Thursday, 2nd October 1913: Ask New Frank Trial On 115 Counts Many Errors Laid To Court; Charge Made Of Jury Intimidation, The Atlanta Georgian
The Atlanta Georgian,
Thursday, 2nd October 1913,
PAGE 1, COLUMN 1.
Citing 115 counts wherein the count is declared to have erred in
the trial of Leo M. Frank, Luther Z. Rosser Wednesday fled with
the criminal court a motion for a new trial for the pencil factory
superintendent, sentenced to hang October 10 for the murder of
Mary Phagan.
The motion, contained in nearly two hundred typewritten
sheets, includes an exhaustive research of the trial and each
count, as it is brought out, is dissected.
The motion will be placed in the hands of Solicitor Dorsey for
his inspection and reply and the first hearing will be given on
October 4.
Principal among the objections offered in the motion is the
conduct of the crowds which attended the trial. Frank's attorneys
openly declare the jury was intimidated, and despite their
objections no effort was made to stop the applause which time
and again rang out in the courtroom.
Threats to clear the room were made by the trial judge,
the motion states, but they were absolutely disregarded and the
threats were not enforced, despite the objections of counsel for
the defense.
Hits at Conley Testimony.
The motion struck also at the admission of the lascivious
testimony of Jim Conley, the negro sweeper. The testimony
referred to included that wherein the negro declared on the
witness stand that Frank had entertained women in the factory on
holidays while he stood watch at the front door.
Lasciviousness is not one of the character traits involved in
a plea of murder and can not be held in a murder trial, even when
the defendant has put his character in issue, the motion stated.
The testimony of Dr. H. F. Harris, Country Physician, also was
objected to. The motion declared that the physician's testimony
was argumentative and not a statement of fact, scientifically or
otherwise. Dr. Harris had gone extensively into an analysis of the
cabbage taken from the stomach of Mary Phagan, which she had
eaten on the morning of her tragic death.
Objection was also made to the testimony of Newt Lee, the
negro night watchman, who first found the Phagan girl's body,
wherein he testified as to Frank's nervousness and his method of
conversation when the two were brought together at the police
station following the murder.
The testimony of Detective Black that Frank was excited,
while Lee was composed, at this time also was made the point of
an objection. Black's statements of a conversation which he had
had with Frank before the murder, when on a private
investigation, were objected to when the detective compared
them to the conversation which he held with the pencil factory
superintendent after the girl was murdered.
Charge Errors to Court.
The petition charges that the court erred in allowing the
testimony of Miss Mary Pirk, who charged immoral conditions at
the pencil factory, and in admitting other testimony hinting at the
same thing over the protests of the defense.
Error is charged in the admission of Miss Irene Jackson's
evidence concerning a conversation with Detective Starnes about
dressing-room conditions, and an incident in which Frank looked
into the room when Miss Emily Mayfield was not dressed.
Another count is based on the admission of Scott's testimony
concerning a conversation he had with Mrs. Arthur White
regarding her seeing a negro on the first floor of the factory. The
State claimed this negro was Jim Conley.
Solicitor's Conduct Attacked.
The court is charged with error in allowing the Solicitor to
declare that he was prepared to prove the charges
PAGE 7, COLUMN 1
PLEA FOR NEW
TRIAL FOR
FRANK, DOOMED
SLAYER
IS BASED ON 115
COUNTS
Continued From Page 1.
of immorality against Frank. The petition charges specific error to
the Solicitor's declaration. I am not fourflushing, made in the
presence of the jury. It is declared that this declaration had undue
influence on the jurors' minds, leading them to unfair inference.
Another error is laid to the court in allowing over the
defense's objection to Solicitor's questions tending to show that
Montag Brothers had attempted to influence the Pinkertons and
had tried to make the detective agency shield the prisoner. The
petition declares that none of the evidence concerning the
employment of the Pinkertons was admissible.
The overruling of any evidence from Street Car Inspector
Leach concerning the dismissal or punishment of employees for
being ahead of schedule time is another count.
Error is charged in the questioning of J. N. Minar, a reporter
for The Georgian. The defense claims that the questions
concerning whether he went to interview the Epps family merely
as a reporter should never have been allowed. The questions
were asked, the petition says, to influence the jury and no
attempt to prove the intimations ever was made.
In refusing to allow Miss Hall to testify to a telephone
conversation in rank told her about work to be done that tragic
day another error is charged and another in the admission of
Philip Chambers' reference to Gantt, tending to show that Frank
had tried to throw suspicion on Gantt and shield himself.
