Friday, 13th March 1914: Frank Witness Accuses Dorsey, The Atlanta Georgian

Reading Time: 19 minutes [3402 words]

### URGED STORY BE ALTERED, SHE SAYS

Mrs. J. B. Simmons Declares She Heard Screams in Factory After 2 o'Clock Day of Crime.

By A STAFF CORRESPONDENT.

BIRMINGHAM, ALA., March 13. Solicitor General Hugh M. Dorsey, up to this time almost overlooked in the fusillade of Phagan case affidavits alleging "frame-up" and "doctored evidence" against the city and detectives and other officials, today was made the target for the sensational charge that he sought to change the testimony of a prospective witness so that it would fit the State's theory of Leo Frank as the murderer, and, failing in this, did not call his informant as a witness in the trial.

Mrs. J. B. Simmons, of this city, is the Solicitor's accuser. She told her story today to a Georgian representative and reaffirmed an affidavit which she made several months ago for Frank's attorneys.

#### Said She Heard Screams.

Mrs. Simmons, visiting in Atlanta at the time of the Phagan murder, was passing the pencil factory at about 2:30 o'clock the afternoon of April 26. She said she heard screams apparently issuing from the basement of the factory, but that when she told the Solicitor her story, he tried to make her say that it was sometime after 3 o'clock, because Leo Frank was not in the pencil factory at 2:30 o'clock. In the affidavit to the defense, Mrs. Simmons said the Solicitor tried to make her change the time to before 1:30.

Mrs. Simmons, in her story to The Georgian, went so far as to say that she could hear the agonized pleading of the girl or woman who was being tortured in the factory basement. Her insistence that it was at or near 2:30 o'clock did not harmonize with the State's notion that Frank did the murder. Frank, at this time, according to the evidence at the trial, was on his way back to the factory from his luncheon at home. If Mrs. Simmons was right about the time and actually heard the screams of little Mary Phagan as the rope was tightening about her neck in the factory basement, then someone else than Frank was guilty of the attack upon the girl and of her slaying.

#### Story Regarded Important

Captain C. W. Burke, who was instrumental in obtaining the affidavit, was in Birmingham today and declared that Frank's defense regarded the statement of Mrs. Simmons as even more important because of the light it threw on the Solicitor's methods of procuring evidence to condemn Frank than because it showed clearly, if it was the death shriek of Mary Phagan that Mrs. Simmons heard, that Frank could not have been the guilty man.

"Mr. Dorsey wanted me to testify that it was at the time Mr. Frank was in the factory that I heard the screams," said Mrs. Simmons, "but I told him that I wasn't going to swear to an untruth just to help him or anyone else. I left him my address, expecting to be called as a witness at the trial, but that was the last I ever heard of it."

"I am 65 years old. I have reached an age when death is not far off. I look upon the matter of swearing falsely with perhaps more seriousness than those who feel that they have many years before they will have to appear before the Great Judge. I would not tell an untruth at the trial and I was not called."

#### Story Told in Affidavit.

Here is Mrs. Simmons' affidavit:

State of Alabama County of Jefferson.

Before me, Griffin Lamkin, a Notary Public in and for said State and county, comes Mrs. J. B. Simmons, known to or being made known to me, of Birmingham, Alabama, who, under oath, deposes and says:

That on the 26th day of April 1913, she was in Atlanta, Ga., and was calling at No. 25 West Alabama Street at the Atlanta Shoe Company's place of business, and while there became involved in a religious argument with Mr. Barron's cousin, who she believes is called Riley, and the deponent believes it was about 2:20 or 2:30 o'clock p.m. when the discussion took place.

Deponent says that the Decoration Day parade was in progress at the time of the argument referred to above, and was moving down Whitehall Street and south on Hunter Street toward Pryor Street.

#### Heard Screams in Basement.

Deponent further says that between the hours of 2 p.m. and 3 p.m. she left the Atlanta Shoe Company's place of business, going north up Alabama Street to Forsyth Street, and then passed the National Pencil Company's factory, it being her intention to go to No. 28 Haynes Street, where she had a temporary room.

