Tuesday, 19th August 1913 Jim Conley To Be Recalled

Reading Time: 423 minutes [78080 words]

The Atlanta Georgian,

Tuesday, 19th August 1913.

PAGE 1

DORSEY ADMITS HE MADE ERASURE ON FACTORY TIME SLIP

With the State determined to make a desperate fight to broad down the impressive story told by Leo M. Frank in his own behalf the trial of the man accused of Mary Phagan's murder was resumed Tuesday morning.

The defense added a few finishing touches to its case calling Mrs. Emil Selig, the prisoner's mother-in-law to identify a suit of brown clothes worn by Frank on Memorial day.

Wiley Roberts, assistant jailer at the Tower was called but did not answer to his name and proceedings were held up for a few moments.

In the wait Solicitor Dorsey arose and made the unexpected announcement that he himself had erased the identification "Taken out at 8:16" on the time slip taken from the clock in the factory. Frank had made the charge he had written words as an identification of the slip and that they had been erased. The Solicitor declared that he thought the detectives had made the identification.

"Frank did not know who made the erasure," said Attorney Reuben Arnold.

Solicitor Prepares To Uphold Dalton.

The Solicitor had announced earlier that his first witnesses in rebuttal would be called to support C. B. Dalton and impeach Daisy Hopkins, who declared she Dalton or that he had ever introduced Dalton to the factory superintendent.

Wiley Roberts was asked.

Q. Has Jim Conley been in your custody during this trial? A. Yes.

Q. Has he ever asked for new papers? A. Yes.

Dorsey interrupted.

"Your honor," he said, "I think the witness Jim Conley ought to have the privilege of denying or affirming that before he can be impeached."

"Conley said that he could only read certain words," said Arnold "but probably Mr. Dorsey is right. I will have to call Jim Conley back again. Mr. Rosser will be back in a minute and we will close."

Frank Proves His Own Best Witness.

Frank had demonstrated that he was better than his lawyers and that he was his own best witness when he came down from the witness chair Monday night after talking almost continuously for four hours.

It is doubtful as shrewd and eloquent as his attorneys are known to be, if anything more impressive, more convincing and more logical will be presented to the jury in his behalf before his fate is placed in the hands of the twelve men.

The young factory superintendent made no attempt at oratory or dramatics. He did not attempt an appeal to the emotions of the jurors. He probably was wise in this as the memory of what he said and the manner in which he said it will remain with the jurors long after an emotion of pity would have passed away.

Although Frank seldom raised his voice above conversational tone his address was deeply impressive from start to finish. Its truth or falsity, of course, is problematical. But it had all the characteristic that the commonly accepted as accompanying the truth.

He did not ask for pity or mercy. He did not take the attitude of demanding anything to which he was not entitled. His mein throughout was that of a man seeking moral justice, and that alone. He was an innocent man or a consummate actor as he stood before the jury. These are the only two conclusions possible.

The matter of fact manner in which he delivered me along and read only added to its impressiveness and eloquence. That a man with the burden of a foul murder on his conscience could talk easily, freely, fearlessly for four hours before the men whose word can send him to the gallows was hardly to be conceived.

As he stood before the jury, examin-

PAGE 2

FRANK PROVES OWN BEST WITNESS, SAY LAWYERS

Continuing from Page 1.

ing minute explanations of the intricate work involved in the financial sheets, the reports and the hundred and one details of his work, the impression that he gave was that of a fluent classroom lecturer thoroughly at home with his subject. He was not disturbed by interruptions. He spoke easily and with unconscious gestures.

He spoke more than two hours on the complexity of the work he was compelled to do Saturday forenoon and afternoon the day that Mary Phagan came to her death. He accounted for every moment of his time on the day of the murder.

The latter part of his address was given over to his experience with the detectives, for whom he did not appear to have great respect or admiration, and to a categorical denial of all the charges made against him.

One of his most startling statements was in reference to the supposed blood spots near the ladies' dressing room on the fourth floor which have figured so prominently in the case since their discovery R. P. Barrett, a machinist at the pencil factory.

Frank said that he made an examination of the spots of which the detectives and Solicitor General have made a great deal.

"I did not depend on the light from the windows for my inspection," said the defendant." I crouched right down on the floor and made the closest sort of an inspection. I discovered a curious thing. I scraped away with my finger and I found that there was an accumulation of dirt and grease over the dark spots. The accumulation was not that of three weeks. It was an accumulation of three months or more."

"Another thing which has been overlooked in connection with these spots is the effect that the Haskoline compound would have had it been smeared over real blood spots when the blood is fresh. The Haskoline, which is simply a lubricating mixture, is supplied in a liquid condition. Had the blood been fresh, as the detectives have presumed, it would have mixed with the Haskoline which would have turned a pink or red color instead of remaining white as has happened to be the case."

Admits His

Nervousness.

Frank admitted readily that he had been nervous when he was routed from bed and taken without his breakfast to the undertaking rooms to view the body of the murdered girl.

"I was nervous; I admit it," he said. "I was extremely nervous. I was distracted. But what man would not have been under the circumstances? It would have been a man of alone who would not have been affected by the tragedy of the little girl killed on the dawn of womanhood."

He made a sensational charge intimating that an attempt had been made to "Frame" against him by the detectives in connection with the time slip taken from the clock the morning after the tragedy.

He declared that on the slip he took from the clock he wrote: "Taken out at 8:26 a. m.," underscoring the words with two heavy illness. He said that he handed this slip at once to Chief Lanford.

That an attempt had been made at the erasure of this means he had taken to identify the slip was the accusation he made. He held the slips up to the juror and told them that the words were still faintly visible as well as the two lines with which he underscored the words.

He added that such a vigorous attempt had been made to rub out his writing that the red lines on the time slip also had been partly obliterated.

Toward the beginning of his address he referred to his home life, which the detectives at various times have sought to show was unhappy. He drew an affectionate smile to the lips of his pretty wife when he said that his married life had been exceptionally happy, the happiest period of his career.

Denies He Ever

Had Seen Dalton.

He referred only briefly to the testimony of C. B. Dalton, who said on the stand that he had seen women in Frank's office and had been introduced to Frank by Miss Daisy Hopkins. Frank denied he ever had met Dalton. He denied flatly any intimacy with women in his office or anywhere else, and denounced as unspeakable slanders the charges of other acts of immorality.

His account of the visit of Mary Phagan to his office was simple and direct. He said she came and asked for her pay and was given it. As she passed from his sight she called back to ask him if the metal had come. He answered, "No," and then hear
d her footsteps retreating. He thought he heard a female voice an instant later, but paid little attention to it.

That, he said, was all he knew of Mary Phagan's movements on the day she met her death. He did not even know her name at the time, identifying her by the number on her envelope. That he had any part in her death or in the disposal of her body he denied absolutely. He branded the story of Jim Conley, the negro, as a tissue of lies from start to finish.

"I have told the truth and the whole truth," he said as he left the stand at 6:05 o'clock. He had been talking almost continuously for four hours.

LIE DIRECT IS GIVEN TO CONLEY'S STORY

Gentlemen, I know nothing whatever of the death of little Mary Phagan, I had no part in causing her death, nor do I know how she came to her death after she took her money and left my office. I never even saw Conley in the factor or anywhere else on that date, April 26, 1913.

The statement of the negro Conley is a tissue of lies from first to last. I know nothing whatever of the cause of the death of Mary Phagan, and Conley's statement as to his coming up and helping me dispose of the body, or that I had anything to do with her or to do with him is a monstrous lie. From Frank's Statement.

Frank's Story in Complete

Form as Told to the Jury

Leo M. Frank, in his remarkable statement to the jury, had little to say of the charges made against him until the latter part of his address, which on this account became the most interesting and most impressive portion of his talk. After going into close detail in respect to his work at the factory office in the afternoon of Mary Phagan's murder, he took up the principal evidence and the principal charges against him.

He explained why he did not talk to Conley. He asserted that it was he who gave the information that Conley could write, in spite of the assertions that he had withheld this information. He made complete denial of seeing Conley on the day of the crime or of having any personal knowledge of how Mary Phagan came to ed all he desired.

Here is Frank's story as it was told with its various interruptions:

Mr. Arnold: "Now Mr. Frank, such papers as you want to use you can come down here at any time or from time to time and get them on this table right here.

The Court: "Before you commence your statement I want to read the law. In criminal procedure, the prisoner will have the right to make to the Court and jury such statement in the case as he may deem proper in his defense. It shall not be under oath and shall have such force as the jury shall think right to give it. They may believe it in preference to the sworn testimony in the case. The prisoner shall not be compelled to answer any questions on cross-examination. He should feel free to decline to answer them. Now you can much such statement as you see fit."

The defendant said: "Gentlemen of the jury, in 1884, the 17th day of April, I was born in Terrall, Tex. At the age of three months my parents took me to Brooklyn, N. Y., which became my home until I came South, to Atlanta, to make my home here. I attended the public schools of Brooklyn and prepared for college in Pratt Institute, Brooklyn, N. Y."

"In the fall of 1902 I entered Cornell University, where I took the course of mechanical engineering, graduating after four years, in June, 1905. I then accepted a position as draughtsman with the B. F. Sturdevant Company, of Hyde Park, Mass. After remaining with this firm for about six months I return once more to my home in Brooklyn, where I accepted a position as testing engineer and draughtsman with the National Meter Company of Brooklyn, N. Y."

"I remained with these parties until about the middle of October, 1907, when at the invitation of some citizens of Atlanta, I came South to confer with them with reference to the starting and operation of a pencil factory to be located in Atlanta. After remaining here for about two weeks I returned once more is New York, where I engaged passage and went to Europe. I remained in Europe nine months. During my sojourn abroad I studied the pencil business and looked after the erection and testing of machinery which had been previously traded for."

Looked After the

Purchase of Materials.

"In the first part of August, 1906, I returned once more to America, and immediately came South, to Atlanta, which has remained my home ever since. I married in Atlanta an Atlanta girl, Miss Lucille Selig. The major portion of my married life, has been spent in the home of parents-in-law, Mr. and Mrs. E. Selig, at No. 68 East Georgia avenue. My married life has been exceptionally happy, indeed it has been the happiest days of my life."

"My duties as superintendent of the National Pencil Company were in general as follows: I took charge of the technical and mechanical end of the factory, looking after the processes and seeing that the product was turned out in quality equal to the standard in quality equal to the standard which was set by our competitors. I looked after the installation of new machinery, and the purchasing of any machinery, and in addition I had charge of the office work at the Forsyth street plant, and the Ford plant on Bell street."

"I looked after the purchasing of the raw material, I saw after the manufacture of pencils and kept up with the market of these materials and when the prices fluctuated so that the purchases could be made to the best possible advantage."

"On Friday, April 25, I arrived at the pencil factory on Forsyth street at about 7 o'clock, my usual time. I immediately started in on my regular routine work, looking over the papers I had laid out the evening before, and attending to any work that needed my special attention that morning."

"At about 9:30 I went over to the office of the general manager and treasurer, Mr. Sigmund Montag, whose office is at Montag Brothers on Nelson street. I stayed over there a short time, and got what papers had arrived in the mail all the mail of the pencil factory comes over to their office. I got that mail and brought it back to the Forsyth street office. I then separated the mail and continued in my usual routine duties in the office on Forsyth street."

"At about 11 o'clock Mr. Schiff handed me the payroll book, covering the plants at Forsyth street and Bell Street, for me to check over and see if the amounts and extensions were correct. Of course, this work has to be very carefully done, so that the proper amount of money is drawn from the bank. This checking took me until about 12:20 p. m."

Went to Bank

To Get Pay Money.

"I then went over to Montag Brothers, took the checks drawn and had them signed by Mr. Sig-Montag, after which I returned to Forsyth street and got the leather bag in which I usually carried the money and the coin from the bank, and got the payroll slip, in the safe and looked it. At this time my wife called for me and in her company and that of Mr. Schiff I went over to the car, and went with my wife home to lunch. After lunch I returned to the factory and took a tour for about an hour through the factory, after which I then assisted Mr. Schiff in checking over the amounts on the pay envelopes, checking the money against the duplicate slips that we had got from the bank to see that the correct amount had been given us, and helped Mr. Schiff in checking over the money and in filling the envelopes."

"This took us approximately until a quarter to six to fill the envelopes and seal them, and place them in a box we have there with two hundred pigeon holes in it, that we call our payoff box."

Paid One Man

Check in Cash.

"While I was so occupied with Mr. Schiff in in filling the envelope, a young man named Wright who had helped us out in the office as clerk during the past week came in and I paid him in cash, as Mr. Schiff had neglected to put his name on the payroll. I just made out a ticket and put it in the payroll box, not the cash box, and continued in the office with Mr. Schiff, taking all the envelopes that were du
e the help that had worked from April 18 to April 24, inclusive, to pay them through the window in one side of the office. There is a little window built in the hall. I had stayed in my office, checking over the amount of money which had been left there."

"This amount should have been equal to the amount loaned out in advance to the help. I took a ticket out when we were filling the envelopes in stocking this amount there. As near as I recollect it, it was about $15."

"I noticed a shortage of about $1.20, or something over a dollar, at any rate, and I kept checking to see it. I could find the shortage in the various deductions which had been made. I could not locate it that evening, after the help had been paid off, during which time I stayed in my office. No one came into my office and asked me for the envelope or for an envelope of any other party."

"After the paying off of the help had taken place, Mr. Schiff returned and handed me the envelopes which were left over, bound with an elastic band, and I put them in the cash compartment, which is different from the cash box, the key to which is kept in my cash box, and placed them in the safe, and Mr. Schiff placed the amounts in the box, and placed the box in the safe and left them."

Tells of Putting

Slips in Tim Clock.

"I placed the time clock slips which were to be used the next day. I took the two time slips dated April 25, which had been used by the help on Friday, April 25 these are the two that I put in the slot" exhibiting the same to the jury."

Mr. Dorsey thereupon vigorously protested that Mr. Frank should be allowed to exhibit these slips to the jury, because they had not been offered in evidence, on the grounds that they were immaterial and irrelevant, and on the second ground that he could not put them in evidence on his own statement.

Counsel for the defendant insisted, however, that they should be allowed to offer these slips in evidence, as they had been testified to by Mr. Darley and others. The testimony, however, was not produced, and Judge Roan ruled that Mr. Frank might make any statement concerning the same, but that he would withhold his ruling until further investigation. Mr. Frank thereupon proceeded to explain to the jury.

"Gentlemen, as I was saying, these two slips that have April 26, 1913, written at the bottom are the two slips I put in the clock on the evening of Friday, April 25, to be used on the day following, which, of course, was April 26."

Darley's Duty to

Employ All Help.

"I neglected to mention also, in going over my duties at the factory that Mr. Darley was superintendent of labor and manufacture, and it fell to his duty engage and help and distribute the help throughout the plant and to discharge the help in case it was necessary. It was also due to him whether the wages were raised or not. In other words, he was the man that came directly in contact with the help. Moreover, he saw that the goods progressed through the plant without stopping, speedily and economically for their manufacture."

"On Friday evenings I got home at about 6:30, had my supper, washed up, and with my wife played a game of auction bridge at a friend's home in the evening. My wife and I returned home and retired about 11 o'clock."

"On Saturday, April 26, I rose between 7 and 7:30 and leisurely washed and dressed and ate my breakfast, and caught a Washington Street or Georgia Avenue car. I don't really remember which, at the corner of Washington and Georgia avenue, and arrived at the factory, Forsyth street plant, at about 3:20."

"Upon my arrival at the factory I found Mr. Holloway, the day watchman, at his usual place, and I greeted him in my usual way, and found Alonzo Mann, the office boy, in the office."

"I took off my cent and hat and opened my desk and opened the safe, and removed the various books and files and wire trays containing the various important papers were placed there the evening before and distributing them in their proper places about the office. I then went out to the shipping room and conversed a few minutes with Mr. Irby, who was at that time shopping clerk, about the work he was going to do that morning."

"According to my recollection, we did no shipping that day, owing to the fact that the freight offices were not reserving any shipments, due to the fact that it was a holiday."

"I returned to my offer and looked through the papers and asked sorted out those which I was going to take over on my usual trip to the general manager's office that morning."

"I then turned to the invoice covering shipments which were made by the pencil factory on Thursday, April 24, and which were typewritten on Friday, April 25, by Miss Eubanks, who was the stenographer who stayed at my office. She had hurried through with the office work on the day previous, so that she could go home and spend the holiday in the country she lived. But I didn't get to shock even the invoices on the shipments on Friday, due to the fact that Mr. Schiff and myself were completely occupied the entire day. Be we left the factory with the payroll. So that naturally, these invoices covering shipments which were made on April 24, ought to have been sent to the customers, and I got right to work checking them."

Shows Invoices to

Jury First Time.

"Now I have these invoices here (taking up the papers and exhibiting them to the jury). These papers have not been exhibited to you before, but I will explain them. You have seen some similar to these."

"Of all the mathematical work in the office of a pencil factory, this very operation, this very piece of work that I have now before me is the most important. It is the invoices covering shipments and is sent to the customer, and it is very important that the prices are correct, that the amount of goods shipped agrees with the amount which is on the invoices, that the terms are correct, and that the price is correct. Also, in some cases, there were freight deductions, all of which has to be very carefully checked over and looked into, because I know of nothing else that exasperates a customer more than to receive invoices which are incorrect."

"Now with reference to the work I did on these orders that is not such an easy job as you might be led to believe. Here are initials. They represent the salesman who took the order. Sometimes I have to go through a world of papers to find out to whom to credit these orders."

"I notice that one of the orders to R. B. Kindele calls for a specialty. That has to be carefully noted and recorded. One column represents the shipping point, another the date, etc."

"The next step is to fill in the orders on this sheet. On this sheet I must separate the orders into price groups. Evidently no work has been done on this sheet since he went away. The reason this is done in the pencil business as in all manufacturing businesses it is advantageous to sell as much of the high-priced goods as possible."

"This sheet is the only means of telling how much of the various goods we are saying. It is the barometer of our business and requires most careful work."

Declares He Wrote

Financial Sheet.

"After I have finished that work I have had to do this, and notwithstanding any insinuations that have been made, I wrote these requisitions."

Frank read the name on each requisition, which were the same as the names on the orders.

"Now that is all my handwriting, except what as written at a subsequent date to April 26th."

"Well, moreover, this operation this morning took me longer than it usually takes the ordinary person to check invoices because usually one calls out and the other checks, but I had this work all myself that morning. As I did this work this morning I saw that Miss Eubanks had evidently sacrificed accuracy to speed, and everyone of them was wrong. I went over the invoices to make the corrections, figure them out, correct them, and make deductions, if any were to be made , and then get the total shipments, because since these shipments were m
ade on April 24, which was Thursday and the last day of our fiscal week, and it was on this week which the financial report which I make out every Saturday afternoon, which has been my custom, so that the total shipments could be figured out, and therefore I could not let it go out at that, so I had to figure every invoice in its entirety, so I could get a figure I would be able to use."

"The first order here is the Hilton, Hart & Kern Co., Detroit, Mich. Here is the original order, which exists in our files in our office. Here is the original transaction which was made March 18, but it was not to be shipped until April 24. This is a small order, 100 gross of Number 2 and here is an order of the Packard Motor Car Company for 125 gross of No. 3, and 150 gross of No. 4. Those figures represent the grade of hardness of the lead in the pencil."

Explains How

Orders are Filled.

Frank thereupon explained how such orders were usually filed, whether in part or in whole, and how shipments were made, and continuing, said:

"In investigating shipments made by the pencil company our method is as follows: We make them in triplicate. Our first original is a white sheet that, and that goes to the customers; the second is a pink sheet and that goes over to the General Manager's office and is filed serially, that is, chronologically; one date on the top, and from that the charges are made on the ledger, and the last sheet or third sheet is a yellow sheet, which is here (exhibiting it), those are placed in a file in my office, and are filed alphabetically. These yellow sheets that I have here are not the yellow sheets I had that day because they have since been perfected, and I am just taking the corrected sheets I made the corrections and Miss Eubanks corrected them on Monday by the corrections I had on the white sheet from the corrections I made and I presume at that time made that correct."

Mr. Frank exhibited to the jury various orders similarly written, to H. W. Williams and Company, of Fort Worth, Tex. The Fort Smith Paper Company, of Fort Smith Paper, Ark. S. O. Barnum & Sons, of Buffalo, N. Y. F. L. Schmidt and Company, of Chicago, and H. S. Kross and Company, of New York.

"Now, there is an order that takes a great deal of study (referring to the Kress order) because in common with these five and ten cent syndicates, there is a great deal of red tape. These are invoices that were typed on April 25, Friday, and were shipped on April 24. It was the date on which the shipment was made irrespective of the date there irrespective of the date there, (referring to the date on the letter) and these were typewritten. In other words, shipments took place April 24, and that date was at the top, typewritten and stamped by the office at the bottom, April 24. Among other things that the S. H. Kress Company demand on their orders, we must state whether or not it is complete, must give the case number, and must tell by which railroad the shipment goes."

Checking Made Hard

By Much Red Tape

"Here is one for F. W. Woolworth and Company. Fort Wayne, which shows 35 pounds, less 86 cents per 100 pounds credit. In other words, we had to find out what was the weight of that was the weight of that was on a basis of 86 cents for every 100 pounds shipped. Then here is another one of our large distributors in New York. They have a freight allowance of 86 cents a 100 pounds also, and their shipments amounted to 618 pounds on Thursday, April 24."

"I started on this work. As I said, I have gone into it in some detail, to show you the carefulness with which the work must be carried out, and I was at work on this until about 9 o'clock, as near as I remember."

"Mr. Darley and Wade Campbell, the inspector, of the factory came into the outer office and I stopped what work I was doing, which was this work, and went, to the outer office and chatted with Mr. Campbell for ten or fifteen minutes, conversed with them, joked with them and while I was talking with them, I think about 9:15, or a quarter after 9. Miss Mattie Smith came in and asked me for her pay envelope, and the envelope of her sister-in-law. I went to the safe and got out the package of envelopes that Mr. Schiff had given me the evening before, and placed the two remaining envelopes in my cash box, as I considered they might come in and I wanted to have them near at hand so that I could pay them off when they came in. I keep my cash box on the lower side of my desk. After Miss Smith had gone away with the envelopes, in a few minutes Mr. Darley came back with one of the envelopes, and pointed out an error in one of them, the one of the sister-in-aw of Miss Mattie Smith, who had gotten too much money."

"When I took the amount which was too much, that amount balanced the error in the payroll that I had noticed the night before, and left about five or ten cents. Those things generally right themselves anyhow. I continued to work on these invoices when I was interrupted by Mr. Lyon, the superintendent of Montag Brothers, and he brought me a pencil display box. He seemed to be in a hurry, and I told him if he would wait a minute I would go over with him, but he passed out of the office, and then I found a stopping place in the work I was working on, and I put on my coat and when I got to the outer office I found that Mr. Lyon had already left."

"Mr. Darley and I left about 9:35 or 9:40, and we got out of the factory and stopped at the corner of Hunter and Forsyth streets, where we each had a drink at Cruickshank's soda fountain, and I bought a package of my favorite cigarettes."

"After that conversation there I left him and went alone to Montag Brothers, where I arrived about 10 o'clock or maybe a little after. I entered Montag Brothers and spoke to Mr. Sig Montag, general manager, on business, and he brought the papers which I collect and laid them on his desk, and I then took the papers out, thrust them in the folder and took the other papers which I had in my folder, and then distributed them at the proper places in the Montag plant. I don't know just which ones they were."

Conversation With

Miss Hall Recalled.

"In chatting with Mr. Montag I spoke to Mr. Montag and Mr. Korse, after that I spoke to Miss Hattie Hall, the pencil company's stenographer, who stays at Montag Brothers, and asked her to come over and help me that morning, as I have already told you, that those invoices were wrong, and I wanted her to help me on that work and could not take it up tomorrow. In fact, I told her I had enough work to keep her busy that whole afternoon if she would stay. She said she didn't want to do that, she wanted to have at least a half holiday."

"I then spoke to several of the Montag Brothers' force on business matters and other matters. Also I then spoke to Mr. Guttenheim, who was sales manager of the Montag Brothers and of the pencil factory, and then spoke to him about several of his orders that were in the factory. There were two of his orders that he paid special stress on that were desired to be shipped right away. I said, I don't know how so far along in the process of manufacture the orders have proceeded, but if you can come back I can look it up and tell you when they can be shipped.' He said he could not come then, but he would come a little later. I told him I would be glad if he would come up a little later on in the afternoon that I would be there until about 1 o'clock in the morning, and then about half past three. I then took the folder and returned."

Arrived at Factory

At About 11 O'clock.

"Upon arrival at the pencil factory I went up to the second or office floor, and then I noticed that the clock was perhaps five minutes after 11 o'clock, and I saw Mr. Holloway there, and I told him he could go as soon as he got ready. He told me had some work to do for Harry Denham and Arthur White, who wanted to do some repairing on the top floor, and that he would do the work first".

"I then went to the office, and found Miss Hattie Hall, who had preceded me from Montag Brothers, and another y
oung lady, who introduced herself to me in Mrs. Arthur White. Mrs. White wanted to see her husband. I went into the inner office, and took off my hate and coat and removed the papers which I had brought back from Montag Brothers and put the folder away."

Week's Sheet Left

In Incomplete Form.

"It was about this time that I first heard the elevator motor start up, and the circular saw in the carpenter shop which was near to it, and I heard it sawing thought it was evidently the work that Mr. Holloway had referred to."

"I separated the orders from the letters which required answers, and took from them the letters that did not need immediate attention and laid them in the various places, and it was about this time I had an idea I would like to see how far along the report sheets were which I used in getting up the financial report every Saturday afternoon. To my surprise I found that the sheet contains the records of the pencils packed for the week had been entered for Thursday. The last day of the fiscal week was omitted, and Mr. Schiff, evidently in the stress of figuring out and filling the envelopes for the payroll for Friday instead of Saturday, had evidently not had enough time. I told Alonzo Mann, the office boy, to call up Mr. Schiff and find out when he was coming down, and Alonzo said that the answer came back over the telephone that Mr. Schiff would be right down, so I didn't pay any more attention to that part of the work, because I expected Mr. Schiff to come down any minute."

Mrs. Freeman and

Corinthia Hall Came In.

"It was about this time that Mrs. Emma Clark Freeman and Miss Corinthia Hall, two of the girls that worked on the fourth floor, came upstairs and asked to go upstairs and get Mrs. Freeman's coat, which permission I gave them. I told them at the same time to tell Arthur White that his wife was downstairs. A few minutes after they left my office two gentlemen office two gentlemen call me in, one of them Mr. Graham, and another gentleman, fathers of two boys who had gotten into some trouble during the noon recess and were taken down to police headquarters, and, of course, could not get their pay envelopes the night before. I gave the required envelopes to the two fathers, and chatted with them at some length in reference to the trouble that their boys had gotten into on the day previous."

"Just before they left the office Mrs. Emma Clark Freeman and Mrs. Corinthia Hall came into my office and asked my permission to use the telephone, and started using the telephone, and started using the telephone during the time these two gentlemen left my office and asked my permission to use the telephone during the time these two gentlemen left office. Previous to the time these two gentlemen came in, I had called Miss Mattie Hall in and dictated what mail I had to give her, and she went out and was typewriting the mail."

Frank went back to the stand. He was handed a glass of water as he resumed his seat, but declined.

"Miss Hall left my office" he continued, "on her way home at this time. There were then in the building Arthur White, Harry Denham and Mrs. White. It must have been from ten to fifteen minutes after that this little girl whom I afterwards found to be Mary Phagan came in. She asked for her pay. I got my cash box, referred to the number and gave her the envelope."

"As she went out, she stopped near my outer office door and said:

"Has the metal come?"

Sound of Voice Made

Little Impression.

"The safe door was open and I could not see her, but I answered No.' The last I heard was the sound of her footsteps going down the hall. But a few moments after she asked me, I had the impression of a voice saying something, but it made no impression on me."

"The little girl had hardly left the office when Lemmie Quinn came in. He said something to me about working on a holiday and went out. A few minutes before 1 o'clock, I called up my wife and told her I was coming to lunch at 1:15. I then went up stairs to where Denham and White were working and found they had a bit of the floor taken up and were sawing."

"I explained to them that I was going to lunch and would lock the door when I left. Mrs. White left at this time. Some lady said that at 12:35 o'clock she found me in front of the safe. It is barely possible that she did. I don't recall her being there. Her mom's cry probably is fresher than mine on this point."

"When I went up stairs I asked Mr. White if his wife was going to stay there with him. She said no, that one would go. She left and then I bet my hat and cost and left, looking the outer dear."

"Now, gentlemen, to the best of my recollection from the time the whistle blew until I went up-

PAGE 3

LEO M. FRANK'S COMPLETE STORY AS TOLD TO THE JURY

Accused Makes Statement Remarkable for Clarity and Wealth of Detail

DIAGRAM ILLUSTRATING FRANK'S ALIBI

On RETURN from LUNCH Met REBECCA CARSON at 3.10 on way to OFFICE

FRANK Left HOME for OFFICE and ARRIVED at 8.20 A.M.

ARRIVED HOME to LUNCH 1.15

FRANK went to MONTAG BROS at 9.30 A.M

RETURNED to WORK. 4.00 P.M

LEFT OFFICE 6.00 P.M for HOME.

TIME TO TALK IS NOW

AND I HAVE TOLD YOU

WHOLE TRUTH,' HE SAYS

Continued from Page 2.

stairs to see Mr. White, I did not stir out of my office. I went on home."

"I called up my brother-in-law, Mr. Ursenbach, to tell him I was unable to keep the engagement to go to the ball game. The cook answered the phone."

"My wife and mother-in-law were going to the opera. My father-in-law and I ate lunch. He went into a backyard while I lit cigarette and lay down for a moment."

"I left and while passing the home of Mrs. Wolfsheimer, saw Mrs. on the porch. I went in to see her and saw Mrs. Wolfsheimer, Mr. Loeb and others."

Watched Parade When

Street Cars Stopped.

"To catch the next car I ran down to Glenn street. On the car I met my wife's cousin, Mr. Loeb. The car was blocked at the corner of Washington and Hunter streets. I walked up to Whitehall street and stood there possibly for fifteen minutes watching the Memorial Day parade."

"As I walked down Whitehall street I met Miss Rebecca Carson. This war probably 3:10 or 3:15 o'clock. I greeted her and walked on. I stopped at Jacobs' Pharmacy and walked on. I went from there to the factory."

"When I reached there I went upstairs and let the boys know I had returned. A minute later, I returned to my office and started to work on the financial sheet."

"In a few minutes the clock hall rang and Arthur White came into the office to borrow two dollars. It was while I was at work on the sheet at probably 4 o'clock that I went to the toilet."

"As I returned towards the office. I noticed Newt Lee coming toward me from the head of the stairs. I told him he could go on off but to be sure and be back at 6 o'clock. I could not let him know about the half holiday but that he was at liberty to enjoy himself as he saw fit, but that he must not fail to return at 6 o'clock."

"The first night that Newt Lee came to work at the factory, I took him over the building, and stressed the fact that he must go into the basement, especially the dust bin every half hour."

"I told him it would be part of his duties to watch the back door. He was to make a complete tour every half hour and punch the clock."

"Now, I will return to the work of the financial sheet. This sheet contains the cost of all the pencils made that week. There are no names but this sample case will show you."

Evidence Excluded

But Jury Sees It.

Frank unfolded a sample case.

Dorsey: "We object to this being used as evidence."

Judge Roan: "I sustain you."

Frank placed the sample case to one side.

"Well," he said, "you got a sufficient glance at those pencils to see there were a great many."

"In making up this sheet it was necessary to go through the list of all that were packed. Specials, of course, have to be figured separately."

"For inst
ance, there is a special 60-60-x pencil known as Crackerjack.' Now I notice that the two expert accountants reported two errors. While they were unimportant, I wish to explain that those errors were not mine. They were made by Mr. Schiff. I never checked his figures. I checked over mine, but not his."

"Now the next is jobs.' The accountant found the only error in my financial, sheet, there in the item job. It was not an error, as I will show you. He did not known my method of figuring."

"Two items here are totals. The total gross amount is 791 gross, the total value amount $396.75, in figuring the average I obtained $50.01. In that average he discovered an error. It was not an error. I simply did not go as far into the decimals as he did. One tenth of a cent was close enough for my purpose."

"Now some of the items in here are taken from the reports of the foremen of the different departments."

Frank then exhibited a report from the foreman or forewoman of each department and explained it.

"Then there is the report of Mr. Schiff, showing the gross of pencils shipped each day of that week that week was an exceptionally heavy one."

"Now there is a little report here that constitutes one of the more difficult calculations. It is from the packing room. We have a trick of the trade to put the pencils that do not bell very fast into fancy packages to make them go."

"Now, very often these pencils were taken from the shelf, where they have laid for more than a year and repacked in the fancy cases. I made all the calculations on this that afternoon, despite everything that has been said here to the contrary."

"Now here is a little sheet that deals with the grades of the pencils. It shows the totals for each class of pencils shipped that week. This data sheet we have had very few clerks at the Forsyth street office capable of keeping it, because it requires rather advanced mathematics to reach the totals."

"Now I will have to get all my thoughts on this sheet. It isn't a hard job but it is a very tedious one and requires much care and accuracy. Here is rubber cheap rubber and good rubber. Now it has been intimated that some of these items this one in particular, if I am not mistaken that I could take two that were already figured and subtract them from the total get the cost of the third."

"That is not so. Some of the pencils haven't any rubber in them at all, I have to go through the same tedious operation one ach item. There are various sorts of packing boxes used. Then there are the skeletons in the boxes. In the boxes. Some pencils don't have skeletons at all."

"All, these items must be gone through accurately to get correct results of this sheet. Then there is no section on this data sheet showing the cost of tips. You can't use rubbers without tips, so after figuring them, I just added them to the rubbers."

"Some pencils take wrappers and some don't. The very cheap pencils are tied with a cord, so we have the same tedious figuring again."

"The slat item is not worked out because I could not find the data. I just put it off until Monday."

"Here are the jobs the payroll at Forsyth street and the payroll at Bell street."

"Now the shipments were figured for the week. I did part of that work in the morning and I explained to you about the invoice being wrong. Well, here are the items on this financial street. Then, as to the orders received. Entering the orders received that day involved no more work than transferring."

Has Own Method of

Figuring Cost Data.

"Here they are in comparison to the amount shipped."

"One of the most intricate things in making out this financial sheet is figuring the cost data. This sheet I may say is a child of my own brain. The first one gotten out was gotten out by myself."

"This item here gives us the net value and the net amount of money the pencil factory received for its pencils. The burden that's business has to carry is its fixed charges rent, insurance, certain salaries, etc. this "charge" that are the same whether great or few pencils are made."

"This machine shop is available. We did make many machines at first, but later the machine shop was used solely for upkeep. The slats are figured at 22 a gross. That cost was simple multiplication."

"The figuring of that price is not done in making out the financial sheet Saturday afternoon. Mr. Montag and myself figure that in advance, making allowance for profit, breakage, etc."

"I have here on the report of April 26 Slats, not complete; that was because Schiff had not made out the slat report, and I planned to complete it Monday morning before taking it to Montag."

"Now, beside the making this large sheet here and the financial sheet there are three other sheets that I made out. Now, I want to call your attention to this. I did not typewrite it. I merely filled in the blanks. I have several of them typewritten and keep them in my desk."

"In addition to that I make out two condensed financial sheets, showing the principal figures. They are sufficient for a director or stockholder to see what the factory is doing."

Mailed Statements

To Stockholders.

"One of these statements I mailed to my uncle, Mr. M. Frank, who is president of the company, and the other to Oscar Papenheimer, who was a director."

"I put one in an envelope and addressed it to Mr. Oscar Papenheimer; the other I sent to my uncle along with a price list, and I wrote him this letter."

"This price list is too long for an ordinary envelope, hence the large envelope."

"After finishing the financial sheet, I folded the large sheet and addressed it to Mr. Selig Montag. I then took up the checking up of the cash and balancing of the cash book. I did that work as near as I remember, between 5:30 and 6 minutes to 6 o'clock. It did not take me an hour and a half. I did it in about 25 minutes. There $30.54. There couldn't have been any more. It was mostly in small change. There was one loan to Mr. White, making the total of cash $28.50."

"Beginning that week, we had $39.25 as a balance. We drew two checks of $15 each I mean by that that we went to Mr. Montag's office and had him draw the checks. The total amount of money we had to account for was 69.25. What it was spent for, of course, is shown on the debit side."

Frank explained each of those items, including drayage, parcel post, etc.

