Author Archives: Chief Curator

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

Posted on by

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

Posted on by

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

Posted on by

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

Posted on by

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

Posted on by

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

Posted on by

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

Posted on by

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

Posted on by

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

Posted on by

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

Posted on by

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

Posted on by

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

Posted on by

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

Posted on by

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

Posted on by

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 →

Lively Tilts Mark the Hearing Of Testimony of Dr. Kendrick

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 14th, 1913

Dr. William S. Kendrick, head of the chair of medicine of the new Atlanta Medical school and for the past thirty eight years a general practitioner of medicine, was the first witness put on the stand Wednesday morning.

The physician on the stand declared the deductions of Dr. H. F. Harris, secretary of the state board of health, as to the time of Mary Phagan’s death and the alleged violation as nothing more than guesswork.

On cross-examination the solicitor forced Dr. Kendrick to admit that he was no expert on digestion and that he had not read a medical treatise on the subject in ten years or possibly in his life.

Many lively tilts occurred while the physician had the stand and in many instances the solicitor forced the witness to admit his ignorance on points pertaining to the subject.

Reuben Arnold outlined the condition in which it is said that Dr. Harris found the girl’s body and asked the witness if he could tell from that whether or not she had been violated. Dr. Kendrick stated that he could not.

“Would it be merely conjecture or not to make such a deduction?”
“I would call it nothing else.”

“Are you or not a stomach specialist?” Mr. Arnold next asked.

Continue Reading →

Surprise Sprung by Introduction of Character Witnesses by Defense

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 14th, 1913

Alfred L. Lane, who stated that he lives in Brooklyn, and is a merchant of New York city, was the first witness to take the stand to swear to the good character of Leo Frank and so quietly was he introduced that not until the defense had asked him several questions did it become known what was about to take place.

“You came here yesterday afternoon especially to testify about Mr. Frank, did you not?” asked Mr. Arnold after he had established the identity of the witness and drawn from him the statement that he had known Frank for about fifteen years.

“Yes, I came here for that purpose,” Lane replied.

“Where did you first known Mr. Frank and when?” asked Mr. Arnold.

“I knew him when we were in school together from 1898 to 1902 at Pratt Institute, a high school in Brooklyn,” replied the witness.

By this time it had begun to dawn on the spectators and lawyers that the defense was introducing the character of the defendant.

Continue Reading →

Dr. William Owen Tells How Conley’s Story Was Re-enacted

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 14th, 1913

Dr. William D. Owens, a well-known physician and one of the timekeepers in the re-enaction of Conley’s story in the pencil factory was recalled to the stand at the afternoon session.

He was questioned by Mr. Arnold and cross-examined by Mr. Hooper.

“How much time did it require you to go through this performance?” asked Mr. Arnold.

“Eighteen and a half minutes.”

“How rapidly did you go through it?”
“Just as fast as the directions could be read.”

The cross-examination began.

“Where did you start the performance?”

“From the second floor to the basement.”

Continue Reading →

Mother of Frank Denounces Solicitor Dorsey in Court

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Constitution
August 14th, 1913

STIRS COURTROOM WHEN SHE RESENTS QUESTIONS ASKED FRANK’S WITNESS

Solicitor Dorsey Was Cross-Examining Ashley Jones, a Witness Who Had Been Testifying to the Good Character of the Prisoner, and Had Just Asked Him if He Had Not Heard of Frank Taking Liberties With Little Girls Out at Druid Hills Some Time Ago.

TEARS FILLING EYES, WOMAN LEAVES COURT WITH SON’S ATTORNEY

Large Part of Wednesday’s Testimony Was Consumed in an Effort on Part of the State to Break Down the Testimony Given by Lemmie Quinn—Dr. William K. Owen Takes the Stand in Afternoon to Tell How Story of Conley Was Reenacted at National Pencil Company Factory.

There was one brief dramatic moment in the Frank trial Wednesday—so dramatic and full of heart interest that spectators were stirred as they have not been since the trial began.

Solicitor Dorsey was cross-questioning Ashley Jones, a character witness for Frank. He asked him if he had not heard of Frank taking liberties with little girls out at Druid Hills.

“No, and you never did—you dog!” exclaimed Mrs. Rae Frank, mother of the accused young man, as she partially rose from her seat and faced Solicitor Dorsey.