B'nai Brith Question Recalled.
The court also errored. It is held, in declining to allow Dr.
David Marx to give testimony as to the character of the Jewish
organization known as the B'nai Brith.
Defendant's counsel, it is said, stated at the time that Dr.
Mary would testify that, while the B'nai Brith was an international
Jewish charity organization, its charity did not extend to giving aid
to persons charged with misdemeanors of criminal law.
The State objected to this, it is further stated, and the court
sustained the objection and so the court errored in this respect,
for the reason that the Solicitor General, in his insinuations to the
jury and in his speech, strongly intimated that Frank was
receiving moral and financial support by reason of his
membership in B'nai Brith.
The court also errored, it is held, in permitting Mr. J. J.
Wardlaw to be asked certain questions in regard to Frank's
alleged conduct on a Hapeville car with Mary Phagan. She
answered, it is said, No to all questions. The defendant objected
to the questions because while the witness denied any knowledge
by hearsay or otherwise of the wrong asked about, the mere
asking of such questions, the answer to which must have been
irrelevant! And prejudicial, was harmful to the defendant, and the
court erred in permitting questions to be asked no matter what
the answers might have been.
Character Ruling Attacked.
The court further erred because, although the defendant had
put his character in issue, admitting such testimony, the State
could not reply by proof of improper or immoral conduct with
women.
A reputation for lasciviousness is not involved in that general
character that is material where the charge is murder, according
to the defense.
The court erred, it is said, in permitting the witness, W. E.
Turner, over the objection of the defendant, to tell of a
conversation he overheard between Frank and Mary Phagan, in
which Frank told her he was superintendent of the factory, and of
Mary Phagan backing away from him, and of Frank walking
toward her. This was prejudicial because it was a distinct
transaction apart from the issues in the case intended to
prejudice the jury.
The court erred in permitting W. P. Merck, over objection, to
tell of an engagement he had with Daisy Hopkins, and to tell of
her remarks that she had just been to the pencil factory.
The court erred in admitting the minutes of the State Board
of Health showing the controversy of Dr. Harris and Dr.
Westmoreland. This was prejudicial to the defendant, centering
the minds of the jury men on something different from the issues
in the case. It erred in permitting E. H. Pickett to testify, over
objections, about Menola McKnight's statements.
Hit Car Evidence.
The court erred in permitting J. C. McEwen, street car man,
to testify as to the arrival of the Euclid avenue car"stating that it
would have to be ahead of the White City car to cut it off.
Objecting also was cited to the testimony of Henry Hoffman,
another street car man who testified about cars coming in ahead
of time.
Objections were cited to the testimony of J. M. Gantt, that
the clocks of the pencil factory were not accurate, on the ground
that the evidence was misleading.
Other objections were: Against the testimony of Harry Scott,
admitted over objection, that Frank did not inform him that
Conley could write.
Against L. T. Kendrick's testimony about the condition of the
clocks while he was in the factory.
Attack Character Evidence.
That the court erred in allowing witnesses to testify that
Frank's character for lasciviousness was bad.
To permit this evidence, states the petition, was highly
prejudicial to the defendant. It attacked his moral character, and
while such an attack would not tend to convict him of murder nor
show him a person of such character as would likely convict him
of murder nor show him a person of such character as would
likely commit murder its introduction prejudiced the jury against
him.
It charges that the court erred in permitting Dewey Hewitt,
who was brought to Atlanta from the Home of the Good Shepard,
in Cincinnati, to testify as to Frank's character, that the court
erred also in admitting the following evidence.
The testimony of Miss Cato that she saw Frank go into a
private dressing room with Miss Rebecca Carson.
That the court erred in refusing to give certain pertinent
legal charges in the language requested by the defendant's
counsel.
The petition states the judge was requested to make this
charge:
If the jury believed from the evidence that the theory or
hypothesis that James Conley may have committed this crime is
just as reasonable as the theory that the defendant may have
committed this crime then under the law, it would be your duty to
acquit the defendant.
Applause in Court Cited.
It charges that the court erred in declining to grant a motion
for a mistrial on account of the applause.
That the court erred in refusing to clear the courtroom. Says
the petition:
The passion and prejudice of those in the crowded
courtroom was so much aroused against the defendant that he
could not obtain a fair and impartial trial. The very presence of
that crowd was a menace to the jury.
It further charges that the court erred in permitting Attorney
Hooper to argue to the jury that the failure of the defense to
cross-examine the State's female character witnesses was
because a cross-examination would have brought out specific
instance of immorality.