"I found at the end a shortage of $4.34 coming about in payrolls within the last three months." At this point Frank paused to take a drink of water having been talking for 2 hours and 30 minutes."

"I finished this work I have just outlined," he continued, "at 5 minutes to 6 o'clock I took those slips I won't show them to you stamped April 28. They were put into the clock because no one was coming into the office until Monday."

"Newt Lee's punches on Monday night, would appear on the Monday night. Just before I left I put a new tape in the clock and made Newt Lee punch it. Then he went on down stairs to wait and let me out."

"As I started out of the factory, I saw Newt Lee walking to a man named Gantt, who had been released about two weeks before. I gave them permission to go into the factory and get Gantt's shoes which he said were left there and I told Newt Lee to go with him."

"I reached home at about 6:25 o'clock and at 6:30, thinking Newt Lee would be near the clock. I called him over the phone to see if everything was all right. I could not get him. I called again at 7 o'clock and again at 7:30. At that time I got him and he told me everything was all right."

"That night my parents-in-law had company at the home. These present were Mr. and Mrs. Marcus, Mrs. Goldstein, Mrs. M. Marx, Mrs. A. B. Marx, Mr. Ike Strauss - who came in at about 10 o'clock. I read a magazine until about 10:30 and then retired."

Told Officer He

Did Not Know Girl.

At this juncture the jury retired for five minutes.

Frank conferred with his attorneys while the jury was out. Upon its return he resumed:

"I believe I have taken in every move Saturday night. I retired Saturday night. Sunday morning about 7 o'clock I was awakened by the telephone ringing and a man's voice which I afterwards found out to be detective Starnes said: "I want you to come down to the factory.' What is the trouble?' I asked. Has there been a fire?' No,' he said. A tragedy has occurred.' I said, All right,' and he said he would send an auto."

"They came before I finished dressing. At this point I differ with the detectives, Black and Starnes, about where conversation took place. They say it was after we were in the machine. I say it was before we left the house, before my wife. At any rate, here is what was said:

"They asked me if I knew Mary Phagan. I answered that I did not. They asked me if I did not pay off a little girl with long hair down her back the afternoon before. I said I did. They said they wanted me to go to the undertaking establishment to see if I could identify the body. They made the trip to the undertaking establishment very quickly. I went in and stood in the doorway. The attendant removed the sheet form the little girl's face and turned the head, toward me. His finger was right by the cut on the head. I noticed her nostrils were filled with dirt and cinders and there were several discolorations. I noticed a place of cord around her neck, the kind we used in the pencil factory. I said it looked like a little girl that came to the factory the day before. They had already told me it was Mary Phagan. We went to the factory and by examining the payroll, I found what Mary Phagan had drawn her pay the day before and that the amount was $1.20."

"As we went into the factory I noticed Mr. Darley going in. We went to the office and I found Newt Lee in the custody of the officers. They told me they wanted to go down into the basement. I got the elevator key, but when I tried to start the elevator machinery I found I could not and I told Mr. Darley to see if he could start it."

Admits Nervousness

And Defends Himself.

"He started the car, and when we got further down I found that one of the chairs had slipped. They showed me where the body was found, where the sheet was found and pointed out every thing that was at that time known. After looking about the basement we got some nails and a hammer and Mr. Darley nailed up the back door. Back upstairs Mr. Darley, Chief Lanford and myself went on a tour of inspection of the three upper floors. We went through the metal room, the same metal room that has figured so prominently in this trial, and neither Mr. Darley nor myself noticed anything particular on that floor. Nor did Sergeant Lanford, chief of the Atlanta detective force."

"We went to the time clock. I took out the slip and a casual gate of this slip would indicate nothing was on it. There was something on it. It had been partially rubbed out. It could not be rubbed out altogether without rubbing but the printed lines. I did write with a pencil across the face of it, 8:26 a. m.' We noticed a slip but overlooked any skips. I folded the time slip as it is new and handed it is Chief Lanford. Now, gentlemen, I have heard a great deal during this trial about nervousness."

"I was nervous. I was completely unstrung. Imagine yourself called from around slumber in the early hours in the morning, whisked through the chill morning air without breakfast, to go into that undertaking establishment and have the light suddenly flashed on a scene like that. To see that little girl on the dawn of womanhood so cruelly murdered it was a scene that would have melted stone. Is it any wonder I was nervous?"

"I got in an automobile and sat on Mr. Darley's knee. I was trembling, perhaps. Later Sunday morning, I went into the home of Mr. Sig Montag and told him what had occurred. I got home about 11 o'clock. My wife and I went over to my sister-in-law's Mrs. Ursenbach's, and with a number of friends we discussed the tragedy."

"We went back home to dinner and mentioned there the terrible crime. After dinner I read a short time and about 10 minutes to 8 o'clock caught a bar downtown."

"The conversation on the cat was about the little girl that had been found dead in the factory. At 3:10 o'clock. I went back to the undertaking establishment and found Joe Stelka there."

"On Monday I went to the police station with Darley and he said he would like to talk to Newt Lee alone. We were shown the two notes found by the side of the slain girl."

Frank then described the notes.

"Now, on one of the notes there was an erasure, but the tracing was still discernable. It was January 11, 1912. The order number was very indistinct, but it was evidently an old serial number."

"Returning to my home at 4:15 I met Mr. Haas and he asked me about the murder. Several people on the street also asked me."

"I remained at home until 5 o'clock, then I went to Mr. Montag's home and made a report of the tragedy to him. From there I went to the home of Mr. Marous where I had received a telephone message from my wife, and I went by there to get her."

"At supper that night the conversation was again about the murder. After supper I read the paper. After supper I read the paper, I called up Mr. Marcus and asked him if he would come down. He said he could not. "Mr. and Mrs. Selig had a party that night. About 10 o'clock, my wife and I went up to bed. Next morning before I had finished dressing, the door bell rang. It was Detectives Black and Hazelett. They said they wanted me to go to the police station with them."

Kept in Ignorance of

Charge Against Him.

"I went and the way I asked them what was the trouble. They said Chief Lanford would tell me."

"I arrived at the police station and sat in an outer office for probably an hour without seeing Chief Lanford. Near 9-o'clock Mr. Sel Montag and Mr. Herbert Haas came down. Near 10 o'clock I saw Mr. Rosser. He came in and said, Hello boys, what's the trouble.'"

"Mr. Haas took him off to one side. Chief Lanford came out and said to me Come in here.'"

"I went into his office. He handed me one time slips and if I am not mistaken this same time slip has the figures still un-erased: 8:26 a. m.'"

"I took the slip and examined it closely, discovering the slips. There seemed to be some altercation about Mr. Rosser getting into the room with me. I heard him say, I am going into that room. That man is my client.' Chief Beavers asked me if I would give him a statement.

"I heard Mr. Rosser say: "Why, it's preposterous. The man who did that would have signs on his body," I jumped up and, opening my clothes, let the detectives see for themselves.

"I then gave them a statement, willingly and freely and without any reluctance. Then one of them said something about examining my linen at my home. I knew that none of it had gone to the laundry at that time and invited the detectives to make a search, which they did. Mr. Herbert Schiff went with them. They were very well satisfied with the search, or rather, they found nothing."

Employed Pinkertons

To Aid the Police.

"That afternoon I telephoned Mr. Schiff to get Mr. Montag's permission to employ the Pinkertons to aid the position. I told him I would be down about 3 o'clock."

"I went around to Mr. Wolfsheimer's, get into his automobile and wasn't down town. I saw Mr. Schiff, Mr. Darley and a number of others including Mr. Quinn."

"Mr. Quinn said he wanted to take her back to the metal room where it was claimed bloodspots had been discovered and where the hair on the lathe was discovered by Mr. Barrett."

"I examined them closely, particularly the spots. I did not examine them standing up. I got down on my knees and examined them with a strong electric flash flight and I arrived at certain conclusions."

"That floor is grass, soap and dirt covered to a thickness varying from a quarter to half an inch."

"To return to that spot, I don't claim it was not blood. The space where these spots were adjoins the ladies dressing room. There have bee
n accidents which may not have been brought out in this trial. We do not report every time one of the employees cuts his finger."

"There are all sorts of paints around the factory. I have seen girls drop bottles in the hall, not exactly at that point, but near there. But the point about bloodspots is that when I examined them there waws over them an accumulation of dirt not of days or weeks, but of at least three months."

Phoned to Prevent

Alarm of Family.

"The white stuff was not fresh it was dry. And another thing if that compound had been put on the blood fresh, it would have been pink and not the white that it was."

"Now, when the Atlanta papers containing the statement that I was detained were published I telegraphed Mr. A. R. Montag to communicate with my uncle that I was no longer that I had been released. I did this because I knew they would be alarmed if they saw the sensational stories in the papers."

"Harry Scott of the Pinkertons came in and spoke to me in the presence of Mr. Darley. He said he had not read the newspapers. I told him all that had been published and in addition the statement that Mrs. White had seen a negro about 1 o'clock on the first floor."

"After I had told him all I know, I took him over the factory. On the second Floor, I noticed him put several articles in his pocket. One I noticed was a piece of cord such as I learned had been found around Mary Phagan's neck. I asked him as to the rates of the Pinkertons. He told me and I informed Mr. Montag, who approved them."

Gave Officers All

Information Wanted.

"Tuesday a. m. I arose between 7 and 7:30 and caught the 8::10 car. I remember I got to the factory at 8:30, I went right into my routine work and at 9:30 oclock went on my regular trip to Montag's. I then went back to the factory and to work again."

"After while Detectives Black and Scott came and told me they wanted me to go to the station house. I went and I have been incorporated since then."

"I went down in an automobile. They took me to Chief Lanford's office. I answered all the questions they asked. In a few minutes Detective Scott and Black came in wish a bundle."

"They me showed me a piece of materials and asked me if I had a shirt like that. I told them I never had. They showed it to Newt Lee and they said he admitted having a shirt like that but declared he had never worn it."

"They then unfolded a bloody shirt."

"About 10 o'clock Mr. Rosser came down and said Chief Beavers thought it best for me to remain at the station, and they thought I might employ a supernumerary to avoid being locked up. I accepted, because of course, I could not do anything else."

"They wanted ta sample of my handwriting, I told them I was willing. They dissected it word for word, spelling the individual words. Detectives Starnes took me down to the desk sergeant and searched me."

"The detectives came to me and said: Mr. Frank, we should like to talk to you a little bit. We went into a little room and they stressed she would of a couple being in the pencil factory at night. Then they sold: You talk to Leo. You are his boss. He will talk to you.'"

"The detectives told me to go after him strong and tell him we would both go to hell. Detective Black said that."

"I went in and talked to Leo. I tried to get him to talk. I said . You had better tell everything you knew or it will get us both into trouble. He struck to his statement that he had told the whole truth."

"Then the detectives came in and I was initiated to the Atlanta police department third degree for the first time. Detective Black was after that poor negro. He called him every vile name he could think of. He fairly screamed with profanity."

"I want to touch upon a few accusations that have been leveled against me, besides this crime. The first is that I would not talk to the detectives. Let us look into that and see if there is any truth in that. I went there Sunday, Monday and Tuesday and discussed the matter freely and openly. I gave them a written statement. I talked to them of midnight. I talked to Newt Lee at their instances. What did they do? They grilled him. They twisted my words. They but words into hiss mouth he never heard. After that I had washed my hands of them. They came to me again - Scott and Black. Black said: We are suspicious of that man Darley. Now, open up and tell us all you know about him.'"

"I said, He is the soul of honor.'"

"'Come on, Scott, nothing doing,' said Black."

"Then I knew I couldn't trust even our own Pinkerton detectives. After that I treated them with silence. That is why I would not see Conley surrounded by a bevy of city detectives. They would distort; they would falsify. That is the reason I kept my silence."

"Now this second charge that I knew Conley could write."

Tells of Showing

Conley Could Write.

"Let's look into that."

"On May I was taken to the Tower. On the same date, as I understand it, the negro Conley was arrested. I didn't know anybody had any suspicions about him. His name was not in the papers. He was an unknown quantity. The police were not looking out for him; they were looking out for me. They didn't want him, and I had no inkling that he ever said he couldn't write."

"I was sitting in that cell in the Fulton County Jail it was along about April 12, April 13 or April 14 that Mr. Leo Gottheimer, a salesman for the National Pencil Company, came running over, shy(?) says: Leo, the Pinkerton detectives have suspicions of Conley. He keeps saying he can't write, these fellows over at the factory know well enough that he can write, can't he?"

"I said: Sure he can write.'"

"We can't prove it. The nigger says he can't write and we feel that he can write.'"

"I said, I know he can write. I have received many notes from him asking me to loan him money. I have received too many notes from him not to know that he can not write. In other words, I have received notes signed with his names purporting to have been written by him, though I have never seen him to this date use a pencil.'"

"I thought a while and then I said: Now, I tell you. If you will look into a drawer in the safe you will find the card of a jeweler from whom Conley bought a watch on the installment plan. Now, perhaps if you go to the jeweler you may find some sort of a receipt that Conley had to stay and be able to prove that Conley can write.'"

Pinkertons Found

Conley's Contacts.

"Well, Gottheimer took that information back to the Pinkertons. They did just as I said they got the contract with Conley's name on it, got back evidently to Scott and then he told the negro to write. Gentlemen, the man who found out or paved the way to find out that Jim Conley could write is sitting right here in this chair. That is the truth about it."

"Then that other insinuation, an insinuation that is dastardly that it is beyond the appreciation of a human being, that is, that my wife didn't visit me; now the truth of the matter is this, that on April 29, the date I was taken in custody at police headquarters, my wife was there to see me, she was downstairs on the first floor; I was up on the top floor. She was there almost in hysterics, having been brought there by her two brothers-in-law, and her father."

"Rabbi Marx was with me at the time. I consulted with him as to the advisability of allowing my dear wife to come up to the top floor to see me in those surroundings with city detectives, reporters and snapshotters; I thought I would save her that humiliation and that harsh sight, because I expected any day to be turned loose and be returned once more to her side at home."

"Gentlemen, we did all we could do to restrain her in the first days when I was down at the jail from coming on alone down to the jail, but she was perfectly willing to even be locked up with me and share my incarceration."

Says He Knows

Nothing of Crime.

"Gentlemen, I know nothing whatever of the death of little Mary Phagan. I had no part in caus
ing her death nor do I know how she came to her death after she took her money and left my office. I never even saw Conley in the factory or anywhere else on that date, April 26, 1913."

"The statement of the witness Dalton is utterly false as far as coming to my office and being introduced to me by the woman Daisy Hopkins is concerned. If Dalton was ever in the factory building with any woman, I didn't know it. I never saw Dalton in my life to know him until this crime."

"In reply to the statement of Miss Irene Jackson, she is wholly mistaken in supposing that I ever went to a ladies' dressing room for the purpose of making improper gaze into the girls' room. I have no recollection of occasions of which she speaks but I do not know that that ladies' dressing room on the fourth floor is a mere room in which the girls change their outer clothing."

"There was no bath or toilet in that room, and it had windows opening onto the street. There was no lock on the door, and I know I never went into that room at any hour when the girls were dressing. These girls were supposed to be at their work at 7 o'clock. Occasionally I have had reports that the girls were flirting from this dressing room through the windows with men."

"It is also true that sometimes the girls would loiter in this room when they ought to have been doing their work. It is possible that on some occasions I looked into this room to see if the girls were doing their duty and were not using this room as a place for loitering and for flirting."

Says Negro's Story

Is Tissue of Lies.

"These girls were not supposed to be dressing in that room after 7 o'clock and I know that I never looked into that room at any hour when I had any reason to suppose that there were girls dressing therein."

"The statement of the negro Conley is a tissue of lies from first to last. I know nothing whatever of the cause of the death of Mary Phagan and Conley's statement as to his coming up and helping me dispose of the body, or that I had anything to do with her or to do with him that day is a monstrous lie."

"The story as to women coming into the factory with me for immoral purposes is a base lie and the few occasions that he claims to have seen me in indecent positions with women is a lie so vile that I have no language with which to fitly denounce it."

"I have no rich relatives in Brooklyn, N. Y. My father is an invalid. My father and mother together are people of very limited means, who have barely enough upon which to live. My father is not able to work. I have no relative who has any means at all, except Mr. M. Frank who lives in Atlanta, Ga. Nobody has raised a fund to pay the fees of my attorneys. These fees have been paid by the sacrifice in part of the small property which my parents possess."

"Gentlemen, some newspaper men have called me "the silent man in

the tower," and I kept my silence and my counsel advisedly, until the proper time and place. The time is now; the place is here; and I have told you the truth, the whole truth."

"Frank bowed slightly to the twelve men to whom he had addressed, this remarkable statement and then stepped down from the stand. Court adjourned work 9 o'clock Tuesday morning."

PAGE 5

ATTACKS FRANK'S TIME ALIBI

WITNESS SAYS HE SAW

MARY PHAGAN ABOUT

NOON OF TRAGIC DAY

Here are the important developments Tuesday in the trial of Leo M. Frank, charged with the murder of Mary Phagan:

Judge Roan rules out all testimony bearing on particular acts of immorality which the State has been endeavoring to prove against the defendant.

Will Turner, former pencil factory employee, testifies he entered the metal room shortly before noon one day near the middle of March and saw Frank seeking to engage Mary Phagan in conversation. He says he cannot recall any other person he (Turner) knew in the factory.

Solicitor Dorsey devotes larges part of forenoon in an endeavor to bolster the character of C. B. Dalton, a State's witness, and tear down that of Miss Daisy Hopkins, who was called by the defense.

George Gordon, called by the Solicitor, swears that the sensational affidavit of Minola McKnight, negro cook at the Selig home, was signed in his absence and that Solicitor Dorsey refused to order her release, saying he "would get in bad with the detectives" if he did.

Roy Crave and E. H. Pickett, hardware store employees, testified Minola McKnight, cook in the Selig home, made the affidavit revealing incriminating remarks and actions of Frank without reserve.

Miss Nellie Wood says she does not know Frank's general character after the Judge has barred sensational questions which the Solicitor proposed to put. The Solicitor says the witness "entrapped" him.

M. E. McCoy, a painter, created a stir in the courtroom Tuesday afternoon by testifying that he saw Mary Phagan on Forsyth street at about three or four minutes after 12 0'clock on the Saturday she has killed.

Attorney Rosser made McCoy admit that he had not told of this circumstance until about a week and a half ago, although the time element had been a vital factor for several months and the city had been scoured for person who saw the girl on the fatal day.

Leo Frank's mother and his wife left the courtroom Tuesday afternoon as Solicitor Dorsey was outlining to the court what he proposed to prove by Miss Nellie Wood, the witness on the stand.

The Solicitor made a determined effort to get into the record and before the jury testimony against Frank's character, but, as was the case at the morning session, he was overruled.

"We wish to show by witness, your honor," said Dorsey, the general character of this defendant, as to get before the jury a specific instance in which this young woman, who worked two days on the fourth floor of the National Pencil Factory, figured."

When Judge Roan overruled this line of questioning, the Solicitor declared he had another witness to testify to an occasion when he saw Frank with a woman in the factory. The judge said the law plainly barred the questions.

Miss Wood was asked if she knew Frank's general character. She replied that she did not. Dorsey claimed he had been trapped, as his talk with the witness was exactly to the contrary.

Charges Sideboard Was Moved.

Attorney Frank A. Hooper made the charge Tuesday afternoon that the mirror in the dining room at the Selig home had been moved for the express purpose of discrediting the testimony of Albert McKnight, who swore that he was in the Selig home the afternoon of April 26 and saw Frank hurriedly enter the dining room, go to the sideboard and then leave the house without stopping to eat.

McKnight was on the stand at the time, having been recalled to testify as to the place he was sitting when he saw Frank through the mirror. He designated the place and then corroborated Hooper's charge by his declaration that the mirror had been moved around several feet.

Boy Craven, one of the Beck & Gregg Hardware employees, who assisted the police in obtaining the sensational affidavit from Minola McKnight, negro cook at the Selig home, declared on the stand in the Frank trial Tuesday afternoon that the McKnight woman made her statements against Frank of her own accord and without reserve, once she had been persuaded it was best to tell what the State says is the whole truth.

Craven said the McKnight woman told him that she had heard conversations at the Selig home Sunday morning follow the murder of Mary Phagan, indicating that Frank had rested poorly and had come home intoxicated, making his wife sleep on the floor. He had asked his wife for a revolver to shoot himself, the McKnight woman said, according to crave. Frank also was

PAGE 6

LEO FRANK SKETCHED AS HE TOLD HIS OWN STORY TO JURY

During the greater part of his story Frank was as Calm and statistical as an accountant discussing an audit. In telling of his dealings with the police and Chief of Detectives Lanford, Frank waxed sarcastic in a quiet yet bitter way. But he never
let loose his emotion or lost his poise. At times Frank would lose his air of complete repression and his face for a moment would take on an aspect of deep feeling. He would, how-ever, quickly resume his normal expression of stoicism.

NEGRO M'KNIGHT SAYS

SIDEBOARD WAS MOVED

Continued from Page 1.

reported to have remarked that he "didn't know why he would murder."

E. H. Pickett, a fellow employee of Craven's, corroborated the latter's story and added that the McKnight woman had admitted getting more money after the murder than she had before.

Both Pickett and Craven were sharply questioned by Attorney Rosser, who sought to show that Minola signed the statement to obtain her freedom from jail.

Dr. S. C. Benedict, president of the State Board of Health, was called at the opening of the afternoon to show that charges of scientific dishonesty against Dr. H. F Harris, secretary of the board, never were found to be well founded. Dr. W. F. Westmoreland asserted on the stand that Dr. Harris had been found guilty of the charges.

By far the most damaging testimony brought out against Frank was that of Will Turner, who testified that he had entered the metal room and come upon Frank socking to press his attentions upon the Phagan girl only a few weeks before the crime.

When Turney was put under the raking fire of Luther Rosser's cross-examination, the weight of his testimony suffered considerably. The youth, who admitted he had worked at the factory only a brief time, was unable to describe Mary Phagan and was unable to tell the name of any other girl in the entire factory.

"I went into the rear room on the second floor one day with some pencils." Said Turner. "It was about the middle of March. Frank was walking from his office toward the rear of the factory. Mary Phagan was coming toward her machine. He told her to wait a minute, that he wanted to talk to her. She said she had to go to work."

"He said: I'm superintendent of the pencil factory and I want to talk to you.' She repeated that she had to go to work and he followed her as she backed away from him. A couple of girls came into the room and I asked them where to put the pencils and then I left. I didn't see any more."

On cross-examination young Turner admitted he did not know whether there were other girls around at the time or not. He did not know the names of the two girl, he said, who entered the room while Frank was trying to talk to Mary Phagan. The extent of his description of Mary Phagan was that she had light hair. The questions of the admissibility of this evidence caused a long wrangle between the attorneys.

Rosser and Arnold objected on the ground that it was not at all material, proving absolutely nothing. They denied Dorsey's contention that it established that Frank had known Mary Phagan, in spite of his declarations that he did not know her. The lawyers said that it did not show that he knew her by the name or that he was conversing with her on any other subject than her work.

"We contend that Mary Phagan was killed right on that second floor." Retorted the Solicitor. "We contend that Mary Phagan and Frank were the only persons in the metal department at the time that this incident took place, and that she was backing away and protesting that she had to go back to work. We contend that it was the beginning of the transaction which ended in the little girl's death. It should go in as contradicting Frank's statement that he did not know her."

Turner was allowed to tell his story.

That Solicitor Dorsey refused to take any step toward the liberation of Minola McKnight, cook at the Selig home, who was imprisoned until she made her sensational affidavit against Frank, on the ground that it would "get him in bad with the detectives," was the unexpected and highly interesting statement made by Attorney George Gordon late in the forenoon session.

Gordon was called by the State, but proved as good a witness for the defense. He declared that the affidavit made by the cook was signal in his absence, although the last paragraph stated that it was signed in his presence.

He said that he had told Solicitor Dorsey that the negro woman was being held illegally, but that Solicitor had replied that it was necessary sometimes to do things of this sort in order to get the information wanted. He told of going to the police station and finding Minola crying and hysterical in her cell.

The attorney for the colored woman said that he had not been permitted to enter the room where his clients was being interrogated by the detectives and Ray Pickett and Arthur Craven, the latter two being employees of the Beck & Gregg Hardware Company. He was present, he said, when part of the notes were being read by G. C. Febuary, but was not there when the affidavit was signed.

The McKnight affidavit told of alleged conversations at the Selig home of a nature very incriminating to Frank. The McKnight woman denied all the statements in the affidavit to a Georgian reporter the night that she was liberated.

A blow was the State by the refusal of Judge Roan to admit either while the defense was completing. Its case or after the State had taken up the rebuttal, any evidence not directly and at first hand hearing upon the specific acts charged against the factory superintendent.

The ruling was sweeping victory for the defense. It gave Frank's case, which had been aided materially the day before by the defendant's own statement, an added strength and heightened the prospects in Frank's favor.

Solicitor Dorsey tried first to cross-question Daisy Hopkins, one of the defense's witnesses, as to conversations she was supposed to have had in regard to incidents at the pencil factory in which she and a man undesignated except as her "foreman" were involved. Frank's name was not mentioned in the indicated charges. The conversation was about a "foreman."

The Hopkins woman denied again that she ever had made visits to the factory for improper purposes or that she had had the conversations referred to by the Solicitor.

Dorsey encountered the same stone wall when he tried to draw testimony against the moral character of Frank his own witnesses. From W. P. Merck and J. P. Floyd the Solicitor had expected to obtain a recital of the stories of happenings which they said had been related to them.

Merck, however, had mysteriously disappeared from the courthouse when his name was called, and Floyd was not permitted to go into the details of the testimony the Solicitor had hoped to bring out.

The Solicitor thereafter confined his efforts to bolstering up the character of C. B. Dalton, the State's witness who testified to seeing women in Frank's office, and attacking that of Diasy Hopkins. He called a number of witnesses, one them cousin of Hopkins woman, who swore that her character for truth and veracity was had and that they wouldn't believe her on oath.

Swear Dalton's

Character Is Good.

Other witnesses testified that Dalton's character was good. They were asked by Attorney Rosser if they were acquainted with his court and chain-gang record. They replied, for the most part, that they were not.

The brown suit worn by Frank April 26 was identified by Mrs. Emil Selig, his mother-in-law, at the opening of court in the forenoon and the suit was placed in evidence.

The defense prepared to show oy Wiley Roberts, inside jailer at the Tower, that Jim Conley had been reading since his incarceration there, but the Solicitor objected on the ground that no basis had been laid for the testimony.

Daisy Hopkins then was called and questioned after which the State began its rebuttal, the defense having closed its case.

While waiting for a witness Solicitor Dorsey arose and made the unexpected announcement that he himself had erased the identification. "Taken out at 8:26" on the time slip taken from the clock in the factory. Frank had made the charge he had written words as an identification of the slip and that they had been erased. The Solicitor declare
d that he thought the detectives had made the identification.

"Frank did not know who made the erasure," said Attorney Reuben Arnold.

The Solicitor had announced earlier that his first witnesses in rebuttal would be called to support C. B. Dalton and impeach Daisy Hopkins who declared she had never visited the factory with Dalton or that he had ever introduced Dalton to the factory superintendent.

When Roberts was asked:

Q: Has Jim Conley been in your custody during the trial? A. Yes.

Q. Has he ever asked for newspapers? A. Yes.

Dorsey interrupted.

"Your honor," he said, "I think the witness. Jim Conley, ought to have the privilege of denying or affirming that before he can be impeached."

"Conley said that he could only read certain words," said Arnold, "but probably Mr. Dorsey is right. I will have to call Jim Conley back again. Mr. Rosser will be back in a minute and we will close."

Daisey Hopkins Is

Recalled by Dorsey.

The witness was excused and Dorsey made the announcement that four doctors of the following five would be called by the prosecution:

Drs. G. C. Mizell, F. L. Eskridge, Clarence Johnson, John Funke, S. E. Benedict of Athens, and J. C. Cramer of Macon, the latter two president and vice president of the State Board of Health.

Solicitor Dorsey asked that Daisy Hopkins be returned to the stand so that he might continue his cross-examination of her.

The witness took the stand.

Q. You say you knew nothing of the cot in the basement of the National Pencil Factory? A. No.

Q. Do you know anything at all of the basement? A. No.

Q. Are you acquainted with A. R. Floyd, of Redan, Ga.? A. Yes.

Q. Have you known him for a long time? A. Yes.

Q. Haven't you been to his house to get milk? A. I don't think I have since the murder.

Q. Didn't you go to the home of Floyd to get milk and tell him about that cot in the basement of that National Pencil Factory? A. No.

Q. Do you know Bob Goddard? A. Yes.

Q. Do you know Mr. Smith, superintendent of the Nunnally-McRae Company? A. On Mitchell street?

Q. Yes. A. yes, I know him.

Q. Do you know Walter P. Merck? A. Where does he live?

Met Merck on

Peach tree Street.

Q. You met him first at Stone Mountain, then you met him on Walker street? A. I met him at Redan. They used to live down there.

Q. You said something about being married. Have you two living husbands? A. No; only one.

Q. Have you seen him since the murder? A. Yes; at Redan.

Q. Do you remember meeting Walter P. Merck one Saturday afternoon on Whitehall street? A. I met him on Peachtree.

Q. Didn't you tell him that afternoon that you were going to the National Pencil Factory? A. No; I told him. I had just left the factory.

Q. Didn't he make an arrangement with you to go to the factory? A. No

Rosser objected, declaring that a female witness could not be attacked in that way.

"Your honor," said Dorsey, "I want to show by Merck that this woman did make an engagement with him that afternoon."

"I understand," replied Rosser, "that when an argument of this kind is to be made the jury is to retire."

"It would be better to have the ladies retire also," said Dorsey, "I don't want to embarrass them."

Jury and Women

Retire From Room.

The jury retired, and after a hurried conference, Frank's wife and mother also left the courtroom at the request of Attorney Arnold.

"This is their witness," said Dorsey. "We want to show that this man Merc had her Saturday afternoon, and she said she was going to the National Pencil Factory. It was cold weather. We want to show that he saw her that night and what she told him."

The witness interrupted:

"It was summer time," she said partly.

"She has denied," said Dorsey, "in the impeachment of Dalton that she ever went to the pencil factory for any improper purpose."

"We object," said Rosser.

"I want to show that she told Merck about meeting her foreman at the factory," said Dorsey.

Then the Solicitor repeated a conversation involving the "foreman," which is unprintable, which he wanted to get before the jury.

"He does not mean to charge Frank is the foreman," said Arnold. "He is frank enough to state that."

"Merck in an affidavit, " said Dorsey, "said foreman. He didn't say Mrs. Hopkins said her superintendent or that she named any names. I mean to let the jury draw its own conclusions."

"I knew when your honor refused to rule out the charges of Conley and Dalton," said Arnold, taking up the argument, "that you were opening the doors for new issues that would obscure the charge of murder. I knew it would lead to a situation in impeachment bringing us to the point where woe would hardly know who we were trying. This woman never would have been put up as an original witness except for the aspersions cast on her by Conley and Dalton. Look how far afield we have wandered. Now, he wants to impeach this witness on something with which the defendant has no connection."

"You can rebut any of their direct testimony," said Judge Roan. "You can not bring any new criminal charge against the defendant. If it is against someone else, it is irrelevant."

"Your honour," said Dorsey, "I want to ask a question to let the jury hear that you rule it out."

"No; we object," said Rosser "That's just why the jury was sent out."

"I'll let you assume that you ask it," said the court to Dorsey.

"Why, your honour," replied Dorsey, "it puts us in the position of not even trying to prove what we have indicated we would."

"I can not permit the question," said Judge Roan.

"Very well," said Dorsey, adding, in an undertone, "That shuts me off; that shuts me off."

Dorsey continued the examination:

Q. Didn't you meet Merc during the afternoon after working hours and tell him you were going to the pencil factory? A. No.

Q. Didn't he come to see you that night? A. No.

Q. Didn't you tell him that you had been to the factory that afternoon? A. No.

Men Say Woman's

Character Is Bad.

Miss Hopkins was excused, and J. R. Floyd of Redan, Ga., was called. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. Do you know Daisy Hopkins? A. Yes.

Q. Do you know how many husbands she has?

Rosser: "I object, your honor. I don't care if she has three hundred husbands."

The objection was sustained.

Q. Would you believe her under oath? A. I would not.

Q. Did you ever hear her say anything about a cot in the basement of the pencil factory? A. I would not.

Q. Would you believe her under oath? A. I would not.

Q. Did you ever hear her say anything about a cot in the basement of the pencil factory? A. Yes.

The witness was excused. Bob Goddard, brother of C. M. Goddard, who was shot to death a few months ago by Elmer F. Darden, was the next witness called in rebuttal. Goddard resides near Redan. Dorsey questioned him.

Goddard testified to the bad character of Daisy Hopkins, and declared he would not believe her under oath.

Henry Carr, of Stone Mountain; N. J. Ballard, a second cousin of Daisy Hopkins, and J. L. Rice all followed each other in rapid succession and testified that they would not believe the Hopkins girl under oath.

Dorsey then addressed the court.

"Your honor," he said, "we want to offer indictments against Daisy Hopkins and also a bond forfeiture."

Rosser: "Your honor, they objected to the introduction of an indictment against Dalton and they objected rightly. An indictment is nothing against one's character."

Dorsey: "Dalton denied any knowledge of an indictment. This is a bond forfeiture."

Judge Roan: "I rule it out."

Dalton's Recent Past

Good, Says J. T. Hearn.

Glenn Smith, superintendent of the Nunnally-McRae Company testified that Daisy Hopkins' character was bad and that he would not believe her on oath.

J. T. Hearn, of Walton County, said he had known C. B. Dalton since 1890. Dorsey questioned him.< /p>

Q. Is his character good or bad? A. The first part of his life was bad. The last part has been good.

Q. Would you believe him on oath? A. Yes.

Rosser took the witness on cross-examination.

Q. When was the last time you knew Dalton? A. 1903 or 1904.

Q. Did you hear about him being indicted for selling whisky in 1906?

A. Yes, but he had joined the church about 1904 and I understood was leading a good life.

Dorsey took the witness.

Q. Do you know the instance of his being indicted for stealing years ago? A. Yes.

Rosser: "We object. He can't go into that."

Judge Roan sustained the objection.

Dorsey: "When they go into specific acts, can't I?"

Judge Roan: "No."

R. V. Johnston, another Walton County citizen was called. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. When were you approached in regard to testifying to the character of C. B. Dalton?

Rosser interposed with an objection, but was overruled.

A. Last Friday, a week ago.

Q. Who approached you? A. Harry Gottheimer.

Rosser again objected, and was sustained.

Q. Are you acquainted with the character of C. B. Dalton? A. Yes.

Q. Would you believe him on oath? A. I would.

Rosser took the witness.

Q. You never heard that he was indicted for stealing and selling whiskey-A. No.

The witness was excused, and W. M. Cook, of Social Circle, Ga., a dairyman and farmer, testified as to Dalton's good character, and declared that he would believe him on oath.

W. J. Elder, of Decatur, followed Cook on the stand, and said that Dalton came to Decatur about five years ago and worked for him as carpenter. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. Are you acquainted with Dalton's general character? A. I don't know as I am.

Q. That means what people say about him? A. Yes.

Q. Is his character good or bad? A. Good.

Rosser took the witness.

Q. Why did you say just now that you didn't know? A. I didn't know as I did.

Q. You said you didn't know because you didn't know yourself? A. Yes.

The witness were excused, and A. B. Houston, of Decatur a farmer, who has lived there (?)1 years, was called. The witness said that he had known Dalton for eight years and that his character was good and that he would believe him under oath.

J. T. Borne, who formerly lived at Ingleside, in DeKalb County, and who now operates a cigar and soda fountain at Decatur, said he knew Dalton and would believe him on oath.

W. M. Wright, of Atlanta, general manager of the Independent Transfer Company, testified in behalf of Dalton's good character and declared that he would believe him on oath.

W. C. Hale, of No. 88 Kirkwood avenue, Atlanta, formerly of Walton County, testified to Dalton's good character and said he would believe him under oath.

L. L. Boyce, a city policeman, formerly of Walton County, testified that nineteen or twenty years age Dalton's character was bad, but that now I was better and that he had heard nothing bad about him recently.

M. Gordon Coldwell, of Atlanta: J. W. Hust, of No. 18 Trinity avenue, and W. P. Patrick of Atlanta, a member of the police force, testified to Dalton's good character and said that they would believe him under oath.

J. E. Dudley, a former employee of the pencil company, was called to the stand. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. Were you working at the National Pencil Factory about October 1912? A. I don't remember.

