Reading Time: 23 minutes [4080 words]
The Atlanta Georgian,
Sunday, 22nd February 1914,
4th Edition (Final),
PAGE 1, COLUMN 7.
Albert Mc Knight, Negro, Makes Affidavit That White Man Coached Him in Testimony"Says He Did Not See Accused on Day of Slaying.
STARTLING NEW EVIDENCE FOR DEFENSE REPORTED
Rosser and Arnold, in Public Statement, Charge State With Suppression of Truth Favorable to Defendant, Referring to Harris' Opinion That Hair Found on Lathe Was not Mary Phagan's.
Startling developments in the Frank case, following one another in rapid succession, came Saturday as the climax of a week of sensations in the famous murder mystery.
Most sensational of all was the unexpected accusation by Albert Mc Knight, a Negro, that he had been used in a plot to concoct false evidence by which Frank might be sent to the gallows.
Second, a heated statement by Leo Frank's lawyers, Luther Rosser and Reuben Arnold, in which they charged an attempt to suppress the truth in evidence that would favor Frank, with particular reference to the opinion of Dr. Harris that hair found on the second floor of the fateful pencil factory was not that of Mary Phagan.
Third, the demand of Robert Barrett, a former employee of the pencil factory, for the $1,000 reward offered by the city for information leading to the conviction of Mary Phagan's murderer. Barrett was the man who found the hair on the lathe on the second floor of the factory.
New Grounds for Retrial Motion
Fourth, the discovery by attorneys for the defense of mysterious new grounds on which, it is announced, will be based much of the strength of the appeal to the Supreme Court for a rehearing.
Like a bolt from a clear sky came the announcement of the Negro Mc Knight's sworn accusation of a "frame-up" of evidence against Frank. It came late Saturday in the shape of an affidavit, signed and sworn to by the Negro, that a white man had worked on his ignorance and cupidity to concoct evidence that formed one of the strong links in the chain to convict Frank. Mc Knight was a witness for the state in the trial last summer.
The affidavit will be incorporated in the extraordinary motion for a new trial that Frank's lawyers will make. It is considered the strongest hope to be held out for the prisoner since his conviction and sentence to death.
In his affidavit and in an interview with The Sunday American, Mc Knight said that all his testimony on the stand was false, and that it had been concocted by the white man in question for him to tell.
Mc Knight on the stand said that he had seen Frank the day of the murder; that Frank had come home from the factory about 1:30 o'clock in the afternoon, and had returned without eating anything; that Minola, his wife, who was a servant at the Selig home where Frank lived, had told of Frank's coming home drunk the Saturday night of the crime and of his telling Mrs. Frank that he was in trouble and that he "didn't know why he should murder a girl," and that one of the family had remarked that Frank had been caught with a girl in the factory.
Denies All in Affidavit
All this, in Saturday's affidavit and interview, he denied.
The white man against whom Mc Knight's charge was made also was seen by The American Saturday night. He denied every one of the Negro's charges and said that his part in the case had been wholly disinterested and with the sole desire to aid in clearing up the baffling murder mystery. He declared that the whole tale had been related piecemeal to him by Mc Knight, and that he thought the officers should know about it.
Mc Knight's affidavit was taken by Captain C. W. Burke, a special agent for the law firm of Rosser & Brandon, and was sworn to in the presence of E. D. Thomas, chief judge of the Municipal Court of Atlanta.
Asked for an expression on the startling charges, Captain Burke said: "The affidavit speaks for itself. If Mc Knight's statements are true and I have every reason to believe that they are then it is one of the most diabolical conspiracies that I ever encountered."
Declares Story Was Freely Told
"Mc Knight told me the story freely and without any inducement whatever. I simply represented to him the great harm that he had done Frank if his story was not true. Most Negroes have a strain of religion in their natures, and I told him that if he had lied, he might succeed in escaping punishment in this world, but that there was an All-seeing Being who had knowledge of everything he had done."
