Sunday, 5th October 1913: Governor Slaton Personally Investigates And Verifies The Circulation Of The Georgian And Hearst’s Sunday American, The Atlanta Georgian

Reading Time: 10 minutes [1583 words]

Daily Sunday

Georgian American

October 4th 1913.

At the request of the management of The Atlanta Georgian

and The Sunday American, I personally examined on Friday after

noon their various circulation statements, in detail. This work

required sometime, but it was willingly given, because I regard

these newspapers as enterprises of which all Georgia should be

proud. The figures the papers furnish, under oath, to the postal

authorities show a marvelous growth for the time The Georgian

and Sunday American have been in Mr. Hearst's hands"

particularly The Sunday American, which is only six months old.

These circulation figures I have checked up and verified in

person. I have examined the sworn statements of the circulation

and the cashier of The Georgian corporation, and cross

questioned them in detail about the circulation figures. I believe

the figures to be absolutely correct.

Purely from a business man's viewpoint, both The Georgian

and The Sunday American, in points of quality and quantity of

circulation, should be, and I have no doubt are, highly satisfactory

and effective advertising mediums. Certainly, they are most

excellent newspapers, and should commend themselves to

merchants for business purposes.

The fine circulation showings furnish me ample foundation

for warm congratulations. I sincerely wish for Mr. Hearst and his

Georgia newspapers the fullest measure of prosperity and

success"both of which seem assured. I am persuaded this great

publisher means to be consistently a firm and powerful friend of

Atlanta, Georgia, and the whole South, and I well know his ability

to do big things in a big way.

PAGE 5, COLUMN 1

INDEFINITE

RESPITE IS

GIVEN FRANK AS

JUROR

CHARGES

FLOOD

Hearing of Motion for New

Trial Is

Postponed on Motion of

Solicitor

Dorsey---Henslee

Indignantly De-

nies Allegation That He Was

Biased.

Confronted by 173 pages of alleged errors made by the trial

judge, nine volumes of evidence and a mass of affidavits charging

prejudice on the part of the jury. Solicitor General Hugh M. Dorsey

and his assistant, A. H. Stephens, Monday morning will begin in

earnest their work of combating the legal issues raised by the

defense in its motion for a new trial for Leo M. Frank,

superintendent of the National pencil factory, convicted of the

murder of Mary Phagan on April 26.

The papers in the motion of the defense form one of the

most voluminous assertions of error in a criminal trial that has

ever been filed in Georgia, comprising 173 pages of court errors

and more than a dozen affidavits attacking the members of the

jury, particularly Jurors A. H. Henslee and Marcellus Johenning.

Both of these jurors are charged with having expressed their

conviction of Frank's guilt before being chosen on the jury, and to

have profanely declared themselves in favor of the factory

superintendent's execution.

It is not thought probable that Solicitor Dorsey will be ready

to reply to the motion of the defense by next Saturday, when

Judge L. S. Roan has set the hearing. Doubt of his ability to

investigate the assertions and affidavits of the defense and

prepare his reply was expressed by the Solicitor yesterday, when

he asked Judge Roan to grant more time if he was not ready by

October 11.

Solicitor Dorsey and his assistant, in preparing their answer

by which they hope to prevent Frank getting a new trial, plan to

probe thoroughly into every affidavit and other legal paper

presented by the defense. The character of the men and women

who made the affidavits attacking the jurors will be thoroughly

investigated, as will the legality of the affidavits themselves, and

the findings will be contained in the Solicitor's reply. Such flaws as

he may be able to find in the records of the people who swear

that Henslee and Johenning expressed their opinions before the

trial will be used in his protest against the granting of a new trial,

and the Solicitor also probably will present affidavits upon which

the defense based its motion. Affidavits by which the Solicitor will

seek to prove that the jury knew nothing of the state of mind of

the crowd about the courthouse during the trial, and that the

jurymen did not hear the shouts and anti-Frank demonstrations,

will also be secured.

While Solicitor Dorsey and Assistant Stephens are trying to

undermine and destroy the contentions contained in the motion

already on file, Attorneys Rosser, Arnold and Haas, for the

defense, will continue their hunt for new evidence by which they

hope to show that Frank did not have a fair trial. It is said that his

quest for additional evidence of prejudice on the part of the jury

will extend to New York and to other portions of the country.

Practically every possible point was covered by the defense

in the numerous affidavits and depositions by Frank's attorneys.

Some of the affidavits asserted that cheering and anti-Frank

demonstrations were perfectly audible in the courtroom and could

easily have been heard by the jury; others cited certain incidents

which the defense declares proves that the jury was not properly

guarded, and still others attack Jurors Henslee and Johenning,

declaring that they frequently expressed their conviction of

Frank's guilt before the trial.