Q. Do you remember a machine named Charley Lee? A. Yes, he was working there.

Q. Were you hurt there? A. Yes.

Q. Where? A. Yes, he was working there.

Q. Were you hurt there? A. Yes.

Q. Where? A. On the second floor, the office floor.

Q. Just where were you hurt? A. On a metal machine. I hurt the forefinger of my left hand.

Mashed Finger Butt

Kept Blood Off Floor.

Q. How were you hurt? A. This fellow Lee had put the metal on the machine. It dropped off. I picked it up and in putting it back I mashed my finger.

Q. What did you do then? A. There was some cotton waste there, which I put around my hand.

Q. Did any blood drop on the floor? A. A few drops.

Q. Did any blood droop near the ladies dressing room? A. None.

Q. How long after this accident did you work? A. I quit then.

Q. What does this fellow Lee do besides working at this trade? A. I don't know.

Q. What did you do then? A. I went to the office to get it dressed, then went to the Atlanta Hospital.

Rosser took the witness on cross-examination.

Q. How badly were you hurt? A. Not very bad.

Q. You bled pretty freely? A. Yes, but I had my hand in the cotton waste. &. You didn't notice whether any blood was on the floor or not? A. Yes; none of it dropped except at the machine where I was working.

Dorsey took the witness.

Q. Was your finger outside of the cotton waste until you got to the

office? A. No.

The witness was excused, and the witness Merck was called, but failed to answer. Willie Turner, of Sandy Springs, the 16-year-old son of E. M.

PAGE 8

FACTORY BOY SWEARS HE SAW FRANK ACCOST MARY PHAGAN

Dorsey Feared He'd Get in Bad' with Detectives, State Witness Says

INDIRECT TESTIMONY

AGAINST PRISONER IS

FORBIDDEN BY JUDGE

Continued from Page 2.

Turner, a farmer, was called to the stand. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. About March, of this year, where did you work? A. At the pencil

factory.

Q. Do you know this man? (pointing to Frank) A. Yes.

Q. Did you know Mary Phagan? A. When I saw her.

Q. Did you ever see Mr. Frank talking to Mary Phagan? A. Yes; on the second floor.

Q. What time was it and how long before the murder? A. About the middle of March.

Q. Where was it? A. In the back part of the building.

Q. What time of day was it? A. Just before dinner.

Q. Who was in the room besides them? A. No one else. Two girls came down after I did.

Q. What was said? A. I heard her say she had to go to work.

Q. What did he say? A. He said he was the superintendent of the factory "

Rosser: "We object and we want to argue this without the jury."

The jury was sent out.

Dorsey Let the witness tell what it is.

Turner Mr. Frank told the girl he was superintendent of the factory and wanted to talk to her. She told him she had to go back to work. Mr. Frank then went off.

Mary Backed

Away From Frank.

Q. How was she acting? A. She backed off from and he walked toward her.

Q. How far did she back? A. Three or four feet. That was all I heard. Mr. Frank turned away.

Judge Roan You can go into this to this extent. You can show whether he knew Mary Phagan.

Rosser This other has nothing to do with it.

Hooper If my brother will just keep still a little bit, we may be able to proceed further. This has another value. It shows familiarity or a desire for familiarity.

Rosser If your honor is with us, I don't want to argue.

Judge Roan The question is whether it can be shown just how this conversation took place.

Rosser That is not the purpose of this evidence

Hooper Your honor

Judge Roan Sit down, Mr. Hooper. The question is whether this will show whether he knew her well enough to know her name.

Rosser This evidence doesn't show that.

Dorsey Your honor, this witness says this meeting occurred in the same place and near the same spot where we have contended the murder occurred. It is the basis for further evidence.

Arnold That last statement let the cat out of the bag. They want to bring out another charge. This whole case has been beclouded with every charge that could be imagined. We have gotten away from the charge of murder and have been made to answer every conceivable charge.

Hooper I object to that, first because it is not true and second because it is not the point at issue.

There was smothered applause.

"There is another disturbance of some sort," shouted Arnold.

Judge Roan rapped for order and directed that
the jury be brought in. He addressed Solicitor Dorsey.

"You may put your question and let him tell what he knows," said Judge Roan.

Q. What did you see? Tell it in your own way, telling everything that you saw. A. They were back in the rear of the building near the entrance. She was coming to her work just before dinner. Mr. Frank met her and said: I want to speak to you.' She said: I have got to go to work.' He said: "I am the superintendent of the pencil factory and I want to speak to you.' She backed off and he walked toward her.

Q. Is this all? A. Yes.

Rosser took the witness on cross-examination.

Q. What time was it? A. Just before dinner.

Q. How was it she was just going to work? A. She was returning to her work at the machine. It was just before the whistle blew.

Q. Lemmie Quinn's office was there, wasn't it? A. Yes.

Q. There were ten or twelve women there in the polishing department? A. I don't know.

Q. Well, what about those two girls in there? A. They came back and told me where to put the pencils.

Q. Do you know who they were? A. No.

Motorman Hits

Daisy Hopkins' Character.

Q. They came back at the time this thing was going on? A. Yes.

Q. What kind of a looking girl was Mary Phagan? A. She had light hair.

Q. What else? A. I can't describe her.

Q. Do you really know her? A. Yes.

Q. How? A. Some boy who worked on the fourth floor pointed her out to me one morning when she came to work.

Q. Do you know any one else at the factory? A. No.

The witness was excused and Walter T. Merck was called.

Dorsey questioned him.

Q. What is your business? A. A street car motorman.

Q. Do you know Daisy Hopkins? A. Yes.

Q. Did you ever meet her on Saturday afternoons at the corner of Whitehall and Alabama streets? A. Yes.

Q. What did she say? A. I asked her where she was going and she said she was going to the pencil factory.

Q. Did you see her any more? A. Yes. I made an engagement to go to her room.

Q. Did you see her? A. Yes, about 8:30 o'clock in a room upstairs at the corner of Walker and Peters streets.

Q. Did she say where she had been? A. To the National Pencil Factory.

Q. Do you know her character? A. yes.

Q. Is it good or bad? A. Bad.

Rosser took the witness on cross-examination.

Q. Does the company know your character? It's a beauty according to your own admission, isn't it?

Dorsey interposed with an objection and was sustained.

Rosser: "Come down, come down, come down."

McKnight Woman's

Lawyer Called.

The witness was excused, and George Gordon, who said he practiced law for thirteen years, was called to the stand. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. Were you present at the police station when Minola McKnight was brought there? A. Yes; or, rather, I was on the outside a part of the time. I went there in connection with getting a habeas corpus proceedings for her release. The detectives told me I could not go in just then. I decided to make a demand to see her, and it was granted. I went in and Stenographer Febuary read a statement to her from his notes, then went out to write it. Detectives Starnes, Campbell and Lanford, Chief Beavers and two men from Beck & Greggs' were there when the stenographer went out. I said that I didn't think that she ought to be held. They told me they could do nothing unless I got your (Dorsey's) permission. So I went to see you, and you told me that you not let the woman go, because it would put you in bad with the detectives.

Q. Didn't I say that I had no right to hold her? A. No: you said you would not release her without a habeas corpus.

Q. Why did you not wait until she signed that paper? A. I went up to see you.

Q. Did you hear her say anything about the statement? Read over the notes and then answer the question.

A. That is the substance of the notes that Febuary read over to her.

Q. What did she say? Did she deny or admit them? A. She said she believed that was about right.

Dorsey Feared He'd

"Get in Bad."

Q. I told you I didn't have anything to do with locking her up, and that it would be meddling for me to order her release. A. You said you would not interfere because you would get in bad with the detectives. That is what my recollection is, Mr. Dorsey.

Rosser took the witness.

Q. You knew that she had been to Mr. Dorsey's office and had been taken away screaming? A. Yes, I heard that.

Q. That Mr. Dorsey, and officer of the peace, let the police take that woman away screaming?

Dorsey interrupted. "You say you know that?" he asked the witness.

Rosser: "Wait until I get through."

Then he continued his question.

Q. Did you ever find out what charges they had against her? A. I had a habeas corpus to get her release, but could not get to her.

Q. They just held her because she would not give a statement to the police that Mr. Dorsey wanted?

Dorsey interposed an objection.

Rosser I submit to this jury that the evidence in this case proves it is true.

Dorsey I submit it is not true. I don't care what you argue to this jury.

Rosser And you didn't care what you did to that poor negro woman.

Dorsey I didn't do anything to that negro woman.

Judge Sustains

Dorsey's Objection.

Judge Road sustained Dorsey's objection. Rosser asked Dorsey for the affidavit that Minola made in Dorsey's office. He asked the witness if he had ever seen it before, and the witness answered, "No."

Q. Who was guilty of false imprisonment was it Starnes or Beavers? A. Beavers said he knew about it, but that he could not let her out unless Dorsey ordered it.

Q. Did he have a warrant? A. No.

Q. Then they let her out the next day? A. yes.

Q. Did you see her? A. I saw her that first evening. She was in a cell and crying hysterically I asked Chief Beavers to let her out in the corridor and I guess he did.

Dorsey took the witness again.

Q. Didn't I tell you that I had absolutely no rights in the matter? A. Something like that, but if you will pardon me, Hugh, I will tell you exactly what was done. I went to you when the police told me they could not let the woman go without an order from you. You told me you had not had the woman arrested and was not having her held.

Q. Now, didn't Febuary read over to you a portion of that affidavit? A. Yes, he read something.

Q. Now, didn't he read a part of the statement, and she added to it the part about the money? A. She said something about money.

Q. Now, what else did she say? A. I don't recall.

Q. Didn't you question her yourself? A. I asked one or two little questions.

Q. What about? A. She said something about a bucket of water that was not very plain, and I questioned her about it.

Rosser took the witness again.

Q. You don't know what happened behind those doors? A. No.

At this point court adjourned until 2 o'clock.

President of State

Board of Health Testifies.

When the afternoon session started Solicitor Dorsey announced that on account of some of the State's witnesses being out of the city he would vary his program. He could Dr. S. E. Benedict, of Athens, president of the State Board of Health, and a member of the faculty of the University of Georgia for 32 years, to the stand.

On the first question asked him, Attorney Arnold made strenuous objection and precipitated a long argument. The question was:

"Were you present at the meeting of the State Board of Health when Dr. Westmoreland preferred charges against Dr. Harris?"

"We object to going into that," said Mr. Arnold. "We would have to get the minutes of the board and all of that."

"I am not going into the matter further than to disprove Dr. Westmoreland's statement," said Mr. Dorsey, "that the State board found Dr. Harris guilty of scientific dishonest."

"You can go into the question of the feeling of the witness," said Judge Roan.

"Suppose," said Rosser, sar
castically, "Mary had a little lamb, it's fleece was white as snow, would that have anything to do with this case?"

"I am not going into it further than to disprove Dr. Westmoreland's statement," insisted Dorsey.

"Well, I am going into it," said Arnold, "if you don't. I am going to ask him about a letter he wrote Dr. Westmoreland."

"Go ahead, Mr. Dorsey," said Judge Roan.

Q. Were you present when Dr. Westmoreland preferred charges against Dr. Harris? A. Yes.

Q. Were those charges substantiated?

Arnold Your honor, the minutes are the best evidence.

Dorsey All right: take the minutes.

The minute book of the State Board of Health was handed the witness.

Q. Look at page 128 and tell me if that is a correct report of that meeting? A. Yes.

Q. Now, doctor, I want to know whether those charges were found to be true.

Arnold The minutes are the best evidence.

Judge Roan Are those charges on the minutes?

A. I don't see them.

Q. Well, what was the vote? A. I think it was unanimous.

Arnold Doctor, where are the charges? A. I suppose they are in the possession of the secretary, somewhere in his office.

Arnold Dr. Harris, then, has the charges preferred against him? And while the defense is on the minutes, charges are not? A. You misunderstood me. Neither the charges nor the defense are on the minutes. Only the action of the board.

Judge Roan Didn't Dr. Westmoreland in his testimony say that he preferred charges of scientific dishonesty against Dr. Harris and because the board would not dismiss Dr. Harris that he resigned?

Rosser Says Record

Speaks for Itself.

Arnold: "No; Dr. Westmoreland's version was that the board found him guilty but refused to dismiss him, and he (Dr. Westmoreland) resigned."

Dr. Benedict: "That is not true."

Rosser: "Never mind; the record speaks for itself."

Dorsey: "I will ask you if you are familiar with the business and professional life of Dr. Harris?"

"We object," said Rosser, and the objection was sustained.

"Dorsey: "Doctor, what is the condition of the board now?"

Rosser objected again, and was sustained.

Attorney Arnold took the witness.

Q. Doctor, I want to ask you about a letter you wrote Dr. Westmoreland.

Dorsey: "We object to that. It is irrelevant."

Arnold: "I haven't the letter here, but will have it long before the doctor's train leaves."

Judge Roan: "I will wait until I see the letter."

Dorsey offered part of the minutes of the State Board of Health as documentary evidence.

Arnold: "I don't think any of this should go in on the ground that is irrelevant, immaterial and incompetent."

Judge Roan: "I will let it in for what it is worth."

The defense asked that their objection be recorded.

Dorsey: "I would like to know if the letter of the fourth to the Governor on the subject was admissible."

Rosser: "it is as admissible as any of the other minutes, but we object to it all."

Judge Roan: "I will rule the letter out."

Recalls Examination

Of Minola McKnight.

Roy Craven, salesman at the Beck & Gregg Hardware Company, was called. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. Did you know Minola McKnight? A. Yes.

Q. When did you see her last? A. At the police station.

Q. How did you come to be there? A. Her husband worked at the same place I do and asked me if I would not go down to the police station and try to get her out.

Q. Were you there when this statement was signed? A. Yes.

Q. Why did you go there? A. Yes.

Q. Who was with you? A. Pickett and her husband.

Q. Why did you go there?

Q. Why did you go there?

Rosser interposed an objection and was sustained.

Q. Did you go either at the request of the Police Department or myself? A. No.

Q. Now, give me the best recollection of the time, if you can?

Rosser objected, but was overruled.

Q. Give me the day? A. It was the middle part of May.

Q. Now, tell what this woman, Minola McKnight, said when she made that affidavit at the police station? A. Well, she would not like at first, but we told her what Albert had said.

Q. What was it that Albert had said?

The witness gave the substance of the Minola McKnight affidavit.

Q. Then what did Minola say? A. She was somewhat reluctant to talk at first, but when we told her what Albert had said she gave us the affidavit without stopping.

Rosser took the witness on cross-examination.

Q. Didn't you know that she was in jail because she would not give the sort of a statement they wanted? A. I did not.

Rosser Objects to

Servant's Affidavit.

Q. Why did you think they had her in jail?

Dorsey: "We object to what he thinks. Stick to the statements."

Q. Did you go to Mr. Dorsey's office before you heard Minola make her statements? A. Yes.

Q. Why did you go there? A. To try to get her out.

Q. It wasn't any trouble to get her out after she made a good statement was it? A. I wasn't there when she got out.

Q. Why didn't you stay there? A. I didn't want to.

Q. You got a statement agreeing with what her husband had told you then you left her in jail? A. I went on out and left her with her husband.

Q. Didn't you try to get Mr. Dorsey to get her out? A. I went to see what I could do.

Q. What did he say? A. He said he would do what he could. He said for me to go to see Mr. Starnes or Mr. Campbell.

Q. Did you go? A. Yes.

Q. How long did you stay? A. About three hours.

Q. Did you ask them to let her out? A. No.

Q. You don't know what happened before you got there, do you? A. No, I am not a mind reader.

Dorsey: "Now I want to tender this affidavit of Minola McKnight is evidence."

Rosser: "All in the world that affidavit can show is the treatment that poor woman received at the hands of the police. It is inadmissible."

Crowd Roars When

Sheriff Sits on Floor

Dorsey: "Every word of it is admissible, because it is a flat and positive repudiation of Minola's sworn statements on the stand."

Judge Roan: "Let me read it. I will rule on it later."

The witness was excused, and E. H. Pickett, also an employee of Beck & Greggs Hardware Company, was called to the stand. Dorsey questioned him. He was given the Minola McKnight affidavit to read. Sheriff Mangum, in an attempt to stop talk in the courtroom, met with a little accident that rent a ripple of merriment throughout the room. While Pickett was reading the affidavit, the Sheriff arose from his seat beside the witness stand.

"You people over to the right are talking too much, and if you don't stop I will have to put you out," he said. When he turned to resume his seat he missed the chair and sat down upon the floor with a red expression on his face. The crowd in the courtroom fairly roared.

Pickett read the affidavit, the Dorsey questioned him.

Q. You were present when that paper was signed, were you not? A. Yes; that is immediately before Minola signed it.

Q. Who else was there? A. Minola's lawyer, Roy Craven, one or two detectives and myself.

Q. What statement was made before she signed it? A. Albert McKnight said she had made certain statements. She then admitted it a little bit at a time.

Q. What did she say first? A. That she had been cautioned not to talk.

Q. Then what? A. She admitted she got a little more money.

Q. Did she say everything shown in this affidavit? A. Not the first part. She didn't make those statements in my presence.

Didn't Appear Willing

To Talk Then.

Q. Was she willing to talk? A. No. She said she would talk to me, but she would not talk to the detectives. Before the detectives left she said her husband was a liar.

Q. Did the detectives leave? A. Yes.

Q. Then you questioned her? A. Yes

Q. Then you questioned her? A. Yes, but we, Craven and myself, could not write shorthand, and sent for the stenographer.

Q. Who was there when she made
the statement about Mrs. Frank making certain remarks to her mother? A. Starnes, Campbell, her lawyer, the stenographer, Lanford, Craven and myself.

Q. Well, tell the jury what she said.

Rosser: "The affidavit is the best evidence."

Dorsey: "But you are objecting to the affidavit."

Judge Roan: "I am going to let in that affidavit with the exception of the part that could not be put in regularly. For instance, that part where she quotes the conversation she overheard."

Dorsey: "May I or not, without considering the affidavit, ask him all relevant point of Minola McKnight's statement?"

Judge Roan: "You can take the affidavit and ask him about all about relevant points."

Dorsey: Mr. Pickett what did the woman say about Frank eating dinner? A. First she said he ate dinner. Finally she said he did not.

Q. What did she say first about her husband, Albert, being there? A. At first she said he was not there, finally she said he was.

Q: What did she say about being told to keep her mouth shut?

Rosser: "Unless he wants to show that Frank told her that, it is irrelevant."

Counsel in

Another Wrangle.

Dorsey: "It is relevant to impeach the negro."

Roan: "It is relevant, I think."

Rosser: "You could not impeach Mr. Selig on such a statement. Certainly it is inadmissible to impeach Minola McKnight."

Rosser dictated his objections to the court stenographer.

Dorsey: "Answer the question, Mr. Pickett."

A. At first she denied it, then she said Mrs. Selig told her to keep quiet.

Rosser continued to object.

Hooper: "This witness can be put on the stand and impeach half a dozen witnesses."

Roan: "You understand it must be relevant to some issue in this case."

Hooper continued to argue that the question should be admitted.

Judge Roan: "If you insist. I will let it in."

Q. What did Minola say with reference to what was said to her about talking? A. She said she was cautioned not to talk.

Q. What did she say at last about receiving a higher or lower wage? A. She said her wages were increased after the crime.

Q. What did she say first about that hat? A. She only made one reference to it.

Q. Did anybody suggest anything about the hat, before anyone asked her about it? A. Yes.

Q. Now who was in there before you went to the door and called the detectives? A. Alfred McKnight, Craven and myself.

Offered to Free Her

If She Made Statement.

Rosser took the witness on cross-examination.

Q. Now why didn't you believe her first statement? A. Because we thought different.

Q. You kept her there two or three hours didn't you? A. Yes.

Q. Did you give her the third degree? A. We didn't call it that.

Q. Did you see Dorsey? A. Yes; we saw him before we went to the police station for us to see her, and that we might arrange to get her out.

Q. Did you tell Minola that you had come down to get her out? A. We did tell her we wanted to get her out if we got a statement.

Q. Well, why didn't you get her out? A. She left the station house before we did.

Q. After she gave that statement they let her out? A. Yes.

Q. Do you know she left there before you did? A. Yes.

Q. Do you know she left there before you did? A. No, but the detectives said she had.

Q. You didn't know she had been there twelve hours when you got there? Yes.

Q. You know she was there because she would not give the statement the detectives wanted, didn't you? A. No.

Q. You know she was there because she would not give the statement the detectives wanted, didn't you? A. No.

Q. You went there to make her give the statement the detectives wanted, didn't you? A. Not that. I thought it was my duty as a good citizen to aid in getting at the truth.

Rosser (very angrily and with contempt in his voice) Let him come down; let him come down.

Negro McKnight

Called to Stand.

The witness was excused, and Albert McKnight, husband of Minola McKnight, was called to the stand. Hooper questioned him, and had the negro step down from the witness chair and stand before the jury while he displayed a blueprint of the Selig home and a diagram of the dining room and the sideboard mirror, through which Albert said he observed Frank during lunch at the Selig home on Saturday, April 26.

Q. Where were you sitting in the kietchen on that day?

Rosser I object: you went over all this on the direct examination.

Hooper We had no diagram then, that was brought in by the defense.

Judge Roan The witness may explain the diagram.

Hooper I want to show by this witness that the sideboard has been moved so as to change the angle of vision.

Q. How is the location of the sideboard to what it was when you saw it? A. It has been pushed around.

The witness pointed out the change to the jury on the diagram.

Rosser took the witness.

Q. How do you know this has been changed? Were you there when it was changed? A. No, sir, but I can tell by looking at the diagram.

Girl Called to

Stand by Dorsey.

Miss Nellie Wood, a former employee of the National Pencil Factory, was called to the stand by Solicitor Dorsey. Attorney Rosser, anticipating the character of her testimony, announced that he would like a definite ruling at once regarding the introduction of certain character evidence. The jury retired.

Frank's wife and mother left the courtroom by request. Dorsey addressed the court. "We want to show by this witness actual specific misconduct on the part of this defendant. We want to show that Frank made an indecent proposal to this lady. It shows his conduct and his character; and I submit that it is material."

Rosser: "your honor, they have no right in the world to put that testimony in. We have never put any evidence in that would allow the introduction of this testimony in rebuttal. We insist that you rule definitely. All the evidence we have put in to show Frank's conduct was (in rebuts) to the statements of Conley."

Judge Roan: "Mr. Dorsey, tell me how you can get around the statutes that you cannot ask specific instances on one's character except on cross-examination."

Dorsey: "What about the questions of Mr. Arnold to the woman who worked on the fourth floor or the National Pencil Factory?"

Judge Roan: "To my mind it is not debatable."

Dorsey: "Then we are shut out."

Judge Roan: "The law shuts you out. On the principle you advance you could put a man on trial at this time for everything he ever did his life."

Dorsey: "I don't want to send jury out any more. I have witnesses to prove other things. Can I prove

Continued on Page 5, Column 1.

PAGE 9

WITNESS GIVE

DALTON GOOD

REPUTATION

Continued From Page 4.

that a girl saw Frank with another woman in the dark?"

Dorsey: "Can I show his conduct slapping girls as he passed through the factory?"

Judge Roan You can show a bad character by this woman or any other: but you can't show a specific act.

The jury was recalled.

Dorsey Says

Witness Mislead Him.

Dorsey questioned the witness.

Q. Do you know the character of Leo M. Frank? A. No, I only knew him two days.

Q. I mean what people said about him; say yes or no.

Rosser She has answered the question; that should end it.

Judge Roan Do you know his character: answer yes or no A. No.

Dorsey addressed the court.

"Your honor. I have been misled by this witness."

Rosser I don't care anything about that.

Judge Roan She hasn't sold anything to hurt you, and you can not proceed as though you were entrapped.

Dorsey Miss Wood, do you remember a conversation with me (Rosser interrupted.)

Rosser Now that is absolutely inadmissible.

Judge Roan I sustain you.

Dorsey Come down.

J. H. Kendricks, a street car motorman, followed Miss Wood on the stand. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. Were you running a street car on April 26? A. Yes.

Q. Do
you know a man named Matthews? A. No.

Q. What route were you on April 26? A. Marietta street to the stock yards.

Q. Is that a portion of the English avenue and Copper street line? A. Yes.

Declares Cars Run

Ahead of Time Often.

Q. What time did you get to town that day about noon? A. I can not remember exactly, but I never get there any later than 12:06.

Q. Did the English avenue car with Matthews and Hollis running it ever get to that corner ahead of time? A. It certainly did.

Q. Do you know what time they got relieved for dinner at Marietta and Broad streets? A. At 12:07.

Q. About April 26, and prior to that time, did Matthews and Hollis ever get to that corner ahead of time, and if so how much? A. Two to three minutes.

Q. When Hollis would be at the corner of Broad and Marietta, and your car was on time, what would Hollis do about going to dinner? A. He would go on my car.

The witness was excused and J. C. McEwen, another motorman was called. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. Did you run on the Cooper street line prior to April 26? A. Yes.

Q. Do you recall what time the Cooper street car would arrive at Broad and Marietta streets with reference to your car? A. My car got there at 12:10.

Q. What time would the car Matthews and Hollis were on get there, if the car was on time? A. 12:07.

Q. What time does the White City car get there? A. At 12:05.

Q. Did the English avenue or Cooper ever cut off the White City care and come in ahead of it? A. Very often.

Q. Do you know the car that Matthews and Hollis run? A. I know their schedule.

Q. Has their car ever cut off the White City car? A. Their schedule has. I don't know who was on it.

Q. Have you ever come in ahead of time? A. Yes.

Q. Frequently? A. Yes; when coming in on a relief trip.

Q. How much was the most you ever came in ahead of time?

Rosser objected and was sustained.

The witness was excused and J. C. McEwen, another motorman was called. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. Did you run on the Cooper street line prior to April 26? A. Yes.

Q. Do you recall that time the Cooper street car would arrive at Broad and Marietta streets with reference to your car? A. My car got there at 12:10

Q. What time would the car Matthews and Hollis were on get there, if the car was on time? A. 12:07.

Q. What time does the White City car get there? A. At 12:05.

Q. Did the English avenue or Cooper ever cut off the White City care and come in ahead of it? A. Very often.

Q. Do you know the car that Matthews and Hollis run? A. I know their schedule.

Q. Has their car ever cut off the White City car? A. Their schedule has. I don't know who was on it.

Q. How much is the most you ever knew the English avenue line car to come in ahead of time A. Three or four minutes.

Rosser took the witness.

Q. When was that? A. I don't remember the exact date.

Q. You don't know whether Matthews and Hollis were on schedule on April 26 or not, do you? A. No.

Witness Says He Saw

Girl at About 12 O'Clock.

Q. Isn't it as feasible for the White City car to be blocked by the English avenue car because the White City car is late as because the English avenue car is ahead of time? A. Yes.

The witness was excused.

M. E. McCoy, a painter and farmer of Bolton, Ga., was called. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. Did you know Mary Phagan? A. Yes.

A. Yea; I saw her in front of No. 12 Forsyth street going toward Alabama street.

Q. Did you see her on April 26? A. Yes.

Q. What time was it? A. About 12 o'clock.

Q. How near 12 o'clock? A. Well, I left Walton and Forsyth streets at 12 o'clock.

Q. How long afterward was this? A. Three or four minutes.

Rosser took the witness on cross-examination.

Q. How long afterward was this? A. Three or four minutes.

Rosser took the witness on cross examination.

Q. When was the first time you told this? A. I think it was a week ago, last Saturday.

Q. Was that the first time you ever told it? A. It was the final time I ever told an officer. I don't know about anybody else.

Q. You didn't know everything was being done to find out about her?

A. Well, I didn't know it was very important and I didn't want to get mixed up in it. Then I saw the statement of the motorman that she got off the car at Broad and Hunter streets and I knew that was wrong.

Q. You saw by George Epps' statement too, didn't you? A. I don't remember about that.

Q. How do you know it was 12 o'clock? A. I looked at my watch.

Q. Where were you yesterday at 12 o'clock? A. At Buckhead.

Q. Did you look at your watch? A. Yes.

The witness was excused and Cleo Henley, a street car motorman, was called. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. Did you know Mary Phagan?

A. Yes.

Q. Did you see her on April 26?

A. yes.

Q. What time was it? A. About 12 o'clock.

Q. Which way was she going? A. Going south on Forsyth street. She had just stepped off the viaduct.

Rosser took the witness on cross-examination.

Q. What time did you get off that day? A. At 11:40 O'clock.

Q. What had you done between that time and noon? A. I went down to Hastings' seed store on Mitchell street and then caught a car back.

Q. What time did the car get back? A. Its schedule is 12 o'clock.

Q. Who else did you see that you knew that day? A. I saw lots of people.

Q. Name one? A. I can't say. When I saw in the papers about this girl I remembered seeing her.

Dorsey took the witness.

Q. You are not mistaken about seeing Mary Phagan? A. No.

Rosser took the witness.

Q. Haven't you been vilifying this defendant on the street cars until you have made yourself a nuisance?

Dorsey objected and Judge Roan overruled him.

A. No.

Q. Didn't you tell Mr. Brent that you knew Frank was guilty? A. No.

Q. When did you tell this first? A. About the day after.

Q. Who did you tell? A. Lots of people.

Q. Name one? A. Mr. Means, for one.

Q. Why didn't you go down and tell the Coroner's jury about this? A. No one asked me to.

Q. You are a good citizen? Why did you keep this secret locked up in your bosom? A. did not.

Q. Didn't you tell Mr. Brent that Frank's children told your children?

A. No.

Q. Didn't you, in the presence of Mrs. Haas on the College Park car, vilify Frank? A. No.

Q. Haven't you just been blowing and making yourself a nuisance on the cars? And didn't you say that if he was released, you would join a party to lynch him? A. No; let me explain.

Q. No: answer my question A. No.

Dorsey Is it right, your honor, to ask this man that question without first putting the witnesses on the stand?

Judge Roan He is your witness he is only trying to show interest.

Rosser-Answer my question, then A. No.

Q. When did you first tell the detectives about all of this? A. About a week ago, when the detectives came to me.

Q. Now, when did you tell that fellow Means about it? A. It was right after the first day.

Q. What did you tell me right at the first? A. That it was about 12 o'clock.

Q. You didn't look at your watch, did you? A. No.

Q. Well, it might have been 12:10?

A. No, it was very near 12 o'clock.

Q. Starting from Lindsay street at 10 minutes to 12, what is the earliest time she could have got to town?

A. 12:50.

Q. Will you swear it was as early 12:05 o'clock that you saw her? A. Yes.

Q. Give me the number of your car. A. 1465.

The witness was excused and Dr. Clarence Johnson, a specialist on the stomach and intestines, was called.

Dorsey questioned him.

Q. Doctor, what is pathology? A. A pathologist is one who makes a special research or diseased conditions.

Q. What are the subjects? A. The dead or fluids supposed to be dead.

Q. What is a physiologist?

Rosser: "We must object to all of this. We think we know grammar, yet you might entrap
us. I may know what a participle is, but I couldn't swear it to save my life."

"There isn't a branch of business, profession or trade in the world that hasn't got cranks or fools in it," added Rosser.

Hits Evidence

Of Dr. Hancock.

Judge Roan: "It is a matter for the jury."

A. A physician of the actions of the human body and health.

Q. What position have you ever held with local colleges? A. I was once professor of physiology and pathology. Now I hold the chair of stomach and intestine diseases.

Q. Who succeeded you? A. Dr. Harris as head of the department of pathology.

Q. When did Dr. Bachman come in? A. Several years ago.

Dorsey showed the witness specimens of the cabbage taken from the stomach of Mary Phagan: also specimens taken from the stomachs of other persons.

Q. If you gave a person cabbage three or four hours after they had drank a chocolate milk and if the cabbage was taken out of the stomach 40 minutes later and showed chocolate coloring, was it a normal stomach? A. That quantity of stuff taken from a stomach 20 minutes after eating would show an abnormal stomach.

This was a sample that had been exhibited by Dr. Hancock, a witness for the defense. The witness also said that another of Dr. Hancock's specimens of tomato was taken from an abnormal stomach. To a hypothetical question from Solicitor Dorsey as to the time a specimen of cabbage was in Mary Phagan's stomach before death, Attorney Arnold objected.

Arnold if this is allowed, we will bring back all our experts.

Dorsey That is not so terrifying to us. It is now almost 8 o'clock. This is very important to the State. Will the court allow me to cite some authorities tomorrow?

Judge Roan I will.

Court then adjourned until 9 o'clock Wednesday morning.

PAGE 7

FRANK'S STATEMENT IS

BEST PLEA PRESENTED

IN HIS DEFENSE SO FAR

By JAMES B. NEVIN

So far, unquestionably, to my way of thinking Leo Frank himself has made the best and most appealing plea in behalf of Leo Frank. His statement in the recital thereof was as clean cut, as dignified, as dispassionate and as convincing as any statement I ever heard from the witness stand, and I have heard hundreds.

Regardless of its merits or, at least, aside from that the defendant acquitted himself with credit, and that much may be said of him ungrudgingly and in the frankest fairness to all parties concerned.

Of course, had Frank been nervous, hesitating, "fidgety," or seemingly in any wise disconcerted, there would be those, perhaps, who would have seen in that great evidence of hi guilty and aby the same token, in that he was calm, poised, self-possessed, even smiling at intervals, there will be those who see in that evidence of a monstrous coldness and unfeeling design.

The vast majority of those who heard that remarkable statement, however, must have been impressed by, at least, the apparent sincerity of it and the seeming inclination in the defendant to hold back nothing.

In its recital the statement of Leo Frank was wonderful in its written form, stripped of the man's personality, it still is a human document of intense and absorbing interest.

It impressed me, too, as being a many ways characteristic of Frank as I have come to know him of late and I never spoke one word to him in all my life.

I have come to know him as the prisoner sitting over there between the two women in the courtroom the alight, spectacled party, a seat or two beyond Luther Rosser and Reuben Arnold.

I have come to know him, in my way of knowing persons charged with grave crimes, not by the way of personal touch so much as by constant observation of him under fire.

Repression Makes the Story.

All that was dramatic in Frank's statement was repressed the dramatic touch was there, to be sure, but the red fire and the usual accompanying stage tricks were not.

If Frank should undertake to sell me a gross of pencils, I should expect him to tell me the truth about the pencils, and nothing but the truth but I should expect him nevertheless to sell me the pencils at a profit.

His statement of Monday seemed to me a recital much after the fashion I should expect from him in the pencil transaction.

To me, it seemed that Frank was undertaking to tell the truth and but I should expect him nevertheless to sell me the pencils at a profit.

His statement of Monday seemed to me a recital much after the fashion I should expect from him in the pencil transaction.

To me, it seemed that Frank was undertaking to tell the truth nothing but the truth of the Mary Phagan murder, as he knows the truth and to tell it at a profit to himself.

That is the best and the worst that I can say of Leo Frank's statement, as it appealed to me.

True, in a transaction involving a mere gross of pencils, there would be lacking all the great elements that entered into the statement Frank made on Monday and yet, at that, neither subject matter is, in its final analysis, anything more or less than something about which the simple truth should be told.

Frank looked the jury fairly and squarely in the eye when he was making his statement and not once did he hesitate or falter in stating his plea.

Contrast the statement of the defendant with the statement of the negro the star witness summoned against him.

Frank's Day in Court.

Now, Monday was Frank's day in court, and it is square and right that Frank's showing should be criticized freely and frankly it is right that his statement should be praised, if it seemed to deserve praise, just as it should be condemned, if it seemed to merit that melancholy fate.

Contrast it, therefore, with the statement of Conley!

Argue the matter with yourself.

Certainly, Frank has behind him a long period of decent life, good reputation, business integrity, and home happiness and Conley has, what?

Take the two stories and upon these two stories the verdict in the Frank case must turn eventually and weigh them, side by side, honestly, without prejudice, and in the light of a clean conscience.

What is your answer?

What will be the jury's answer?

The field of speculation thus opened is most engaging, and it will, if one but undertake to enter it seriously and with open mind, be well worth the entering.

In the matter of his character, Frank said little. He entered simple denials to some few things cited against him.

In the matter of his character, Frank said little. He entered simple denials to some few things cited against him.

He was willing to be cross-examined on his statement. He himself insisted that his general character be put in issue. He furnished the State with the first information it ever had that Conley could write.

All the way through, his statement rang with confident challenge, and a dare to the State to prove anything vile in him whatever!

Now, then, people will differ as to the EFFECT Frank's statement will and ought to have on the jury.

Maybe it is a clever evasion of grave issue maybe it is possible of rebuttal, and maybe it will be broken down.

Impressively Delivered.

The fact remains that it was most impressively delivered, and carried with it every emphasis of apparent truth and straight forwardness!

It is my opinion now that State has in Frank's statement the hardest thing to get away from that yet has been tendered to it.

