Audio Information
File Name: 1914-04-23-new-battle-on-to-save-frank-the-atlanta-georgian.mp3
Modified Date: 2026-06-19 16:32:11
File Size: 14.95 mb
Duration: 00:16:19 (980 seconds)
Bitrate: 128 kbps
Codec: MP3
Reading Time: 17 minutes, [3035 words]
The Atlanta Georgian,
Thursday, 23rd April 1914,
3rd Edition,
PAGE 1, COLUMN 4.
Dorsey Springs Surprise as Hear Ing Opens, Announcing No Counter-Showing.
The hearing on the extraordinary motion for a new trial for Leo M. Frank was begun Thursday before Judge Hill in the library at the State Capitol.
Solicitor Dorsey caused a surprise at the opening of the hearing by announcing that he had no counter-showing to make and no affidavits to submit at this time.
This made it necessary for the defense to go ahead at once. Attorney Reuben Arnold made the point that if the State at any subsequent time during the hearing should introduce affidavits, the defense would reserve the right to demand an extension of time in which to investigate them and make reply.
Courtroom Cleared.
Judge Hill had the library in the Capitol cleared of spectators because of the limited space. Only the lawyers, reporters and others actually connected with the case were permitted to remain.
The long motion for a new trial, consisting of 36 typewritten pages, was read by Leonard Haas, of counsel for the prisoner.
The other lawyers representing Frank were Luther Z. Rosser, Stiles Hopkins, Herbert J. Haas and Mr. Arnold.
The grounds for the extraordinary motion already have been made public and included recantations by the State's witnesses and the affidavit of Mrs. J. B. Simmons that she heard screams of a girl or woman in the basement of the pencil factory at 2:30 o'clock the afternoon of the murder, as well as that of a negro woman, Mary Rich, who swore that she saw Jim Conley coming from the rear of the pencil factory about 2:20 the same afternoon.
Sensation Likely.
Sensations were promised at the hearing in the event that the lawyers for the defense considered it advisable to make public parts of the report of Detective W. J. Burns.
A feature of the report that is regarded by the defense as significant is the disclosure of the fact that the negro, Jim Conley, was a habitual note-writer before Mary Phagan was killed and that he had used this device on previous occasions for reasons quite similar to those for which it is asserted he employed the note-writing after the slaying of Mary Phagan.
"Conley has been pictured as an unintelligent and illiterate negro," said Mr. Burns before the hearing was called. "He is illiterate, all right, but he is not unintelligent, by any means.
Shrewd and Tricky, Says Burns.
"He is about as shrewd and tricky a negro as one would find in a week's travels. I am going to show that the notes he wrote and placed by Mary Phagan's body were not the only notes he had devised for like purposes.
Habitual Note Writer.
"Conley was a habitual note-writer, and I have specimens of his work. I know when they were written. All of this is in my report and will be made public with the rest of it at the proper time."
Detective Burns was asked if he had proof of Conley's perversion, which he had charged against the negro in his letter written to the lawyers for Frank on Wednesday. He replied that he had and that it would be convincing. He declined to say what it was.
It is understood that the detective will say that the grime and dirt on the slain girl's face did not come from the body being dragged along the dirt floor of the basement, but because of the action of her assailant in deliberately shoving her face into a pile of dirt and trash a short distance from the boiler and near the spot where her body was found.
This is expected to account for the particles of sawdust that were found
Continued on Page 2, Column 6.
3rd Edition, PAGE 2, COLUMN 6
PREVIOUS DEATH NOTES LAID TO JIM CONLEY
Continued from Page 1
to have been breathed up into the girl's nostrils.
Burns denied emphatically the published report that he was to leave town at once.
To Ask Continuance.
"I am here to stay until the case is finished," he said, "and that means until Leo Frank is given a new trial. Dan Lenon, who has been my chief assistant in the investigation I have made of the case, will remain here also until every phase is cleared up and finished."