The depositions regarding the cheering and demonstrations

and charging the jurors talked to certain people during the

progress of the trial were made by H. C. Loevenhart, Mrs. J. G.

Loevenhart, Miss Miriam Loevenhart, S. Aron, Mack Farkas, R. L.

Gremer, J. J. Nunnally, W. L. Picker, J. A. Lehman, Samuel Boorstin,

Mrs. A Shurman, Sampson Kay, B. M. Kay, Miss Martha Kay,

Charles G. Moore, W. B. Cate, J. H. G. Cochran and H. G. Williams.

Eight affidavits alleging that Jurors Henslee and Johenning

made remarks showing prejudice against Frank were filed. They

were made by C. P. Stough, of Atlanta; John M. Holmes, Shi Gray

and S. M. Johnston, of Sparta; R. L. Gremer and Mack Farkas, of

Albany; Julian A. Lehman and Sam Aaron, of Atlanta. These

affidavits relate in detail conservations and discussions of the

Frank case in which Henslee and Johenning are alleged to have

taken part. Henslee is charged in an affidavit by Samuel Aaron

with having declared at the Elks' Club in Atlanta two days after

Frank was indicted that I am glad they indicted the ---Jew! They

ought to take him out and lynch him, and if I get on the jury I will

hang that Jew sure!

Johenning is charged by Mrs. J. G. Loevenhart, Miss Miriam

Loevenhart and H. C. Loevenhart with having expressed forcibly

and positively his opinion that Frank was guilty. Juror Henslee is

charged also with having shown prejudice against Frank in

conversations of Albany, Ga., and Sparta, Ga., before he was

selected for the jury.

Henslee, in an interview given out last Friday, declared that

the eight affidavits filed against him are a tissue of lies from

beginning to end. He denies expressing his views on the Frank

case and probably will embody his statements of innocence in an

affidavit for the use of Solicitor Dorsey.

Attorneys for the defense have announced that in the event

that Judge L. S. denies the motion for a new trial and again

sentences Frank to be hanged, the case will be carried at once to

the Supreme Court of Georgia. In the event of an unfavorable

decision from that tribunal it is likely that the case will be

appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States on some

technicality of law that will insure a hearing.

Frank was originally sentenced to hang on October 10, but

the motion for a new trial and the prospect of an immediate

appeal to the Supreme Court act as a stay of sentence

indefinitely.

PAGE 62, COLUMN 5

INDEFINITE

STAY

OF

SENTENCE IS

GIVEN

FRANK

Hearing of Motion for

New Trial

Is Postponed on Motion

of

Dorsey.

With Leo M. Frank's sentence respited indefinitely, and the

hearing on his lawyers' motion postponed for a week, new

sensations were sprung in the fight for the convicted

superintendent's life with the revelation Saturday of the contents

of a mass of affidavits charging prejudice against A. H. Henslee

and Marcellus Johenning, members of the trial jury.

Most of the fire is directed at Henslee, who is charged by

many persons with having expressed violent feelings on the case

before he was chosen as a juror. He is accused of having

expressed his conviction of Frank's guilt and his eagerness to see

him hanged, and to have referred in profane terms to the

prisoner's race.

The hearing of the motion for a new trial was postponed by

Judge Roan at the request of the Solicitor General Hugh M. Dorsey

when the case was called shortly after 9 o'clock Saturday

morning. The Solicitor said he needed time to look into the

volumes of contentions made by the defense in the pleas setting

forth 115 reasons why Frank should get a new trial. Judge Roan

put the hearing off until next Saturday, and announced that he

would be ready to grant the Solicitor more time then, if

necessary.

The order for an indefinite stay was issued in less than ten

minutes after the hearing of the motion for a new trial was taken

up.

I have not had time in which to prepare my reply to the

motion, as it was only presented to me a day or two ago, and is

quite lengthy, said Solicitor Dorsey. Therefore, I am going to ask

your honor to postpone this hearing until I have time to complete

my work on it.

It is my desire to complete the case as quickly as possible,

and it is imperative that it should be. The work of the Court of

Appeals is hinging on this case in a way, as you are being delayed

in taking up your duties there until after you have heard this

motion. I think that possibly I can complete my reply by next

Saturday, but in the event I find this impossible I would like for

your honor to grant a further delay.

Attorneys Arnold and Rosser said this would be agreeable to

them.

Dorsey asked that he be furnished with all of the depositions

which the defense had taken, and Attorney Rosser advised that

he would furnish them to the Solicitor some time during the day.

I will set this hearing for 9:30 o'clock next Saturday

morning, then, said Judge Roan. I trust, however, Mr. Dorsey,

that you will be prepared by that time.