It contradicts the State at points that the defense has been able to fortify abundantly with facts.

It makes more necessary than ever before the complete success of the State's efforts to break down Frank's good name.

For I think it safe to predict that unless the State DOES demolish Frank utterly, the wonderful statement he made on Monday more than likely will serve in connection with the other things set up to clear him of the charge of murdering Mary Phagan!

It matters not, so far as this article is concerned, moreover, whether the statement ought to clear him the prospect is that i
t WILL clear him unless the State can batter it down and collapse it entirely!

The defendant touched upon every phase of this State's case against him the happiness of his home, his nervousness on the morning of the murder, his movements on the day of the crime, and the day before, and the day after, his family's financial resources, his disinclination to talk to Conley, although he at first talked freely to the police officers, his alleged peeping into the girl's dressing room, his lack of knowledge of or acquaintance with the impeached Dalton, his non-association with loose characters, male and female.

Is there a gap that Frank MIGHT let down that he has FAILED to let down?

Is there a point involved that Frank has not invited investigation of?

Hard to Find Gaps.

It is rather hard to locate any such gaps or points, if they are there.

And yet they may be there! That is for the State yet to demonstrate!

The State has the full right of rebuttal, as applied to Frank's statement, that it enjoys in respect of other evidence. There may be weak points in his story just as there are weak points in Conley's.

The point is that they are not nearly so apparent upon the surface of things in the Frank statement.

For one thing, Conley made four sworn statements, all contradictory, before he got one finally landed, and Conley admitted freely from the stand that he had lied time and again.

On the other hand, Frank's statement is the first and only sustained and sequenced utterance as to the details of his story yet falling from his lips.

It must stand in its entirely or fail in its entirety.

Whatever may be the effect of that statement in the end, it will go down in the criminal history of Georgia as on the most remarkably clear and apparently convincing statements ever falling from a defendant's lips.

When the State gets through with it, the statement may be shot to pieces and rendered utterly ineffective.

As it stands today, however, I hardly think a dozen people who heard it will deny the profound impression it made, and the present probability of its determining effect upon the minds of the jury.

The defense has played its best card in Leo Frank's statement.

It remains yet to be seen, however, whether that card is sufficient to win the case!

Mother of Leo Frank

Mrs.

Rae

Frank.

Wife at Last Breaks Down,

Overcome by Frank's Story

After having braved every trying courtroom ordeal and faced every horrible charge hurried at her husband with a stoicism almost as unflinching and imperturbable as his, Mrs. Leo Frank gave away completely to her emotions and sobbed unrestrainedly as Frank said the last words of his wonderful and most impressive address to the jury Monday.

It was the final dramatic touch to a situation that had held a courtroom full of spectators in an irresistible thrall through four long hours of the afternoon.

The spell that had been cast over the room by the quiet but earnest words of the slight young factory superintendent was broken by the tones of the deputies, who shouted the moment Frank rose to leave the witness chair!

"Keep your seats, gentlemen, while the jury passes out."

Frank Rushes to Wife.

In the confusion that followed some did not notice that Frank rushed right to the side of his wife who had thrown her head in her arms and was shaking with pitiful sobs as she moaned his name again and again.

The woman who had steeled herself against the accusations and innuendoes of the Solicitor General during the three long weeks of the trial collapsed when her husband himself took the stand to declare his innocence.

Many who had rushed into the enclosure to give their congratulations to Frank caused as they observed the piteous figure.

The jurors, already deeply impressed by the talk of Frank, were freshly touched by this exhibition of emotion. They had arisen to file over to the Kimball House. Juror Johening, at the head of the line, stood for several minutes with tears running down his cheeks, oblivious of the fact that he was blocking the rest of the jurors and that three deputies were waiting to take them on their way.

Deputy Sheriff Plennie Minor leaned against the railing of the enclosure. There was a suspicious moisture in his eyes, which have grown accustomed to many tragic and affecting spectacles.

Troublesome Lump Rises.

Very few in the courtroom had much to say until they had managed to subdue that troublesome lump that persisted in rising in their throats.

"Rube, that boy put it all over you and me," muttered massive Luther Rosser, huskily, to Reuben Arnold, his partner in the case.

For many minutes after the packed courtroom had emptied itself a little group of persons remained in front of the judge's bench. Mrs. Frank, the wife of the man accused of the revolting murder, and the elder Mrs. Frank, his mother, were weeping hysterically, overcome by the appeal that had been made. Relatives surrounded them. Frank talked comfortingly to them for several minutes, and then, feeling in danger of breaking down himself signaled Sheriff Mangum and returned to his cell in the Tower.

PAGE 10

NEGRESS' DENIAL OF

AFFIDAVIT, DAMAGING

TO THE ACCUSED, HIT

Here are the important developments Tuesday in the trial of Leo M. Frank, charged with the murder of Mary Phagan:

Judge Roan rules out all testimony bearing on particular acts of immorality which the State has been endeavoring to prove against the defendant.

Will Turner, former pencil factory employee, testifies he entered the metal room shortly before noon one day near the middle of March and saw Frank seeking to engage Mary Phagan in conversation. He says he cannot recall any other person he (Turner) knew in the factory.

Solicitor Dorsey devotes larges part of forenoon in an endeavor to bolster the character of C. B. Dalton, a State's witness, and tear down that of Miss Daisy Hopkins, who was called by the defense.

George Gordon, called by the Solicitor, swears that the sensational affidavit of Minola McKnight, negro cook at the Selig home, was signed in his absence and that Solicitor Dorsey refused to order her release, saying he "would get in bad with the detectives" if he did.

Roy Crave and E. H. Pickett, hardware store employees, testified Minola McKnight, cook in the Selig home, made the affidavit revealing incriminating remarks and actions of Frank without reserve.

Miss Nellie Wood says she does not know Frank's general character after the Judge has barred sensational questions which the Solicitor proposed to put. The Solicitor says the witness "entrapped" him.

M. E. McCoy, a painter, created a stir in the courtroom Tuesday afternoon by testifying that he saw Mary Phagan on Forsyth street at about three or four minutes after 12 0'clock on the Saturday she has killed.

Attorney Rosser made McCoy admit that he had not told of this circumstance until about a week and a half ago, although the time element had been a vital factor for several months and the city had been scoured for person who saw the girl on the fatal day.

Leo Frank's mother and his wife left the courtroom Tuesday afternoon as Solicitor Dorsey was outlining to the court what he proposed to prove by Miss Nellie Wood, the witness on the stand.

The Solicitor made a determined effort to get into the record and before the jury testimony against Frank's character, but, as was the case at the morning session, he was overruled.

"We wish to show by witness, your honor," said Dorsey, the general character of this defendant, as to get before the jury a specific instance in which this young woman, who worked two days on the fourth floor of the National Pencil Factory, figured."

When Judge Roan overruled this line of questioning, the Solicitor declared he had another witness to testify to an occasion when he saw Frank with a woman in the factory. The judge said the law plainly barred the questions.

Miss Wood was aske
d if she knew Frank's general character. She replied that she did not. Dorsey claimed he had been trapped, as his talk with the witness was exactly to the contrary.

Charges Sideboard Was Moved.

Attorney Frank A. Hooper made the charge Tuesday afternoon that the mirror in the dining room at the Selig home had been moved for the express purpose of discrediting the testimony of Albert McKnight, who swore that he was in the Selig home the afternoon of April 26 and saw Frank hurriedly enter the dining room, go to the sideboard and then leave the house without stopping to eat.

McKnight was on the stand at the time, having been recalled to testify as to the place he was sitting when he saw Frank through the mirror. He designated the place and then corroborated Hooper's charge by his declaration that the mirror had been moved around several feet.

Boy Craven, one of the Beck & Gregg Hardware employees, who assisted the police in obtaining the sensational affidavit from Minola McKnight, negro cook at the Selig home, declared on the stand in the Frank trial Tuesday afternoon that the McKnight woman made her statements against Frank of her own accord and without reserve, once she had been persuaded it was best to tell what the State says is the whole truth.

Craven said the McKnight woman told him that she had heard conversations at the Selig home Sunday morning follow the murder of Mary Phagan, indicating that Frank had rested poorly and had come home intoxicated, making his wife sleep on the floor. He had asked his wife for a revolver to shoot himself, the McKnight woman said, according to crave. Frank also was reported to have remarked that he "didn't know why he would murder."

Health Board President Testifies.

E. H. Pickett, a fellow employee of Craven's, corroborated the latter's story and added that the McKnight woman had admitted getting more money after the murder than she had before.

Both Pickett and Craven were sharply questioned by Attor-

Continued on Page 2, Column 1.

PAGE 11

LEO FRANK SKETCHED AS HE TOLD HIS OWN STORY TO JURY

During the greater part of his story Frank was as Calm and statistical as an accountant discussing an audit. In telling of his dealings with the police and Chief of Detectives Lanford, Frank waxed sarcastic in a quiet yet bitter way. But he never let loose his emotion or lost his poise. At times Frank would lose his air of complete repression and his face for a moment would take on an aspect of deep feeling. He would, how-ever, quickly resume his normal expression of stoicism.

NEGRO M'KNIGHT SAYS

SIDEBOARD IN HOME OF

SELIGS HAS BEEN MOVED

Continued from Page 1.

ney Rosser, who sought to show that Minola signed the statement to obtain her freedom from jail.

Dr. S. C. Benedict, president of the State Board of Health, was called at the opening of the afternoon to show that charges of scientific dishonesty against Dr. H. F Harris, secretary of the board, never were found to be well founded. Dr. W. F. Westmoreland asserted on the stand that Dr. Harris had been found guilty of the charges.

By far the most damaging testimony brought out against Frank was that of Will Turner, who testified that he had entered the metal room and come upon Frank socking to press his attentions upon the Phagan girl only a few weeks before the crime.

When Turney was put under the raking fire of Luther Rosser's cross-examination, the weight of his testimony suffered considerably. The youth, who admitted he had worked at the factory only a brief time, was unable to describe Mary Phagan and was unable to tell the name of any other girl in the entire factory.

"I went into the rear room on the second floor one day with some pencils." Said Turner. "It was about the middle of March. Frank was walking from his office toward the rear of the factory. Mary Phagan was coming toward her machine. He told her to wait a minute, that he wanted to talk to her. She said she had to go to work."

"He said: I'm superintendent of the pencil factory and I want to talk to you.' She repeated that she had to go to work and he followed her as she backed away from him. A couple of girls came into the room and I asked them where to put the pencils and then I left. I didn't see any more."

On cross-examination young Turner admitted he did not know whether there were other girls around at the time or not. He did not know the names of the two girl, he said, who entered the room while Frank was trying to talk to Mary Phagan. The extent of his description of Mary Phagan was that she had light hair. The questions of the admissibility of this evidence caused a long wrangle between the attorneys.

Rosser and Arnold objected on the ground that it was not at all material, proving absolutely nothing. They denied Dorsey's contention that it established that Frank had known Mary Phagan, in spite of his declarations that he did not know her. The lawyers said that it did not show that he knew her by the name or that he was conversing with her on any other subject than her work.

"We contend that Mary Phagan was killed right on that second floor." Retorted the Solicitor. "We contend that Mary Phagan and Frank were the only persons in the metal department at the time that this incident took place, and that she was backing away and protesting that she had to go back to work. We contend that it was the beginning of the transaction which ended in the little girl's death. It should go in as contradicting Frank's statement that he did not know her."

Turner was allowed to tell his story.

That Solicitor Dorsey refused to take any step toward the liberation of Minola McKnight, cook at the Selig home, who was imprisoned until she made her sensational affidavit against Frank, on the ground that it would "get him in bad with the detectives," was the unexpected and highly interesting statement made by Attorney George Gordon late in the forenoon session.

Gordon was called by the State, but proved as good a witness for the defense. He declared that the affidavit made by the cook was signal in his absence, although the last paragraph stated that it was signed in his presence.

He said that he had told Solicitor Dorsey that the negro woman was being held illegally, but that Solicitor had replied that it was necessary sometimes to do things of this sort in order to get the information wanted. He told of going to the police station and finding Minola crying and hysterical in her cell.

The attorney for the colored woman said that he had not been permitted to enter the room where his clients was being interrogated by the detectives and Ray Pickett and Arthur Craven, the latter two being employees of the Beck & Gregg Hardware Company. He was present, he said, when part of the notes were being read by G. C. Febuary, but was not there when the affidavit was signed.

The McKnight affidavit told of alleged conversations at the Selig home of a nature very incriminating to Frank. The McKnight woman denied all the statements in the affidavit to a Georgian reporter the night that she was liberated.

A blow was the State by the refusal of Judge Roan to admit either while the defense was completing. Its case or after the State had taken up the rebuttal, any evidence not directly and at first hand hearing upon the specific acts charged against the factory superintendent.

The ruling was sweeping victory for the defense. It gave Frank's case, which had been aided materially the day before by the defendant's own statement, an added strength and heightened the prospects in Frank's favor.

Solicitor Dorsey tried first to cross-question Daisy Hopkins, one of the defense's witnesses, as to conversations she was supposed to have had in regard to incidents at the pencil factory in which she and a man undesignated except as her "foreman" were involved. Frank's name was not mentioned in the indicated charges. The conversation was about a "foreman."

The Hopkins woman denied again that she ever had made visits to the factory for impro
per purposes or that she had had the conversations referred to by the Solicitor.

Dorsey encountered the same stone wall when he tried to draw testimony against the moral character of Frank his own witnesses. From W. P. Merck and J. P. Floyd the Solicitor had expected to obtain a recital of the stories of happenings which they said had been related to them.

Merck, however, had mysteriously disappeared from the courthouse when his name was called, and Floyd was not permitted to go into the details of the testimony the Solicitor had hoped to bring out.

The Solicitor thereafter confined his efforts to bolstering up the character of C. B. Dalton, the State's witness who testified to seeing women in Frank's office, and attacking that of Diasy Hopkins. He called a number of witnesses, one them cousin of Hopkins woman, who swore that her character for truth and veracity was had and that they wouldn't believe her on oath.

Swear Dalton's

Character Is Good.

Other witnesses testified that Dalton's character was good. They were asked by Attorney Rosser if they were acquainted with his court and chain-gang record. They replied, for the most part, that they were not.

The brown suit worn by Frank April 26 was identified by Mrs. Emil Selig, his mother-in-law, at the opening of court in the forenoon and the suit was placed in evidence.

The defense prepared to show oy Wiley Roberts, inside jailer at the Tower, that Jim Conley had been reading since his incarceration there, but the Solicitor objected on the ground that no basis had been laid for the testimony.

Daisy Hopkins then was called and questioned after which the State began its rebuttal, the defense having closed its case.

While waiting for a witness Solicitor Dorsey arose and made the unexpected announcement that he himself had erased the identification. "Taken out at 8:26" on the time slip taken from the clock in the factory. Frank had made the charge he had written words as an identification of the slip and that they had been erased. The Solicitor declared that he thought the detectives had made the identification.

"Frank did not know who made the erasure," said Attorney Reuben Arnold.

The Solicitor had announced earlier that his first witnesses in rebuttal would be called to support C. B. Dalton and impeach Daisy Hopkins who declared she had never visited the factory with Dalton or that he had ever introduced Dalton to the factory superintendent.

When Roberts was asked:

Q: Has Jim Conley been in your custody during the trial? A. Yes.

Q. Has he ever asked for newspapers? A. Yes.

Dorsey interrupted.

"Your honor," he said, "I think the witness. Jim Conley, ought to have the privilege of denying or affirming that before he can be impeached."

"Conley said that he could only read certain words," said Arnold, "but probably Mr. Dorsey is right. I will have to call Jim Conley back again. Mr. Rosser will be back in a minute and we will close."

Daisey Hopkins Is

Recalled by Dorsey.

The witness was excused and Dorsey made the announcement that four doctors of the following five would be called by the prosecution:

Drs. G. C. Mizell, F. L. Eskridge, Clarence Johnson, John Funke, S. E. Benedict of Athens, and J. C. Cramer of Macon, the latter two president and vice president of the State Board of Health.

Solicitor Dorsey asked that Daisy Hopkins be returned to the stand so that he might continue his cross-examination of her.

The witness took the stand.

Q. You say you knew nothing of the cot in the basement of the National Pencil Factory? A. No.

Q. Do you know anything at all of the basement? A. No.

Q. Are you acquainted with A. R. Floyd, of Redan, Ga.? A. Yes.

Q. Have you known him for a long time? A. Yes.

Q. Haven't you been to his house to get milk? A. I don't think I have since the murder.

Q. Didn't you go to the home of Floyd to get milk and tell him about that cot in the basement of that National Pencil Factory? A. No.

Q. Do you know Bob Goddard? A. Yes.

Q. Do you know Mr. Smith, superintendent of the Nunnally-McRae Company? A. On Mitchell street?

Q. Yes. A. yes, I know him.

Q. Do you know Walter P. Merck? A. Where does he live?

Met Merck on

Peach tree Street.

Q. You met him first at Stone Mountain, then you met him on Walker street? A. I met him at Redan. They used to live down there.

Q. You said something about being married. Have you two living husbands? A. No; only one.

Q. Have you seen him since the murder? A. Yes; at Redan.

Q. Do you remember meeting Walter P. Merck one Saturday afternoon on Whitehall street? A. I met him on Peachtree.

Q. Didn't you tell him that afternoon that you were going to the National Pencil Factory? A. No; I told him. I had just left the factory.

Q. Didn't he make an arrangement with you to go to the factory? A. No

Rosser objected, declaring that a female witness could not be attacked in that way.

"Your honor," said Dorsey, "I want to show by Merck that this woman did make an engagement with him that afternoon."

"I understand," replied Rosser, "that when an argument of this kind is to be made the jury is to retire."

"It would be better to have the ladies retire also," said Dorsey, "I don't want to embarrass them."

Jury and Women

Retire From Room.

The jury retired, and after a hurried conference, Frank's wife and mother also left the courtroom at the request of Attorney Arnold.

"This is their witness," said Dorsey. "We want to show that this man Merc had her Saturday afternoon, and she said she was going to the National Pencil Factory. It was cold weather. We want to show that he saw her that night and what she told him."

The witness interrupted:

"It was summer time," she said partly.

"She has denied," said Dorsey, "in the impeachment of Dalton that she ever went to the pencil factory for any improper purpose."

"We object," said Rosser.

"I want to show that she told Merck about meeting her foreman at the factory," said Dorsey.

Then the Solicitor repeated a conversation involving the "foreman," which is unprintable, which he wanted to get before the jury.

"He does not mean to charge Frank is the foreman," said Arnold. "He is frank enough to state that."

"Merck in an affidavit, " said Dorsey, "said foreman. He didn't say Mrs. Hopkins said her superintendent or that she named any names. I mean to let the jury draw its own conclusions."

"I knew when your honor refused to rule out the charges of Conley and Dalton," said Arnold, taking up the argument, "that you were opening the doors for new issues that would obscure the charge of murder. I knew it would lead to a situation in impeachment bringing us to the point where woe would hardly know who we were trying. This woman never would have been put up as an original witness except for the aspersions cast on her by Conley and Dalton. Look how far afield we have wandered. Now, he wants to impeach this witness on something with which the defendant has no connection."

"You can rebut any of their direct testimony," said Judge Roan. "You can not bring any new criminal charge against the defendant. If it is against someone else, it is irrelevant."

"Your honour," said Dorsey, "I want to ask a question to let the jury hear that you rule it out."

"No; we object," said Rosser "That's just why the jury was sent out."

"I'll let you assume that you ask it," said the court to Dorsey.

"Why, your honour," replied Dorsey, "it puts us in the position of not even trying to prove what we have indicated we would."

"I can not permit the question," said Judge Roan.

"Very well," said Dorsey, adding, in an undertone, "That shuts me off; that shuts me off."

Dorsey continued the examination:

Q. Didn't you meet Merc during the afternoon after working hours and tell him you were going to the pencil factory? A. No.

Q. Didn't he come to see you that night?
A. No.

Q. Didn't you tell him that you had been to the factory that afternoon? A. No.

Men Say Woman's

Character Is Bad.

Miss Hopkins was excused, and J. R. Floyd of Redan, Ga., was called. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. Do you know Daisy Hopkins? A. Yes.

Q. Do you know how many husbands she has?

Rosser: "I object, your honor. I don't care if she has three hundred husbands."

The objection was sustained.

Q. Would you believe her under oath? A. I would not.

Q. Did you ever hear her say anything about a cot in the basement of the pencil factory? A. I would not.

Q. Would you believe her under oath? A. I would not.

Q. Did you ever hear her say anything about a cot in the basement of the pencil factory? A. Yes.

The witness was excused. Bob Goddard, brother of C. M. Goddard, who was shot to death a few months ago by Elmer F. Darden, was the next witness called in rebuttal. Goddard resides near Redan. Dorsey questioned him.

Goddard testified to the bad character of Daisy Hopkins, and declared he would not believe her under oath.

Henry Carr, of Stone Mountain; N. J. Ballard, a second cousin of Daisy Hopkins, and J. L. Rice all followed each other in rapid succession and testified that they would not believe the Hopkins girl under oath.

Dorsey then addressed the court.

"Your honor," he said, "we want to offer indictments against Daisy Hopkins and also a bond forfeiture."

Rosser: "Your honor, they objected to the introduction of an indictment against Dalton and they objected rightly. An indictment is nothing against one's character."

Dorsey: "Dalton denied any knowledge of an indictment. This is a bond forfeiture."

Judge Roan: "I rule it out."

Dalton's Recent Past

Good, Says J. T. Hearn.

Glenn Smith, superintendent of the Nunnally-McRae Company testified that Daisy Hopkins' character was bad and that he would not believe her on oath.

J. T. Hearn, of Walton County, said he had known C. B. Dalton since 1890. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. Is his character good or bad? A. The first part of his life was bad. The last part has been good.

Q. Would you believe him on oath? A. Yes.

Rosser took the witness on cross-examination.

Q. When was the last time you knew Dalton? A. 1903 or 1904.

Q. Did you hear about him being indicted for selling whisky in 1906?

A. Yes, but he had joined the church about 1904 and I understood was leading a good life.

Dorsey took the witness.

Q. Do you know the instance of his being indicted for stealing years ago? A. Yes.

Rosser: "We object. He can't go into that."

Judge Roan sustained the objection.

Dorsey: "When they go into specific acts, can't I?"

Judge Roan: "No."

R. V. Johnston, another Walton County citizen was called. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. When were you approached in regard to testifying to the character of C. B. Dalton?

Rosser interposed with an objection, but was overruled.

B. Last Friday, a week ago.

Q. Who approached you? A. Harry Gottheimer.

Rosser again objected, and was sustained.

Q. Are you acquainted with the character of C. B. Dalton? A. Yes.

Q. Would you believe him on oath? A. I would.

Rosser took the witness.

Q. You never heard that he was indicted for stealing and selling whiskey? A. No.

The witness was excused, and W. M. Cook, of Social Circle, Ga., a dairyman and farmer, testified as to Dalton's good character, and declared that he would believe him on oath.

W. J. Elder, of Decatur, followed Cook on the stand, and said that Dalton came to Decatur about five years ago and worked for him as carpenter. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. Are you acquainted with Dalton's general character? A. I don't know as I am.

Q. That means what people say about him? A. Yes.

Q. Is his character good or bad? A. Good.

Rosser took the witness.

Q. Why did you say just now that you didn't know? A. I didn't know as I did.

Q. You said you didn't know because you didn't know yourself? A. Yes.

The witness were excused, and A. B. Houston, of Decatur a farmer, who has lived there (?)1 years, was called. The witness said that he had known Dalton for eight years and that his character was good and that he would believe him under oath.

J. T. Borne, who formerly lived at Ingleside, in DeKalb County, and who now operates a cigar and soda fountain at Decatur, said he knew Dalton and would believe him on oath.

W. M. Wright, of Atlanta, general manager of the Independent Transfer Company, testified in behalf of Dalton's good character and declared that he would believe him on oath.

W. C. Hale, of No. 88 Kirkwood avenue, Atlanta, formerly of Walton County, testified to Dalton's good character and said he would believe him under oath.

L. L. Boyce, a city policeman, formerly of Walton County, testified that nineteen or twenty years age Dalton's character was bad, but that now I was better and that he had heard nothing bad about him recently.

M. Gordon Coldwell, of Atlanta: J. W. Hust, of No. 18 Trinity avenue, and W. P. Patrick of Atlanta, a member of the police force, testified to Dalton's good character and said that they would believe him under oath.

J. E. Dudley, a former employee of the pencil company, was called to the stand. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. Were you working at the National Pencil Factory about October 1912? A. I don't remember.

Q. Do you remember a machine named Charley Lee? A. Yes, he was working there.

Q. Were you hurt there? A. Yes.

Q. Where? A. Yes, he was working there.

Q. Were you hurt there? A. Yes.

Q. Where? A. On the second floor, the office floor.

Q. Just where were you hurt? A. On a metal machine. I hurt the forefinger of my left hand.

Mashed Finger Butt

Kept Blood Off Floor.

Q. How were you hurt? A. This fellow Lee had put the metal on the machine. It dropped off. I picked it up and in putting it back I mashed my finger.

Q. What did you do then? A. There was some cotton waste there, which I put around my hand.

Q. Did any blood drop on the floor? A. A few drops.

Q. Did any blood droop near the ladies dressing room? A. None.

Q. How long after this accident did you work? A. I quit then.

Q. What does this fellow Lee do besides working at this trade? A. I don't know.

Q. What did you do then? A. I went to the office to get it dressed, then went to the Atlanta Hospital.

Rosser took the witness on cross-examination.

Q. How badly were you hurt? A. Not very bad.

Q. You bled pretty freely? A. Yes, but I had my hand in the cotton waste.

&. You didn't notice whether any blood was on the floor or not? A. Yes; none of it dropped except at the machine where I was working.

Dorsey took the witness.

Q. Was your finger outside of the cotton waste until you got to the office? A. No.

The witness was excused, and the witness Merck was called, but failed to answer. Willie Turner, of Sandy Springs, the 16-year-old son of E. M.

Continued on Page 4, Column 1.

PAGE 13

FACTORY BOY SWEARS HE SAW FRANK ACCOST MARY PHAGAN

Dorsey Feared He'd Get in Bad' With Detectives, State Witness Says

INDIRECT TESTIMONY

AGAINST PRISONER IS

FORBIDDEN BY JUDGE

Continued from Page 2.

Turner, a farmer, was called to the stand. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. About March, of this year, where did you work? A. At the pencil factory.

Q. Do you know this man? (pointing to Frank) A. Yes.

Q. Did you know Mary Phagan? A. When I saw her.

Q. Did you ever see Mr. Frank talking to Mary Phagan? A. Yes; on the second floor.

Q. What time was it and how long before the murder? A. About the middle of March.

Q. Where was it? A. In the back part of the building.

Q. What time of day was it? A. Just before dinner.

Q. Who was in the room besides them? A. No one else. Two girls came down after I did.

Q. What
was said? A. I heard her say she had to go to work.

Q. What did he say? A. He said he was the superintendent of the factory "

Rosser: "We object and we want to argue this without the jury."

The jury was sent out.

Dorsey Let the witness tell what it is.

Turner Mr. Frank told the girl he was superintendent of the factory and wanted to talk to her. She told him she had to go back to work. Mr. Frank then went off.

Mary Backed

Away From Frank.

Q. How was she acting? A. She backed off from and he walked toward her.

Q. How far did she back? A. Three or four feet. That was all I heard. Mr. Frank turned away.

Judge Roan You can go into this to this extent. You can show whether he knew Mary Phagan.

Rosser This other has nothing to do with it.

Hooper If my brother will just keep still a little bit, we may be able to proceed further. This has another value. It shows familiarity or a desire for familiarity.

Rosser If your honor is with us, I don't want to argue.

Judge Roan The question is whether it can be shown just how this conversation took place.

Rosser That is not the purpose of this evidence

Hooper Your honor

Judge Roan Sit down, Mr. Hooper. The question is whether this will show whether he knew her well enough to know her name.

Rosser This evidence doesn't show that.

Dorsey Your honor, this witness says this meeting occurred in the same place and near the same spot where we have contended the murder occurred. It is the basis for further evidence.

Arnold That last statement let the cat out of the bag. They want to bring out another charge. This whole case has been beclouded with every charge that could be imagined. We have gotten away from the charge of murder and have been made to answer every conceivable charge.

Hooper I object to that, first because it is not true and second because it is not the point at issue.

There was smothered applause.

"There is another disturbance of some sort," shouted Arnold.

Judge Roan rapped for order and directed that the jury be brought in. He addressed Solicitor Dorsey.

"You may put your question and let him tell what he knows," said Judge Roan.

Q. What did you see? Tell it in your own way, telling everything that you saw. A. They were back in the rear of the building near the entrance. She was coming to her work just before dinner. Mr. Frank met her and said: I want to speak to you.' She said: I have got to go to work.' He said: "I am the superintendent of the pencil factory and I want to speak to you.' She backed off and he walked toward her.

Q. Is this all? A. Yes.

Rosser took the witness on cross-examination.

Q. What time was it? A. Just before dinner.

Q. How was it she was just going to work? A. She was returning to her work at the machine. It was just before the whistle blew.

Q. Lemmie Quinn's office was there, wasn't it? A. Yes.

Q. There were ten or twelve women there in the polishing department? A. I don't know.

Q. Well, what about those two girls in there? A. They came back and told me where to put the pencils.

Q. Do you know who they were? A. No.

Motorman Hits

Daisy Hopkins' Character.

Q. They came back at the time this thing was going on? A. Yes.

Q. What kind of a looking girl was Mary Phagan? A. She had light hair.

Q. What else? A. I can't describe her.

Q. Do you really know her? A. Yes.

Q. How? A. Some boy who worked on the fourth floor pointed her out to me one morning when she came to work.

Q. Do you know any one else at the factory? A. No.

The witness was excused and Walter T. Merck was called.

Dorsey questioned him.

Q. What is your business? A. A street car motorman.

Q. Do you know Daisy Hopkins? A. Yes.

Q. Did you ever meet her on Saturday afternoons at the corner of Whitehall and Alabama streets? A. yes.

Q. What did she say? A. I asked her where she was going and she said she was going to the pencil factory.

Q. Did you see her any more? A. Yes. I made an engagement to go to her room.

Q. Did you see her? A. Yes, about 8:30 o'clock in a room upstairs at the corner of Walker and Peters streets.

Q. Did she say where she had been? A. To the National Pencil Factory.

Q. Do you know her character? A. yes.

Q. Is it good or bad? A. Bad.

Rosser took the witness on cross-examination.

Q. Does the company know your character? It's a beauty according to your own admission, isn't it?

Dorsey interposed with an objection and was sustained.

Rosser: "Come down, come down, come down."

McKnight Woman's

Lawyer Called.

The witness was excused, and George Gordon, who said he practiced law for thirteen years, was called to the stand. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. Were you present at the police station when Minola McKnight was brought there? A. Yes; or, rather, I was on the outside a part of the time. I went there in connection with getting a habeas corpus proceedings for her release. The detectives told me I could not go in just then. I decided to make a demand to see her, and it was granted. I went in and Stenographer Febuary read a statement to her from his notes, then went out to write it. Detectives Starnes, Campbell and Lanford, Chief Beavers and two men from Beck & Greggs' were there when the stenographer went out. I said that I didn't think that she ought to be held. They told me they could do nothing unless I got your (Dorsey's) permission. So I went to see you, and you told me that you not let the woman go, because it would put you in bad with the detectives.

Q. Didn't I say that I had no right to hold her? A. No: you said you would not release her without a habeas corpus.

Q. Why did you not wait until she signed that paper? A. I went up to see you.

Q. Did you hear her say anything about the statement? Read over the notes and then answer the question.

A. That is the substance of the notes that Febuary read over to her.

Q. What did she say? Did she deny or admit them? A. She said she believed that was about right.

Dorsey Feared He'd

"Get in Bad."

Q. I told you I didn't have anything to do with locking her up, and that it would be meddling for me to order her release. A. You said you would not interfere because you would get in bad with the detectives. That is what my recollection is, Mr. Dorsey.

Rosser took the witness.

Q. You knew that she had been to Mr. Dorsey's office and had been taken away screaming? A. Yes, I heard that.

Q. That Mr. Dorsey, and officer of the peace, let the police take that woman away screaming?

Dorsey interrupted. "You say you know that?" he asked the witness.

Rosser: "Wait until I get through."

Then he continued his question.

Q. Did you ever find out what charges they had against her? A. I had a habeas corpus to get her release, but could not get to her.

Q. They just held her because she would not give a statement to the police that Mr. Dorsey wanted?

Dorsey interposed an objection.

Rosser I submit to this jury that the evidence in this case proves it is true.

Dorsey I submit it is not true. I don't care what you argue to this jury.

Rosser And you didn't care what you did to that poor negro woman.

Dorsey I didn't do anything to that negro woman.

Judge Sustains

Dorsey's Objection.

Judge Road sustained Dorsey's objection. Rosser asked Dorsey for the affidavit that Minola made in Dorsey's office. He asked the witness if he had ever seen it before, and the witness answered, "No."

Q. Who was guilty of false imprisonment was it Starnes or Beavers? A. Beavers said he knew about it, but that he could not let her out unless Dorsey ordered it.

Q. Did he have a warrant? A. No.

Q. Then they let her out the next day? A. yes.

Q. Did you see her? A. I saw her that first evening. She was in a cell and crying hysterically I asked Chief Beavers to let her out in the corridor a
nd I guess he did.

Dorsey took the witness again.

Q. Didn't I tell you that I had absolutely no rights in the matter? A. Something like that, but if you will pardon me, Hugh, I will tell you exactly what was done. I went to you when the police told me they could not let the woman go without an order from you. You told me you had not had the woman arrested and was not having her held.

Q. Now, didn't Febuary read over to you a portion of that affidavit? A. Yes, he read something.

Q. Now, didn't he read a part of the statement, and she added to it the part about the money? A. She said something about money.

Q. Now, what else did she say? A. I don't recall.

Q. Didn't you question her yourself? A. I asked one or two little questions.

Q. What about? A. She said something about a bucket of water that was not very plain, and I questioned her about it.

Rosser took the witness again.

Q. You don't know what happened behind those doors? A. No.

At this point court adjourned until 2 o'clock.

President of State

Board of Health Testifies.

When the afternoon session started Solicitor Dorsey announced that on account of some of the State's witnesses being out of the city he would vary his program. He could Dr. S. E. Benedict, of Athens, president of the State Board of Health, and a member of the faculty of the University of Georgia for 32 years, to the stand.

On the first question asked him, Attorney Arnold made strenuous objection and precipitated a long argument. The question was:

"Were you present at the meeting of the State Board of Health when Dr. Westmoreland preferred charges against Dr. Harris?"

"We object to going into that," said Mr. Arnold. "We would have to get the minutes of the board and all of that."

"I am not going into the matter further than to disprove Dr. Westmoreland's statement," said Mr. Dorsey, "that the State board found Dr. Harris guilty of scientific dishonest."

"You can go into the question of the feeling of the witness," said Judge Roan.

"Suppose," said Rosser, sarcastically, "Mary had a little lamb, it's fleece was white as snow, would that have anything to do with this case?"

"I am not going into it further than to disprove Dr. Westmoreland's statement," insisted Dorsey.

"Well, I am going into it," said Arnold, "if you don't. I am going to ask him about a letter he wrote Dr. Westmoreland."

"Go ahead, Mr. Dorsey," said Judge Roan.

Q. Were you present when Dr. Westmoreland preferred charges against Dr. Harris? A. Yes.

Q. Were those charges substantiated?

Arnold Your honor, the minutes are the best evidence.

Dorsey All right: take the minutes.

The minute book of the State Board of Health was handed the witness.

Q. Look at page 128 and tell me if that is a correct report of that meeting? A. Yes.

Q. Now, doctor, I want to know whether those charges were found to be true.

Arnold The minutes are the best evidence.

Judge Roan Are those charges on the minutes?

A. I don't see them.

Q. Well, what was the vote? A. I think it was unanimous.

Arnold Doctor, where are the charges? A. I suppose they are in the possession of the secretary, somewhere in his office.

Arnold Dr. Harris, then, has the charges preferred against him? And while the defense is on the minutes, charges are not? A. You misunderstood me. Neither the charges nor the defense are on the minutes. Only the action of the board.

Judge Roan Didn't Dr. Westmoreland in his testimony say that he preferred charges of scientific dishonesty against Dr. Harris and because the board would not dismiss Dr. Harris that he resigned?

Rosser Says Record

Speaks for Itself.

Arnold: "No; Dr. Westmoreland's version was that the board found him guilty but refused to dismiss him, and he (Dr. Westmoreland) resigned."