The expectation was that the lawyers for Frank would ask for a further continuance of the hearing on the extraordinary motion in case Solicitor Dorsey filed counter affidavits to combat those taken by the defense.
7th Edition, PAGE 1, COLUMN 3
JIM CONLEY HIT IN NEW AFFIDAVIT
An affidavit attacking the story of Jim Conley on the witness stand when he explained his reason for not returning to the National Pencil Factory to burn the body of Mary Phagan, as he had said Leo M. Frank ordered him to do, was read late Thursday at the hearing on the extraordinary motion for a new trial in Judge Hill's court.
The affidavit was signed by J. W. Boozer, a collector for a jewelry firm. Conley's explanation for his not returning to the pencil factory was that he had gone home and fallen asleep until 6 o'clock the night of the Phagan murder.
The affidavit declared that Boozer met Conley between 4 and 4:30 o'clock the afternoon of the murder on Peters street, and had a conversation with the negro relative to his payments for a watch which Conley had obtained from the firm by which Boozer was employed.
The affidavit was submitted to disprove the negro's story told on the witness stand, and also to show that his affidavits to the police were false.
Affidavits on Hair Theory.
Two affidavits were read late Thursday afternoon in the hearing on the extraordinary motion for a new trial for Leo Frank in Judge Ben Hill's Court to the effect that the hair found on a lathe in the pencil factory was not that of Mary Phagan. The affidavits were from Dr. G. Bachman, professor of physiology at the Atlanta Medical College and Dr. J. W. Pate, a graduate of the University of Minnesota.
The affidavits declared it was possible to differentiate by the use of the microscope hair taken from the heads of different persons. Dr. Bachman was present at the hearing with instruments to make a practical demonstration to prove that Dr. Harris was entirely warranted in his original statement that the hair found in the National Pencil Factory was not the same as that taken from the head of Mary Phagan.
An affidavit corroborating the assertion of Mrs. J. B. Simmons that she heard screams issuing from the basement of the National Pencil Factory at 2:30 o'clock in the afternoon of April 26, 1913, was introduced by counsel for Leo Frank.
The affidavit was sworn to by Mrs. Elizabeth Cohen, of No. 40 Robins street. Mrs. Cohen asserts that she came downtown on the day Mary Phagan was murdered, and about 3 o'clock, after watching the Memorial Day parade, met Mrs. Simmons near Forsyth street. She asked Mrs. Simmons how she enjoyed the parade, and Mrs. Simmons replied: "I've been badly frightened and
Continued on Page 5, Column 3.
7th Edition, PAGE 5, COLUMN 3
NEW AFFIDAVIT ON SCREAMS IN FACTORY
Continued from Page 1
and scared by hearing a girl scream in the basement of the National Pencil Factory."
Mrs. Cohen said she laughed and told Mrs. Simmons that it probably was somebody celebrating Memorial Day and having a good time.
"The screams I heard were not made by anyone having a good time," Mrs. Cohen says Mrs. Simmons replied. "They sounded like someone was being murdered."
Mrs. Cohen said she went to Mrs. Simmons' home the next morning, and Mrs. Simmons' son-in-law came into the room where they were, and said:
"You were right about those screams yesterday, mother. The screams you heard were Mary Phagan being murdered."
Prejudice Charged.
That prejudice against Leo Frank was so intense in the days preceding his trial and at the time of the appeal to the Supreme Court that persons who had information favorable to his case feared to reveal it, was the charge made in an affidavit sworn to by the lawyers for Frank and read Thursday at the hearing.
Only the lawyers engaged in the case at the time Messrs. Rosser, Brandon, Arnold and Herbert Haas signed the affidavit.
It was asserted that stories of such vileness had been circulated against the prisoner that the whole public had become embittered and prejudiced, and almost unanimously wanted a conviction.