"Most everything I said on the stand was a lie," declared Mc Knight to The American in amplifying the charges he had made.
PAGE 2, COLUMN 1
FRANK DEFENSE SAID TO HAVE VITAL NEW EVIDENCE
Hope of Doomed Man Rises as Negro Mc Knight Confesses That He Testified Falsely in Plot by a White Man to Convict the Accused in Order to Claim the Reward Offered by the City.
Continued From Page 1.
In his affidavit, Albert Mc Knight stated: "I was just about ready two or three times to tell the truth."
"I reckon if Mr. Rosser had asked me a few more questions, I would have come out and told him I didn't know anything about Frank the day the little girl was killed, for I didn't see him like I said I did. Mr. Dorsey and the detectives thought I was telling the truth, for Mr. Dorsey says to me that if I wasn't going to tell the truth I needn't testify at all, and if I went and told a lie I would have to go to the chain gang."
The Mc Knight affidavit, while the most sensational of the week's developments, was not alone in gripping the public's interest in the Frank case.
Hair Not Mary Phagan's.
It was preceded only a day by the amazing declaration of Dr. H. F. Harris, another of the state's star witnesses, that the strands of hair found on the lathing machine on the second floor were not Mary Phagan's.
The state, by adducing evidence that they were Mary Phagan's, had strengthened its contention that the murder was committed on the second floor. Dr. Harris' statement came as a complete surprise. Both he and Solicitor Dorsey said that they had not been seeking to conceal anything from the jury, but that they did not regard the circumstance as material in the case from the standpoint of either side.
Luther Z. Rosser and Reuben R. Arnold, counsel for Frank, said in commenting on the revelations that it was an astounding miscarriage of justice that such important evidence be hidden from the public and from the defendant's lawyers. They hinted that other disclosures equally as startling as the Harris statement might be expected in the desperate battle that is now on in behalf of the factory superintendent.
Saturday's other contribution to the Phagan case was the demand of Robert Barrett, an ex-employee of the pencil factory, for the $1,000 reward offered by the city for the conviction of the murderer. Barrett, designated by the defense as the "Christopher Columbus" of the mystery, was the discoverer of the strands of hair on the lathing machine on the second floor.
Fixed Location of Crime, He Says
Through his attorney, Lawton Nalley, he contended that this was the evidence which first convinced the detectives that the murder was committed not in the basement, but on the second floor, where Frank's office was located.
The statement of Dr. Harris and the affidavit of Albert Mc Knight will form two of the strongest grounds that will be incorporated in the extraordinary motion for a new trial to be argued before Judge Ben H. Hill.
This motion will not be submitted, it is authoritatively stated, until the motion for a rehearing before the Supreme Court has been made and ruled on. In the event of a refusal by the Supreme Court to hear arguments or of another adverse decision after arguments are heard, the defense will be in a position to present these latest developments, together with other sensations that are hinted at, as new evidence warranting the granting of an extraordinary motion for a new trial.
Here is Mc Knight's story to The American of the manner in which his story on the stand was devised: Didn't See Frank, He Says."I wasn't working the day the little girl was killed. I went to the home of Mr. Frank, like I said I did, but I didn't see Mr. Frank at all, because I left there before he came home."
"Next Monday, the man who fixed the story sent a boy for me to come to the store. He asks me if I want to work, and I say, 'Course I do.' Two or three days go by, and then I see him reading a paper about the murder. I ask him what about Mr. Frank, and he says, 'Oh, yes; your wife works there at Frank's, doesn't she?' just as if he didn't know it, but I had told him before."
"He doesn't say much more to me about it then, but a little while after he asks me if I don't want to get the reward that was offered, and I says, 'Sure, I do.' Then he fixes up this story. I tell him what things I know about the Franks, and he makes up what I am to tell. There ain't none of it true, and I say so, but he says that don't make no difference, and for me to go ahead and learn what I've got to say."
Declares Story Was Fixed Up.