Dr. Benedict: "That is not true."

Rosser: "Never mind; the record speaks for itself."

Dorsey: "I will ask you if you are familiar with the business and professional life of Dr. Harris?"

"We object," said Rosser, and the objection was sustained.

"Dorsey: "Doctor, what is the condition of the board now?"

Rosser objected again, and was sustained.

Attorney Arnold took the witness.

Q. Doctor, I want to ask you about a letter you wrote Dr. Westmoreland.

Dorsey: "We object to that. It is irrelevant."

Arnold: "I haven't the letter here, but will have it long before the doctor's train leaves."

Judge Roan: "I will wait until I see the letter."

Dorsey offered part of the minutes of the State Board of Health as documentary evidence.

Arnold: "I don't think any of this should go in on the ground that is irrelevant, immaterial and incompetent."

Judge Roan: "I will let it in for what it is worth."

The defense asked that their objection be recorded.

Dorsey: "I would like to know if the letter of the fourth to the Governor on the subject was admissible."

Rosser: "it is as admissible as any of the other minutes, but we object to it all."

Judge Roan: "I will rule the letter out."

Recalls Examination

Of Minola McKnight.

Roy Craven, salesman at the Beck & Gregg Hardware Company, was called. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. Did you know Minola McKnight? A. Yes.

Q. When did you see her last? A. At the police station.

Q. How did you come to be there? A. Her husband worked at the same place I do and asked me if I would not go down to the police station and try to get her out.

Q. Were you there when this statement was signed? A. Yes.

Q. Why did you go there? A. Yes.

Q. Who was with you? A. Pickett and her husband.

Q. Why did you go there?

Q. Why did you go there?

Rosser interposed an objection and was sustained.

Q. Did you go either at the request of the Police Department or myself? A. No.

Q. Now, give me the best recollection of the time, if you can?

Rosser objected, but was overruled.

Q. Give me the day? A. It was the middle part of May.

Q. Now, tell what this woman, Minola McKnight, said when she made that affidavit at the police station? A. Well, she would not like at first, but we told her what Albert had said.

Q. What was it that Albert had said?

The witness gave the substance of the Minola McKnight affidavit.

Q. Then what did Minola say? A. She was somewhat reluctant to talk at first, but when we told her what Albert had said she gave us the affidavit without stopping.

Rosser took the witness on cross-examination.

Q. Didn't you know that she was in jail because she would not give the sort of a statement they wanted? A. I did not.

Rosser Objects to

Servant's Affidavit.

Q. Why did you think they had her in jail?

Dorsey: "We object to what he thinks. Stick to the statements."

Q. Did you go to Mr. Dorsey's office before you heard Minola make her statements? A. Yes.

Q. Why did you go there? A. To try to get her out.

Q. It wasn't any trouble to get her out after she made a good statement was it? A. I wasn't there when she got out.

Q. Why didn't you stay there? A. I didn't want to.

Q. You got a statement agreeing with what her husband had told you then you left her in jail? A. I went on out and left her with her husband.

Q. Didn't you try to get Mr. Dorsey to get her out? A. I went to see what I could do.

Q. What did he say? A. He said he would do what he could. He said for me to go to see Mr. Starnes or Mr. Campbell.

Q. Did you go? A. Yes.

Q. How long did you stay? A. About three hours.

Q. Did you ask them to let her out? A. No.

Q. You don't know what happened before you got there, do you? A. No, I am not a mind reader.

Dorsey: "Now I want to tender this affidavit of Minola McKnight is evidence."

Rosser: "All in the world that affidavit can show is the treatment that poor woman received at the hands of the police. It is inadmissible."

Crowd Roars
When

Sheriff Sits on Floor

Dorsey: "Every word of it is admissible, because it is a flat and positive repudiation of Minola's sworn statements on the stand."

Judge Roan: "Let me read it. I will rule on it later."

The witness was excused, and E. H. Pickett, also an employee of Beck & Greggs Hardware Company, was called to the stand. Dorsey questioned him. He was given the Minola McKnight affidavit to read. Sheriff Mangum, in an attempt to stop talk in the courtroom, met with a little accident that rent a ripple of merriment throughout the room. While Pickett was reading the affidavit, the Sheriff arose from his seat beside the witness stand.

"You people over to the right are talking too much, and if you don't stop I will have to put you out," he said. When he turned to resume his seat he missed the chair and sat down upon the floor with a red expression on his face. The crowd in the courtroom fairly roared.

Pickett read the affidavit, the Dorsey questioned him.

Q. You were present when that paper was signed, were you not? A. Yes; that is immediately before Minola signed it.

Q. Who else was there? A. Minola's lawyer, Roy Craven, one or two detectives and myself.

Q. What statement was made before she signed it? A. Albert McKnight said she had made certain statements. She then admitted it a little bit at a time.

Q. What did she say first? A. That she had been cautioned not to talk.

Q. Then what? A. She admitted she got a little more money.

Q. Did she say everything shown in this affidavit? A. Not the first part. She didn't make those statements in my presence.

Didn't Appear Willing

To Talk Then.

Q. Was she willing to talk? A. No. She said she would talk to me, but she would not talk to the detectives. Before the detectives left she said her husband was a liar.

Q. Did the detectives leave? A. Yes.

Q. Then you questioned her? A. Yes

Q. Then you questioned her? A. Yes, but we, Craven and myself, could not write shorthand, and sent for the stenographer.

Q. Who was there when she made the statement about Mrs. Frank making certain remarks to her mother? A. Starnes, Campbell, her lawyer, the stenographer, Lanford, Craven and myself.

Q. Well, tell the jury what she said.

Rosser: "The affidavit is the best evidence."

Dorsey: "But you are objecting to the affidavit."

Judge Roan: "I am going to let in that affidavit with the exception of the part that could not be put in regularly. For instance, that part where she quotes the conversation she overheard."

Dorsey: "May I or not, without considering the affidavit, ask him all relevant point of Minola McKnight's statement?"

Judge Roan: "You can take the affidavit and ask him about all about relevant points."

Dorsey: Mr. Pickett what did the woman say about Frank eating dinner? A. First she said he ate dinner. Finally she said he did not.

Q. What did she say first about her husband, Albert, being there? A. At first she said he was not there, finally she said he was.

Q: What did she say about being told to keep her mouth shut?

Rosser: "Unless he wants to show that Frank told her that, it is irrelevant."

Counsel in

Another Wrangle.

Dorsey: "It is relevant to impeach the negro."

Roan: "It is relevant, I think."

Rosser: "You could not impeach Mr. Selig on such a statement. Certainly it is inadmissible to impeach Minola McKnight."

Rosser dictated his objections to the court stenographer.

Dorsey: "Answer the question, Mr. Pickett."

B. At first she denied it, then she said Mrs. Selig told her to keep quiet.

Rosser continued to object.

Hooper: "This witness can be put on the stand and impeach half a dozen witnesses."

Roan: "You understand it must be relevant to some issue in this case."

Hooper continued to argue that the question should be admitted.

Judge Roan: "If you insist. I will let it in."

Q. What did Minola say with reference to what was said to her about talking? A. She said she was cautioned not to talk.

Q. What did she say at last about receiving a higher or lower wage? A. She said her wages were increased after the crime.

Q. What did she say first about that hat? A. She only made one reference to it.

Q. Did anybody suggest anything about the hat, before anyone asked her about it? A. Yes.

Q. Now who was in there before you went to the door and called the detectives? A. Alfred McKnight, Craven and myself.

Offered to Free Her

If She Made Statement.

Rosser took the witness on cross-examination.

Q. Now why didn't you believe her first statement? A. Because we thought different.

Q. You kept her there two or three hours didn't you? A. Yes.

Q. Did you give her the third degree? A. We didn't call it that.

Q. Did you see Dorsey? A. Yes; we saw him before we went to the police station for us to see her, and that we might arrange to get her out.

Q. Did you tell Minola that you had come down to get her out? A. We did tell her we wanted to get her out if we got a statement.

Q. Well, why didn't you get her out? A. She left the station house before we did.

Q. After she gave that statement they let her out? A. Yes.

Q. Do you know she left there before you did? A. Yes.

Q. Do you know she left there before you did? A. No, but the detectives said she had.

Q. You didn't know she had been there twelve hours when you got there? Yes.

Q. You know she was there because she would not give the statement the detectives wanted, didn't you? A. No.

Q. You know she was there because she would not give the statement the detectives wanted, didn't you? A. No.

Q. You went there to make her give the statement the detectives wanted, didn't you? A. Not that. I thought it was my duty as a good citizen to aid in getting at the truth.

Rosser (very angrily and with contempt in his voice) Let him come down; let him come down.

Negro McKnight

Called to Stand.

The witness was excused, and Albert McKnight, husband of Minola McKnight, was called to the stand. Hooper questioned him, and had the negro step down from the witness chair and stand before the jury while he displayed a blueprint of the Selig home and a diagram of the dining room and the sideboard mirror, through which Albert said he observed Frank during lunch at the Selig home on Saturday, April 26.

Q. Where were you sitting in the kitchen on that day?

Rosser I object: you went over all this on the direct examination.

Hooper We had no diagram then, that was brought in by the defense.

Judge Roan The witness may explain the diagram.

Hooper I want to show by this witness that the sideboard has been moved so as to change the angle of vision.

Q. How is the location of the sideboard to what it was when you saw it? A. It has been pushed around.

The witness pointed out the change to the jury on the diagram.

Rosser took the witness.

Q. How do you know this has been changed? Were you there when it was changed? A. No, sir, but I can tell by looking at the diagram.

Girl Called to

Stand by Dorsey.

Miss Nellie Wood, a former employee of the National Pencil Factory, was called to the stand by Solicitor Dorsey. Attorney Rosser, anticipating the character of her testimony, announced that he would like a definite ruling at once regarding the introduction of certain character evidence. The jury retired.

Frank's wife and mother left the courtroom by request. Dorsey addressed the court. "We want to show by this witness actual specific misconduct on the part of this defendant. We want to show that Frank made an indecent proposal to this lady. It shows his conduct and his character; and I submit that it is material."

Rosser: "your honor, they have no right in the world to put that testimony in. We have never put any evidence in that would allow the introduction of this testimony in rebuttal. We insist that you rule definitely. All the e
vidence we have put in to show Frank's conduct was (in rebuts) to the statements of Conley."

Judge Roan: "Mr. Dorsey, tell me how you can get around the statutes that you cannot ask specific instances on one's character except on cross-examination."

Dorsey: "What about the questions of Mr. Arnold to the woman who worked on the fourth floor or the National Pencil Factory?"

Judge Roan: "To my mind it is not debatable."

Dorsey: "Then we are shut out."

Judge Roan: "The law shuts you out. On the principle you advance you could put a man on trial at this time for everything he ever did his life."

Dorsey: "I don't want to send jury out any more. I have witnesses to prove other things. Can I prove

Continued on Page 5, Column 1.

PAGE 14

WITNESSES GIVE

DALTON GOOD

REPUTATION

Continued From Page 4.

that a girl saw Frank with another woman in the dark?"

Dorsey: "Can I show his conduct slapping girls as he passed through the factory?"

Judge Roan You can show a bad character by this woman or any other: but you can't show a specific act.

The jury was recalled.

Dorsey Says

Witness Mislead Him.

Dorsey questioned the witness.

Q. Do you know the character of Leo M. Frank? A. No, I only knew him two days.

Q. I mean what people said about him; say yes or no.

Rosser She has answered the question; that should end it.

Judge Roan Do you know his character: answer yes or no A. No.

Dorsey addressed the court.

"Your honor. I have been misled by this witness."

Rosser I don't care anything about that.

Judge Roan She hasn't sold anything to hurt you, and you can not proceed as though you were entrapped.

Dorsey Miss Wood, do you remember a conversation with me (Rosser interrupted.)

Rosser Now that is absolutely inadmissible.

Judge Roan I sustain you.

Dorsey Come down.

J. H. Kendricks, a street car motorman, followed Miss Wood on the stand. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. Were you running a street car on April 26? A. Yes.

Q. Do you know a man named Matthews? A. No.

Q. What route were you on April 26? A. Marietta street to the stock yards.

Q. Is that a portion of the English avenue and Copper street line? A. Yes.

Declares Cars Run

Ahead of Time Often.

Q. What time did you get to town that day about noon? A. I can not remember exactly, but I never get there any later than 12:06.

Q. Did the English avenue car with Matthews and Hollis running it ever get to that corner ahead of time? A. It certainly did.

Q. Do you know what time they got relieved for dinner at Marietta and Broad streets? A. At 12:07.

Q. About April 26, and prior to that time, did Matthews and Hollis ever get to that corner ahead of time, and if so how much? A. Two to three minutes.

Q. When Hollis would be at the corner of Broad and Marietta, and your car was on time, what would Hollis do about going to dinner? A. He would go on my car.

The witness was excused and J. C. McEwen, another motorman was called. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. Did you run on the Cooper street line prior to April 26? A. Yes.

Q. Do you recall what time the Cooper street car would arrive at Broad and Marietta streets with reference to your car? A. My car got there at 12:10.

Q. What time would the car Matthews and Hollis were on get there, if the car was on time? A. 12:07.

Q. What time does the White City car get there? A. At 12:05.

Q. Did the English avenue or Cooper ever cut off the White City care and come in ahead of it? A. Very often.

Q. Do you know the car that Matthews and Hollis run? A. I know their schedule.

Q. Has their car ever cut off the White City car? A. Their schedule has. I don't know who was on it.

PAGE 12

FRANK'S STATEMENT IS

BEST PLEA PRESENTED

IN HIS DEFENSE SO FAR

By JAMES B. NEVIN

So far, unquestionably, to my way of thinking Leo Frank himself has made the best and most appealing plea in behalf of Leo Frank. His statement in the recital thereof was as clean cut, as dignified, as dispassionate and as convincing as any statement I ever heard from the witness stand, and I have heard hundreds.

Regardless of its merits or, at least, aside from that the defendant acquitted himself with credit, and that much may be said of him ungrudgingly and in the frankest fairness to all parties concerned.

Of course, had Frank been nervous, hesitating, "fidgety," or seemingly in any wise disconcerted, there would be those, perhaps, who would have seen in that great evidence of hi guilty and aby the same token, in that he was calm, poised, self-possessed, even smiling at intervals, there will be those who see in that evidence of a monstrous coldness and unfeeling design.

The vast majority of those who heard that remarkable statement, however, must have been impressed by, at least, the apparent sincerity of it and the seeming inclination in the defendant to hold back nothing.

In its recital the statement of Leo Frank was wonderful in its written form, stripped of the man's personality, it still is a human document of intense and absorbing interest.

It impressed me, too, as being a many ways characteristic of Frank as I have come to know him of late and I never spoke one word to him in all my life.

I have come to know him as the prisoner sitting over there between the two women in the courtroom the alight, spectacled party, a seat or two beyond Luther Rosser and Reuben Arnold.

I have come to know him, in my way of knowing persons charged with grave crimes, not by the way of personal touch so much as by constant observation of him under fire.

Repression Makes the Story.

All that was dramatic in Frank's statement was repressed the dramatic touch was there, to be sure, but the red fire and the usual accompanying stage tricks were not.

If Frank should undertake to sell me a gross of pencils, I should expect him to tell me the truth about the pencils, and nothing but the truth but I should expect him nevertheless to sell me the pencils at a profit.

His statement of Monday seemed to me a recital much after the fashion I should expect from him in the pencil transaction.

To me, it seemed that Frank was undertaking to tell the truth and but I should expect him nevertheless to sell me the pencils at a profit.

His statement of Monday seemed to me a recital much after the fashion I should expect from him in the pencil transaction.

To me, it seemed that Frank was undertaking to tell the truth nothing but the truth of the Mary Phagan murder, as he knows the truth and to tell it at a profit to himself.

That is the best and the worst that I can say of Leo Frank's statement, as it appealed to me.

True, in a transaction involving a mere gross of pencils, there would be lacking all the great elements that entered into the statement Frank made on Monday and yet, at that, neither subject matter is, in its final analysis, anything more or less than something about which the simple truth should be told.

Frank looked the jury fairly and squarely in the eye when he was making his statement and not once did he hesitate or falter in stating his plea.

Contrast the statement of the defendant with the statement of the negro the star witness summoned against him.

Frank's Day in Court.

Now, Monday was Frank's day in court, and it is square and right that Frank's showing should be criticized freely and frankly it is right that his statement should be praised, if it seemed to deserve praise, just as it should be condemned, if it seemed to merit that melancholy fate.

Contrast it, therefore, with the statement of Conley!

Argue the matter with yourself.

Certainly, Frank has behind him a long period of decent life, good reputation, business integrity, and home happiness and Conley has, what?

Take the two stories and upon these two stories the verdict in the Frank case must turn eventually and weigh them,
side by side, honestly, without prejudice, and in the light of a clean conscience.

What is your answer?

What will be the jury's answer?

The field of speculation thus opened is most engaging, and it will, if one but undertake to enter it seriously and with open mind, be well worth the entering.

In the matter of his character, Frank said little. He entered simple denials to some few things cited against him.

In the matter of his character, Frank said little. He entered simple denials to some few things cited against him.

He was willing to be cross-examined on his statement. He himself insisted that his general character be put in issue. He furnished the State with the first information it ever had that Conley could write.

All the way through, his statement rang with confident challenge, and a dare to the State to prove anything vile in him whatever!

Now, then, people will differ as to the EFFECT Frank's statement will and ought to have on the jury.

Maybe it is a clever evasion of grave issue maybe it is possible of rebuttal, and maybe it will be broken down.

Impressively Delivered.

The fact remains that it was most impressively delivered, and carried with it every emphasis of apparent truth and straight forwardness!

It is my opinion now that State has in Frank's statement the hardest thing to get away from that yet has been tendered to it.

It contradicts the State at points that the defense has been able to fortify abundantly with facts.

It makes more necessary than ever before the complete success of the State's efforts to break down Frank's good name.

For I think it safe to predict that unless the State DOES demolish Frank utterly, the wonderful statement he made on Monday more than likely will serve in connection with the other things set up to clear him of the charge of murdering Mary Phagan!

It matters not, so far as this article is concerned, moreover, whether the statement ought to clear him the prospect is that it WILL clear him unless the State can batter it down and collapse it entirely!

The defendant touched upon every phase of this State's case against him the happiness of his home, his nervousness on the morning of the murder, his movements on the day of the crime, and the day before, and the day after, his family's financial resources, his disinclination to talk to Conley, although he at first talked freely to the police officers, his alleged peeping into the girl's dressing room, his lack of knowledge of or acquaintance with the impeached Dalton, his non-association with loose characters, male and female.

Is there a gap that Frank MIGHT let down that he has FAILED to let down?

Is there a point involved that Frank has not invited investigation of?

Hard to Find Gaps.

It is rather hard to locate any such gaps or points, if they are there.

And yet they may be there! That is for the State yet to demonstrate!

The State has the full right of rebuttal, as applied to Frank's statement, that it enjoys in respect of other evidence. There may be weak points in his story just as there are weak points in Conley's.

The point is that they are not nearly so apparent upon the surface of things in the Frank statement.

For one thing, Conley made four sworn statements, all contradictory, before he got one finally landed, and Conley admitted freely from the stand that he had lied time and again.

On the other hand, Frank's statement is the first and only sustained and sequenced utterance as to the details of his story yet falling from his lips.

It must stand in its entirely or fail in its entirety.

Whatever may be the effect of that statement in the end, it will go down in the criminal history of Georgia as on the most remarkably clear and apparently convincing statements ever falling from a defendant's lips.

When the State gets through with it, the statement may be shot to pieces and rendered utterly ineffective.

As it stands today, however, I hardly think a dozen people who heard it will deny the profound impression it made, and the present probability of its determining effect upon the minds of the jury.

The defense has played its best card in Leo Frank's statement.

It remains yet to be seen, however, whether that card is sufficient to win the case!

Mother of Leo Frank

Mrs.

Rae

Frank.

Wife at Last Breaks Down,

Overcome by Frank's Story

After having braved every trying courtroom ordeal and faced every horrible charge hurried at her husband with a stoicism almost as unflinching and imperturbable as his, Mrs. Leo Frank gave away completely to her emotions and sobbed unrestrainedly as Frank said the last words of his wonderful and most impressive address to the jury Monday.

It was the final dramatic touch to a situation that had held a courtroom full of spectators in an irresistible thrall through four long hours of the afternoon.

The spell that had been cast over the room by the quiet but earnest words of the slight young factory superintendent was broken by the tones of the deputies, who shouted the moment Frank rose to leave the witness chair!

"Keep your seats, gentlemen, while the jury passes out."

Frank Rushes to Wife.

In the confusion that followed some did not notice that Frank rushed right to the side of his wife who had thrown her head in her arms and was shaking with pitiful sobs as she moaned his name again and again.

The woman who had steeled herself against the accusations and innuendoes of the Solicitor General during the three long weeks of the trial collapsed when her husband himself took the stand to declare his innocence.

Many who had rushed into the enclosure to give their congratulations to Frank caused as they observed the piteous figure.

The jurors, already deeply impressed by the talk of Frank, were freshly touched by this exhibition of emotion. They had arisen to file over to the Kimball House. Juror Johening, at the head of the line, stood for several minutes with tears running down his cheeks, oblivious of the fact that he was blocking the rest of the jurors and that three deputies were waiting to take them on their way.

Deputy Sheriff Plennie Minor leaned against the railing of the enclosure. There was a suspicious moisture in his eyes, which have grown accustomed to many tragic and affecting spectacles.

Troublesome Lump Rises.

Very few in the courtroom had much to say until they had managed to subdue that troublesome lump that persisted in rising in their throats.

"Rube, that boy put it all over you and me," muttered massive Luther Rosser, huskily, to Reuben Arnold, his partner in the case.

For many minutes after the packed courtroom had emptied itself a little group of persons remained in front of the judge's bench. Mrs. Frank, the wife of the man accused of the revolting murder, and the elder Mrs. Frank, his mother, were weeping hysterically, overcome by the appeal that had been made. Relatives surrounded them. Frank talked comfortingly to them for several minutes, and then, feeling in danger of breaking down himself signaled Sheriff Mangum and returned to his cell in the Tower.

PAGE 15

DORSEY HAMMERS AWAY AT DEFENSE

Hit's Cook's Denial of Affidavit Against Frank

2 WITNESSES SWEAR

NEGRESS' STATEMENT

WAS MADE WILLINGLY

Here are the important developments Tuesday in the trial of Leo M. Frank, charged with the murder of Mary Phagan:

Judge Roan rules out all testimony bearing on particular acts of immorality which the State has been endeavoring to prove against the defendant.

Will Turner, former pencil factory employee, testifies he entered the metal room shortly before noon one day near the middle of March and saw Frank seeking to engage Mary Phagan in conversation. He says he cannot recall any other person he (Turner) knew in the factory.

Solicitor Dorsey devotes larges part of forenoon in an endeavor to bolster the character of C. B. Dalton, a State's w
itness, and tear down that of Miss Daisy Hopkins, who was called by the defense.

George Gordon, called by the Solicitor, swears that the sensational affidavit of Minola McKnight, negro cook at the Selig home, was signed in his absence and that Solicitor Dorsey refused to order her release, saying he "would get in bad with the detectives" if he did.

Roy Crave and E. H. Pickett, hardware store employees, testified Minola McKnight, cook in the Selig home, made the affidavit revealing incriminating remarks and actions of Frank without reserve.

Miss Nellie Wood says she does not know Frank's general character after the Judge has barred sensational questions which the Solicitor proposed to put. The Solicitor says the witness "entrapped" him.

M. E. McCoy, a painter, created a stir in the courtroom Tuesday afternoon by testifying that he saw Mary Phagan on Forsyth street at about three or four minutes after 12 0'clock on the Saturday she has killed.

Attorney Rosser made McCoy admit that he had not told of this circumstance until about a week and a half ago, although the time element had been a vital factor for several months and the city had been scoured for person who saw the girl on the fatal day.

Leo Frank's mother and his wife left the courtroom Tuesday afternoon as Solicitor Dorsey was outlining to the court what he proposed to prove by Miss Nellie Wood, the witness on the stand.

The Solicitor made a determined effort to get into the record and before the jury testimony against Frank's character, but, as was the case at the morning session, he was overruled.

"We wish to show by witness, your honor," said Dorsey, the general character of this defendant, as to get before the jury a specific instance in which this young woman, who worked two days on the fourth floor of the National Pencil Factory, figured."

When Judge Roan overruled this line of questioning, the Solicitor declared he had another witness to testify to an occasion when he saw Frank with a woman in the factory. The judge said the law plainly barred the questions.

Miss Wood was asked if she knew Frank's general character. She replied that she did not. Dorsey claimed he had been trapped, as his talk with the witness was exactly to the contrary.

Charges Sideboard Was Moved.

Attorney Frank A. Hooper made the charge Tuesday afternoon that the mirror in the dining room at the Selig home had been moved for the express purpose of discrediting the testimony of Albert McKnight, who swore that he was in the Selig home the afternoon of April 26 and saw Frank hurriedly enter the dining room, go to the sideboard and then leave the house without stopping to eat.

McKnight was on the stand at the time, having been recalled to testify as to the place he was sitting when he saw Frank through the mirror. He designated the place and then corroborated Hooper's charge by his declaration that the mirror had been moved around several feet.

Boy Craven, one of the Beck & Gregg Hardware employees, who assisted the police in obtaining the sensational affidavit from Minola McKnight, negro cook at the Selig home, declared on the stand in the Frank trial Tuesday afternoon that the McKnight woman made her statements against Frank of her own accord and without reserve, once she had been persuaded it was best to tell what the State says is the whole truth.

Craven said the McKnight woman told him that she had heard conversations at the Selig home Sunday morning follow the murder of Mary Phagan, indicating that Frank had rested poorly and had come home intoxicated, making his wife sleep on the floor. He had asked his wife for a revolver to shoot himself, the McKnight woman said, according to crave. Frank also was reported to have remarked that he "didn't know why he would murder."

E. H. Pickett, a fellow employee of Craven's, corroborated the latter's story and added that the McKnight woman had admitted getting more money after the murder than she had before.

Both Pickett and Craven were sharply questioned by Attorney Rosser, who sought to show that Minola signed the statement to obtain her freedom from jail.

Dr. S. C. Benedict, president of the State Board of Health, was called at the opening of the afternoon to show that charges of scientific dishonesty against Dr. H. F Harris, secretary of the board, never were found to be well founded. Dr. W. F. Westmoreland asserted on the stand that Dr. Harris had been found guilty of the charges.

By far the most damaging testimony brought out against Frank was that of Will Turner, who testified that he had entered the metal room and come upon Frank socking to press his attentions upon the Phagan girl only a few weeks before the crime.

When Turney was put under the raking fire of Luther Rosser's cross-examination, the weight of his testimony suffered considerably. The youth, who admitted he had worked at the factory only a brief time, was unable to describe Mary Phagan and was unable to tell the name of any other girl in the entire factory.

"I went into the rear room on the second floor one day with some pencils." Said Turner. "It was about the middle of March. Frank was walking from his office toward the rear of the factory. Mary Phagan was coming toward her machine. He told her to wait a minute, that he wanted to talk to her. She said she had to go to work."

"He said: I'm superintendent of the pencil factory and I want to talk to you.' She repeated that she had to go to work and he followed her as she backed away from him. A couple of girls came into the room and I asked them where to put the pencils and then I left. I didn't see any more."

On cross-examination young Turner admitted he did not know whether there were other girls around at the time or not. He did not know the names of the two girl, he said, who entered the room while Frank was trying to talk to Mary Phagan. The extent of his description of Mary Phagan was that she had light hair. The questions of the admissibility of this evidence caused a long wrangle between the attorneys.

Rosser and Arnold objected on the ground that it was not at all material, proving absolutely nothing. They denied Dorsey's contention that it established that Frank had known Mary Phagan, in spite of his declarations that he did not know her. The lawyers said that it did not show that he knew her by the name or that he was conversing with her on any other subject than her work.

"We contend that Mary Phagan was killed right on that second floor." Retorted the Solicitor. "We contend that Mary Phagan and Frank were the only persons in the metal department at the time that this incident took

PAGE 16

LEO FRANK SKETCHED AS HE TOLD HIS OWN STORY TO JURY

During the greater part of his story Frank was as Calm and statistical as an accountant discussing an audit. In telling of his dealings with the police and Chief of Detectives Lanford, Frank waxed sarcastic in a quiet yet bitter way. But he never let loose his emotion or lost his poise. At times Frank would lose his air of complete repression and his face for a moment would take on an aspect of deep feeling. He would, how-ever, quickly resume his normal expression of stoicism.

WITNESSES GIVE

DALTON GOOD

REPUTATION

Continued from Page 1.

place, and that she was backing away and protesting that she had to go back to work. We contend that it was the beginning of the transaction which ended in the little girl's death. It should go in as contradicting Frank's statement that he did not know her."

Turner was allowed to tell his story.

That Solicitor Dorsey refused to take any step toward the liberation of Minola McKnight, cook at the Selig home, who was imprisoned until she made her sensational affidavit against Frank, on the ground that it would "get him in bad with the detectives," was the unexpected and highly interesting statement made by Attorney George Gordon late in the forenoon session.

Gordon was called by the State, but proved as good a witness for the defense. He declared that t
he affidavit made by the cook was signal in his absence, although the last paragraph stated that it was signed in his presence.

He said that he had told Solicitor Dorsey that the negro woman was being held illegally, but that Solicitor had replied that it was necessary sometimes to do things of this sort in order to get the information wanted. He told of going to the police station and finding Minola crying and hysterical in her cell.

The attorney for the colored woman said that he had not been permitted to enter the room where his clients was being interrogated by the detectives and Ray Pickett and Arthur Craven, the latter two being employees of the Beck & Gregg Hardware Company. He was present, he said, when part of the notes were being read by G. C. Febuary, but was not there when the affidavit was signed.

The McKnight affidavit told of alleged conversations at the Selig home of a nature very incriminating to Frank. The McKnight woman denied all the statements in the affidavit to a Georgian reporter the night that she was liberated.

A blow was the State by the refusal of Judge Roan to admit either while the defense was completing. Its case or after the State had taken up the rebuttal, any evidence not directly and at first hand hearing upon the specific acts charged against the factory superintendent.

The ruling was sweeping victory for the defense. It gave Frank's case, which had been aided materially the day before by the defendant's own statement, an added strength and heightened the prospects in Frank's favor.

Solicitor Dorsey tried first to cross-question Daisy Hopkins, one of the defense's witnesses, as to conversations she was supposed to have had in regard to incidents at the pencil factory in which she and a man undesignated except as her "foreman" were involved. Frank's name was not mentioned in the indicated charges. The conversation was about a "foreman."

The Hopkins woman denied again that she ever had made visits to the factory for improper purposes or that she had had the conversations referred to by the Solicitor.

Dorsey encountered the same stone wall when he tried to draw testimony against the moral character of Frank his own witnesses. From W. P. Merck and J. P. Floyd the Solicitor had expected to obtain a recital of the stories of happenings which they said had been related to them.

Merck, however, had mysteriously disappeared from the courthouse when his name was called, and Floyd was not permitted to go into the details of the testimony the Solicitor had hoped to bring out.

The Solicitor thereafter confined his efforts to bolstering up the character of C. B. Dalton, the State's witness who testified to seeing women in Frank's office, and attacking that of Diasy Hopkins. He called a number of witnesses, one them cousin of Hopkins woman, who swore that her character for truth and veracity was had and that they wouldn't believe her on oath.

Swear Dalton's

Character Is Good.

Other witnesses testified that Dalton's character was good. They were asked by Attorney Rosser if they were acquainted with his court and chain-gang record. They replied, for the most part, that they were not.

The brown suit worn by Frank April 26 was identified by Mrs. Emil Selig, his mother-in-law, at the opening of court in the forenoon and the suit was placed in evidence.

The defense prepared to show oy Wiley Roberts, inside jailer at the Tower, that Jim Conley had been reading since his incarceration there, but the Solicitor objected on the ground that no basis had been laid for the testimony.

Daisy Hopkins then was called and questioned after which the State began its rebuttal, the defense having closed its case.

While waiting for a witness Solicitor Dorsey arose and made the unexpected announcement that he himself had erased the identification. "Taken out at 8:26" on the time slip taken from the clock in the factory. Frank had made the charge he had written words as an identification of the slip and that they had been erased. The Solicitor declared that he thought the detectives had made the identification.

"Frank did not know who made the erasure," said Attorney Reuben Arnold.

The Solicitor had announced earlier that his first witnesses in rebuttal would be called to support C. B. Dalton and impeach Daisy Hopkins who declared she had never visited the factory with Dalton or that he had ever introduced Dalton to the factory superintendent.

When Roberts was asked:

Q: Has Jim Conley been in your custody during the trial? A. Yes.

Q. Has he ever asked for newspapers? A. Yes.

Dorsey interrupted.

"Your honor," he said, "I think the witness. Jim Conley, ought to have the privilege of denying or affirming that before he can be impeached."

"Conley said that he could only read certain words," said Arnold, "but probably Mr. Dorsey is right. I will have to call Jim Conley back again. Mr. Rosser will be back in a minute and we will close."

Daisey Hopkins Is

Recalled by Dorsey.

The witness was excused and Dorsey made the announcement that four doctors of the following five would be called by the prosecution:

Drs. G. C. Mizell, F. L. Eskridge, Clarence Johnson, John Funke, S. E. Benedict of Athens, and J. C. Cramer of Macon, the latter two president and vice president of the State Board of Health.

Solicitor Dorsey asked that Daisy Hopkins be returned to the stand so that he might continue his cross-examination of her.

The witness took the stand.

Q. You say you knew nothing of the cot in the basement of the National Pencil Factory? A. No.

Q. Do you know anything at all of the basement? A. No.

Q. Are you acquainted with A. R. Floyd, of Redan, Ga.? A. Yes.

Q. Have you known him for a long time? A. Yes.

Q. Haven't you been to his house to get milk? A. I don't think I have since the murder.

Q. Didn't you go to the home of Floyd to get milk and tell him about that cot in the basement of that National Pencil Factory? A. No.

Q. Do you know Bob Goddard? A. Yes.

Q. Do you know Mr. Smith, superintendent of the Nunnally-McRae Company? A. On Mitchell street?

Q. Yes. A. yes, I know him.

Q. Do you know Walter P. Merck? A. Where does he live?

Met Merck on

Peach tree Street.

Q. You met him first at Stone Mountain, then you met him on Walker street? A. I met him at Redan. They used to live down there.

Q. You said something about being married. Have you two living husbands? A. No; only one.

Q. Have you seen him since the murder? A. Yes; at Redan.

Q. Do you remember meeting Walter P. Merck one Saturday afternoon on Whitehall street? A. I met him on Peachtree.

Q. Didn't you tell him that afternoon that you were going to the National Pencil Factory? A. No; I told him. I had just left the factory.

Q. Didn't he make an arrangement with you to go to the factory? A. No

Rosser objected, declaring that a female witness could not be attacked in that way.

"Your honor," said Dorsey, "I want to show by Merck that this woman did make an engagement with him that afternoon."

"I understand," replied Rosser, "that when an argument of this kind is to be made the jury is to retire."

"It would be better to have the ladies retire also," said Dorsey, "I don't want to embarrass them."

Jury and Women

Retire From Room.

The jury retired, and after a hurried conference, Frank's wife and mother also left the courtroom at the request of Attorney Arnold.

"This is their witness," said Dorsey. "We want to show that this man Merc had her Saturday afternoon, and she said she was going to the National Pencil Factory. It was cold weather. We want to show that he saw her that night and what she told him."

The witness interrupted:

"It was summer time," she said partly.

"She has denied," said Dorsey, "in the impeachment of Dalton that she ever went to the pencil factory for any improper purpose."

"We object," said Rosser.

"I want to show that s
he told Merck about meeting her foreman at the factory," said Dorsey.

Then the Solicitor repeated a conversation involving the "foreman," which is unprintable, which he wanted to get before the jury.

"He does not mean to charge Frank is the foreman," said Arnold. "He is frank enough to state that."

"Merck in an affidavit, " said Dorsey, "said foreman. He didn't say Mrs. Hopkins said her superintendent or that she named any names. I mean to let the jury draw its own conclusions."

"I knew when your honor refused to rule out the charges of Conley and Dalton," said Arnold, taking up the argument, "that you were opening the doors for new issues that would obscure the charge of murder. I knew it would lead to a situation in impeachment bringing us to the point where woe would hardly know who we were trying. This woman never would have been put up as an original witness except for the aspersions cast on her by Conley and Dalton. Look how far afield we have wandered. Now, he wants to impeach this witness on something with which the defendant has no connection."

