Reading Time: 13 minutes [2372 words]
The Atlanta Georgian,
Monday, 16th March 1914,
8th Edition (Final),
PAGE 1, COLUMN 1.
### SCANS TRAIL OF NEGRO IN FACTORY
Great Detective Is Confident That He Can Clear Up Mystery of Girl's Death.
Step by step over the same trail in the National Pencil Factory that Jim Conley led the city detectives nine months ago, William J. Burns, master detective, went Monday afternoon. Conley made the dramatic trip through the factory, meanwhile reeling off glibly a remarkable story of his part in the crime, in what he asserted was a re-enactment of the tragedy of last April 26. Detective Burns, already cognizant of every detail of the negro's story, went over each separate move that Conley said he made that day, checking up to determine if he could discover any discrepancies or improbabilities in the tale which was the chief cause of Frank's conviction and sentence to hang.
Thinks He Will Lift Mystery.
When he had finished, he had no comment to make, except to explain that his first move was to become acquainted with the physical features of the factory and to photograph the negro's story in his mind. "I am here merely to make a common-sense and impartial investigation of the crime. I do not think that there will be any mystery to it when all the facts are known." "I do not intend to hazard any opinion as to the guilt of any person until I have completed my investigation and am ready to make my report public. To do so would be impractical and improper."
With Detective Burns while he was making his tour of the pencil factory were C. W. Burke, special detective for Frank's counsel, and Leonard Haas, one of the defendant's lawyers. Burns was taken to the spot in the rear of the metal room where Conley told the officers he found the huddled and lifeless form of Mary Phagan shortly before 1 o'clock the afternoon of April 26.
Goes Over Ground Carefully.
The inspection took the three men along the narrow passageway through which Conley said he carried the body of the slain girl to the elevator in the front of the building. The place was pointed out where the negro related that the body had become too heavy for him and that Frank came, cursing, from the front of the building to help him carry it. Burns went in the basement and back through the dim light to the place where the body of the girl lay when it was discovered by the negro night watchman, Newt Lee, and later by the city police. The detective asked numerous questions and made a careful inspection of Frank's office, particularly with the idea of ascertaining what could be seen from Frank's desk and how easy or difficult it would be to see Frank sitting at his desk when the safe door in the outer office was open and swung into the office doorway.
Invites Frank Interviews.
Dr. B. Wildauer and Milton Klein, friends of Frank who were active in getting the assistance of Burns, appeared at the session of the Southern Newspaper Publishers' Association at the Hotel Ansley Monday and extended an invitation to the publishers to send representatives of their papers at any time they wished to interview Frank in the Tower. "Mr. Frank is easily accessible and will converse on any phase of his case," was the effect of their message to the newspaper men.
Mc Knight Not Out of County.
Albert Mc Knight, making a statement to a representative of the Southern Railway Monday, declared that he had not been out of the county for a week, and that he had not been hurt in jumping off a train, as published. He said that the accident was caused by his confusion in crossing the Southern tracks at Mc Daniel Street. He walked from behind a string of freight cars, according to his story, and stepped directly in front of an approaching passenger train. He stepped back, but not quickly enough to avoid being hit. He said that he was on his way to visit a cousin in "Pittsburgh." The fact that Mc Knight's eyes were badly bruised and discolored led to the report Monday that he had been badly beaten up near the railroad tracks and had been left there by his assailants. Mc Knight made no mention of any quarrel. He declared that he had been making no special effort to hide from the detectives.
### FRANK IS NORMAL MAN, DECLARES BURNS AS HE STARTS 'HUNT FOR TRUTH'
Continued From Page 1.
Mr. Burns declared that he would give his best personal efforts to the case and would be in Atlanta for several weeks. He announced that he would be assisted by some of his ablest men.
Will See Jim Conley.
The famous detective is known to be anxious to avoid any semblance of a controversy with local officials but determined to prosecute his inquiry to a satisfactory end, no matter where it leads. He said he was confident that the city and county authorities would not want to put any obstacles in his way. Mr. Burns will see Jim Conley in the course of his inquiry. He did not want to talk about any fight that might be made on his seeing the negro, but he has overcome far greater opposition in some of his previous cases and his demeanor made it plain that if he wants to see the negro he will see him. Mr. Burns said, however, that he was not expecting to break the negro down at this late date. The detective said it was too early for him to pass comment on the justice or injustice of the conviction of Frank but did not hesitate to say that the prisoner has not one single characteristic of a pervert. Burns arrived in Atlanta Sunday with his daughter, Miss Florence, and took quarters at the Georgian Terrace. He went over the evidence in the case with Frank's lawyers, but he is working absolutely independently.
Confident of Free Rein.
"I am here in the interest of truth and I am sure that no good citizen of Atlanta and no official eager to see justice done will want any obstacles put in my path. I propose to make a complete and exhaustive investigation," said Burns. "The murder of little Mary Phagan was a terrible crime. Of course, we are all agreed that the guilty criminal should be punished. I enter on my work with a mind absolutely open and unprejudiced in favor of this man or that. If Leo Frank is the guilty man, no man will want to see him pay the penalty more than myself. If Jim Conley is the slayer, we want the facts the true facts to show that he is the man who should be punished." "The great State of Georgia will surely welcome any investigation that may serve to remove the acknowledged doubts of the justice of the sentence it has pronounced upon Frank or avert the hideous tragedy of taking an innocent man's life. Whichever way the inquiry I am beginning tends, it will be carried to a finish." "I came into this case at the urging of men of standing and character. They quoted to me my own words that there are no mysteries, and I believe that when my work is finished we will be able to say that there is no mystery here." "They asked me if I had any entanglements that would prevent me taking up this task. To speak of entanglements when a man's life is at stake, when justice itself is on trial, is absurd. There were no entanglements to keep me from undertaking this investigation and there are none that will prevent me from prosecuting it to a conclusion."