A similar objection is made to Dorsey's argument.
One objection to Dorsey's speech was his reasons for Mrs.
Frank's failure to visit her husband.
It charges that the court erred in permitting Dorsey to
intimate that the defense called some of the expert witnesses
because they were physicians of some of the jurors.
The petition charges that J. A. Hensley and Mr. Johannon
were prejudiced against the defendant when they were selected
as jurors, and were not fair and impartial jurors.
Other Points in Motion.
Other interesting extracts from the petition are.
Public sentiment was greatly aroused against the defendant.
The courtroom was quite a small room and during the argument
of the case every seat was taken. The jury, in going to and fro
was dependent on the small passage ways made by the officers
of the court. The jurymen could hear the whispers of the crowd.
During the argument of the Solicitor, Mr. Arnold made an
objection and the crowd and laughingly jeered at him so that Mr.
Arnold appealed to the court.
On Saturday, prior to the rendition of the verdict, excitement
in and about the courtroom was so apparent as to cause
apprehension in the mind of the court as to whether he could
safely continue the trial Saturday afternoon.
Tells of Court Conference.
In making up his mind his honor conferred with, while on the
stand and in the presence of the jury, the chief of police of Atlanta
and the colonel of the Fifth Georgia Regiment. The public press,
apprehending trouble also, united in a request to the court that
he not continue the court on Saturday.
So court was adjourned until Monday morning.
But public excitement had not subsided Monday morning.
When the Solicitor entered the courtroom he was vociferously
cheered by the large crowd"ladies and gentlemen"present, by
stamping their feet and clapping hands while the jury was not 20
feet away in their rooms.
While Mr. Arnold was making a motion for a mistrial and
while taking testimony to support it the crowd applauded.
Cheers for Dorsey Recalled.
When the jury was finally charged by the court and retired to
consider their verdict, and when Mr. Dorsey left the courtroom, a
large crowd on the outside of the courthouse and in the street
cheered by yelling and clapping hands and yelling Hurray for
Dorsey.
When it was announced that the jury had agreed upon a
verdict the court felt constrained to clear the courtroom, but when
the verdict was rendered a crowd of more than 1,000 people
outside raised a mighty shout of approval.
The court erred in not leaving it to the jury to say whether or
not, under the facts, the witness Conley was an accomplice.
Allege Technical Errors.
The court further erred in not charging the jury that if, under
the instructions given them, they found Conley was an accomplice
of Frank, they could not convict Frank under the testimony of
Conley alone, but that to do so there must be a witness other
than Conley alone, but that to do so there must be a witness
other than Conley in circumstances corroborating the evidence of
Conley.
The court erred, over the objection of the defendant, in
allowing the witness, Lewis Ingram, to testify as to the street car
coming in ahead of time. The court erred for the same reason in
permitting the witness, W. D. Owens, to testify as to the time.
The court erred in charging the jury as follows:
Is Leo Frank guilty? Are you satisfied of that beyond a
reasonable doubt from the evidence in this case or is his plea of
not guilty the truth?
Reason for Objection.
The court erred in putting the proposition of the
defendant's guilt or innocence to the jury in this manner, because
the effect of the same was to put the burden upon the defendant
of establishing his plea of not guilty and the further effect was to
impress upon the jury, that, unless they believed that the
defendant's plea of not guilty was the truth that they could not
acquit him, and even though they did not believe his plea of not
guilty to be true, it left out entirely the consideration that if they
still had a reasonable doubt in their minds of his guilt they should
acquit him.
Twenty-five pages of the petition are devoted to objections
to Solicitor Dorsey's speech. The various objections to his
arguments that were made in court are recited and urged as
grounds for a new trial. The court is charged with having erred in
performance putting certain comparisons between the Durrant,
Richeson and Wilde cases and the Frank case.
Mentions Vain Request.
The petition says that a new trial should be granted because
of the following grounds:
The Solicitor General having, in his concluding argument,
made the various statements of fact about the Durant case, as
shown in the preceding grounds of this motion, the defendant
requested the court, in writing, before the judge began his
charge, to charge the jury as follows, which request the judge
refused to grant and thereupon committed error:
The jury was instructed that the facts in other cases read or
stated in your hearing are to have no influence upon you in
making your verdict. You are to try this case upon its own facts
and upon the opinion you entertain of the evidence here
introduced.
PAGE 2, COLUMN 7
DORSEY DISSECTS
FRANK PLEAS
HEARING OF NEW
TRIAL
MOTION CERTAIN
TO BE
POSTPONED
SATURDAY
It was regarded as absolutely certain Thursday morning that
the hearing of the Frank motion for a new trial would be
postponed when it is called by Judge Roan Saturday morning.