"You can rebut any of their direct testimony," said Judge Roan. "You can not bring any new criminal charge against the defendant. If it is against someone else, it is irrelevant."

"Your honour," said Dorsey, "I want to ask a question to let the jury hear that you rule it out."

"No; we object," said Rosser "That's just why the jury was sent out."

"I'll let you assume that you ask it," said the court to Dorsey.

"Why, your honour," replied Dorsey, "it puts us in the position of not even trying to prove what we have indicated we would."

"I can not permit the question," said Judge Roan.

"Very well," said Dorsey, adding, in an undertone, "That shuts me off; that shuts me off."

Dorsey continued the examination:

Q. Didn't you meet Merc during the afternoon after working hours and tell him you were going to the pencil factory? A. No.

Q. Didn't he come to see you that night? A. No.

Q. Didn't you tell him that you had been to the factory that afternoon? A. No.

Men Say Woman's

Character Is Bad.

Miss Hopkins was excused, and J. R. Floyd of Redan, Ga., was called. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. Do you know Daisy Hopkins? A. Yes.

Q. Do you know how many husbands she has?

Rosser: "I object, your honor. I don't care if she has three hundred husbands."

The objection was sustained.

Q. Would you believe her under oath? A. I would not.

Q. Did you ever hear her say anything about a cot in the basement of the pencil factory? A. I would not.

Q. Would you believe her under oath? A. I would not.

Q. Did you ever hear her say anything about a cot in the basement of the pencil factory? A. Yes.

The witness was excused. Bob Goddard, brother of C. M. Goddard, who was shot to death a few months ago by Elmer F. Darden, was the next witness called in rebuttal. Goddard resides near Redan. Dorsey questioned him.

Goddard testified to the bad character of Daisy Hopkins, and declared he would not believe her under oath.

Henry Carr, of Stone Mountain; N. J. Ballard, a second cousin of Daisy Hopkins, and J. L. Rice all followed each other in rapid succession and testified that they would not believe the Hopkins girl under oath.

Dorsey then addressed the court.

"Your honor," he said, "we want to offer indictments against Daisy Hopkins and also a bond forfeiture."

Rosser: "Your honor, they objected to the introduction of an indictment against Dalton and they objected rightly. An indictment is nothing against one's character."

Dorsey: "Dalton denied any knowledge of an indictment. This is a bond forfeiture."

Judge Roan: "I rule it out."

Dalton's Recent Past

Good, Says J. T. Hearn.

Glenn Smith, superintendent of the Nunnally-McRae Company testified that Daisy Hopkins' character was bad and that he would not believe her on oath.

J. T. Hearn, of Walton County, said he had known C. B. Dalton since 1890. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. Is his character good or bad? A. The first part of his life was bad. The last part has been good.

Q. Would you believe him on oath? A. Yes.

Rosser took the witness on cross-examination.

Q. When was the last time you knew Dalton? A. 1903 or 1904.

Q. Did you hear about him being indicted for selling whisky in 1906?

A. Yes, but he had joined the church about 1904 and I understood was leading a good life.

Dorsey took the witness.

Q. Do you know the instance of his being indicted for stealing years ago? A. Yes.

Rosser: "We object. He can't go into that."

Judge Roan sustained the objection.

Dorsey: "When they go into specific acts, can't I?"

Judge Roan: "No."

R. V. Johnston, another Walton County citizen was called. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. When were you approached in regard to testifying to the character of C. B. Dalton?

Rosser interposed with an objection, but was overruled.

C. Last Friday, a week ago.

Q. Who approached you? A. Harry Gottheimer.

Rosser again objected, and was sustained.

Q. Are you acquainted with the character of C. B. Dalton? A. Yes.

Q. Would you believe him on oath? A. I would.

Rosser took the witness.

Q. You never heard that he was indicted for stealing and selling whiskey? A. No.

The witness was excused, and W. M. Cook, of Social Circle, Ga., a dairyman and farmer, testified as to Dalton's good character, and declared that he would believe him on oath.

W. J. Elder, of Decatur, followed Cook on the stand, and said that Dalton came to Decatur about five years ago and worked for him as carpenter. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. Are you acquainted with Dalton's general character? A. I don't know as I am.

Q. That means what people say about him? A. Yes.

Q. Is his character good or bad? A. Good.

Rosser took the witness.

Q. Why did you say just now that you didn't know? A. I didn't know as I did.

Q. You said you didn't know because you didn't know yourself? A. Yes.

The witness were excused, and A. B. Houston, of Decatur a farmer, who has lived there (?)1 years, was called. The witness said that he had known Dalton for eight years and that his character was good and that he would believe him under oath.

J. T. Borne, who formerly lived at Ingleside, in DeKalb County, and who now operates a cigar and soda fountain at Decatur, said he knew Dalton and would believe him on oath.

W. M. Wright, of Atlanta, general manager of the Independent Transfer Company, testified in behalf of Dalton's good character and declared that he would believe him on oath.

W. C. Hale, of No. 88 Kirkwood avenue, Atlanta, formerly of Walton County, testified to Dalton's good character and said he would believe him under oath.

L. L. Boyce, a city policeman, formerly of Walton County, testified that nineteen or twenty years age Dalton's character was bad, but that now I was better and that he had heard nothing bad about him recently.

M. Gordon Coldwell, of Atlanta: J. W. Hust, of No. 18 Trinity avenue, and W. P. Patrick of Atlanta, a member of the police force, testified to Dalton's good character and said that they would believe him under oath.

J. E. Dudley, a former employee of the pencil company, was called to the stand. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. Were you working at the National Pencil Factory about October 1912? A. I don't remember.

Q. Do you remember a machine named Charley Lee? A. Yes, he was working there.

Q. Were you hurt there? A. Yes.

Q. Where? A. Yes, he was working there.

Q. Were you hurt there? A. Yes.

Q. Where? A. On the second floor, the office floor.

Q. Just where were you hurt? A. On a metal machine. I hurt the forefinger of my left hand.

Mashed Finger Butt

Kept Blood Off Floor.

Q. How were you hurt? A. This fellow Lee had put the metal on the machine. It dropped off. I picked it up and in putting it back I mashed my finger.< /p>

Q. What did you do then? A. There was some cotton waste there, which I put around my hand.

Q. Did any blood drop on the floor? A. A few drops.

Q. Did any blood droop near the ladies dressing room? A. None.

Q. How long after this accident did you work? A. I quit then.

Q. What does this fellow Lee do besides working at this trade? A. I don't know.

Q. What did you do then? A. I went to the office to get it dressed, then went to the Atlanta Hospital.

Rosser took the witness on cross-examination.

Q. How badly were you hurt? A. Not very bad.

Q. You bled pretty freely? A. Yes, but I had my hand in the cotton waste.

&. You didn't notice whether any blood was on the floor or not? A. Yes; none of it dropped except at the machine where I was working.

Dorsey took the witness.

Q. Was your finger outside of the cotton waste until you got to the office? A. No.

The witness was excused, and the witness Merck was called, but failed to answer. Willie Turner, of Sandy Springs, the 16-year-old son of E. M.

Continued on Page 4, Column 1.

PAGE 18

FACTORY BOY SWEARS HE SAW FRANK ACCOST MARY PHAGAN

Dorsey Feared He'd Get in Bad' With Detectives, State Witness Says

INDIRECT TESTIMONY

AGAINST PRISONER IS

FORBIDDEN BY JUDGE

Continued from Page 2.

Turner, a farmer, was called to the stand. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. About March, of this year, where did you work? A. At the pencil factory.

Q. Do you know this man? (pointing to Frank) A. Yes.

Q. Did you know Mary Phagan? A. When I saw her.

Q. Did you ever see Mr. Frank talking to Mary Phagan? A. Yes; on the second floor.

Q. What time was it and how long before the murder? A. About the middle of March.

Q. Where was it? A. In the back part of the building.

Q. What time of day was it? A. Just before dinner.

Q. Who was in the room besides them? A. No one else. Two girls came down after I did.

Q. What was said? A. I heard her say she had to go to work.

Q. What did he say? A. He said he was the superintendent of the factory "

Rosser: "We object and we want to argue this without the jury."

The jury was sent out.

Dorsey Let the witness tell what it is.

Turner Mr. Frank told the girl he was superintendent of the factory and wanted to talk to her. She told him she had to go back to work. Mr. Frank then went off.

Mary Backed

Away From Frank.

Q. How was she acting? A. She backed off from and he walked toward her.

Q. How far did she back? A. Three or four feet. That was all I heard. Mr. Frank turned away.

Judge Roan You can go into this to this extent. You can show whether he knew Mary Phagan.

Rosser This other has nothing to do with it.

Hooper If my brother will just keep still a little bit, we may be able to proceed further. This has another value. It shows familiarity or a desire for familiarity.

Rosser If your honor is with us, I don't want to argue.

Judge Roan The question is whether it can be shown just how this conversation took place.

Rosser That is not the purpose of this evidence

Hooper Your honor

Judge Roan Sit down, Mr. Hooper. The question is whether this will show whether he knew her well enough to know her name.

Rosser This evidence doesn't show that.

Dorsey Your honor, this witness says this meeting occurred in the same place and near the same spot where we have contended the murder occurred. It is the basis for further evidence.

Arnold That last statement let the cat out of the bag. They want to bring out another charge. This whole case has been beclouded with every charge that could be imagined. We have gotten away from the charge of murder and have been made to answer every conceivable charge.

Hooper I object to that, first because it is not true and second because it is not the point at issue.

There was smothered applause.

"There is another disturbance of some sort," shouted Arnold.

Judge Roan rapped for order and directed that the jury be brought in. He addressed Solicitor Dorsey.

"You may put your question and let him tell what he knows," said Judge Roan.

Q. What did you see? Tell it in your own way, telling everything that you saw. A. They were back in the rear of the building near the entrance. She was coming to her work just before dinner. Mr. Frank met her and said: I want to speak to you.' She said: I have got to go to work.' He said: "I am the superintendent of the pencil factory and I want to speak to you.' She backed off and he walked toward her.

Q. Is this all? A. Yes.

Rosser took the witness on cross-examination.

Q. What time was it? A. Just before dinner.

Q. How was it she was just going to work? A. She was returning to her work at the machine. It was just before the whistle blew.

Q. Lemmie Quinn's office was there, wasn't it? A. Yes.

Q. There were ten or twelve women there in the polishing department? A. I don't know.

Q. Well, what about those two girls in there? A. They came back and told me where to put the pencils.

Q. Do you know who they were? A. No.

Motorman Hits

Daisy Hopkins' Character.

Q. They came back at the time this thing was going on? A. Yes.

Q. What kind of a looking girl was Mary Phagan? A. She had light hair.

Q. What else? A. I can't describe her.

Q. Do you really know her? A. Yes.

Q. How? A. Some boy who worked on the fourth floor pointed her out to me one morning when she came to work.

Q. Do you know any one else at the factory? A. No.

The witness was excused and Walter T. Merck was called.

Dorsey questioned him.

Q. What is your business? A. A street car motorman.

Q. Do you know Daisy Hopkins? A. Yes.

Q. Did you ever meet her on Saturday afternoons at the corner of Whitehall and Alabama streets? A. yes.

Q. What did she say? A. I asked her where she was going and she said she was going to the pencil factory.

Q. Did you see her any more? A. Yes. I made an engagement to go to her room.

Q. Did you see her? A. Yes, about 8:30 o'clock in a room upstairs at the corner of Walker and Peters streets.

Q. Did she say where she had been? A. To the National Pencil Factory.

Q. Do you know her character? A. yes.

Q. Is it good or bad? A. Bad.

Rosser took the witness on cross-examination.

Q. Does the company know your character? It's a beauty according to your own admission, isn't it?

Dorsey interposed with an objection and was sustained.

Rosser: "Come down, come down, come down."

McKnight Woman's

Lawyer Called.

The witness was excused, and George Gordon, who said he practiced law for thirteen years, was called to the stand. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. Were you present at the police station when Minola McKnight was brought there? A. Yes; or, rather, I was on the outside a part of the time. I went there in connection with getting a habeas corpus proceedings for her release. The detectives told me I could not go in just then. I decided to make a demand to see her, and it was granted. I went in and Stenographer Febuary read a statement to her from his notes, then went out to write it. Detectives Starnes, Campbell and Lanford, Chief Beavers and two men from Beck & Greggs' were there when the stenographer went out. I said that I didn't think that she ought to be held. They told me they could do nothing unless I got your (Dorsey's) permission. So I went to see you, and you told me that you not let the woman go, because it would put you in bad with the detectives.

Q. Didn't I say that I had no right to hold her? A. No: you said you would not release her without a habeas corpus.

Q. Why did you not wait until she signed that paper? A. I went up to see you.

Q. Did you hear her say anything about the statement? Read over the notes and then answer the question.

A. That is the substance of the notes that Febuary read over to her.

Q. What
did she say? Did she deny or admit them? A. She said she believed that was about right.

Dorsey Feared He'd

"Get in Bad."

Q. I told you I didn't have anything to do with locking her up, and that it would be meddling for me to order her release. A. You said you would not interfere because you would get in bad with the detectives. That is what my recollection is, Mr. Dorsey.

Rosser took the witness.

Q. You knew that she had been to Mr. Dorsey's office and had been taken away screaming? A. Yes, I heard that.

Q. That Mr. Dorsey, and officer of the peace, let the police take that woman away screaming?

Dorsey interrupted. "You say you know that?" he asked the witness.

Rosser: "Wait until I get through."

Then he continued his question.

Q. Did you ever find out what charges they had against her? A. I had a habeas corpus to get her release, but could not get to her.

Q. They just held her because she would not give a statement to the police that Mr. Dorsey wanted?

Dorsey interposed an objection.

Rosser I submit to this jury that the evidence in this case proves it is true.

Dorsey I submit it is not true. I don't care what you argue to this jury.

Rosser And you didn't care what you did to that poor negro woman.

Dorsey I didn't do anything to that negro woman.

Judge Sustains

Dorsey's Objection.

Judge Road sustained Dorsey's objection. Rosser asked Dorsey for the affidavit that Minola made in Dorsey's office. He asked the witness if he had ever seen it before, and the witness answered, "No."

Q. Who was guilty of false imprisonment was it Starnes or Beavers? A. Beavers said he knew about it, but that he could not let her out unless Dorsey ordered it.

Q. Did he have a warrant? A. No.

Q. Then they let her out the next day? A. yes.

Q. Did you see her? A. I saw her that first evening. She was in a cell and crying hysterically I asked Chief Beavers to let her out in the corridor and I guess he did.

Dorsey took the witness again.

Q. Didn't I tell you that I had absolutely no rights in the matter? A. Something like that, but if you will pardon me, Hugh, I will tell you exactly what was done. I went to you when the police told me they could not let the woman go without an order from you. You told me you had not had the woman arrested and was not having her held.

Q. Now, didn't Febuary read over to you a portion of that affidavit? A. Yes, he read something.

Q. Now, didn't he read a part of the statement, and she added to it the part about the money? A. She said something about money.

Q. Now, what else did she say? A. I don't recall.

Q. Didn't you question her yourself? A. I asked one or two little questions.

Q. What about? A. She said something about a bucket of water that was not very plain, and I questioned her about it.

Rosser took the witness again.

Q. You don't know what happened behind those doors? A. No.

At this point court adjourned until 2 o'clock.

President of State

Board of Health Testifies.

When the afternoon session started Solicitor Dorsey announced that on account of some of the State's witnesses being out of the city he would vary his program. He could Dr. S. E. Benedict, of Athens, president of the State Board of Health, and a member of the faculty of the University of Georgia for 32 years, to the stand.

On the first question asked him, Attorney Arnold made strenuous objection and precipitated a long argument. The question was:

"Were you present at the meeting of the State Board of Health when Dr. Westmoreland preferred charges against Dr. Harris?"

"We object to going into that," said Mr. Arnold. "We would have to get the minutes of the board and all of that."

"I am not going into the matter further than to disprove Dr. Westmoreland's statement," said Mr. Dorsey, "that the State board found Dr. Harris guilty of scientific dishonest."

"You can go into the question of the feeling of the witness," said Judge Roan.

"Suppose," said Rosser, sarcastically, "Mary had a little lamb, it's fleece was white as snow, would that have anything to do with this case?"

"I am not going into it further than to disprove Dr. Westmoreland's statement," insisted Dorsey.

"Well, I am going into it," said Arnold, "if you don't. I am going to ask him about a letter he wrote Dr. Westmoreland."

"Go ahead, Mr. Dorsey," said Judge Roan.

Q. Were you present when Dr. Westmoreland preferred charges against Dr. Harris? A. Yes.

Q. Were those charges substantiated?

Arnold Your honor, the minutes are the best evidence.

Dorsey All right: take the minutes.

The minute book of the State Board of Health was handed the witness.

Q. Look at page 128 and tell me if that is a correct report of that meeting? A. Yes.

Q. Now, doctor, I want to know whether those charges were found to be true.

Arnold The minutes are the best evidence.

Judge Roan Are those charges on the minutes?

A. I don't see them.

Q. Well, what was the vote? A. I think it was unanimous.

Arnold Doctor, where are the charges? A. I suppose they are in the possession of the secretary, somewhere in his office.

Arnold Dr. Harris, then, has the charges preferred against him? And while the defense is on the minutes, charges are not? A. You misunderstood me. Neither the charges nor the defense are on the minutes. Only the action of the board.

Judge Roan Didn't Dr. Westmoreland in his testimony say that he preferred charges of scientific dishonesty against Dr. Harris and because the board would not dismiss Dr. Harris that he resigned?

Rosser Says Record

Speaks for Itself.

Arnold: "No; Dr. Westmoreland's version was that the board found him guilty but refused to dismiss him, and he (Dr. Westmoreland) resigned."

Dr. Benedict: "That is not true."

Rosser: "Never mind; the record speaks for itself."

Dorsey: "I will ask you if you are familiar with the business and professional life of Dr. Harris?"

"We object," said Rosser, and the objection was sustained.

"Dorsey: "Doctor, what is the condition of the board now?"

Rosser objected again, and was sustained.

Attorney Arnold took the witness.

Q. Doctor, I want to ask you about a letter you wrote Dr. Westmoreland.

Dorsey: "We object to that. It is irrelevant."

Arnold: "I haven't the letter here, but will have it long before the doctor's train leaves."

Judge Roan: "I will wait until I see the letter."

Dorsey offered part of the minutes of the State Board of Health as documentary evidence.

Arnold: "I don't think any of this should go in on the ground that is irrelevant, immaterial and incompetent."

Judge Roan: "I will let it in for what it is worth."

The defense asked that their objection be recorded.

Dorsey: "I would like to know if the letter of the fourth to the Governor on the subject was admissible."

Rosser: "it is as admissible as any of the other minutes, but we object to it all."

Judge Roan: "I will rule the letter out."

Recalls Examination

Of Minola McKnight.

Roy Craven, salesman at the Beck & Gregg Hardware Company, was called. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. Did you know Minola McKnight? A. Yes.

Q. When did you see her last? A. At the police station.

Q. How did you come to be there? A. Her husband worked at the same place I do and asked me if I would not go down to the police station and try to get her out.

Q. Were you there when this statement was signed? A. Yes.

Q. Why did you go there? A. Yes.

Q. Who was with you? A. Pickett and her husband.

Q. Why did you go there?

Q. Why did you go there?

Rosser interposed an objection and was sustained.

Q. Did you go either at the request of the Police Department or myself? A. No.

Q. Now, give me the best recollection of the time, if you can?

Rosser objected, but was overruled.

Q. Give me
the day? A. It was the middle part of May.

Q. Now, tell what this woman, Minola McKnight, said when she made that affidavit at the police station? A. Well, she would not like at first, but we told her what Albert had said.

Q. What was it that Albert had said?

The witness gave the substance of the Minola McKnight affidavit.

Q. Then what did Minola say? A. She was somewhat reluctant to talk at first, but when we told her what Albert had said she gave us the affidavit without stopping.

Rosser took the witness on cross-examination.

Q. Didn't you know that she was in jail because she would not give the sort of a statement they wanted? A. I did not.

Rosser Objects to

Servant's Affidavit.

Q. Why did you think they had her in jail?

Dorsey: "We object to what he thinks. Stick to the statements."

Q. Did you go to Mr. Dorsey's office before you heard Minola make her statements? A. Yes.

Q. Why did you go there? A. To try to get her out.

Q. It wasn't any trouble to get her out after she made a good statement was it? A. I wasn't there when she got out.

Q. Why didn't you stay there? A. I didn't want to.

Q. You got a statement agreeing with what her husband had told you then you left her in jail? A. I went on out and left her with her husband.

Q. Didn't you try to get Mr. Dorsey to get her out? A. I went to see what I could do.

Q. What did he say? A. He said he would do what he could. He said for me to go to see Mr. Starnes or Mr. Campbell.

Q. Did you go? A. Yes.

Q. How long did you stay? A. About three hours.

Q. Did you ask them to let her out? A. No.

Q. You don't know what happened before you got there, do you? A. No, I am not a mind reader.

Dorsey: "Now I want to tender this affidavit of Minola McKnight is evidence."

Rosser: "All in the world that affidavit can show is the treatment that poor woman received at the hands of the police. It is inadmissible."

Crowd Roars When

Sheriff Sits on Floor

Dorsey: "Every word of it is admissible, because it is a flat and positive repudiation of Minola's sworn statements on the stand."

Judge Roan: "Let me read it. I will rule on it later."

The witness was excused, and E. H. Pickett, also an employee of Beck & Greggs Hardware Company, was called to the stand. Dorsey questioned him. He was given the Minola McKnight affidavit to read. Sheriff Mangum, in an attempt to stop talk in the courtroom, met with a little accident that rent a ripple of merriment throughout the room. While Pickett was reading the affidavit, the Sheriff arose from his seat beside the witness stand.

"You people over to the right are talking too much, and if you don't stop I will have to put you out," he said. When he turned to resume his seat he missed the chair and sat down upon the floor with a red expression on his face. The crowd in the courtroom fairly roared.

Pickett read the affidavit, the Dorsey questioned him.

Q. You were present when that paper was signed, were you not? A. Yes; that is immediately before Minola signed it.

Q. Who else was there? A. Minola's lawyer, Roy Craven, one or two detectives and myself.

Q. What statement was made before she signed it? A. Albert McKnight said she had made certain statements. She then admitted it a little bit at a time.

Q. What did she say first? A. That she had been cautioned not to talk.

Q. Then what? A. She admitted she got a little more money.

Q. Did she say everything shown in this affidavit? A. Not the first part. She didn't make those statements in my presence.

Didn't Appear Willing

To Talk Then.

Q. Was she willing to talk? A. No. She said she would talk to me, but she would not talk to the detectives. Before the detectives left she said her husband was a liar.

Q. Did the detectives leave? A. Yes.

Q. Then you questioned her? A. Yes

Q. Then you questioned her? A. Yes, but we, Craven and myself, could not write shorthand, and sent for the stenographer.

Q. Who was there when she made the statement about Mrs. Frank making certain remarks to her mother? A. Starnes, Campbell, her lawyer, the stenographer, Lanford, Craven and myself.

Q. Well, tell the jury what she said.

Rosser: "The affidavit is the best evidence."

Dorsey: "But you are objecting to the affidavit."

Judge Roan: "I am going to let in that affidavit with the exception of the part that could not be put in regularly. For instance, that part where she quotes the conversation she overheard."

Dorsey: "May I or not, without considering the affidavit, ask him all relevant point of Minola McKnight's statement?"

Judge Roan: "You can take the affidavit and ask him about all about relevant points."

Dorsey: Mr. Pickett what did the woman say about Frank eating dinner? A. First she said he ate dinner. Finally she said he did not.

Q. What did she say first about her husband, Albert, being there? A. At first she said he was not there, finally she said he was.

Q: What did she say about being told to keep her mouth shut?

Rosser: "Unless he wants to show that Frank told her that, it is irrelevant."

Counsel in

Another Wrangle.

Dorsey: "It is relevant to impeach the negro."

Roan: "It is relevant, I think."

Rosser: "You could not impeach Mr. Selig on such a statement. Certainly it is inadmissible to impeach Minola McKnight."

Rosser dictated his objections to the court stenographer.

Dorsey: "Answer the question, Mr. Pickett."

C. At first she denied it, then she said Mrs. Selig told her to keep quiet.

Rosser continued to object.

Hooper: "This witness can be put on the stand and impeach half a dozen witnesses."

Roan: "You understand it must be relevant to some issue in this case."

Hooper continued to argue that the question should be admitted.

Judge Roan: "If you insist. I will let it in."

Q. What did Minola say with reference to what was said to her about talking? A. She said she was cautioned not to talk.

Q. What did she say at last about receiving a higher or lower wage? A. She said her wages were increased after the crime.

Q. What did she say first about that hat? A. She only made one reference to it.

Q. Did anybody suggest anything about the hat, before anyone asked her about it? A. Yes.

Q. Now who was in there before you went to the door and called the detectives? A. Alfred McKnight, Craven and myself.

Offered to Free Her

If She Made Statement.

Rosser took the witness on cross-examination.

Q. Now why didn't you believe her first statement? A. Because we thought different.

Q. You kept her there two or three hours didn't you? A. Yes.

Q. Did you give her the third degree? A. We didn't call it that.

Q. Did you see Dorsey? A. Yes; we saw him before we went to the police station for us to see her, and that we might arrange to get her out.

Q. Did you tell Minola that you had come down to get her out? A. We did tell her we wanted to get her out if we got a statement.

Q. Well, why didn't you get her out? A. She left the station house before we did.

Q. After she gave that statement they let her out? A. Yes.

Q. Do you know she left there before you did? A. Yes.

Q. Do you know she left there before you did? A. No, but the detectives said she had.

Q. You didn't know she had been there twelve hours when you got there? Yes.

Q. You know she was there because she would not give the statement the detectives wanted, didn't you? A. No.

Q. You know she was there because she would not give the statement the detectives wanted, didn't you? A. No.

Q. You went there to make her give the statement the detectives wanted, didn't you? A. Not that. I thought it was my duty as a good citizen to aid in getting at the truth.

Rosser (very angrily and with contempt in his voice) Let him come down; let him come down.

Negro McKnight

Called to Stand.

Th
e witness was excused, and Albert McKnight, husband of Minola McKnight, was called to the stand. Hooper questioned him, and had the negro step down from the witness chair and stand before the jury while he displayed a blueprint of the Selig home and a diagram of the dining room and the sideboard mirror, through which Albert said he observed Frank during lunch at the Selig home on Saturday, April 26.

PAGE 17

Frank's Statement Is

Best Plea Presented

In His Defense So Far

By JAMES B. NEVIN

So far, unquestionably, to my way of thinking Leo Frank himself has made the best and most appealing plea in behalf of Leo Frank. His statement in the recital thereof was as clean cut, as dignified, as dispassionate and as convincing as any statement I ever heard from the witness stand, and I have heard hundreds.

Regardless of its merits or, at least, aside from that the defendant acquitted himself with credit, and that much may be said of him ungrudgingly and in the frankest fairness to all parties concerned.

Of course, had Frank been nervous, hesitating, "fidgety," or seemingly in any wise disconcerted, there would be those, perhaps, who would have seen in that great evidence of hi guilty and aby the same token, in that he was calm, poised, self-possessed, even smiling at intervals, there will be those who see in that evidence of a monstrous coldness and unfeeling design.

The vast majority of those who heard that remarkable statement, however, must have been impressed by, at least, the apparent sincerity of it and the seeming inclination in the defendant to hold back nothing.

In its recital the statement of Leo Frank was wonderful in its written form, stripped of the man's personality, it still is a human document of intense and absorbing interest.

It impressed me, too, as being a many ways characteristic of Frank as I have come to know him of late and I never spoke one word to him in all my life.

I have come to know him as the prisoner sitting over there between the two women in the courtroom the alight, spectacled party, a seat or two beyond Luther Rosser and Reuben Arnold.

I have come to know him, in my way of knowing persons charged with grave crimes, not by the way of personal touch so much as by constant observation of him under fire.

Repression Makes the Story.

All that was dramatic in Frank's statement was repressed the dramatic touch was there, to be sure, but the red fire and the usual accompanying stage tricks were not.

If Frank should undertake to sell me a gross of pencils, I should expect him to tell me the truth about the pencils, and nothing but the truth but I should expect him nevertheless to sell me the pencils at a profit.

His statement of Monday seemed to me a recital much after the fashion I should expect from him in the pencil transaction.

To me, it seemed that Frank was undertaking to tell the truth and but I should expect him nevertheless to sell me the pencils at a profit.

His statement of Monday seemed to me a recital much after the fashion I should expect from him in the pencil transaction.

To me, it seemed that Frank was undertaking to tell the truth nothing but the truth of the Mary Phagan murder, as he knows the truth and to tell it at a profit to himself.

That is the best and the worst that I can say of Leo Frank's statement, as it appealed to me.

True, in a transaction involving a mere gross of pencils, there would be lacking all the great elements that entered into the statement Frank made on Monday and yet, at that, neither subject matter is, in its final analysis, anything more or less than something about which the simple truth should be told.

Frank looked the jury fairly and squarely in the eye when he was making his statement and not once did he hesitate or falter in stating his plea.

Contrast the statement of the defendant with the statement of the negro the star witness summoned against him.

Frank's Day in Court.

Now, Monday was Frank's day in court, and it is square and right that Frank's showing should be criticized freely and frankly it is right that his statement should be praised, if it seemed to deserve praise, just as it should be condemned, if it seemed to merit that melancholy fate.

Contrast it, therefore, with the statement of Conley!

Argue the matter with yourself.

Certainly, Frank has behind him a long period of decent life, good reputation, business integrity, and home happiness and Conley has, what?

Take the two stories and upon these two stories the verdict in the Frank case must turn eventually and weigh them, side by side, honestly, without prejudice, and in the light of a clean conscience.

What is your answer?

What will be the jury's answer?

The field of speculation thus opened is most engaging, and it will, if one but undertake to enter it seriously and with open mind, be well worth the entering.

In the matter of his character, Frank said little. He entered simple denials to some few things cited against him.

In the matter of his character, Frank said little. He entered simple denials to some few things cited against him.

He was willing to be cross-examined on his statement. He himself insisted that his general character be put in issue. He furnished the State with the first information it ever had that Conley could write.

All the way through, his statement rang with confident challenge, and a dare to the State to prove anything vile in him whatever!

Now, then, people will differ as to the EFFECT Frank's statement will and ought to have on the jury.

Maybe it is a clever evasion of grave issue maybe it is possible of rebuttal, and maybe it will be broken down.

Impressively Delivered.

The fact remains that it was most impressively delivered, and carried with it every emphasis of apparent truth and straight forwardness!

It is my opinion now that State has in Frank's statement the hardest thing to get away from that yet has been tendered to it.

It contradicts the State at points that the defense has been able to fortify abundantly with facts.

It makes more necessary than ever before the complete success of the State's efforts to break down Frank's good name.

For I think it safe to predict that unless the State DOES demolish Frank utterly, the wonderful statement he made on Monday more than likely will serve in connection with the other things set up to clear him of the charge of murdering Mary Phagan!

It matters not, so far as this article is concerned, moreover, whether the statement ought to clear him the prospect is that it WILL clear him unless the State can batter it down and collapse it entirely!

The defendant touched upon every phase of this State's case against him the happiness of his home, his nervousness on the morning of the murder, his movements on the day of the crime, and the day before, and the day after, his family's financial resources, his disinclination to talk to Conley, although he at first talked freely to the police officers, his alleged peeping into the girl's dressing room, his lack of knowledge of or acquaintance with the impeached Dalton, his non-association with loose characters, male and female.

Is there a gap that Frank MIGHT let down that he has FAILED to let down?

Is there a point involved that Frank has not invited investigation of?

Hard to Find Gaps.

It is rather hard to locate any such gaps or points, if they are there.

And yet they may be there! That is for the State yet to demonstrate!

The State has the full right of rebuttal, as applied to Frank's statement, that it enjoys in respect of other evidence. There may be weak points in his story just as there are weak points in Conley's.

The point is that they are not nearly so apparent upon the surface of things in the Frank statement.

For one thing, Conley made four sworn statements, all contradictory, before he got one finally landed, and Conley admitted freely from the stand that he had
lied time and again.

On the other hand, Frank's statement is the first and only sustained and sequenced utterance as to the details of his story yet falling from his lips.

It must stand in its entirely or fail in its entirety.

Whatever may be the effect of that statement in the end, it will go down in the criminal history of Georgia as on the most remarkably clear and apparently convincing statements ever falling from a defendant's lips.

When the State gets through with it, the statement may be shot to pieces and rendered utterly ineffective.

As it stands today, however, I hardly think a dozen people who heard it will deny the profound impression it made, and the present probability of its determining effect upon the minds of the jury.

The defense has played its best card in Leo Frank's statement.

It remains yet to be seen, however, whether that card is sufficient to win the case!

Mother of Leo Frank

Mrs.

Rae

Frank.

Wife at Last Breaks Down,

Overcome by Frank's Story

After having braved every trying courtroom ordeal and faced every horrible charge hurried at her husband with a stoicism almost as unflinching and imperturbable as his, Mrs. Leo Frank gave away completely to her emotions and sobbed unrestrainedly as Frank said the last words of his wonderful and most impressive address to the jury Monday.

It was the final dramatic touch to a situation that had held a courtroom full of spectators in an irresistible thrall through four long hours of the afternoon.

The spell that had been cast over the room by the quiet but earnest words of the slight young factory superintendent was broken by the tones of the deputies, who shouted the moment Frank rose to leave the witness chair!

"Keep your seats, gentlemen, while the jury passes out."

Frank Rushes to Wife.

In the confusion that followed some did not notice that Frank rushed right to the side of his wife who had thrown her head in her arms and was shaking with pitiful sobs as she moaned his name again and again.

The woman who had steeled herself against the accusations and innuendoes of the Solicitor General during the three long weeks of the trial collapsed when her husband himself took the stand to declare his innocence.

Many who had rushed into the enclosure to give their congratulations to Frank caused as they observed the piteous figure.

The jurors, already deeply impressed by the talk of Frank, were freshly touched by this exhibition of emotion. They had arisen to file over to the Kimball House. Juror Johening, at the head of the line, stood for several minutes with tears running down his cheeks, oblivious of the fact that he was blocking the rest of the jurors and that three deputies were waiting to take them on their way.

Deputy Sheriff Plennie Minor leaned against the railing of the enclosure. There was a suspicious moisture in his eyes, which have grown accustomed to many tragic and affecting spectacles.

Troublesome Lump Rises.

Very few in the courtroom had much to say until they had managed to subdue that troublesome lump that persisted in rising in their throats.

"Rube, that boy put it all over you and me," muttered massive Luther Rosser, huskily, to Reuben Arnold, his partner in the case.

For many minutes after the packed courtroom had emptied itself a little group of persons remained in front of the judge's bench. Mrs. Frank, the wife of the man accused of the revolting murder, and the elder Mrs. Frank, his mother, were weeping hysterically, overcome by the appeal that had been made. Relatives surrounded them. Frank talked comfortingly to them for several minutes, and then, feeling in danger of breaking down himself signaled Sheriff Mangum and returned to his cell in the Tower.

PAGE 19

NEW WITNESSES CALLED AGAINST FRANK

Former Employee Testifies Accused Knew Mary Phagan

PRETTY FACTORY WORKERS TELL

JURY OF FRANK'S GOOD CHARACTER

Miss Lena McMurty, Monday on Stand for Frank

Miss Magnolia Kennedy, below.

Mrs. W. R. Johnson, bride, who testified for Frank

INDIRECT TESTIMONY

AGAINST PRISONER IS

FORBIDDEN BY JUDGE

Here are the important developments Tuesday in the trial of Leo M. Frank, charged with the murder of Mary Phagan:

Judge Roan rules out all testimony bearing on particular acts of immorality which the State has been endeavoring to prove against the defendant.

Will Turner, former pencil factory employee, testifies he entered the metal room shortly before noon one day near the middle of March and saw Frank seeking to engage Mary Phagan in conversation. He says he cannot recall any other person he (Turner) knew in the factory.

Solicitor Dorsey devotes larges part of forenoon in an endeavor to bolster the character of C. B. Dalton, a State's witness, and tear down that of Miss Daisy Hopkins, who was called by the defense.

George Gordon, called by the Solicitor, swears that the sensational affidavit of Minola McKnight, negro cook at the Selig home, was signed in his absence and that Solicitor Dorsey refused to order her release, saying he "would get in bad with the detectives" if he did.

Roy Crave and E. H. Pickett, hardware store employees, testified Minola McKnight, cook in the Selig home, made the affidavit revealing incriminating remarks and actions of Frank without reserve.