This situation, according to the lawyers, made it almost impossible to get information of the circumstances that were favorable to their client. Persons having such information withheld it because of the undesirable publicity it would give them and because they feared they would be hurt in reputation or in a business way.
The lawyers represented to Judge Hill that although they had spent weeks and months in the endeavor to bring to light every fact and circumstance of the crime of Mary Phagan's murder, there had been many things hid which had not been discovered until work was begun on the extraordinary motion for a new trial.
The first day of the hearing was devoted to the reading of the extraordinary motion and of several score of affidavits obtained by the defense.
Smith Gives Affidavit.
One of the new ones was signed by W. M. Smith, lawyer for the negro, Jim Conley. Smith testified to being present at a conversation between Solicitor Dorsey, Dr. H. F. Harris and Dr. R. T. Dorsey, a brother of the Solicitor.
Smith said it was his recollection that Dr. Harris expressed his belief to the Solicitor that the hair found on a lathe on the second floor of the National Pencil factory was not that of Mary Phagan, a conclusion at which Dr. Harris had arrived from a microscopical examination of the strands found in the factory and a comparison with strands taken from the head of the slain girl.
He also swore that opportunity was given Dr. Dorsey to examine the hair, but that he refused.
Harris Is Not Positive.
A corroborative affidavit was signed by Harlee Branch, a reporter, who interviewed Dr. Harris and quoted him as saying that the examination was virtually conclusive and that there could be but little doubt that the strands found on the second floor were not from the head of Mary Phagan.
A deposition of Dr. Harris was read in which he asserted that his examination was not exhaustive, and that while the strands appeared to be those of different persons, he could not be positive.
Attorney Rosser called the attention of the court to the fact that R. P. Barrett, discoverer of the hair, had testified that there were not more than six or eight strands on the lathe at the most, while Dr. Harris had sworn that he was given about twelve.
Hearing in Capitol.
An affidavit by Oscar Pappenheimer, a neighbor of Dr. Harris, related a conversation between the two in which Mr. Pappenheimer asked the physician the result of his examination of the Phagan girl's body.
Dr. Harris declined to do this, according to the affiant, but said as the conversation ended:
"I may say that what I found was absolutely of no consequence, and you need not be bothered about it."
The hearing is being conducted in the library of the State Capitol and probably will last for several days. Morning and afternoon sessions are being held.
Dorsey Causes Surprise.
Solicitor Dorsey caused a surprise at the opening of the hearing by announcing that he had no counter-showing to make and no affidavits to submit at this time.
This made it necessary for the defense to go ahead at once. Attorney Reuben Arnold made the point that if the State at any subsequent time during the hearing should introduce affidavits, the defense would reserve the right to demand an extension of time in which to investigate them and make reply.
The grounds for the extraordinary motion already have been made public and included recantations by the State's witnesses and the affidavit of Mrs. J. B. Simmons that she heard screams of a girl or woman in the basement of the pencil factory at 2:30 o'clock of the afternoon of the murder, as well as that of a negro woman, Mary Rich, who swore that she saw Jim Conley coming from the rear of the pencil factory about 2:20 the same afternoon.
Sensation Likely.
Sensations were promised at the hearing in the event that the lawyers for the defense considered it advisable to make public parts of the report of Detective W. J. Burns.
A feature of the report that is regarded by the defense as significant is the disclosure of the fact that the negro, Jim Conley, was a habitual note-writer before Mary Phagan was killed and that he had used this device on previous occasions for reasons quite similar to those for which it is asserted he employed the note-writing after the slaying of Mary Phagan.
"Conley has been pictured as an unintelligent and illiterate negro," said Mr. Burns before the hearing was called. "He is illiterate, all right, but he is not unintelligent, by any means.
Shrewd and Tricky, Says Burns.
"He is about as shrewd and tricky a negro as one would find in a week's travels. I am going to show that the notes he wrote and placed by Mary Phagan's body were not the only notes he had devised for like purposes."