The last doubt about the postponement was removed
following a statement of Solicitor General Hugh Dorsey who
declared that it would take him from now until Saturday and
perhaps longer to check up the brief of evidence alone.
The evidence is quite a bulky affair, as it is contained in
nine volumes, each one of which must be examined with the
utmost care.
Huge Task Checking Evidence.
Although it had been announced that the amended motion
would be placed in the Solicitor's hands Wednesday at noon, this
was found to be impossible because of the magnitude of the work
of checking up the evidence. Attorney Rosser's clerks worked all
the afternoon in an effort to get it to the Solicitor Thursday
morning. It probably will be in Mr. Dorsey's hands before noon
Thursday.
Exactly 115 instances are cited in the amended motion as
reasons why Leo Frank should be granted a new trial. Foremost
among these are citations charging that jury was influenced by
the various forms of popular clamor for the conviction of the
prisoner and alleging bias and prejudice against the defendant on
the part of two members of the jury, Henslee and Johenning.
On several different counts the court is attacked because of
its alleged fail clear the court room when the alleged prejudice of
the crowd was in evidence. Reference is made also to the jeering
laughter of part of the crowd when Attorney Arnold commented
on certain of the Solicitor's remarks.
Dorsey's Durant Speech Hit.
A large part of Solicitor Dorsey's speech, containing
reference to the California slapper. Durant, as well as others, also
is attacked on the grounds that it was over the protest of the
defense.
The motion, which will be placed in the Solicitor's hands
Thursday, is an amendment to the formal motion presented to the
court on the day Frank was sentenced to hang. The formal motion
was merely a skeleton affair and contained but the merest outline
of evidence contained in the complete papers.
The amended motion covers 173 closely typewritten pages
and goes into the most minute detail on various points wherein it
is alleged the court erred in not declaring a mistrial. That it will
take the Solicitor at least four or five days to prepare an answer is
regarded as certain.
PAGE 3, COLUMN 3
FRANK JUROR DENIES CHARGE OF
PREJUDICE
SOLICIT
OR
CERTAI
N
TO
GET
DELAY
Dorsey Unable to Prepare
Data to
Fight New Trial Motion
by
Saturday.
With the prospect Thursday of a postponement of the
hearing of the Frank motion for a new trial when it comes up
Saturday, there came also the positive assurance that Solicitor
Dorsey would have absolute denials from the two jurors charged
with prejudice in the motion.
Marcus Johenning, No. 161 Jones avenue, one of the jurors,
declared Thursday that the accusation was a complete falsehood.
I served on that the jury because I did not want to try to be
out of doing so, said Johenning, even though I would gladly
have escaped the work. And now, to accuse me of having told a
falsehood in secure the month's service is rank injustice.
I lost money through neglect of my business, and there was
not a man on the jury who had anything to gain, other than to do
his duty as a citizen. If there are any persons who have made
affidavits that we did not do Frank justice, they have lied
outright.
Henslee's Friends Tell of Denial.
J. A. Henslee, a travelling salesman and second juror charged
with having been prejudiced, has moved to Barnesville since the
end of the Frank trial. However, his Atlanta friends Thursday
declared that he had made strenuous denials to them of the
accusation when became public some time ago.
The last doubt about the postponement was removed
following a statement of Solicitor Dorsey, who declared that it
would take him from new until Saturday and perhaps longer to
check up the brief of evidence alone.
The Solicitor added however, that he would plunge into the
subject immediately with the view of preparing his answer at the
earliest possible moment. Although he refused to venture an
assertion as to the length of the delay, it is believed that the
hearing will be postponed longer than one week.
The judge has it in his power to proceed with the hearing
regardless of the many requests of the Solicitor or the defense
but it is certain that no such ruling will be invoked Saturday.
The motion has not been served on me, said Mr. Dorsey
Wednesday morning, but without regard to the amended motion,
it will take me from now until Saturday, even longer to check up
the brief of evidence alone.
The evidence is quite a bulky affair, as it is contained in
nine volumes, each one of which must be examined with the
utmost care.
Huge Task Checking Evidence.
Although it had been announced that the amended motion
would be placed in the Solicitor's hands Wednesday at noon, this
was found to be impossible because of the magnitude of the work
of checking up the evidence. Attorney Rosser's clerks worked all
the afternoon in an effort to get in to the Solicitor Thursday
morning. It probably will be in Mr. Dorsey's hands before noon
Thursday.