### 3 Pastors From Pulpit Demand New Frank Trial
Much interest was manifest in Atlanta Monday over the demands made from three Atlanta pulpits Sunday by three of the best-known ministers of the city for a new trial for Leo Frank. The action of the preachers in taking up the question after a long and careful study of the conditions that prevailed when Frank was convicted, is taken as an indication that the pendulum of public opinion has begun to swing from the belief that Frank was tried were such that no man could have been given a just hearing. The three pastors who asserted that Frank should have a new trial were Dr. A. R. Holderby of the Moore Memorial Presbyterian Church, Dr. L. O. Bricker of the First Christian Church, and Dr. Julian Rodgers of the East Atlanta Baptist Church. A fourth, Dr. Fred A. Line of the First Universalist Church, announced he will also attempt to show that the condemned man did not have a fair trial.Neither of the three preachers who demanded a new trial made any assertions relating to the possible guilt or innocence of Frank, which they declared was not material to the question. They based their plea for a new trial on the grounds that the public mind was bitterly inflamed against Frank at the time, and that the jury and the judge necessarily were influenced by this state of affairs, whether the mutterings of the mob reached their ears or not.
Each of them made some reference to Jim Conley and his testimony. Dr. Bricker called attention to the statements of some of Atlanta's best known lawyers that the case of the State falls to the ground without the evidence of Conley; Dr. Holderby declared that it would be unfair to hang a "sheep-killing dog" upon the evidence that convicted Frank, and Dr. Rodgers declared that he would not hang a yellow dog upon Jim Conley's unsupported story.
"Under ordinary circumstances," declared Dr. Bricker, "we of the South do not take the word of a negro against the word of a white man, but we are willing to believe the word of a drunken, worthless jailbird negro, even after he had sworn to three or four other affidavits and had admitted criminal knowledge and complicity in the crime, and was a self-confessed liar and perjurer. In the face of this we are ready to believe his last story."
"Ready to Believe Anything." "The only ground upon which we could have done this is that we felt Frank was guilty and were, therefore, ready to believe anything that seemed to confirm it."
Dr. Bricker gave three reasons upheld by arguments, why Frank should have a new trial. He said: "The first reason is that we were in no frame of mind to have granted the prisoner a new trial. The way into the public mind is through our own. We live and move among our human kind and take a humanity bath every time we walk the streets. We read what others read, come to share the opinion and feel as others feel, and if we stop to analyze our own mind we shall have a pretty good analysis of the public mind. Looking back now, I can see that I was in no frame of mind to have granted the accused a fair trial. I thought I was. I remember how bitterly I resented a man saying in my presence 'Frank has not had a fair trial.' He had had the sort of trial I wanted him to have, and to admit that it had not been fair would have been to admit that I was unfair and unjust and we do not readily do that. We believed that he was guilty and it was the verdict we wanted rather than a trial. Personally, I was convinced of his guilt by reading the stories reflecting upon the moral character that were printed in our newspapers."
"Calls Evidence Insufficient. Second, I submit that Frank should have a new trial because of the alleged insufficiency of evidence under which he was convicted. We are so constituted that we can believe anything we want to believe. Belief is a function of the will. We can believe without any evidence, and once we believe, every little circumstance looks like evidence. The legal fraternity of Atlanta are almost a unit in saying that there were no direct circumstances pointing to the guilt of Frank, excepting the revolting and horrible story of the negro, Jim Conley."
"Third, I submit that Frank should have a new trial because, under the awful tension of public feeling, it was next to impossible for a jury of our fellow human beings to have granted him a fair, fearless and impartial trial."
"Lastly, justice has nothing to fear nor to lose in granting the accused a new trial. If Frank was proven guilty once, he can be proven guilty again; facts do not change. If he was convicted by false witnesses and is a victim of a criminal conspiracy, it ought to be known before it is too late, for the truth will be known some day."
Dr. Holderby's Views. Dr. Holderby declared that Leo Frank personally concerned him no more than the lowest negro of the State, but asserted that in the interests of fairness and justice the condemned man should have a new trial. He said: "Leo M. Frank has been condemned to die. If he is the man who cruelly and inhumanely murdered an innocent child, as is alleged, he ought to suffer the extreme penalty of the law."
"I am not asserting his guilt or innocence, nor do I care any more about Frank than I would about the poorest negro in Georgia. I never heard of this man until his arrest. I would feel it my duty to appeal for a fair trial for any man."
"This Frank has not had, as every unbiased man must admit; nor is it likely he can get such trial in Atlanta, on account of the prejudice against him. This should not be, but it is true."
"If the evidence against this unfortunate man is true, if there be no reasonable doubt then he ought to suffer the penalty. But it would be unfair to hang a sheep-killing dog on the evidence upon which Frank has been convicted."
"Should this man be executed and it be discovered that he was not guilty, then the State of Georgia would be guilty of an atrocious murder."