"My wife, Minola, had told me all right that someone there at the Franks had said that Mr. Frank was in trouble and might be arrested, but that was after the Detectives had come out and searched the house. The man, in the story he fixed up for me, had them say that on Sunday morning."
"I told him a person could see from the kitchen into the dining room from the looking glass and he put that in my story to make it seem as though I had seen Mr. Frank, but I didn't see him at all, for he wasn't there while I was there."
"He drilled me every day in what I was to say on the Stand. I told Minola about it, and she said that it wasn't right, and that she would tell everybody it was a lie. Then I told him that we better not do it, but he said I was just two minutes too late, for he had just called up the Detectives."
The Negro's Affidavit
Here is Mc Knight's Affidavit in full:
Albert Mc Knight, 21 years of age, residing at the rear of No. 17 Georgia Avenue, in Atlanta, Fulton County, Georgia, deposes and says that he is at the present time at the store of Beck & Gregg, and deponent says that he was at work there most of the month of April, 1913.
Deponent says that he was a witness for the State in the case of Georgia vs. Leo M. Frank and testified to a story that had been prepared for him by a white man.
Deponent says that the story prepared, is not the truth, and that the evidence that the deponent gave at the above-named trial was not the truth.
Not There After 12:30 O'Clock.
Deponent now says that it is true that his wife, Minola, was employed at the home of Mr. Selig, where Mr. Frank resided, and it is true that on Saturday, April 26, he called at the Selig home to see his wife, but deponent says he reached the Selig home a little before 12 o'clock noon, and that he heard the 12 o'clock whistle blow at the Southern Railway shops, and also heard the 12:30 o'clock whistle blow while he was talking with his wife, and deponent says that when he heard the 12:30 whistle blow he left the Selig home and walked up Georgia Avenue to Pulliam Street, to Bass Street, and to his own home, which at that time was located in the rear of No. 351 Pulliam Street.
Deponent says that when he reached the Selig home on Saturday, April 26, that his wife was preparing the noontime meal, but had not yet served it, and that she did not serve the meal before he left the house.
Deponent says that he did not see Mr. Frank at all on April 26, and that his evidence at the trial of Mr. Frank was the result of a plan perfected by others to collect the reward offered for the arrest and conviction of the murderer of Mary Phagan.
Reward Held Up To Him.
Deponent says that he told the man that he did not want to tell any lies on Mr. Frank, but the man would tell him to go right ahead and do what he told him to do, and that he was weak enough to do as he was told to do.
Deponent says that he is sorry for all the wrong he has done to Mr. Frank, and that he wants this true statement of facts placed in the hands of Mr. L. Z. Rosser to be used by him with the hope that the same can in some way undo the great wrong he was led to do by the white people he was working with at the store of Beck & Gregg.
Deponent again says that he did not see Leo M. Frank at any time or place on Saturday, April 26, 1913, and that he will, so testify, when called upon, at any time. ALBERT MCKNIGHT.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 18th day of January, 1914.
C. W. BURKE,
Notary Fulton County.
Sworn to and subscribed to with signature acknowledged before me January 19, 1914. E. D. THOMAS,
Chief Judge of the Municipal Court of Atlanta.
Marietta Veterans
Plan Phagan Memorial.
The Cobb County Confederate Veterans and other organizations of that county will meet in the Cobb County courthouse at Marietta Tuesday, March 3, to decide on the nature of a memorial to Mary Phagan, who was slain last April 26. The memorial will be erected at the little girl's grave on the first anniversary of the crime.
The decision to erect a memorial was made at a recent meeting of the Cobb veterans. Those desiring to contribute to a fund for that purpose are requested to write J. Gid Morris, senior commander, U. C. V., No. 763, Marietta, Ga.
PAGE 2, COLUMN 3
Suppression of Truth Charged in
Statement by Lawyers for Frank
Editor Sunday American:
The two evening papers carried a short interview from us on Friday, but the admissions of Dr. Harris ought not to be passed over so hurriedly the matter is too vital, not only to this case, but to the integrity of courts of justice.