Exactly 115 instances are cited in the amended motion as
reasons why Leo Frank should be granted a new
Continued on Page 2, Column 6.
PAGE 9, COLUMN 6
trial. Foremost among these are citations charging that jury was
influenced by the various forms of popular clamor for the
conviction of the prisoner and alleging bias and prejudice against
the defendant on the part of two members of the jury, Henslee
and Johenning.
On several different counts the court is attacked because of
its alleged fail clear the court room when the alleged prejudice of
the crowd was in evidence. Reference is made also to the jeering
laughter of part of the crowd when Attorney Arnold commented
on certain of the Solicitor's remarks.
Dorsey's Durant Speech Hit.
A large part of Solicitor Dorsey's speech, containing
reference to the California slapper. Durant, as well as others, also
is attacked on the grounds that it was over the protest of the
defense.
The motion, which will be placed in the Solicitor's hands
Thursday, is an amendment to the formal motion presented to the
court on the day Frank was sentenced to hang. The formal motion
was merely a skeleton affair and contained but the merest outline
of evidence contained in the complete papers.
The amended motion covers 173 closely typewritten pages
and goes into the most minute detail on various points wherein it
is alleged the court erred in not declaring a mistrial. That it will
take the Solicitor at least four or five days to prepare an answer is
regarded as certain.
PAGE 4, COLUMNS 1,
3, 4, & 7
PAGE 4, COLUMN 1
FRANK JUROR DENIES
CHARGE OF BIAS
PAGE 4, COLUMN 3
Slaton Sets
Days
For Clemency
Pleas
Governor Slaton has promulgated a rule that hereafter petitions
for clemency will be heard in the executive offices on the fourth
Thursday and Friday of each month.
The Governor is forced to the adoption of this rule in order to find
time for other public business.
PAGE 4, COLUMNS 4 &
5
TWO FRANK JURORS
CHARGED WITH
BIAS
J. A. HENSLEE
MARCELLUS JOHENNING
PAGE 4, COLUMN 7
SOLICITOR
CERTAIN TO
GET DELAY IN
WHICH
TO PREPARE
EVIDENCE
With the prospect Thursday of a postponement of the
hearing of the Frank motion for a new trial when it comes up
Saturday, there came also the positive assurance that Solicitor
Dorsey would have absolute denials from the two jurors charged
with prejudice in the motion.
Marcus Johenning, No. 161 Jones avenue, one of the jurors,
declared Thursday that the accusation was a complete falsehood.
I served on that the jury because I did not want to try to be
out of doing so, said Johenning, even though I would gladly
have escaped the work. And now, to accuse me of having told a
falsehood in secure the month's service is rank injustice.
I lost money through neglect of my business, and there was
not a man on the jury who had anything to gain, other than to do
his duty as a citizen. If there are any persons who have made
affidavits that we did not do Frank justice, they have lied
outright.
Henslee's Friends Tell of Denial.
J. A. Henslee, a travelling salesman and second juror charged
with having been prejudiced, has moved to Barnesville since the
end of the Frank trial. However, his Atlanta friends Thursday
declared that he had made strenuous denials to them of the
accusation when became public some time ago.
The last doubt about the postponement was removed
following a statement of Solicitor Dorsey, who declared that it
would take him from new until Saturday and perhaps longer to
check up the brief of evidence alone.
The Solicitor added however, that he would plunge into the
subject immediately with the view of preparing his answer at the
earliest possible moment. Although he refused to venture an
assertion as to the length of the delay, it is believed that the
hearing will be postponed longer than one week.
The judge has it in his power to proceed with the hearing
regardless of the many requests of the Solicitor or the defense
but it is certain that no such ruling will be invoked Saturday.
The motion has not been served on me, said Mr. Dorsey
Wednesday morning, but without regard to the amended motion,
it will take me from now until Saturday, even longer to check up
the brief of evidence alone.
The evidence is quite a bulky affair, as it is contained in
nine volumes, each one of which must be examined with the
utmost care.
Huge Task Checking Evidence.
Although it had been announced that the amended motion
would be placed in the Solicitor's hands Wednesday at noon, this
was found to be impossible because of the magnitude of the work
of checking up the evidence. Attorney Rosser's clerks worked all
the afternoon in an effort to get in to the Solicitor Thursday
morning. It probably will be in
Continued on Page 2, Column 4.
PAGE 10, COLUMN 4
Continued From Page 1.
Mr. Dorsey's hands before noon Thursday.