7th Edition, PAGE 5, COLUMN 5
POLICE METHODS DENOUNCED BY FRANK
How Long Will This 'Opera Bouffe' Go Unchallenged? Asks Doomed Man.
Editor Atlanta Georgian:
The past few weeks have brought to light many new revelations in the "Frank case," and the actions of the city detectives under the strain of these revelations have been most interesting. I have been especially interested in their "secret" performances, in view of Chief Lanford's public declaration that he would gladly co-operate with Mr. Burns in every possible way to ascertain the truth. This avowal on the part of the detective chief was most worthy, and yet his first public endeavor in this direction was the placing behind the bars of the negro, Albert Mc Knight, who now resides at police headquarters as a "voluntary guest."
Is it not passing strange that a negro should, of his own volition, desire to be locked up at the station house? I venture the assertion that in the annals of police history no negro has ever made such a demand. It stands to reason that a negro ordinarily has no love for the station house and its environment, and tries to avoid it at all times. Is it not quite remarkable that a negro should try to break into jail?
What Pretext? He Asks.
And what pretext is advanced for this negro Mc Knight's "visit" to headquarters? Somebody is supposed to be pestering the negro, and in order to give him "protection," the police lock him up. Why not lock up the person who is doing the pestering? In future if a man complains to the police that someone is trying to harm him, they will lock up the poor fellow who complains to "protect" him. Protection, indeed! And against what?
Mc Knight had repudiated publicly before newspapermen the testimony given at the trial, and that in no uncertain way. Two months thereafter we learn that the irresponsible negro has made another affidavit and becomes the "guest" of the police for protection and in payment therefor. Is it not rather this last story of Mc Knight's that the police are desirous of protecting, and not the prisoner? THE TRUTH NEEDS NO PROTECTION. It can even withstand third degree police methods!
Is it possible that the fair-minded public will longer be fooled and bamboozled by the cunning of our police and the detectives? Is it possible that the public of this city will stand for the brazen announcement from police headquarters that Mc Knight is being entertained as a "voluntary guest," as a consideration for his apparent elasticity?
Calls for Explanation.
It will be remembered that Chief Lanford said, as soon as the verdict in my case was published, that "police methods were vindicated." Does he think that, having already fooled twelve men as to his iniquitous methods, he can continue to keep the public in the dark? To further show the strength of the so-called "police vindication," it might be well for him to explain why Nina Formby, who, according to his own statement, was the last and final link in the chain of evidence around me, and who has since repudiated her statement in toto, is not residing at this time at the station house as a "voluntary guest" for protection. Oh, the cunning of our great detective chief!
How long is this "opera bouffe" performance to continue unchallenged? To every thinking man in this community the spectacle of the actions of the police and the detectives in nursing and feeding witnesses at the public's expense must be positively sickening. Be it remembered also that the star witness for the prosecution, Jim Conley, was also a "guest" in the very apartment now occupied by Albert Mc Knight.
It was there that Conley received his tutoring; it was there, his outrageous story was nurtured and constructed. It is perfectly reasonable to suppose that the detectives believe that the negro Albert Mc Knight also needs a bit of grooming and tutoring.
"Let Us Have the Truth."
The object of legal investigation should be the ascertainment of truth. When reliable evidence points to the real solution of the case, why do not the detectives, in all fairness, follow these sign posts of truth, instead of browbeating witnesses and jailing them until they sign statements pleasing to the police? Who are these witnesses that, under police guidance and nursing, blow both hot and cold? They are State witnesses, vouched for at my trial by the prosecution, and whose word we are to take at face value to damn and destroy human life at whatever sacrifice. Has the due process of law and the safeguarding of human life become such a triviality that it can be so flagrantly outraged?
Let us have the truth in this case, and that speedily! Let us play with all the cards on the table, for the issue involves human life. Let the detectives get right, lest they fall themselves into the grave which they have dug for another, for "truth is on the march," and all things hidden will come to light.
LEO M. FRANK.