 1913

Frank Paine, formerly an office boy for the National Pencil company and who claims to have been working there on Thanksgiving day of last year, was placed on the stand following the introduction of the three character witnesses.

The lad stated that he and Herbert G. Schiff were at the factory on the morning of Thanksgiving day, and that Schiff sent him to the top floor to help Jim Conley straighten out some boxes, which were cluttered around there. He declared that Conley left about 10:20 and then he left at 11 o’clock or thereabouts.

That he did not see Conley in the hallway when he left was another statement made by the lad who further declared that he had never known Frank to have women in his office or to have liquor there.

“Did you spend your time in the office?” Attorney Frank Hooper asked on cross-examination.

“Yes.”

“Was Schiff in the office all the time?”
“Did you ever see any beer bottles in there?”
“No.”

“Was Frank in there on Thanksgiving day?”
“Yes.”

“Did you see Jim Conley there?”

“Yes.”

“When did you first notice Jim?”
“When he was sweeping.”
“When you left at 11 o’clock, you didn’t come back, did you?”
“No.”

“You don’t know whether Jim was in the basement?”
“No.”

The lad was then excused.

* * *

Atlanta Constitution, August 14th 1913, “Former Office Boy Saw No Women With Frank on Thanksgiving Day,” Leo Frank case newspaper article series (Original PDF)

Quinn Intimates That Spots May Have Been on Floor for Months

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 14th, 1913

Lemmie Quinn, foreman of the metal department of the National Pencil factory, was put on the stand by the defense following the ex-office boy.

“Aren’t you foreman of the department Mary Phagan worked in?”
“Yes.”

“Do you recall the time R. P. Barrett found the spots on the floor?”
“Yes.”

“Did Barrett ever state to you about his hope of getting a reward?”
“Yes, he asked my opinion.”

“What statement has he made about getting a reward if Frank should be convicted?”

“He asked me if I didn’t think he was entitled to something.”

“Did anybody ever see that blood or the strands of hair before he pointed them out, did they?”
“Not that I know.”

“Did you ever notice any spots on the floor?”
“Yes, quite often.”

Continue Reading →