Exactly 115 instances are cited in the amended motion as
reasons why Leo Frank should be granted a new trial. Foremost
among these are the citations charging that the Jury was
influenced by the various forms of popular clamor for the
conviction of the prisoner and alleging bias and prejudice against
the defendant on the part of two members of the jury, Henslee
and Johenning.
On several different counts the court is attacked because of
its alleged failure to clear the court room when the alleged
prejudice of the crowd was in evidence. Reference is made also to
the jeering laughter of part of the crowd when Attorney Arnold
commented on certain of the Solicitor's remarks.
Dorsey's Durant Speech Hit.
A large part of Solicitor Dorsey's speech, containing
reference to the California slayer, Durant, as well as others, also
is attacked on the grounds that it was over the protest of the
defense.
The motion, which will be placed in the Solicitor's hands
Thursday, is an amendment to the formal motion presented to the
court on the day Frank was sentenced to bang. The formal motion
was merely a skeleton affair and contained but the merest outline
of evidence contained in the complete papers.
The amended motion covers 173 closely typewritten pages
and goes into the most minute detail on various points wherein it
is alleged the court erred in not declaring a mistrial. That it will
take the Solicitor at least four or five days to prepare an answer is
regarded as certain.
Leo Frank Victim
of
Mob Rule, Says
Rabbi
SAVANNAH, Oct. 2"Rabbi George Soloman in his annual
New Year sermon to-day declared that Leo M. Frank was the
victim of mob rule and racial prejudice, and that the courts were
doing nothing but reflecting the sentiment of an excited populace.
Rabbi Solomon compared the case to the Godbee trial
wherein a woman directly guilty of a double slaying, was only
sentenced to life imprisonment whereas, he said. Frank, only
remotely connected, had been sentenced to hang. He blamed it
on the idle mob that crowded the court.
PAGE 5, COLUMN 5
FRANK TRIAL JUROR DENIES
CHARGE OF BIAS
SOLICITO
R
CERTAIN
TO GET
DELAY
Dorsey Unable to
Prepare Data to
Fight New Trial Motion
by
Saturday.
With the prospect Thursday of a postponement of the
hearing of the Frank motion for a new trial when it comes up
Saturday, there came also the positive assurance that Solicitor
Dorsey would have absolute denials from the two jurors charged
with prejudice in the motion.
Marcellus Johenning, No. 161 Jones avenue, one of the jurors,
declared Thursday that the accusation was a complete falsehood.
I served on that the jury because I did not want to try to be
out of doing so, said Johenning, even though I would gladly
have escaped the work. And now, to accuse me of having told a
falsehood in secure the month's service is rank injustice.
I lost money through neglect of my business, and there was
not a man on the jury who had anything to gain, other than to do
his duty as a citizen. If there are any persons who have made
affidavits that we did not do Frank justice, they have lied
outright.
Made No Statements.
I don't know anything about the affidavit but when I saw in
the papers, added Johenning. Solicitor Dorsey has not notified
me that there was any such affidavit. If there is one, it is
absolutely false.
I made no utterances before the trial that would disqualify
me for jury service. Friday before the case was called, I was
informed that I had been drawn as a talesman. I did not mention
that to anyone but my business partner, and that was for
business reasons.
I went to the trial absolutely impartial. My mind was
unprejudiced. I was in the attitude of demanding that the State
prove its case.
I would have gladly avoided serving that month on the jury,
and the only reason I did serve was because I did not want to lie
out of it.
As soon as I can see the affidavit, we will show that is
flimsier than the paper on which it is written.
Henslee's Friends Tell of Denial.
J. A. Henslee, a travelling salesman and second juror charged
with having been prejudiced, has moved to Barnesville since the
end of the Frank trial. However, his Atlanta friends Thursday
declared that he had made strenuous denials to them of the
accusation when became public some time ago.
The last doubt about the postponement was removed
following a statement of Solicitor Dorsey, who declared that it
would take him from new until Saturday and perhaps longer to
check up the brief of evidence alone.
The Solicitor added, however, that he would plunge into the
subject immediately with the view of preparing his answer at the
earliest possible moment. Although he refused to venture an
assertion as to the length of the delay, it is believed that the
hearing will be postponed longer than one week.
The judge has it in his power to proceed with the hearing
regardless of the many requests of the Solicitor or the defense
but it is certain that no
Continued on Page 2, Column 5.
PAGE 11, COLUMN 5
PREJUDICE
DENIED
BY FRANK
JURYMAN
Continued From Page 1.
such ruling will be invoked Saturday.