Very early in this case, the State adopted the theory that the murder took place on the second floor of the Factory. Indeed, such a theory was essential to Frank's guilt.
Every effort of the State, therefore, was bent to establish this theory. A man by the name of Barrett claimed to find on that floor what he contended to be blood spots and a few strands of hair, which were asserted to be Mary Phagan's hair, hanging to a lathe.
Heralded as
Evidence of Guilt.
These two finds were heralded everywhere by Frank's accusers as evidence conclusive of his guilt, and the State put forward all its force and power to show that the blood and hair were the hair and blood of Mary Phagan.
The Solicitor, like every other well-informed, intelligent man, knew that it would be scientifically demonstrated whether the apparent blood was human blood and whether the hair was Mary Phagan's hair.
Dr. Claude Smith, an expert chemist, examined the red substance smeared upon the floor and supposed to be human blood. The smeared wood was chipped up, making four or five chips smeared equally with the substance appearing to the eye to be blood.
Found Blood
On Only One Chip.
Dr. Smith reported that he found blood on only one of the chips, there being no blood on the others. Dr. Smith's evidence was not guesswork, but was as certain as mathematics. It demonstrated that the substance appearing from the eye to be blood was not blood; for, had it been blood, the doctor would have found it on all the chips, for the smear was equally on all the chips.
On the one chip, he found only a trace of blood, only four or five corpuscles to the field, whereas a drop of blood contains about 80,000 corpuscles.
While the doctor could demonstrate whether the smear was blood or not, he could not tell whether it was human or animal blood, nor whether it had been on the floor for days, weeks, or years.
Declare Blood
Claim Is Refuted.
It is, therefore, perfectly clear that the claim that the blood of Mary Phagan was found on the second floor was not sustained. The evidence of non-expert witnesses that the smear seemed to be blood was clearly of no avail against this accurate and unmistakable expert testimony. An honest, capable expert can tell the existence or non-existence of blood just the same as a mathematician can tell that two and two are four.To determine, among other things, whether the hair was the hair of Mary Phagan, the State (at the expense of the county, as we are informed) employed Dr. Harris, an eminent expert. Dr. Harris exhumed the body of Mary Phagan and obtained some of her hair. With the aid of a powerful microscope (as fine as there is in the world, he says), he compared the hair found in the Factory with the hair of Mary Phagan.
Hair Declared Not Mary Phagan's. That examination demonstrated that the hair found was not the hair of Mary Phagan. It differed from her hair in shade, shape, and texture. Dr. Harris reported that the hair was not Mary's, that it differed from Mary's in shade, texture, and shape. An honest, efficient expert cannot be mistaken in determining whether two samples of hair did or did not come from the same person. Under a powerful microscope, the difference between the hair of different persons is almost as easily discernible as the difference between two trees or two human faces. Indeed, as to this, the microscopic test is practically infallible.
Say Dorsey Knew Test Settled Issue. Dr. Harris knew that, and he knew it was not Mary Phagan's hair. An intelligent man like Mr. Dorsey knew, without being told, that the microscope would, and did, settle the matter. To that end, he employed Dr. Harris. Dr. Harris settled the matter, and Mr. Dorsey knew he had settled it. It is equally certain that the opinions of non-expert witnesses are of little or no value in determining whether two samples of hair came from the same or different persons. In a contest with the microscopes, such opinions are absolutely worthless. No two men knew this any better than Dr. Harris and the Solicitor. Both of them knew that Dr. Harris' examination settled the matter, for when Harris told the Solicitor that the hair was not Mary Phagan's, that it differed from hers in shade, shape, and texture, the Solicitor told the doctor "there would be no necessity of going further into the hair theory;" *** "that he would let the matter end there."