Deponent further says that when she got in front of the National Pencil Company's factory, she heard a girl or woman screaming and crying and saying, "Please don't!" and then heard the voice shut off suddenly, making a noise or sound much as though one person was holding his hand over the mouth of another person.

Deponent says when she heard cries she stopped and listened and says that the sound of the voice in distress apparently came from the basement of the building because there is a grating in the front of the building and because it is open beneath the grating, and because the doors facing the street of the building were all closed; and also because she noted an open place beneath the grating which led into the basement of the building.

Deponent further says that at the time she heard the screaming girl or woman, the thought came to her that some man was perhaps whipping his wife or that perhaps it was some negro riot, and after waiting a short time and hearing no further similar sounds, deponent decided to go on to her destination.

#### Told Son-in-Law of Screams.

Deponent further says that as soon as she reached her home she related the circumstances herein described to her son-in-law, who is Mr. A. B. Williams, and who was at that time living at No. 28 Haynes Street. Deponent further says that she thought no more of the incident or occurrence until the following morning when her son-in-law came into her room and told her that Mary Phagan had been murdered in the National Pencil Company's factory.

Defendant further deposes and says that at the time she gave the information referred to herein to her son-in-law, that he insisted that she should go before the Solicitor General of Fulton County and give him the benefit of the information she had outlined to him the same as she has outlined herein. Deponent says that she was subpoenaed to appear before the Solicitor General, who is Mr. Hugh Dorsey, and that she answered the subpoena, and made and signed a sworn statement in his office, said statement being taken by Mr. Dorsey in his own handwriting, and which set forth the same facts as described in this statement.

Deponent further deposes and says that the Solicitor General tried very hard to induce her to swear that the screaming which she had heard was at a much later time in the day, and he called her attention to the fact that Mr. Frank was not in the factory at the time deponent was describing; and deponent told the Solicitor General that she would not testify to anything except the truth, even though her testimony did not suit the Solicitor.

#### Not Called as Witness.

Deponent further says that she left her address with the Solicitor General, and fully expected that she would be subpoenaed to testify at the trial of Leo M. Frank, but she never was subpoenaed the cause of which she does not understand.

Deponent further deposes and says that she gives this information of her own free will and accord, without any promise of a reward whatsoever.At the beginning of the case, the State held that the murder was committed either between 12 and 1 o'clock in the afternoon, or that it took place after Frank returned to the factory at 3 o'clock. Later, with their theory crystallized, the authorities contended that Frank attacked and killed the Phagan girl a few minutes after 12 o'clock; that he and Conley disposed of the body in the time from 12:56 and 1:30; that Frank left the factory at 1:30 and returned at 3, intending to burn the body or have Conley burn it.

Mrs. Simmons' story fitted in neither with the alternative theories of the early days of the case nor with the later theory that was advanced at the trial.

### Dorsey Declines to Talk Of Mrs. Simmons' Story

Solicitor Hugh Dorsey, informed of the details of Mrs. Simmons' statement, declined to discuss it in any way. He would not say that he had seen or heard of Mrs. Simmons, or that he had not seen or heard of her.

"Nothing whatever to say about it," he said.

Later, in talking about the case, and with no reference to connect the story with that of Mrs. Simmons, the Solicitor mentioned what he termed an odd offer of "evidence" that came to him while investigating prior to the trial.

### Wild Stories Common.

"It merely illustrates the strange pranks played by unbalanced minds under the pressure of a much-talked-of case," he explained. "While we were engaged in the investigation, a man came to me who stated he came direct from a woman who wanted to offer the following testimony:

"He said that the woman said that at 11 o'clock the night of Decoration Day, Leo Frank and another man, and a hackman, drove up to her house in a cab and after gaining access to the house, deposited the body of Mary Phagan on the floor of her dining room, and began to make propositions to her to help them get rid of it. She said she had made them take the body and go away."