Miss Nellie Wood says she does not know Frank's general character after the Judge has barred sensational questions which the Solicitor proposed to put. The Solicitor says the witness "entrapped" him.

M. E. McCoy, a painter, created a stir in the courtroom Tuesday afternoon by testifying that he saw Mary Phagan on Forsyth street at about three or four minutes after 12 0'clock on the Saturday she has killed.

Attorney Rosser made McCoy admit that he had not told of this circumstance until about a week and a half ago, although the time element had been a vital factor for several months and the city had been scoured for person who saw the girl on the fatal day.

Leo Frank's mother and his wife left the courtroom Tuesday afternoon as Solicitor Dorsey was outlining to the court what he proposed to prove by Miss Nellie Wood, the witness on the stand.

The Solicitor made a determined effort to get into the record and before the jury testimony against Frank's character, but, as was the case at the morning session, he was overruled.

"We wish to show by witness, your honor," said Dorsey, the general character of this defendant, as to get before the jury a specific instance in which this young woman, who worked two days on the fourth floor of the National Pencil Factory, figured."

When Judge Roan overruled this line of questioning, the Solicitor declared he had another witness to testify to an occasion when he saw Frank with a woman in the factory. The judge said the law plainly barred the questions.

Miss Wood was asked if she knew Frank's general character. She replied that she did not. Dorsey claimed he had been trapped, as his talk with the witness was exactly to the contrary.

Charges Sideboard Was Moved.

Attorney Frank A. Hooper made the charge Tuesday afternoon that the mirror in the dining room at the Selig home had been moved for the express purpose of discrediting the testimony of Albert McKnight, who swore that he was in the Selig home the afternoon of April 26 and saw Frank hurriedly enter the dining room, go to the sideboard and then leave the house without stopping to eat.

McKnight was on the stand at the time, having been recalled to testify as to the place he was sitting when he saw Frank through the mirror. He designated the place and then corroborated Hooper's charge by his declaration that the mirror had been moved around several feet.

Boy Craven, one of the Beck & Gregg Hardware employees, who assisted the police in obtaining the sensational affidavit from Minola McKnight, negro cook at the Selig home, declared on the stand in the Frank trial Tuesday afternoon that
the McKnight woman made her statements against Frank of her own accord and without reserve, once she had been persuaded it was best to tell what the State says is the whole truth.

Craven said the McKnight woman told him that she had heard conversations at the Selig home Sunday morning follow the murder of Mary Phagan, indicating that Frank had rested poorly and had come home intoxicated, making his wife sleep on the floor. He had asked his wife for a revolver to shoot himself, the McKnight woman said, according to crave. Frank also was reported to have remarked that he "didn't know why he would murder."

E. H. Pickett, a fellow employee of Craven's, corroborated the latter's story and added that the McKnight woman had admitted getting more money after the murder than she had before.

Both Pickett and Craven were sharply questioned by Attorney Rosser, who sought to show that Minola signed the statement to obtain her freedom from jail.

Dr. S. C. Benedict, president of the State Board of Health, was called at the opening of the afternoon to show that charges of scientific dishonesty against Dr. H. F Harris, secretary of the board, never were found to be well founded. Dr. W. F. Westmoreland asserted on the stand that Dr. Harris had been found guilty of the charges.

By far the most damaging testimony brought out against Frank was that of Will Turner, who testified that he had entered the metal room and come upon Frank socking to press his attentions upon the Phagan girl only a few weeks before the crime.

When Turney was put under the raking fire of Luther Rosser's cross-examination, the weight of his testimony suffered considerably. The youth, who admitted he had worked at the factory only a brief time, was unable to describe Mary Phagan and was unable to tell the name of any other girl in the entire factory.

"I went into the rear room on the second floor one day with some pencils." Said Turner. "It was about the middle of March. Frank was walking from his office toward the rear of the factory. Mary Phagan was coming toward her machine. He told her to wait a minute, that he wanted to talk to her. She said she had to go to work."

"He said: I'm superintendent of the pencil factory and I want to talk to you.' She repeated that she had to go to work and he followed her as she backed away from him. A couple of girls came into the room and I asked them where to put the pencils and then I left. I didn't see any more."

On cross-examination young Turner admitted he did not know whether there were other girls around at the time or not. He did not know the names of the two girl, he said, who entered the room while Frank was trying to talk to Mary Phagan. The extent of his description of Mary Phagan was that she had light hair. The questions of the admissibility of this evidence caused a long wrangle between the attorneys.

Rosser and Arnold objected on the ground that it was not at all material, proving absolutely nothing. They denied Dorsey's contention that it established that Frank had known Mary Phagan, in spite of his declarations that he did not know her. The lawyers said that it did not show that he knew her by the name or that he was conversing with her on any other subject than her work.

Charges It Was First Step to Murder.

"We contend that Mary Phagan was killed right on that second floor." Retorted the Solicitor. "We contend that Mary Phagan and Frank were the only persons in the metal department at the time that this incident took place, and that she was backing away and protesting that she had to go back to work. We contend that it was the beginning of the transaction which ended in the little girl's death. It should go in as contradicting Frank's statement that he did not know her."

Turner was allowed to tell his story.

That Solicitor Dorsey refused to take any step toward the liberation of Minola McKnight, cook at the Selig home, who was imprisoned until she made her sensational affidavit against Frank, on the ground that it would "get him in bad with the detectives," was the unexpected and highly interesting statement made by Attorney George Gordon late in the forenoon session.

Gordon was called by the State, but proved as good a witness for the defense. He declared that the affidavit made by the cook was signal in his absence, although the last paragraph stated that

PAGE 20

LEO FRANK SKETCHED AS HE TOLD HIS OWN STORY TO JURY

During the greater part of his story Frank was as Calm and statistical as an accountant discussing an audit. In telling of his dealings with the police and Chief of Detectives Lanford, Frank waxed sarcastic in a quiet yet bitter way. But he never let loose his emotion or lost his poise. At times Frank would lose his air of complete repression and his face for a moment would take on an aspect of deep feeling. He would, how-ever, quickly resume his normal expression of stoicism.

WITNESSES GIVE

DALTON GOOD

REPUTATION

Once Bad Man, but He Has Re-

formed, Old Acquaintances

Testify for State.

Continued for Page 1.

it was signed in his presence.

He said that he had told Solicitor Dorsey that the negro woman was being held illegally, but that Solicitor had replied that it was necessary sometimes to do things of this sort in order to get the information wanted. He told of going to the police station and finding Minola crying and hysterical in her cell.

The attorney for the colored woman said that he had not been permitted to enter the room where his clients was being interrogated by the detectives and Ray Pickett and Arthur Craven, the latter two being employees of the Beck & Gregg Hardware Company. He was present, he said, when part of the notes were being read by G. C. Febuary, but was not there when the affidavit was signed.

The McKnight affidavit told of alleged conversations at the Selig home of a nature very incriminating to Frank. The McKnight woman denied all the statements in the affidavit to a Georgian reporter the night that she was liberated.

A blow was the State by the refusal of Judge Roan to admit either while the defense was completing. Its case or after the State had taken up the rebuttal, any evidence not directly and at first hand hearing upon the specific acts charged against the factory superintendent.

The ruling was sweeping victory for the defense. It gave Frank's case, which had been aided materially the day before by the defendant's own statement, an added strength and heightened the prospects in Frank's favor.

Solicitor Dorsey tried first to cross-question Daisy Hopkins, one of the defense's witnesses, as to conversations she was supposed to have had in regard to incidents at the pencil factory in which she and a man undesignated except as her "foreman" were involved. Frank's name was not mentioned in the indicated charges. The conversation was about a "foreman."

The Hopkins woman denied again that she ever had made visits to the factory for improper purposes or that she had had the conversations referred to by the Solicitor.

Dorsey encountered the same stone wall when he tried to draw testimony against the moral character of Frank his own witnesses. From W. P. Merck and J. P. Floyd the Solicitor had expected to obtain a recital of the stories of happenings which they said had been related to them.

Merck, however, had mysteriously disappeared from the courthouse when his name was called, and Floyd was not permitted to go into the details of the testimony the Solicitor had hoped to bring out.

The Solicitor thereafter confined his efforts to bolstering up the character of C. B. Dalton, the State's witness who testified to seeing women in Frank's office, and attacking that of Diasy Hopkins. He called a number of witnesses, one them cousin of Hopkins woman, who swore that her character for truth and veracity was had and that they wouldn't believe her on oath.

Swear Dalton's

Character Is Good.

Other witnesses testified that Dalton's character was good. They were asked by Att
orney Rosser if they were acquainted with his court and chain-gang record. They replied, for the most part, that they were not.

The brown suit worn by Frank April 26 was identified by Mrs. Emil Selig, his mother-in-law, at the opening of court in the forenoon and the suit was placed in evidence.

The defense prepared to show oy Wiley Roberts, inside jailer at the Tower, that Jim Conley had been reading since his incarceration there, but the Solicitor objected on the ground that no basis had been laid for the testimony.

Daisy Hopkins then was called and questioned after which the State began its rebuttal, the defense having closed its case.

While waiting for a witness Solicitor Dorsey arose and made the unexpected announcement that he himself had erased the identification. "Taken out at 8:26" on the time slip taken from the clock in the factory. Frank had made the charge he had written words as an identification of the slip and that they had been erased. The Solicitor declared that he thought the detectives had made the identification.

"Frank did not know who made the erasure," said Attorney Reuben Arnold.

The Solicitor had announced earlier that his first witnesses in rebuttal would be called to support C. B. Dalton and impeach Daisy Hopkins who declared she had never visited the factory with Dalton or that he had ever introduced Dalton to the factory superintendent.

When Roberts was asked:

Q: Has Jim Conley been in your custody during the trial? A. Yes.

Q. Has he ever asked for newspapers? A. Yes.

Dorsey interrupted.

"Your honor," he said, "I think the witness. Jim Conley, ought to have the privilege of denying or affirming that before he can be impeached."

"Conley said that he could only read certain words," said Arnold, "but probably Mr. Dorsey is right. I will have to call Jim Conley back again. Mr. Rosser will be back in a minute and we will close."

Daisey Hopkins Is

Recalled by Dorsey.

The witness was excused and Dorsey made the announcement that four doctors of the following five would be called by the prosecution:

Drs. G. C. Mizell, F. L. Eskridge, Clarence Johnson, John Funke, S. E. Benedict of Athens, and J. C. Cramer of Macon, the latter two president and vice president of the State Board of Health.

Solicitor Dorsey asked that Daisy Hopkins be returned to the stand so that he might continue his cross-examination of her.

The witness took the stand.

Q. You say you knew nothing of the cot in the basement of the National Pencil Factory? A. No.

Q. Do you know anything at all of the basement? A. No.

Q. Are you acquainted with A. R. Floyd, of Redan, Ga.? A. Yes.

Q. Have you known him for a long time? A. Yes.

Q. Haven't you been to his house to get milk? A. I don't think I have since the murder.

Q. Didn't you go to the home of Floyd to get milk and tell him about that cot in the basement of that National Pencil Factory? A. No.

Q. Do you know Bob Goddard? A. Yes.

Q. Do you know Mr. Smith, superintendent of the Nunnally-McRae Company? A. On Mitchell street?

Q. Yes. A. yes, I know him.

Q. Do you know Walter P. Merck? A. Where does he live?

Met Merck on

Peach tree Street.

Q. You met him first at Stone Mountain, then you met him on Walker street? A. I met him at Redan. They used to live down there.

Q. You said something about being married. Have you two living husbands? A. No; only one.

Q. Have you seen him since the murder? A. Yes; at Redan.

Q. Do you remember meeting Walter P. Merck one Saturday afternoon on Whitehall street? A. I met him on Peachtree.

Q. Didn't you tell him that afternoon that you were going to the National Pencil Factory? A. No; I told him. I had just left the factory.

Q. Didn't he make an arrangement with you to go to the factory? A. No

Rosser objected, declaring that a female witness could not be attacked in that way.

"Your honor," said Dorsey, "I want to show by Merck that this woman did make an engagement with him that afternoon."

"I understand," replied Rosser, "that when an argument of this kind is to be made the jury is to retire."

"It would be better to have the ladies retire also," said Dorsey, "I don't want to embarrass them."

Jury and Women

Retire From Room.

The jury retired, and after a hurried conference, Frank's wife and mother also left the courtroom at the request of Attorney Arnold.

"This is their witness," said Dorsey. "We want to show that this man Merc had her Saturday afternoon, and she said she was going to the National Pencil Factory. It was cold weather. We want to show that he saw her that night and what she told him."

The witness interrupted:

"It was summer time," she said partly.

"She has denied," said Dorsey, "in the impeachment of Dalton that she ever went to the pencil factory for any improper purpose."

"We object," said Rosser.

"I want to show that she told Merck about meeting her foreman at the factory," said Dorsey.

Then the Solicitor repeated a conversation involving the "foreman," which is unprintable, which he wanted to get before the jury.

"He does not mean to charge Frank is the foreman," said Arnold. "He is frank enough to state that."

"Merck in an affidavit, " said Dorsey, "said foreman. He didn't say Mrs. Hopkins said her superintendent or that she named any names. I mean to let the jury draw its own conclusions."

"I knew when your honor refused to rule out the charges of Conley and Dalton," said Arnold, taking up the argument, "that you were opening the doors for new issues that would obscure the charge of murder. I knew it would lead to a situation in impeachment bringing us to the point where woe would hardly know who we were trying. This woman never would have been put up as an original witness except for the aspersions cast on her by Conley and Dalton. Look how far afield we have wandered. Now, he wants to impeach this witness on something with which the defendant has no connection."

"You can rebut any of their direct testimony," said Judge Roan. "You can not bring any new criminal charge against the defendant. If it is against someone else, it is irrelevant."

"Your honour," said Dorsey, "I want to ask a question to let the jury hear that you rule it out."

"No; we object," said Rosser "That's just why the jury was sent out."

"I'll let you assume that you ask it," said the court to Dorsey.

"Why, your honour," replied Dorsey, "it puts us in the position of not even trying to prove what we have indicated we would."

"I can not permit the question," said Judge Roan.

"Very well," said Dorsey, adding, in an undertone, "That shuts me off; that shuts me off."

Dorsey continued the examination:

Q. Didn't you meet Merc during the afternoon after working hours and tell him you were going to the pencil factory? A. No.

Q. Didn't he come to see you that night? A. No.

Q. Didn't you tell him that you had been to the factory that afternoon? A. No.

Men Say Woman's

Character Is Bad.

Miss Hopkins was excused, and J. R. Floyd of Redan, Ga., was called. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. Do you know Daisy Hopkins? A. Yes.

Q. Do you know how many husbands she has?

Rosser: "I object, your honor. I don't care if she has three hundred husbands."

The objection was sustained.

Q. Would you believe her under oath? A. I would not.

Q. Did you ever hear her say anything about a cot in the basement of the pencil factory? A. I would not.

Q. Would you believe her under oath? A. I would not.

Q. Did you ever hear her say anything about a cot in the basement of the pencil factory? A. Yes.

The witness was excused. Bob Goddard, brother of C. M. Goddard, who was shot to death a few months ago by Elmer F. Darden, was the next witness called in rebuttal. Goddard resides near Redan. Dorsey questioned him.

Goddard testified to the bad character of Daisy Hopkins, and declared
he would not believe her under oath.

Henry Carr, of Stone Mountain; N. J. Ballard, a second cousin of Daisy Hopkins, and J. L. Rice all followed each other in rapid succession and testified that they would not believe the Hopkins girl under oath.

Dorsey then addressed the court.

"Your honor," he said, "we want to offer indictments against Daisy Hopkins and also a bond forfeiture."

Rosser: "Your honor, they objected to the introduction of an indictment against Dalton and they objected rightly. An indictment is nothing against one's character."

Dorsey: "Dalton denied any knowledge of an indictment. This is a bond forfeiture."

Judge Roan: "I rule it out."

Dalton's Recent Past

Good, Says J. T. Hearn.

Glenn Smith, superintendent of the Nunnally-McRae Company testified that Daisy Hopkins' character was bad and that he would not believe her on oath.

J. T. Hearn, of Walton County, said he had known C. B. Dalton since 1890. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. Is his character good or bad? A. The first part of his life was bad. The last part has been good.

Q. Would you believe him on oath? A. Yes.

Rosser took the witness on cross-examination.

Q. When was the last time you knew Dalton? A. 1903 or 1904.

Q. Did you hear about him being indicted for selling whisky in 1906?

A. Yes, but he had joined the church about 1904 and I understood was leading a good life.

Dorsey took the witness.

Q. Do you know the instance of his being indicted for stealing years ago? A. Yes.

Rosser: "We object. He can't go into that."

Judge Roan sustained the objection.

Dorsey: "When they go into specific acts, can't I?"

Judge Roan: "No."

R. V. Johnston, another Walton County citizen was called. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. When were you approached in regard to testifying to the character of C. B. Dalton?

Rosser interposed with an objection, but was overruled.

D. Last Friday, a week ago.

Q. Who approached you? A. Harry Gottheimer.

Rosser again objected, and was sustained.

Q. Are you acquainted with the character of C. B. Dalton? A. Yes.

Q. Would you believe him on oath? A. I would.

Rosser took the witness.

Q. You never heard that he was indicted for stealing and selling whiskey? A. No.

The witness was excused, and W. M. Cook, of Social Circle, Ga., a dairyman and farmer, testified as to Dalton's good character, and declared that he would believe him on oath.

W. J. Elder, of Decatur, followed Cook on the stand, and said that Dalton came to Decatur about five years ago and worked for him as carpenter. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. Are you acquainted with Dalton's general character? A. I don't know as I am.

Q. That means what people say about him? A. Yes.

Q. Is his character good or bad? A. Good.

Rosser took the witness.

Q. Why did you say just now that you didn't know? A. I didn't know as I did.

Q. You said you didn't know because you didn't know yourself? A. Yes.

The witness were excused, and A. B. Houston, of Decatur a farmer, who has lived there (?)1 years, was called. The witness said that he had known Dalton for eight years and that his character was good and that he would believe him under oath.

J. T. Borne, who formerly lived at Ingleside, in DeKalb County, and who now operates a cigar and soda fountain at Decatur, said he knew Dalton and would believe him on oath.

W. M. Wright, of Atlanta, general manager of the Independent Transfer Company, testified in behalf of Dalton's good character and declared that he would believe him on oath.

W. C. Hale, of No. 88 Kirkwood avenue, Atlanta, formerly of Walton County, testified to Dalton's good character and said he would believe him under oath.

L. L. Boyce, a city policeman, formerly of Walton County, testified that nineteen or twenty years age Dalton's character was bad, but that now I was better and that he had heard nothing bad about him recently.

M. Gordon Coldwell, of Atlanta: J. W. Hust, of No. 18 Trinity avenue, and W.P. Patrick of Atlanta, a member of the police force, testified to Dalton's good character and said that they would believe him under oath.

J. E. Dudley, a former employee of the pencil company, was called to the stand. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. Were you working at the National Pencil Factory about October 1912? A. I don't remember.

Q. Do you remember a machine named Charley Lee? A. Yes, he was working there.

Q. Were you hurt there? A. Yes.

Q. Where? A. Yes, he was working there.

Q. Were you hurt there? A. Yes.

Q. Where? A. On the second floor, the office floor.

Q. Just where were you hurt? A. On a metal machine. I hurt the forefinger of my left hand.

Mashed Finger Butt

Kept Blood Off Floor.

Q. How were you hurt? A. This fellow Lee had put the metal on the machine. It dropped off. I picked it up and in putting it back I mashed my finger.

Q. What did you do then? A. There was some cotton waste there, which I put around my hand.

Q. Did any blood drop on the floor? A. A few drops.

Q. Did any blood droop near the ladies dressing room? A. None.

Q. How long after this accident did you work? A. I quit then.

Q. What does this fellow Lee do besides working at this trade? A. I don't know.

Q. What did you do then? A. I went to the office to get it dressed, then went to the Atlanta Hospital.

Rosser took the witness on cross-examination.

Q. How badly were you hurt? A. Not very bad.

Q. You bled pretty freely? A. Yes, but I had my hand in the cotton waste.

&. You didn't notice whether any blood was on the floor or not? A. Yes; none of it dropped except at the machine where I was working.

Dorsey took the witness.

Q. Was your finger outside of the cotton waste until you got to the office? A. No.

The witness was excused, and the witness Merck was called, but failed to answer. Willie Turner, of Sandy Springs, the 16-year-old son of E. M.

Continued on Page 6, Column 1.

PAGE 24

FACTORY BOY SWEARS HE SAW FRANK ACCOST MARY PHAGAN

Dorsey Feared He'd Get in Bad' with Detectives, State Witness Says

Turner, a farmer, was called to the stand. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. About March, of this year, where did you work? A. At the pencil factory.

Q. Do you know this man? (pointing to Frank) A. Yes.

Q. Did you know Mary Phagan? A. When I saw her.

Q. Did you ever see Mr. Frank talking to Mary Phagan? A. Yes; on the second floor.

Q. What time was it and how long before the murder? A. About the middle of March.

Q. Where was it? A. In the back part of the building.

Q. What time of day was it? A. Just before dinner.

Q. Who was in the room besides them? A. No one else. Two girls came

down after I did.

Q. What was said? A. I heard her say she had to go to work.

Q. What did he say? A. He said he was the superintendent of the factory "

Rosser: "We object and we want to argue this without the jury."

The jury was sent out.

Dorsey Let the witness tell what it is.

Turner Mr. Frank told the girl he was superintendent of the factory and wanted to talk to her. She told him she had to go back to work. Mr. Frank then went off.

Mary Backed

Away From Frank.

Q. How was she acting? A. She backed off from and he walked toward her.

Q. How far did she back? A. Three or four feet. That was all I heard. Mr. Frank turned away.

Judge Roan You can go into this to this extent. You can show whether he knew Mary Phagan.

Rosser This other has nothing to do with it.

Hooper If my brother will just keep still a little bit, we may be able to proceed further. This has another value. It shows familiarity or a desire for familiarity.

Rosser If your honor is with us, I don't want to argue.

Judge Roan The question is whether it can be shown just how this conversation took place.

Rosser That is not the purpose of
this evidence

Hooper Your honor

Judge Roan Sit down, Mr. Hooper. The question is whether this will show whether he knew her well enough to know her name.

Rosser This evidence doesn't show that.

Dorsey Your honor, this witness says this meeting occurred in the same place and near the same spot where we have contended the murder occurred. It is the basis for further evidence.

Arnold That last statement let the cat out of the bag. They want to

bring out another charge. This whole case has been beclouded with every charge that could be imagined. We have gotten away from the charge of murder and have been made to answer every conceivable charge.

Hooper I object to that, first because it is not true and second because it is not the point at issue.

There was smothered applause.

"There is another disturbance of some sort," shouted Arnold.

Judge Roan rapped for order and directed that the jury be brought in. He addressed Solicitor Dorsey.

"You may put your question and let him tell what he knows," said Judge Roan.

Q. What did you see? Tell it in your own way, telling everything that you saw. A. They were back in the rear of the building near the entrance. She was coming to her work just before dinner. Mr. Frank met her and said: I want to speak to you.' She said: I have got to go to work.' He said: "I am the superintendent of the pencil factory and I want to speak to you.' She backed off and he walked toward her.

Q. Is this all? A. Yes.

Rosser took the witness on cross-examination.

Q. What time was it? A. Just before dinner.

Q. How was it she was just going to work? A. She was returning to her work at the machine. It was just before the whistle blew.

Q. Lemmie Quinn's office was there, wasn't it? A. Yes.

Q. There were ten or twelve women there in the polishing department? A. I don't know.

Q. Well, what about those two girls in there? A. They came back and told me where to put the pencils.

Q. Do you know who they were? A. No.

Motorman Hits

Daisy Hopkins' Character.

Q. They came back at the time this thing was going on? A. Yes.

Q. What kind of a looking girl was Mary Phagan? A. She had light hair.

Q. What else? A. I can't describe her.

Q. Do you really know her? A. Yes.

Q. How? A. Some boy who worked on the fourth floor pointed her out to me one morning when she came to work.

Q. Do you know any one else at the factory? A. No.

The witness was excused and Walter T. Merck was called.

Dorsey questioned him.

Q. What is your business? A. A street car motorman.

Q. Do you know Daisy Hopkins? A. Yes.

Q. Did you ever meet her on Saturday afternoons at the corner of Whitehall and Alabama streets? A. Yes.

Q. What did she say? A. I asked her where she was going and she said she was going to the pencil factory.

Q. Did you see her any more? A. Yes. I made an engagement to go to her room.

Q. Did you see her? A. Yes, about 8:30 o'clock in a room upstairs at the corner of Walker and Peters streets.

Q. Did she say where she had been? A. To the National Pencil Factory.

Q. Do you know her character? A. yes.

Q. Is it good or bad? A. Bad.

Rosser took the witness on cross-examination.

Q. Does the company know your character? It's a beauty according to your own admission, isn't it?

Dorsey interposed with an objection and was sustained.

Rosser: "Come down, come down, come down."

McKnight Woman's

Lawyer Called.

The witness was excused, and George Gordon, who said he practiced law for thirteen years, was called to the stand. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. Were you present at the police station when Minola McKnight was brought there? A. Yes; or, rather, I was on the outside a part of the time. I went there in connection with getting a habeas corpus proceedings for her release. The detectives told me I could not go in just then. I decided to make a demand to see her, and it was granted. I went in and Stenographer Febuary read a statement to her from his notes, then went out to write it. Detectives Starnes, Campbell and Lanford, Chief Beavers and two men from Beck & Greggs' were there when the stenographer went out. I said that I didn't think that she ought to be held. They told me they could do nothing unless I got your (Dorsey's) permission. So I went to see you, and you told me that you not let the woman go, because it would put you in bad with the detectives.

Q. Didn't I say that I had no right to hold her? A. No: you said you would not release her without a habeas corpus.

Q. Why did you not wait until she signed that paper? A. I went up to see you.

Q. Did you hear her say anything about the statement? Read over the notes and then answer the question.

A. That is the substance of the notes that Febuary read over to her.

Q. What did she say? Did she deny or admit them? A. She said she believed that was about right.

Dorsey Feared He'd

"Get in Bad."

Q. I told you I didn't have anything to do with locking her up, and that it would be meddling for me to order her release. A. You said you would not interfere because you would get in bad with the detectives. That is what my recollection is, Mr. Dorsey.

Rosser took the witness.

Q. You knew that she had been to Mr. Dorsey's office and had been taken away screaming? A. Yes, I heard that.

Q. That Mr. Dorsey, and officer of the peace, let the police take that woman away screaming?

Dorsey interrupted. "You say you know that?" he asked the witness.

Rosser: "Wait until I get through."

Then he continued his question.

Q. Did you ever find out what charges they had against her? A. I had a habeas corpus to get her release, but could not get to her.

Q. They just held her because she would not give a statement to the police that Mr. Dorsey wanted?

Dorsey interposed an objection.

Rosser I submit to this jury that the evidence in this case proves it is true.

Dorsey I submit it is not true. I don't care what you argue to this jury.

Rosser And you didn't care what you did to that poor negro woman.

Dorsey I didn't do anything to that negro woman.

Judge Sustains

Dorsey's Objection.

Judge Road sustained Dorsey's objection. Rosser asked Dorsey for the affidavit that Minola made in Dorsey's office. He asked the witness if he had ever seen it before, and the witness answered, "No."

Q. Who was guilty of false imprisonment was it Starnes or Beavers? A. Beavers said he knew about it, but that he could not let her out unless Dorsey ordered it.

Q. Did he have a warrant? A. No.

Q. Then they let her out the next day? A. yes.

Q. Did you see her? A. I saw her that first evening. She was in a cell and crying hysterically I asked Chief Beavers to let her out in the corridor and I guess he did.

Dorsey took the witness again.

Q. Didn't I tell you that I had absolutely no rights in the matter? A. Something like that, but if you will pardon me, Hugh, I will tell you exactly what was done. I went to you when the police told me they could not let the woman go without an order from you. You told me you had not had the woman arrested and was not having her held.

Q. Now, didn't Febuary read over to you a portion of that affidavit? A. Yes, he read something.

Q. Now, didn't he read a part of the statement, and she added to it the part about the money? A. She said something about money.

Q. Now, what else did she say? A. I don't recall.

Q. Didn't you question her yourself? A. I asked one or two little questions.

Q. What about? A. She said something about a bucket of water that was not very plain, and I questioned her about it.

Rosser took the witness again.

Q. You don't know what happened behind those doors? A. No.

At this point court adjourned until 2 o'clock.

President of State

Board of Health Testifies.

When the afternoon session started Solicitor Dorsey anno
unced that on account of some of the State's witnesses being out of the city he would vary his program. He could Dr. S. E. Benedict, of Athens, president of the State Board of Health, and a member of the faculty of the University of Georgia for 32 years, to the stand.

On the first question asked him, Attorney Arnold made strenuous objection and precipitated a long argument. The question was:

"Were you present at the meeting of the State Board of Health when Dr. Westmoreland preferred charges against Dr. Harris?"

"We object to going into that," said Mr. Arnold. "We would have to get the minutes of the board and all of that."

"I am not going into the matter further than to disprove Dr. Westmoreland's statement," said Mr. Dorsey, "that the State board found Dr. Harris guilty of scientific dishonest."

"You can go into the question of the feeling of the witness," said Judge Roan.

"Suppose," said Rosser, sarcastically, "Mary had a little lamb, it's fleece was white as snow, would that have anything to do with this case?"

"I am not going into it further than to disprove Dr. Westmoreland's statement," insisted Dorsey.

"Well, I am going into it," said Arnold, "if you don't. I am going to ask him about a letter he wrote Dr. Westmoreland."

"Go ahead, Mr. Dorsey," said Judge Roan.

Frank Proves His

Own Best Witness.

Frank had demonstrated that he was better than his lawyers and that he was his own best witness when he came down from the witness chair Monday night after talking almost continuously for four hours.

It is doubtful as shrewd and eloquent as his attorneys are known to be, if anything more impressive, more convincing and more logical will be presented to the jury in his behalf before his fate is placed in the hands of the twelve men.

The young factory superintendent made no attempt at oratory or dramatics. He did not attempt an appeal to the emotions of the jurors. He probably was wise in this as the memory of what he said and the manner in which he said it will remain with the jurors long after an emotion of pity would have passed away.

Although Frank seldom raised his voice above conversational tone his address was deeply impressive from start to finish. Its truth or falsity, of course, is problematical. But it had all the characteristic that the commonly accepted as accompanying the truth.

He did not ask for pity or mercy. He did not take the attitude of demanding anything to which he was not entitled. His mein throughout was that of a man seeking moral justice, and that alone. He was an innocent man or a consummate actor as he stood before the jury. These are the only two conclusions possible.

The matter of fact manner in which he delivered me along and read only added to its impressiveness and eloquence. That a man with the burden of a foul murder on his conscience could talk easily, freely, fearlessly for four hours before the men whose word can send him to the gallows was hardly to be conceived.

PAGE 21

FRANK'S STATEMENT IS

BEST PLEA PRESENTED

IN HIS DEFENSE SO FAR

By JAMES B. NEVIN

So far, unquestionably, to my way of thinking Leo Frank himself has made the best and most appealing plea in behalf of Leo Frank. His statement in the recital thereof was as clean cut, as dignified, as dispassionate and as convincing as any statement I ever heard from the witness stand, and I have heard hundreds.

Regardless of its merits or, at least, aside from that the defendant acquitted himself with credit, and that much may be said of him ungrudgingly and in the frankest fairness to all parties concerned.

Of course, had Frank been nervous, hesitating, "fidgety," or seemingly in any wise disconcerted, there would be those, perhaps, who would have seen in that great evidence of hi guilty and aby the same token, in that he was calm, poised, self-possessed, even smiling at intervals, there will be those who see in that evidence of a monstrous coldness and unfeeling design.

The vast majority of those who heard that remarkable statement, however, must have been impressed by, at least, the apparent sincerity of it and the seeming inclination in the defendant to hold back nothing.

In its recital the statement of Leo Frank was wonderful in its written form, stripped of the man's personality, it still is a human document of intense and absorbing interest.

It impressed me, too, as being a many ways characteristic of Frank as I have come to know him of late and I never spoke one word to him in all my life.

I have come to know him as the prisoner sitting over there between the two women in the courtroom the alight, spectacled party, a seat or two beyond Luther Rosser and Reuben Arnold.

I have come to know him, in my way of knowing persons charged with grave crimes, not by the way of personal touch so much as by constant observation of him under fire.

Repression Makes the Story.

All that was dramatic in Frank's statement was repressed the dramatic touch was there, to be sure, but the red fire and the usual accompanying stage tricks were not.

If Frank should undertake to sell me a gross of pencils, I should expect him to tell me the truth about the pencils, and nothing but the truth but I should expect him nevertheless to sell me the pencils at a profit.

His statement of Monday seemed to me a recital much after the fashion I should expect from him in the pencil transaction.

To me, it seemed that Frank was undertaking to tell the truth and but I should expect him nevertheless to sell me the pencils at a profit.

His statement of Monday seemed to me a recital much after the fashion I should expect from him in the pencil transaction.

To me, it seemed that Frank was undertaking to tell the truth nothing but the truth of the Mary Phagan murder, as he knows the truth and to tell it at a profit to himself.

That is the best and the worst that I can say of Leo Frank's statement, as it appealed to me.

True, in a transaction involving a mere gross of pencils, there would be lacking all the great elements that entered into the statement Frank made on Monday and yet, at that, neither subject matter is, in its final analysis, anything more or less than something about which the simple truth should be told.

Frank looked the jury fairly and squarely in the eye when he was making his statement and not once did he hesitate or falter in stating his plea.

Contrast the statement of the defendant with the statement of the negro the star witness summoned against him.

Frank's Day in Court.

Now, Monday was Frank's day in court, and it is square and right that Frank's showing should be criticized freely and frankly it is right that his statement should be praised, if it seemed to deserve praise, just as it should be condemned, if it seemed to merit that melancholy fate.

Contrast it, therefore, with the statement of Conley!

Argue the matter with yourself.

Certainly, Frank has behind him a long period of decent life, good reputation, business integrity, and home happiness and Conley has, what?

Take the two stories and upon these two stories the verdict in the Frank case must turn eventually and weigh them, side by side, honestly, without prejudice, and in the light of a clean conscience.

What is your answer?

What will be the jury's answer?

The field of speculation thus opened is most engaging, and it will, if one but undertake to enter it seriously and with open mind, be well worth the entering.

In the matter of his character, Frank said little. He entered simple denials to some few things cited against him.

In the matter of his character, Frank said little. He entered simple denials to some few things cited against him.

He was willing to be cross-examined on his statement. He himself insisted that his general character be put in issue. He furnished the State with the first information it ever had that Conley could write.

All the way through, his statement rang with confide
nt challenge, and a dare to the State to prove anything vile in him whatever!

Now, then, people will differ as to the EFFECT Frank's statement will and ought to have on the jury.

Maybe it is a clever evasion of grave issue maybe it is possible of rebuttal, and maybe it will be broken down.

Impressively Delivered.

The fact remains that it was most impressively delivered, and carried with it every emphasis of apparent truth and straight forwardness!

It is my opinion now that State has in Frank's statement the hardest thing to get away from that yet has been tendered to it.

It contradicts the State at points that the defense has been able to fortify abundantly with facts.

It makes more necessary than ever before the complete success of the State's efforts to break down Frank's good name.

For I think it safe to predict that unless the State DOES demolish Frank utterly, the wonderful statement he made on Monday more than likely will serve in connection with the other things set up to clear him of the charge of murdering Mary Phagan!

It matters not, so far as this article is concerned, moreover, whether the statement ought to clear him the prospect is that it WILL clear him unless the State can batter it down and collapse it entirely!

The defendant touched upon every phase of this State's case against him the happiness of his home, his nervousness on the morning of the murder, his movements on the day of the crime, and the day before, and the day after, his family's financial resources, his disinclination to talk to Conley, although he at first talked freely to the police officers, his alleged peeping into the girl's dressing room, his lack of knowledge of or acquaintance with the impeached Dalton, his non-association with loose characters, male and female.

Is there a gap that Frank MIGHT let down that he has FAILED to let down?

Is there a point involved that Frank has not invited investigation of?

Hard to Find Gaps.

It is rather hard to locate any such gaps or points, if they are there.

And yet they may be there! That is for the State yet to demonstrate!

The State has the full right of rebuttal, as applied to Frank's statement, that it enjoys in respect of other evidence. There may be weak points in his story just as there are weak points in Conley's.

The point is that they are not nearly so apparent upon the surface of things in the Frank statement.