With this certain knowledge in the face of Dr. Harris and the Solicitor, the Frank trial was begun, Mr. Dorsey being the Solicitor representing the State, and Dr. Harris, secretary of the State Board of Health, the leading expert witness. During the trial, and for months thereafter, Dr. Harris concealed the fact that he knew that the hair found in the Factory was not Mary Phagan's hair, although he must have known that the Solicitor was contending, with all his force, from the beginning to the end of the case, that the hair found was the hair of Mary Phagan and was strong physical evidence of Frank's guilt. It is therefore nonsense to say that he did not consider the matter a material one! Why was he experimenting as to the hair? Surely not to kill time. He must have known the State's contention!
Newspapers Were Full of This. He must have known if the hair was Mary Phagan's that fact would hurt Frank; and if not, it would aid him. The papers were full of this. Scarcely was there an intelligent man or woman in the city who did not appreciate its materiality. Is it possible that this learned, expert witness stood alone in his ignorance as to the importance of the experiments he was making? Such a thing is, of course, possible; but if so, a possibility close to the miraculous. The doctor cannot say he was not asked. When on the witness Stand, Mr. Arnold, for the defense, asked him the following questions:
Harris Said Not To Have Mentioned Hair. "Q. What did he (the Solicitor) tell you to examine (referring to the examination of Mary Phagan's body)? What parts of the body did he tell you to exhume?" "Q. What did you have in your own mind? What were you working to determine by the autopsy? What did you understand you were seeking?" Can there be any doubt that these questions covered Dr. Harris' examination of the hair? To contend otherwise is the shallowest quibbling, not to be resorted to in a case involving life and death. Dr. Harris answered these questions without once mentioning the subject of hair. As to other parts of the body examined, he went into the minutest details.
Contention Is Called Silly. Concede, however, as we cannot, that Harris was ignorant of the importance of this hair. What about the Solicitor? He knew its importance, and he knew that the hair found in the Factory was not Mary Phagan's hair! He knew, as Dr. Harris knew, that this hair was put under one of the best microscopes, and that it had been demonstrated, beyond a doubt, that it was not Mary Phagan's hair. And yet, with that knowledge, he showed by Barrett that he found hair, and that by Magnolia Kennedy that it looked like Mary's hair. It is worse than silly to say that these "look-like" witnesses saw more of the hair than did Dr. Harris. He had enough, and more than enough, for microscopic purposes. He retained the microscopic section and returned the balance to the Solicitor. Not only so, but with this knowledge, the Solicitor urged in his speech to the jury three or four different times that this hair was Mary Phagan's hair. He knew the truth and, in spite of his knowledge, urged upon the jury that this hair was evidence of Frank's guilt. Not only so, but he made the same contention in his brief in the Supreme Court.
Harris told him the truth! He recognized it by telling Harris "that he would let the matter end;" and yet, in the highest court of the land, with human life at stake, he positively and emphatically states that the finding of this hair in the Factory is one evidence of Frank's guilt.
Hair Specimens Are Now Lost. In this, the Solicitor, in his zeal, misconceived his duty. The State of Georgia sternly demands full punishment for the guilty, but always in open candor never by concealment or subterfuge. The Solicitor says that the hair is now lost. Dr. Harris says that he returned the hair to the Solicitor, except the microscopic sections which he examined. Of course, we cannot undertake to say why, or how, this hair was lost by the Solicitor. It was never produced at the trial; but that it had its weight on the Court, Jury and public there can be no doubt! Since it thus develops that the hair, as a piece of physical evidence showing Frank to have committed the Crime, was a myth and had no existence in Fact, the inquiry arises. How much else of the State's Case is a myth? Is not the Charge of perversion, based upon the evidence of Jim Conley, also a myth? Are not the various slanders circulated against Frank, by malicious minds, equally as much without Foundation as the State's claim of finding the hair of Mary Phagan on this lathe? The question horrible to contemplate is, Will these myths be dissolved while Frank lives or after he is dead?
REUBEN R. ARNOLD. LUTHER Z. ROSSER.