"I didn't even see the woman who wanted to make oath to this absurd concoction," said the Solicitor. "It obviously was the product of some crank's disordered mind."

Leo Frank has his experiences with the "cranks" also.

### Frank Gets Freak Letters.

"I got two letters Thursday," he said, "one from Chicago and one from South Carolina, and both anonymous writers asserting that they were guilty of the murder of Mary Phagan.

"'I'm sorry, old man, that you will have to swing for what I did,' the Chicago writer said, and he closed it, 'Yours for my crime.'"

Mr. Dorsey says it is the history of every big mystery case that cranks and ill-balanced persons all over the country seek either to connect themselves with the crime, or with evidence concerning it.

"And this case is no exception," he said.

### Story of Woman Who Says She Heard Cries

Here is the story of Mrs. Simmons, told in her own words to The Georgian's correspondent, who found her in her rooms in the Carter House, First Avenue and Twenty-fourth Street, in Birmingham:

"My husband gets pension money, and I had been at the Atlanta Shoe Company, No. 25 West Alabama Street, to see if his letter had come. This was the day Mary Phagan was murdered. The Decoration Day parade had started. The old soldiers had gone by and the High School boys were just passing when I left the store and went to Forsyth Street and then down past the pencil factory.

"It must have been 2:30 o'clock or later. Just as I got to the factory, I heard a scream and then another one. I stopped and put my hand on the little railing that runs in front of the building and I bent over to listen."

### Thought Someone Was Being Killed.

I said to myself, 'Somebody is sure killing somebody,' and I stayed there a minute longer. I heard the screams three times. Every time, it seemed as though someone was putting his hand over the mouth of the person that was screaming so as to muffle the sound. I tried to look in, but I couldn't see anything. After the third scream, everything was quiet, and I didn't hear anything more.

I waited around there for a while, but I didn't see anything or hear anything more suspicious, and I thought it was just some man beating his wife or some fight. I looked down the street and there was a woman, but that was the only person in particular that I noticed at the time.

I went home and told my son-in-law, 'Buck' Williams, about it. He didn't think much of it at the time, but the next morning he came to me and said: 'Do you remember what you were telling me yesterday?' I asked what of it, and he said that someone had murdered little Mary Phagan in the pencil factory. He told some people about what I had heard, and pretty soon two detectives came out to my house. Their names were Webb and Harper. They asked me all about what I had heard and about the time that I went by the factory, and when they got through they told me not to say anything to anyone else about what I had told them."

### Tells of Seeing Dorsey.

"The next thing I knew, I got a subpoena to go to Solicitor Dorsey's office. This was some time during the week after the murder. There were a lot of people around. Two or three young girls were there who had been subpoenaed, too. Mr. Dorsey was in a hurry, and I don't suppose I talked with him more than half an hour.

"I told him just what I have told you, and he said, 'Are you sure about the time?' I told him I was, and that it was when the Decoration Day parade was passing. That is how I fixed the time. He says to me, 'Now, are you sure? Think good about this. You know the girl was killed before this time.'

"I told him I didn't know the time except by the fact that the parade was passing, and that the old soldiers had gone by and the high school boys were right in front of me when I walked out of the store.

"Then he says to me, 'Well, I think it was earlier than that. Just think it over again. Mr. Frank is supposed not to have been in the factory at 2 o'clock or 2:30 o'clock.'"

### Says He Argued With Her.

"I told him that it didn't make any difference to me where Frank was supposed to be; I was going to tell the truth just as it was. I didn't care whom it helped or hurt. He kept on arguing with me, but I stuck by what I said at first. He nor anyone else could change me. I know what I heard and when I heard it.

"When I came down here I sent him a letter telling him where I was, but he never sent for me to testify at the trial. This surprised me, but I read the papers and it looks as if he didn't need my kind of testimony.