The motion has not been served on me, said Mr. Dorsey
Wednesday morning, but without regard to the amended motion,
it will take me from now until Saturday, even longer to check up
the brief of evidence alone.
The evidence is quite a bulky affair, as it is contained in
nine volumes, each one of which must be examined with the
utmost care.
Huge Task Checking Evidence.
Although it had been announced that the amended motion
would be placed in the Solicitor's hands Wednesday at noon, this
was found to be impossible because of the magnitude of the work
of checking up the evidence. Attorney Rosser's clerks worked all
the afternoon in an effort to get in to the Solicitor Thursday
morning. It probably will be in Mr. Dorsey's hands before noon
Thursday.
Exactly 115 instances are cited in the amended motion as
reasons why Leo Frank should be granted a new trial. Foremost
among these are citations charging that jury was influenced by
the various forms of popular clamor for the conviction of the
prisoner and alleging bias and prejudice against the defendant on
the part of two members of the jury, Henslee and Johenning.
On several different counts the court is attacked because of
its alleged fail clear the court room when the alleged prejudice of
the crowd was in evidence. Reference is made also to the jeering
laughter of part of the crowd when Attorney Arnold commented
on certain of the Solicitor's remarks.
Dorsey's Durant Speech Hit.
A large part of Solicitor Dorsey's speech, containing
reference to the California slapper. Durant, as well as others, also
is attacked on the grounds that it was over the protest of the
defense.
The motion, which will be placed in the Solicitor's hands
Thursday, is an amendment to the formal motion presented to the
court on the day Frank was sentenced to hang. The formal motion
was merely a skeleton affair and contained but the merest outline
of evidence contained in the complete papers.
The amended motion covers 173 closely typewritten pages
and goes into the most minute detail on various points wherein it
is alleged the court erred in not declaring a mistrial. That it will
take the Solicitor at least four or five days to prepare an answer is
regarded as certain.
Leo Frank Victim
of
Mob Rule, Says
Rabbi
SAVANNAH, Oct. 2"Rabbi George Soloman in his annual
New Year sermon to-day declared that Leo M. Frank was the
victim of mob rule and racial prejudice, and that the courts were
doing nothing but reflecting the sentiment of an excited populace.
Rabbi Solomon compared the case to the Godbee trial
wherein a woman directly guilty of a double slaying, was only
sentenced to life imprisonment whereas, he said. Frank, only
remotely connected, had been sentenced to hang. He blamed it
on the idle mob that crowded the court.
PAGE 6, COLUMNS 3 &
5
PAGE 6, COLUMN 3
FRANK TRIAL JUROR DENIES
PREJUDICE
PAGE 6, COLUMN 5
SOLICIT
OR
CERTAI
N
TO GET
DELAY
Dorsey Unable to
Prepare Data to
Fight New Trial
Motion by
Saturday.
With the prospect Thursday of a postponement of the
hearing of the Frank motion for a new trial when it comes up
Saturday, there came also the positive assurance that Solicitor
Dorsey would have absolute denials from the two jurors charged
with prejudice in the motion.
Marcus Johenning, No. 161 Jones avenue, one of the jurors,
declared Thursday that the accusation was a complete falsehood.
I served on that the jury because I did not want to try to be
out of doing so, said Johenning, even though I would gladly
have escaped the work. And now, to accuse me of having told a
falsehood in secure the month's service is rank injustice.
I lost money through neglect of my business, and there was
not a man on the jury who had anything to gain, other than to do
his duty as a citizen. If there are any persons who have made
affidavits that we did not do Frank justice, they have lied
outright.
Made No Statements.
I don't know anything about the affidavit but when I saw in
the papers, added Johenning. Solicitor Dorsey has not notified
me that there was any such affidavit. If there is one, it is
absolutely false.
I made no utterances before the trial that would disqualify
me for jury service. Friday before the case was called, I was
informed that I had been drawn as a talesman. I did not mention
that to anyone but my business partner, and that was for
business reasons.
I went to the trial absolutely impartial. My mind was
unprejudiced. I was in the attitude of demanding that the State
prove its case.
I would have gladly avoided serving that month on the jury,
and the only reason I did serve was because I did not want to lie
out of it.
As soon as I can see the affidavit, we will show that is
flimsier than the paper on which it is written.
Henslee's Friends Tell of Denial.
J. A. Henslee, a travelling salesman and second juror charged
with having been prejudiced, has moved to Barnesville since the
end of the Frank trial. However, his Atlanta friends Thursday
declared that he had made strenuous denials to them of the
accusation when became public some time ago.