Continue Reading →

Court Stirred by Outburst From Leo Frank’s Mother

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Journal
August 14th, 1913

Defense Character Witness Is Used by Solicitor to Get Suggestions Before Jury

Solicitor Mentions Names of Many Persons, Who Will Probably be Put Up in Rebuttal to Attack Frank’s Conduct as Related to Woman Employes of Factory—Mrs. Rae Frank, Mother of the Accused, Creates a Sensation Shouting at the Solicitor.

Court adjourned at 5:40 until 9 o’clock Thursday morning.

The trial of Leo M. Frank took another sensational turn Wednesday afternoon when Solicitor Dorsey began, through his questions to John Ashley Jones, put up as a character witness by the defense, a vigorous attack upon the character of Frank. The solicitor hurled one sensational question at the witness after the other.

“You’ve never heard L. T. Coursey and Miss Myrtis Cator tell about Frank walking into the dressing room?” shouted the solicitor.

“You never heard how he tried to put his arms around Miss Myrtis Cator?”
“You never heard about his looking at poor little Gordie Jackson?”
“You didn’t hear of what he tried to do to Luis McDonald and Rachel Prater, did you?”
“And you didn’t know about Mrs. Pearl Dodson hitting him with a monkey wrench?”
To all of these questions the witness answered in the negative. The solicitor proceeded with others, asking the witness if he had ever talked to Mrs. G. D. Dunnegan and Marian Dunnegan or to Mrs. Wingard, of 45 Mills street.

It is inferred that the solicitor expects to put up the persons mentioned to testify in rebuttal against Frank’s good character.

Mr. Dorsey drew from Mr. Jones, who is an insurance agent, the admission that he had written to the grand jury, urging an indictment of Jim Conley. Mr. Jones said he did so because his insurance company had written a policy for Frank and before issuing it had made a thorough investigation of his character and found it to be good.

Continue Reading →

Frank’s Story of Before and After Crime Corroborated; Defense’s Motion to Strike Sensational Questions Fails

Posted on by

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

Atlanta Journal
August 14th, 1913

FRANK WAS SEEN BY WITNESSES ON HIS WAY TO AND FROM HOME DAY LITTLE GIRL WAS KILLED

Solicitor Declares That Outburst of Yesterday Should Not Be Allowed and That as There Is Further Unpleasant Testimony to Be Heard, He Suggests That Frank’s Wife and Mother Do Not Hear It—Judge Issues Caution

MOTION OF ATTORNEY ROSSER TO STRIKE OUT SENSATIONAL QUESTIONS IS OVERRULED

Solicitor Dorsey’s Questions Put to John Ashley Jones Will Stand and the Defense Will Be Forced to Disprove Suggestions Given to Jury by Cross-Questioning Witnesses Whom Solicitor Will Summon in Rebuttal

There were three big features in the Thursday morning session of the trial of Leo M. Frank:

First, the request of Solicitor Hugh M. Dorsey that the mother and wife of the accused be excluded from the court room to prevent an interruption similar to that made by Mrs. Rae Frank Wednesday afternoon. Judge Roan did not grant the request but cautioned the ladies that they must contain themselves.

Second, the overruling of a motion made by the defense to strike from the record the sensational questions and answers reflecting on Frank’s character elicited Wednesday afternoon during the examination of John Ashley Jones, a character witness.

Third, a formidable presentation of evidence corroborating Frank’s story in reference to his movements on the day of the tragedy.

Through the witnesses who testified Thursday the defense showed that Frank was on his way home at 1:10 o’clock and that he was on his way back to the factory at 2 o’clock. Previously Emil Selig had testified that Frank reached his home at 68 East Georgia avenue about 1:20 o’clock. The superintendent’s story of where he was and what he did immediately before immediately after the tragedy has, therefore, been very strongly corroborated.

Miss Helen Curran, of 360 Ashby street, stenographer, whose father works for Montag Bros., and who herself is employed by the Bennett Printing company, testified that she saw Frank in front of Jacobs’ Alabama and Whitehall streets store at 1:20 o’clock Saturday afternoon.

Mrs. M. O. Michael, of Athens, aunt of Mrs. Lucile Frank, saw Frank, she testified, in front of her sister’s, Mrs. C. Wolfsheimer’s home, 387 Washington street, Saturday afternoon about 2 o’clock. Frank came over and spoke to her, she said. Jerome Michael, her son, also saw Frank in front of the Wolfsheimer residence. Mrs. A. B. Leavy, of 69 East Georgia avenue, Mrs. Wolfsheimer, Julian Loeb and Miss Rebecca Carson were other witnesses who testified to seeing Frank either on his way home shortly after 1 o’clock or as he returned to the factory about 3 o’clock.

Continue Reading →