"I was talking to Mrs. A. B. Davis, who lives here in Birmingham now, but who used to live in Atlanta, and she told me that I ought to let Mr. Frank's lawyers know about it. I took her advice and that is how they found it all out. If Frank is the one that killed the little girl, I think he should be punished, but if he wasn't in the factory at the time I heard the screams, I don't see how he could have done it."

Mrs. Simmons' story to The Georgian differs in one important particular from her affidavit. To the reporter, she declared that Solicitor Dorsey kept insisting that the murder was committed before the time that she said she heard the screams. In her affidavit, she swore that the Solicitor tried to make her say that the screams were even later. She stated that she was afraid of the ordeal of going into court, but that if necessary she would do so in order that the truth might be known. One of the grounds of the extraordinary motion for a new trial will be based on her statement.

J. B. Simmons for years was employed with the Atlanta Shoe Company as an expert shoemaker and repairer. Mrs. Simmons says that her relatives brought her to Birmingham when they found that her testimony might benefit Frank. A married daughter, formerly Mrs. Carter and now Mrs. Mabell Birch, conducts the Carter House in Birmingham. Mrs. Simmons declares that she will return to Atlanta to live within a few weeks, despite the objections of her relatives.

### Church in Fight For New Frank Trial.The church has taken up the fight for a new trial for Leo M. Frank. The absorbing problem is to be discussed next Sunday by Dr. L. O. Bricker, pastor of the First Christian Church, prompted, as he says, by a "sense of public duty and responsibility" for conditions that made a "square deal" impossible in the original trial.

Dr. Bricker is to take the position, not that Leo Frank is innocent of the crime charged to him"the guilt or innocence of the accused man is not an important part of the discussion"but that, innocent or guilty, the atmosphere surrounding the trial was such as to preclude an unbiased hearing. Dr. C. B. Wilmer, of St. Luke's Episcopal Church, takes the same attitude.

Says He Was Wrought Up.

"I assume my full share of the responsibility for this condition," said Dr. Bricker Friday. "I admit freely that I was wrought up to a pitch that prevented the proper exercise of judgment and decision. I believe that most of us"that practically all of us"were in the same state of mind during the first trial.

This state of affairs reached a point that charged the very atmosphere of the courtroom with prejudice. An unbiased trial was impossible. I am prompted now to do my best to square my part of this grave responsibility by opening the problem to discussion in my pulpit, and I invite the attention of all people who feel, as I do, that they were hasty and not in the proper mood for judgment during the first trial."

Dr. Wilmer, rector of St. Luke's, has made the statement that, despite the Supreme Court's majority decision that the first trial should stand, it is the duty of the people to see that there is another trial "in a more judicial atmosphere, especially in view of the fact that the trial judge himself was not convinced either way."

Burns Expected Friday.

While the Frank counsel is busy strengthening its position and adding to the grounds on which the plea for a new trial will be based, William J. Burns is expected in Atlanta sometime Friday to go to work on the local end of the celebrated case.

It is understood that the defense will have some important evidence to disclose before the present week is out, perhaps surpassing that of the Jenkins family Thursday, when another attack was made on the case made out by the detective department.

The arrival of Burns now is the event most eagerly awaited by all concerned, and especially by a public well acquainted with the great record of the detective in the San Francisco graft investigation, the "dynamiters" case, and other work of great scope and national importance.

Police Not to Hamper Him.

What the detective will do on his arrival in Atlanta is largely a matter for speculation. It is certain, of course, that he will pursue his methods without let or hindrance by the local police, or by any lawyers connected with the case in any of its phases.

Frank, on his part, says he welcomes Burns in the case as a means of getting more light on it. That is all he desires, he says"that the truth be known.

The prosecution appears no less confident that the investigation will substantiate its case, and even Jim Conley has made a statement that he is ready to answer any questions Burns may want to ask him, with the proviso that a white man, not interested in the case on either side, be present at the examination.

The lawyers for the defense Friday continued their campaign for new evidence, and their efforts to show a "frame-up" in the first trial by means of repudiation of former testimony and corroborative affidavits by persons familiar with the different phases of the situation.