The last doubt about the postponement was removed
following a statement of Solicitor Dorsey, who declared that it
would take him from new until Saturday and perhaps longer to
check up the brief of evidence alone.
The Solicitor added however, that he would plunge into the
subject immediately with the view of preparing his answer at the
earliest possible moment. Although he refused to venture an
assertion as to the length of the delay, it is believed that the
hearing will be postponed longer than one week.
The judge has it in his power to proceed with the hearing
regardless of the many requests of the Solicitor or the defense
but it is certain that no
Continued on Page 2, Column 5.
PAGE 11, COLUMN 5
PREJUDICE
DENIED
BY FRANK
JURYMAN
Continued From Page 1.
such ruling will be invoked Saturday.
The motion has not been served on me, said Mr. Dorsey
Wednesday morning, but without regard to the amended motion,
it will take me from now until Saturday, even longer to check up
the brief of evidence alone.
The evidence is quite a bulky affair, as it is contained in
nine volumes, each one of which must be examined with the
utmost care.
Huge Task Checking Evidence.
Although it had been announced that the amended motion
would be placed in the Solicitor's hands Wednesday at noon, this
was found to be impossible because of the magnitude of the work
of checking up the evidence. Attorney Rosser's clerks worked all
the afternoon in an effort to get in to the Solicitor Thursday
morning. It probably will be in Mr. Dorsey's hands before noon
Thursday.
Exactly 115 instances are cited in the amended motion as
reasons why Leo Frank should be granted a new trial. Foremost
among these are citations charging that jury was influenced by
the various forms of popular clamor for the conviction of the
prisoner and alleging bias and prejudice against the defendant on
the part of two members of the jury, Henslee and Johenning.
On several different counts the court is attacked because of
its alleged fail clear the court room when the alleged prejudice of
the crowd was in evidence. Reference is made also to the jeering
laughter of part of the crowd when Attorney Arnold commented
on certain of the Solicitor's remarks.
Dorsey's Durant Speech Hit.
A large part of Solicitor Dorsey's speech, containing
reference to the California slapper. Durant, as well as others, also
is attacked on the grounds that it was over the protest of the
defense.
The motion, which will be placed in the Solicitor's hands
Thursday, is an amendment to the formal motion presented to the
court on the day Frank was sentenced to hang. The formal motion
was merely a skeleton affair and contained but the merest outline
of evidence contained in the complete papers.
The amended motion covers 173 closely typewritten pages
and goes into the most minute detail on various points wherein it
is alleged the court erred in not declaring a mistrial. That it will
take the Solicitor at least four or five days to prepare an answer is
regarded as certain.
Leo Frank Victim
of
Mob Rule, Says
Rabbi
SAVANNAH, Oct. 2"Rabbi George Soloman in his annual
New Year sermon to-day declared that Leo M. Frank was the
victim of mob rule and racial prejudice, and that the courts were
doing nothing but reflecting the sentiment of an excited populace.
Rabbi Solomon compared the case to the Godbee trial
wherein a woman directly guilty of a double slaying, was only
sentenced to life imprisonment whereas, he said. Frank, only
remotely connected, had been sentenced to hang. He blamed it
on the idle mob that crowded the court.
PAGE 6, COLUMN 8
Slaton Sets
Days
For Clemency
Pleas
Governor Slaton has promulgated a rule that hereafter
petitions for clemency will be heard in the executive offices on
the fourth Thursday and Friday of each month.
The Governor is forced to the adoption of this rule in order to
find time for other public business.
PAGE 11, COLUMN 2
Detective Black
Has
Gun Duel With
Tiger'
Detective John Black had a narrow escape Wednesday night
when two bullets fired by Jim Mills, a negro, grazed his hat.
A duel took place under the Courtland street viaduct
between Black and the negro, who was charged with operating a
blind tiger. The struggle was brought to a conclusion by the
arrival of Official Milan, who pounced upon the negro's back.
PAGE 11, COLUMN 2
Policemen
Invited to Hear
Special Sermon
Many members of Atlanta's police department who are off
duty Sunday night will attend the Second Baptist Church in a
body, where the pastor Dr. John E. White, will deliver a special
sermon on A Policeman and His Duty.
The entire center section of the church will be reserved for
the policemen, who have been specially invited.
atlanta-georgian-10-02-
1913-full-pages-clipping-
#2 11, COLUMNS 3 & 4
TWO FRANK
JURORS
CHARGED
WITH BIAS
J. A.
HENSLEE
MARCELLUS
JOHENNING.