For one thing, Conley made four sworn statements, all contradictory, before he got one finally landed, and Conley admitted freely from the stand that he had lied time and again.

On the other hand, Frank's statement is the first and only sustained and sequenced utterance as to the details of his story yet falling from his lips.

It must stand in its entirely or fail in its entirety.

Whatever may be the effect of that statement in the end, it will go down in the criminal history of Georgia as on the most remarkably clear and apparently convincing statements ever falling from a defendant's lips.

When the State gets through with it, the statement may be shot to pieces and rendered utterly ineffective.

As it stands today, however, I hardly think a dozen people who heard it will deny the profound impression it made, and the present probability of its determining effect upon the minds of the jury.

The defense has played its best card in Leo Frank's statement.

It remains yet to be seen, however, whether that card is sufficient to win the case!

Mother of Leo Frank

Mrs.

Rae

Frank.

Wife at Last Breaks Down,

Overcome by Frank's Story

After having braved every trying courtroom ordeal and faced every horrible charge hurried at her husband with a stoicism almost as unflinching and imperturbable as his, Mrs. Leo Frank gave away completely to her emotions and sobbed unrestrainedly as Frank said the last words of his wonderful and most impressive address to the jury Monday.

It was the final dramatic touch to a situation that had held a courtroom full of spectators in an irresistible thrall through four long hours of the afternoon.

The spell that had been cast over the room by the quiet but earnest words of the slight young factory superintendent was broken by the tones of the deputies, who shouted the moment Frank rose to leave the witness chair!

"Keep your seats, gentlemen, while the jury passes out."

Frank Rushes to Wife.

In the confusion that followed some did not notice that Frank rushed right to the side of his wife who had thrown her head in her arms and was shaking with pitiful sobs as she moaned his name again and again.

The woman who had steeled herself against the accusations and innuendoes of the Solicitor General during the three long weeks of the trial collapsed when her husband himself took the stand to declare his innocence.

Many who had rushed into the enclosure to give their congratulations to Frank caused as they observed the piteous figure.

The jurors, already deeply impressed by the talk of Frank, were freshly touched by this exhibition of emotion. They had arisen to file over to the Kimball House. Juror Johening, at the head of the line, stood for several minutes with tears running down his cheeks, oblivious of the fact that he was blocking the rest of the jurors and that three deputies were waiting to take them on their way.

Deputy Sheriff Plennie Minor leaned against the railing of the enclosure. There was a suspicious moisture in his eyes, which have grown accustomed to many tragic and affecting spectacles.

Troublesome Lump Rises.

Very few in the courtroom had much to say until they had managed to subdue that troublesome lump that persisted in rising in their throats.

"Rube, that boy put it all over you and me," muttered massive Luther Rosser, huskily, to Reuben Arnold, his partner in the case.

For many minutes after the packed courtroom had emptied itself a little group of persons remained in front of the judge's bench. Mrs. Frank, the wife of the man accused of the revolting murder, and the elder Mrs. Frank, his mother, were weeping hysterically, overcome by the appeal that had been made. Relatives surrounded them. Frank talked comfortingly to them for several minutes, and then, feeling in danger of breaking down himself signaled Sheriff Mangum and returned to his cell in the Tower.

PAGE 22

LEO M. FRANK'S COMPLETE STORY AS TOLD TO THE JURY

Accused Makes Statement Remarkable for Clarity and Wealth of Detail

TIME TO TALK IS NOW

AND I HAVE TOLD YOU

WHOLE TRUTH,' HE SAYS

Leo M. Frank, in his remarkable statement to the jury, had little to say of the charges made against him until the latter part of his address, which on this account became the most interesting and most impressive portion of his talk. After going into close detail in respect to his work at the factory office in the afternoon of Mary Phagan's murder, he took up the principal evidence and the principal charges against him.

He explained why he did not talk to Conley. He asserted that it was he who gave the information that Conley could write, in spite of the assertions that he had withheld this information. He made complete denial of seeing Conley on the day of the crime or of having any personal knowledge of how Mary Phagan came to ed all he desired.

Here is Frank's story as it was told with its various interruptions:

Mr. Arnold: "Now Mr. Frank, such papers as you want to use you can come down here at any time or from time to time and get them on this table right here.

The Court: "Before you commence your statement I want to read the law. In criminal procedure, the prisoner will have the right to make to the Court and jury such statement in the case as he may deem proper in his defense. It shall not be under oath and shall have such force as the jury shall think right to give it. They may believe it in preference to the sworn testimony in the case. The prisoner shall not be compelled to answer any
questions on cross-examination. He should feel free to decline to answer them. Now you can much such statement as you see fit."

The defendant said: "Gentlemen of the jury, in 1884, the 17th day of April, I was born in Terrall, Tex. At the age of three months my parents took me to Brooklyn, N. Y., which became my home until I came South, to Atlanta, to make my home here. I attended the public schools of Brooklyn and prepared for college in Pratt Institute, Brooklyn, N. Y."

"In the fall of 1902 I entered Cornell University, where I took the course of mechanical engineering, graduating after four years, in June, 1905. I then accepted a position as draughtsman with the B. F. Sturdevant Company, of Hyde Park, Mass. After remaining with this firm for about six months I return once more to my home in Brooklyn, where I accepted a position as testing engineer and draughtsman with the National Meter Company of Brooklyn, N. Y."

"I remained with these parties until about the middle of October, 1907, when at the invitation of some citizens of Atlanta, I came South to confer with them with reference to the starting and operation of a pencil factory to be located in Atlanta. After remaining here for about two weeks I returned once more is New York, where I engaged passage and went to Europe. I remained in Europe nine months. During my sojourn abroad I studied the pencil business and looked after the erection and testing of machinery which had been previously traded for."

Looked After the

Purchase of Materials.

"In the first part of August, 1906, I returned once more to America, and immediately came South, to Atlanta, which has remained my home ever since. I married in Atlanta an Atlanta girl, Miss Lucille Selig. The major portion of my married life, has been spent in the home of parents-in-law, Mr. and Mrs. E. Selig, at No. 68 East Georgia avenue. My married life has been exceptionally happy, indeed it has been the happiest days of my life."

"My duties as superintendent of the National Pencil Company were in general as follows: I took charge of the technical and mechanical end of the factory, looking after the processes and seeing that the product was turned out in quality equal to the standard in quality equal to the standard which was set by our competitors. I looked after the installation of new machinery, and the purchasing of any machinery, and in addition I had charge of the office work at the Forsyth street plant, and the Ford plant on Bell street."

"I looked after the purchasing of the raw material, I saw after the manufacture of pencils and kept up with the market of these materials and when the prices fluctuated so that the purchases could be made to the best possible advantage."

"On Friday, April 25, I arrived at the pencil factory on Forsyth street at about 7 o'clock, my usual time. I immediately started in on my regular routine work, looking over the papers I had laid out the evening before, and attending to any work that needed my special attention that morning."

"At about 9:30 I went over to the office of the general manager and treasurer, Mr. Sigmund Montag, whose office is at Montag Brothers on Nelson street. I stayed over there a short time, and got what papers had arrived in the mail all the mail of the pencil factory comes over to their office. I got that mail and brought it back to the Forsyth street office. I then separated the mail and continued in my usual routine duties in the office on Forsyth street."

"At about 11 o'clock Mr. Schiff handed me the payroll book, covering the plants at Forsyth street and Bell Street, for me to check over and see if the amounts and extensions were correct. Of course, this work has to be very carefully done, so that the proper amount of money is drawn from the bank. This checking took me until about 12:20 p. m."

Went to Bank

To Get Pay Money.

"I then went over to Montag Brothers, took the checks drawn and had them signed by Mr. Sig-Montag, after which I returned to Forsyth street and got the leather bag in which I usually carried the money and the coin from the bank, and got the payroll slip, in the safe and looked it. At this time my wife called for me and in her company and that of Mr. Schiff I went over to the car, and went with my wife home to lunch. After lunch I returned to the factory and took a tour for about an hour through the factory, after which I then assisted Mr. Schiff in checking over the amounts on the pay envelopes, checking the money against the duplicate slips that we had got from the bank to see that the correct amount had been given us, and helped Mr. Schiff in checking over the money and in filling the envelopes."

"This took us approximately until a quarter to six to fill the envelopes and seal them, and place them in a box we have there with two hundred pigeon holes in it, that we call our payoff box."

Paid One Man

Check in Cash.

"While I was so occupied with Mr. Schiff in in filling the envelope, a young man named Wright who had helped us out in the office as clerk during the past week came in and I paid him in cash, as Mr. Schiff had neglected to put his name on the payroll. I just made out a ticket and put it in the payroll box, not the cash box, and continued in the office with Mr. Schiff, taking all the envelopes that were due the help that had worked from April 18 to April 24, inclusive, to pay them through the window in one side of the office. There is a little window built in the hall. I had stayed in my office, checking over the amount of money which had been left there."

"This amount should have been equal to the amount loaned out in advance to the help. I took a ticket out when we were filling the envelopes in stocking this amount there. As near as I recollect it, it was about $15."

"I noticed a shortage of about $1.20, or something over a dollar, at any rate, and I kept checking to see it. I could find the shortage in the various deductions which had been made. I could

LIE DIRECT IS GIVEN TO CONLEY'S STORY

Gentlemen, I know nothing whatever of the death of little Mary Phagan, I had no part in causing her death, nor do I know how she came to her death after she took her money and left my office. I never even saw Conley in the factor or anywhere else on that date, April 26, 1913.

The statement of the negro Conley is a tissue of lies from first to last. I know nothing whatever of the cause of the death of Mary Phagan, and Conley's statement as to his coming up and helping me dispose of the body, or that I had anything to do with her or to do with him is a monstrous lie. From Frank's Statement.

not locate it that evening, after the help had been paid off, during which time I stayed in my office. No one came into my office and asked me for the envelope or for an envelope of any other party."

"After the paying off of the help had taken place, Mr. Schiff returned and handed me the envelopes which were left over, bound with an elastic band, and I put them in the cash compartment, which is different from the cash box, the key to which is kept in my cash box, and placed them in the safe, and Mr. Schiff placed the amounts in the box, and placed the box in the safe and left them."

Tells of Putting

Slips in Tim Clock.

"I placed the time clock slips which were to be used the next day. I took the two time slips dated April 25, which had been used by the help on Friday, April 25 these are the two that I put in the slot" exhibiting the same to the jury."

Mr. Dorsey thereupon vigorously protested that Mr. Frank should be allowed to exhibit these slips to the jury, because they had not been offered in evidence, on the grounds that they were immaterial and irrelevant, and on the second ground that he could not put them in evidence on his own statement.

Counsel for the defendant insisted, however, that they should be allowed to offer these slips in evidence, as they had been testified to by Mr. Darley and others. The testimony, however, was not produced, and Judge Roan ruled that Mr. Frank might make any
statement concerning the same, but that he would withhold his ruling until further investigation. Mr. Frank thereupon proceeded to explain to the jury.

"Gentlemen, as I was saying, these two slips that have April 26, 1913, written at the bottom are the two slips I put in the clock on the evening of Friday, April 25, to be used on the day following, which, of course, was April 26."

Darley's Duty to

Employ All Help.

"I neglected to mention also, in going over my duties at the factory that Mr. Darley was superintendent of labor and manufacture, and it fell to his duty engage and help and distribute the help throughout the plant and to discharge the help in case it was necessary. It was also due to him whether the wages were raised or not. In other words, he was the man that came directly in contact with the help. Moreover, he saw that the goods progressed through the plant without stopping, speedily and economically for their manufacture."

"On Friday evenings I got home at about 6:30, had my supper, washed up, and with my wife played a game of auction bridge at a friend's home in the evening. My wife and I returned home and retired about 11 o'clock."

"On Saturday, April 26, I rose between 7 and 7:30 and leisurely washed and dressed and ate my breakfast, and caught a Washington Street or Georgia Avenue car. I don't really remember which, at the corner of Washington and Georgia avenue, and arrived at the factory, Forsyth street plant, at about 3:20."

"Upon my arrival at the factory I found Mr. Holloway, the day watchman, at his usual place, and I greeted him in my usual way, and found Alonzo Mann, the office boy, in the office."

"I took off my cent and hat and opened my desk and opened the safe, and removed the various books and files and wire trays containing the various important papers were placed there the evening before and distributing them in their proper places about the office. I then went out to the shipping room and conversed a few minutes with Mr. Irby, who was at that time shopping clerk, about the work he was going to do that morning."

"According to my recollection, we did no shipping that day, owing to the fact that the freight offices were not reserving any shipments, due to the fact that it was a holiday."

"I returned to my offer and looked through the papers and asked sorted out those which I was going to take over on my usual trip to the general manager's office that morning."

"I then turned to the invoice covering shipments which were made by the pencil factory on Thursday, April 24, and which were typewritten on Friday, April 25, by Miss Eubanks, who was the stenographer who stayed at my office. She had hurried through with the office work on the day previous, so that she could go home and spend the holiday in the country she lived. But I didn't get to shock even the invoices on the shipments on Friday, due to the fact that Mr. Schiff and myself were completely occupied the entire day. Be we left the factory with the payroll. So that naturally, these invoices covering shipments which were made on April 24, ought to have been sent to the customers, and I got right to work checking them."

Shows Invoices to

Jury First Time.

"Now I have these invoices here (taking up the papers and exhibiting them to the jury). These papers have not been exhibited to you before, but I will explain them. You have seen some similar to these."

"Of all the mathematical work in the office of a pencil factory, this very operation, this very piece of work that I have now before me is the most important. It is the invoices covering shipments and is sent to the customer, and it is very important that the prices are correct, that the amount of goods shipped agrees with the amount which is on the invoices, that the terms are correct, and that the price is correct. Also, in some cases, there were freight deductions, all of which has to be very carefully checked over and looked into, because I know of nothing else that exasperates a customer more than to receive invoices which are incorrect."

"Now with reference to the work I did on these orders that is not such an easy job as you might be led to believe. Here are initials. They represent the salesman who took the order. Sometimes I have to go through a world of papers to find out to whom to credit these orders."

"I notice that one of the orders to R. B. Kindele calls for a specialty. That has to be carefully noted and recorded. One column represents the shipping point, another the date, etc."

"The next step is to fill in the orders on this sheet. On this sheet I must separate the orders into price groups. Evidently no work has been done on this sheet since he went away. The reason this is done in the pencil business as in all manufacturing businesses it is advantageous to sell as much of the high-priced goods as possible."

"This sheet is the only means of telling how much of the various goods we are saying. It is the barometer of our business and requires most careful work."

Declares He Wrote

Financial Sheet.

"After I have finished that work I have had to do this, and notwithstanding any insinuations that have been made, I wrote these requisitions."

Frank read the name on each requisition, which were the same as the names on the orders.

"Now that is all my handwriting, except what as written at a subsequent date to April 26th."

"Well, moreover, this operation this morning took me longer than it usually takes the ordinary person to check invoices because usually one calls out and the other checks, but I had this work all myself that morning. As I did this work this morning I saw that Miss Eubanks had evidently sacrificed accuracy to speed, and everyone of them was wrong. I went over the invoices to make the corrections, figure them out, correct them, and make deductions, if any were to be made , and then get the total shipments, because since these shipments were made on April 24, which was Thursday and the last day of our fiscal week, and it was on this week which the financial report which I make out every Saturday afternoon, which has been my custom, so that the total shipments could be figured out, and therefore I could not let it go out at that, so I had to figure every invoice in its entirety, so I could get a figure I would be able to use."

"The first order here is the Hilton, Hart & Kern Co., Detroit, Mich. Here is the original order, which exists in our files in our office. Here is the original transaction which was made March 18, but it was not to be shipped until April 24. This is a small order, 100 gross of Number 2 and here is an order of the Packard Motor Car Company for 125 gross of No. 3, and 150 gross of No. 4. Those figures represent the grade of hardness of the lead in the pencil."

Explains How

Orders are Filled.

Frank thereupon explained how such orders were usually filed, whether in part or in whole, and how shipments were made, and continuing, said:

"In investigating shipments made by the pencil company our method is as follows: We make them in triplicate. Our first original is a white sheet that, and that goes to the customers; the second is a pink sheet and that goes over to the General Manager's office and is filed serially, that is, chronologically; one date on the top, and from that the charges are made on the ledger, and the last sheet or third sheet is a yellow sheet, which is here (exhibiting it), those are placed in a file in my office, and are filed alphabetically. These yellow sheets that I have here are not the yellow sheets I had that day because they have since been perfected, and I am just taking the corrected sheets I made the corrections and Miss Eubanks corrected them on Monday by the corrections I had on the white sheet from the corrections I made and I presume at that time made that correct."

Mr. Frank exhibited to the jury various orders similarly written, to H. W. Williams and Company, of Fort Worth, Tex. The Fort Smith Paper Company, of Fort Smith Paper, Ark. S. O. Barnum & S
ons, of Buffalo, N. Y. F. L. Schmidt and Company, of Chicago, and H. S. Kross and Company, of New York.

"Now, there is an order that takes a great deal of study (referring to the Kress order) because in common with these five and ten cent syndicates, there is a great deal of red tape. These are invoices that were typed on April 25, Friday, and were shipped on April 24. It was the date on which the shipment was made irrespective of the date there irrespective of the date there, (referring to the date on the letter) and these were typewritten. In other words, shipments took place April 24, and that date was at the top, typewritten and stamped by the office at the bottom, April 24. Among other things that the S. H. Kress Company demand on their orders, we must state whether or not it is complete, must give the case number, and must tell by which railroad the shipment goes."

Checking Made Hard

By Much Red Tape

"Here is one for F. W. Woolworth and Company. Fort Wayne, which shows 35 pounds, less 86 cents per 100 pounds credit. In other words, we had to find out what was the weight of that was the weight of that was on a basis of 86 cents for every 100 pounds shipped. Then here is another one of our large distributors in New York. They have a freight allowance of 86 cents a 100 pounds also, and their shipments amounted to 618 pounds on Thursday, April 24."

"I started on this work. As I said, I have gone into it in some detail, to show you the carefulness with which the work must be carried out, and I was at work on this until about 9 o'clock, as near as I remember."

"Mr. Darley and Wade Campbell, the inspector, of the factory came into the outer office and I stopped what work I was doing, which was this work, and went, to the outer office and chatted with Mr. Campbell for ten or fifteen minutes, conversed with them, joked with them and while I was talking with them, I think about 9:15, or a quarter after 9. Miss Mattie Smith came in and asked me for her pay envelope, and the envelope of her sister-in-law. I went to the safe and got out the package of envelopes that Mr. Schiff had given me the evening before, and placed the two remaining envelopes in my cash box, as I considered they might come in and I wanted to have them near at hand so that I could pay them off when they came in. I keep my cash box on the lower side of my desk. After Miss Smith had gone away with the envelopes, in a few minutes Mr. Darley came back with one of the envelopes, and pointed out an error in one of them, the one of the sister-in-aw of Miss Mattie Smith, who had gotten too much money."

"When I took the amount which was too much, that amount balanced the error in the payroll that I had noticed the night before, and left about five or ten cents. Those things generally right themselves anyhow. I continued to work on these invoices when I was interrupted by Mr. Lyon, the superintendent of Montag Brothers, and he brought me a pencil display box. He seemed to be in a hurry, and I told him if he would wait a minute I would go over with him, but he passed out of the office, and then I found a stopping place in the work I was working on, and I put on my coat and when I got to the outer office I found that Mr. Lyon had already left."

"Mr. Darley and I left about 9:35 or 9:40, and we got out of the factory and stopped at the corner of Hunter and Forsyth streets, where we each had a drink at Cruickshank's soda fountain, and I bought a package of my favorite cigarettes."

"After that conversation there I left him and went alone to Montag Brothers, where I arrived about 10 o'clock or maybe a little after. I entered Montag Brothers and spoke to Mr. Sig Montag, general manager, on business, and he brought the papers which I collect and laid them on his desk, and I then took the papers out, thrust them in the folder and took the other papers which I had in my folder, and then distributed them at the proper places in the Montag plant. I don't know just which ones they were."

Conversation With

Miss Hall Recalled.

"In chatting with Mr. Montag I spoke to Mr. Montag and Mr. Korse, after that I spoke to Miss Hattie Hall, the pencil company's stenographer, who stays at Montag Brothers, and asked her to come over and help me that morning, as I have already told you, that those invoices were wrong, and I wanted her to help me on that work and could not take it up tomorrow. In fact, I told her I had enough work to keep her busy that whole afternoon if she would stay. She said she didn't want to do that, she wanted to have at least a half holiday."

"I then spoke to several of the Montag Brothers' force on business matters and other matters. Also I then spoke to Mr. Guttenheim, who was sales manager of the Montag Brothers and of the pencil factory, and then spoke to him about several of his orders that were in the factory. There were two of his orders that he paid special stress on that were desired to be shipped right away. I said, I don't know how so far along in the process of manufacture the orders have proceeded, but if you can come back I can look it up and tell you when they can be shipped.' He said he could not come then, but he would come a little later. I told him I would be glad if he would come up a little later on in the afternoon that I would be there until about 1 o'clock in the morning, and then about half past three. I then took the folder and returned."

Arrived at Factory

At About 11 O'clock.

"Upon arrival at the pencil factory I went up to the second or office floor, and then I noticed that the clock was perhaps five minutes after 11 o'clock, and I saw Mr. Holloway there, and I told him he could go as soon as he got ready. He told me had some work to do for Harry Denham and Arthur White, who wanted to do some repairing on the top floor, and that he would do the work first".

"I then went to the office, and found Miss Hattie Hall, who had preceded me from Montag Brothers, and another young lady, who introduced herself to me in Mrs. Arthur White. Mrs. White wanted to see her husband. I went into the inner office, and took off my hate and coat and removed the papers which I had brought back from Montag Brothers and put the folder away."

Week's Sheet Left

In Incomplete Form.

"It was about this time that I first heard the elevator motor start up, and the circular saw in the carpenter shop which was near to it, and I heard it sawing thought it was evidently the work that Mr. Holloway had referred to."

"I separated the orders from the letters which required answers, and took from them the letters that did not need immediate attention and laid them in the various places, and it was about this time I had an idea I would like to see how far along the report sheets were which I used in getting up the financial report every Saturday afternoon. To my surprise I found that the sheet contains the records of the pencils packed for the week had been entered for Thursday. The last day of the fiscal week was omitted, and Mr. Schiff, evidently in the stress of figuring out and filling the envelopes for the payroll for Friday instead of Saturday, had evidently not had enough time. I told Alonzo Mann, the office boy, to call up Mr. Schiff and find out when he was coming down, and Alonzo said that the answer came back over the telephone that Mr. Schiff would be right down, so I didn't pay any more attention to that part of the work, because I expected Mr. Schiff to come down any minute."

Mrs. Freeman and

Corinthia Hall Came In.

"It was about this time that Mrs. Emma Clark Freeman and Miss Corinthia Hall, two of the girls that worked on the fourth floor, came upstairs and asked to go upstairs and get Mrs. Freeman's coat, which permission I gave them. I told them at the same time to tell Arthur White that his wife was downstairs. A few minutes after they left my office two gentlemen office two gentlemen call me in, one of them Mr. Graham, and another gentleman, fathers of two boys who had gotten into some trouble during the noon recess and were taken down to
police headquarters, and, of course, could not get their pay envelopes the night before. I gave the required envelopes to the two fathers, and chatted with them at some length in reference to the trouble that their boys had gotten into on the day previous."

"Just before they left the office Mrs. Emma Clark Freeman and Mrs. Corinthia Hall came into my office and asked my permission to use the telephone, and started using the telephone, and started using the telephone during the time these two gentlemen left my office and asked my permission to use the telephone during the time these two gentlemen left office. Previous to the time these two gentlemen came in, I had called Miss Mattie Hall in and dictated what mail I had to give her, and she went out and was typewriting the mail."

Frank went back to the stand. He was handed a glass of water as he resumed his seat, but declined.

"Miss Hall left my office" he continued, "on her way home at this time. There were then in the building Arthur White, Harry Denham and Mrs. White. It must have been from ten to fifteen minutes after that this little girl whom I afterwards found to be Mary Phagan came in. She asked for her pay. I got my cash box, referred to the number and gave her the envelope."

"As she went out, she stopped near my outer office door and said:

"Has the metal come?"

Sound of Voice Made

Little Impression.

"The safe door was open and I could not see her, but I answered No.' The last I heard was the sound of her footsteps going down the hall. But a few moments after she asked me, I had the impression of a voice saying something, but it made no impression on me."

"The little girl had hardly left the office when Lemmie Quinn came in. He said something to me about working on a holiday and went out. A few minutes before 1 o'clock, I called up my wife and told her I was coming to lunch at 1:15. I then went up stairs to where Denham and White were working and found they had a bit of the floor taken up and were sawing."

"I explained to them that I was going to lunch and would lock the door when I left. Mrs. White left at this time. Some lady said that at 12:35 o'clock she found me in front of the safe. It is barely possible that she did. I don't recall her being there. Her mom's cry probably is fresher than mine on this point."

"When I went up stairs I asked Mr. White if his wife was going to stay there with him. She said no, that one would go. She left and then I bet my hat and cost and left, looking the outer dear."

"Now, gentlemen, to the best of my recollection from the time the whistle blew until I went upstairs to see Mr. White, I did not stir out of my office. I went on home."

"I called up my brother-in-law, Mr. Ursenbach, to tell him I was unable to keep the engagement to go to the ball game. The cook answered the phone."

"My wife and mother-in-law were going to the opera. My father-in-law and I ate lunch. He went into a backyard while I lit cigarette and lay down for a moment."

"I left and while passing the home of Mrs. Wolfsheimer, saw Mrs. on the porch. I went in to see her and saw Mrs. Wolfsheimer, Mr. Loeb and others."

Watched Parade When

Street Cars Stopped.

"To catch the next car I ran down to Glenn street. On the car I met my wife's cousin, Mr. Loeb. The car was blocked at the corner of Washington and Hunter streets. I walked up to Whitehall street and stood there possibly for fifteen minutes watching the Memorial Day parade."

"As I walked down Whitehall street I met Miss Rebecca Carson. This war probably 3:10 or 3:15 o'clock. I greeted her and walked on. I stopped at Jacobs' Pharmacy and walked on. I went from there to the factory."

"When I reached there I went upstairs and let the boys know I had returned. A minute later, I returned to my office and started to work on the financial sheet."

"In a few minutes the clock hall rang and Arthur White came into the office to borrow two dollars. It was while I was at work on the sheet at probably 4 o'clock that I went to the toilet."

"As I returned towards the office. I noticed Newt Lee coming toward me from the head of the stairs. I told him he could go on off but to be sure and be back at 6 o'clock. I could not let him know about the half holiday but that he was at liberty to enjoy himself as he saw fit, but that he must not fail to return at 6 o'clock."

"The first night that Newt Lee came to work at the factory, I took him over the building, and stressed the fact that he must go into the basement, especially the dust bin every half hour."

"I told him it would be part of his duties to watch the back door. He was to make a complete tour every half hour and punch the clock."

"Now, I will return to the work of the financial sheet. This sheet contains the cost of all the pencils made that week. There are no names but this sample case will show you."

Evidence Excluded

But Jury Sees It.

Frank unfolded a sample case.

Dorsey: "We object to this being used as evidence."

Judge Roan: "I sustain you."

Frank placed the sample case to one side.

"Well," he said, "you got a sufficient glance at those pencils to see there were a great many."

"In making up this sheet it was necessary to go through the list of all that were packed. Specials, of course, have to be figured separately."

"For instance, there is a special 60-60-x pencil known as Crackerjack.' Now I notice that the two expert accountants reported two errors. While they were unimportant, I wish to explain that those errors were not mine. They were made by Mr. Schiff. I never checked his figures. I checked over mine, but not his."

"Now the next is jobs.' The accountant found the only error in my financial, sheet, there in the item job. It was not an error, as I will show you. He did not known my method of figuring."

"Two items here are totals. The total gross amount is 791 gross, the total value amount $396.75, in figuring the average I obtained $50.01. In that average he discovered an error. It was not an error. I simply did not go as far into the decimals as he did. One tenth of a cent was close enough for my purpose."

"Now some of the items in here are taken from the reports of the foremen of the different departments."

Frank then exhibited a report from the foreman or forewoman of each department and explained it.

"Then there is the report of Mr. Schiff, showing the gross of pencils shipped each day of that week that week was an exceptionally heavy one."

"Now there is a little report here that constitutes one of the more difficult calculations. It is from the packing room. We have a trick of the trade to put the pencils that do not bell very fast into fancy packages to make them go."

"Now, very often these pencils were taken from the shelf, where they have laid for more than a year and repacked in the fancy cases. I made all the calculations on this that afternoon, despite everything that has been said here to the contrary."

"Now here is a little sheet that deals with the grades of the pencils. It shows the totals for each class of pencils shipped that week. This data sheet we have had very few clerks at the Forsyth street office capable of keeping it, because it requires rather advanced mathematics to reach the totals."

"Now I will have to get all my thoughts on this sheet. It isn't a hard job but it is a very tedious one and requires much care and accuracy. Here is rubber cheap rubber and good rubber. Now it has been intimated that some of these items this one in particular, if I am not mistaken that I could take two that were already figured and subtract them from the total get the cost of the third."

"That is not so. Some of the pencils haven't any rubber in them at all, I have to go through the same tedious operation one ach item. There are various sorts of packing boxes used. Then there are the skeletons in the boxes. In the boxes. Some pencils don't have skeletons at all."

"All, these items must be gone through acc
urately to get correct results of this sheet. Then there is no section on this data sheet showing the cost of tips. You can't use rubbers without tips, so after figuring them, I just added them to the rubbers."

"Some pencils take wrappers and some don't. The very cheap pencils are tied with a cord, so we have the same tedious figuring again."

"The slat item is not worked out because I could not find the data. I just put it off until Monday."

"Here are the jobs the payroll at Forsyth street and the payroll at Bell street."

"Now the shipments were figured for the week. I did part of that work in the morning and I explained to you about the invoice being wrong. Well, here are the items on this financial street. Then, as to the orders received. Entering the orders received that day involved no more work than transferring."

Mailed Statements

To Stockholders.

"One of these statements I mailed to my uncle, Mr. M. Frank, who is president of the company, and the other to Oscar Papenheimer, who was a director."

"I put one in an envelope and addressed it to Mr. Oscar Papenheimer; the other I sent to my uncle along with a price list, and I wrote him this letter."

"This price list is too long for an ordinary envelope, hence the large envelope."

"After finishing the financial sheet, I folded the large sheet and addressed it to Mr. Selig Montag. I then took up the checking up of the cash and balancing of the cash book. I did that work as near as I remember, between 5:30 and 6 minutes to 6 o'clock. It did not take me an hour and a half. I did it in about 25 minutes. There $30.54. There couldn't have been any more. It was mostly in small change. There was one loan to Mr. White, making the total of cash $28.50."

"Beginning that week, we had $39.25 as a balance. We drew two checks of $15 each I mean by that that we went to Mr. Montag's office and had him draw the checks. The total amount of money we had to account for was

Continue on Page 4, Column 1.

PAGE 23

COUNSEL CONSIDER THAT FRANK IS HIS OWN BEST WITNESS

Accused Looks Squarely at Jury as He Tells of Every Act on Day of Crime

DIAGRAM ILLUSTRATING FRANK'S ALIBI

On RETURN from LUNCH Met REBECCA CARSON at 3.10 on way to OFFICE

FRANK Left HOME for OFFICE and ARRIVED at 8.20 A.M.

ARRIVED HOME to LUNCH 1.15

FRANK went to MONTAG BROS at 9.30 A.M

RETURNED to WORK. 4.00 P.M

LEFT OFFICE 6.00 P.M for HOME.

DECLARES HE DOES NOT

KNOW ANYTHING OF HOW

MARY PHAGAN MET DEATH

Continued from Page 4.

69.25. What it was spent for, of course, is shown on the debit side."

Frank explained each of those items, including drayage, parcel post, etc.

"I found at the end a shortage of $4.34 coming about in payrolls within the last three months." At this point Frank paused to take a drink of water having been talking for 2 hours and 30 minutes."

"I finished this work I have just outlined," he continued, "at 5 minutes to 6 o'clock I took those slips I won't show them to you stamped April 28. They were put into the clock because no one was coming into the office until Monday."

"Newt Lee's punches on Monday night, would appear on the Monday night. Just before I left I put a new tape in the clock and made Newt Lee punch it. Then he went on down stairs to wait and let me out."

"As I started out of the factory, I saw Newt Lee walking to a man named Gantt, who had been released about two weeks before. I gave them permission to go into the factory and get Gantt's shoes which he said were left there and I told Newt Lee to go with him."

"I reached home at about 6:25 o'clock and at 6:30, thinking Newt Lee would be near the clock. I called him over the phone to see if everything was all right. I could not get him. I called again at 7 o'clock and again at 7:30. At that time I got him and he told me everything was all right."

"That night my parents-in-law had company at the home. These present were Mr. and Mrs. Marcus, Mrs. Goldstein, Mrs. M. Marx, Mrs. A. B. Marx, Mr. Ike Strauss - who came in at about 10 o'clock. I read a magazine until about 10:30 and then retired."

Told Officer He

Did Not Know Girl.

At this juncture the jury retired for five minutes.

Frank conferred with his attorneys while the jury was out. Upon its return he resumed:

"I believe I have taken in every move Saturday night. I retired Saturday night. Sunday morning about 7 o'clock I was awakened by the telephone ringing and a man's voice which I afterwards found out to be detective Starnes said: "I want you to come down to the factory.' What is the trouble?' I asked. Has there been a fire?' No,' he said. A tragedy has occurred.' I said, All right,' and he said he would send an auto."

"They came before I finished dressing. At this point I differ with the detectives, Black and Starnes, about where conversation took place. They say it was after we were in the machine. I say it was before we left the house, before my wife. At any rate, here is what was said:"

"They asked me if I knew Mary Phagan. I answered that I did not. They asked me if I did not pay off a little girl with long hair down her back the afternoon before. I said I did. They said they wanted me to go to the undertaking establishment to see if I could identify the body. They made the trip to the undertaking establishment very quickly. I went in and stood in the doorway. The attendant removed the sheet form the little girl's face and turned the head, toward me. His finger was right by the cut on the head. I noticed her nostrils were filled with dirt and cinders and there were several discolorations. I noticed a place of cord around her neck, the kind we used in the pencil factory. I said it looked like a little girl that came to the factory the day before. They had already told me it was Mary Phagan. We went to the factory and by examining the payroll, I found what Mary Phagan had drawn her pay the day before and that the amount was $1.20."

"As we went into the factory I noticed Mr. Darley going in. We went to the office and I found Newt Lee in the custody of the officers. They told me they wanted to go down into the basement. I got the elevator key, but when I tried to start the elevator machinery I found I could not and I told Mr. Darley to see if he could start it."

Admits Nervousness

And Defends Himself.

"He started the car, and when we got further down I found that one of the chairs had slipped. They showed me where the body was found, where the sheet was found and pointed out every thing that was at that time known. After looking about the basement we got some nails and a hammer and Mr. Darley nailed up the back door. Back upstairs Mr. Darley, Chief Lanford and myself went on a tour of inspection of the three upper floors. We went through the metal room, the same metal room that has figured so prominently in this trial, and neither Mr. Darley nor myself noticed anything particular on that floor. Nor did Sergeant Lanford, chief of the Atlanta detective force."

"We went to the time clock. I took out the slip and a casual gate of this slip would indicate nothing was on it. There was something on it. It had been partially rubbed out. It could not be rubbed out altogether without rubbing but the printed lines. I did write with a pencil across the face of it, 8:26 a. m.' We noticed a slip but overlooked any skips. I folded the time slip as it is new and handed it is Chief Lanford. Now, gentlemen, I have heard a great deal during this trial about nervousness."

"I was nervous. I was completely unstrung. Imagine yourself called from around slumber in the early hours in the morning, whisked through the chill morning air without breakfast, to go into that undertaking establishment and have the light suddenly flashed on a scene like that. To see that little girl on the dawn of womanhood so cruelly murdered it was a scene that would have melted stone. Is it any wonder I was nervous?"

"I got in an automobile and sat on Mr. Darley's knee. I wa
s trembling, perhaps. Later Sunday morning, I went into the home of Mr. Sig Montag and told him what had occurred. I got home about 11 o'clock. My wife and I went over to my sister-in-law's Mrs. Ursenbach's, and with a number of friends we discussed the tragedy."

"We went back home to dinner and mentioned there the terrible crime. After dinner I read a short time and about 10 minutes to 8 o'clock caught a bar downtown."

"The conversation on the cat was about the little girl that had been found dead in the factory. At 3:10 o'clock. I went back to the undertaking establishment and found Joe Stelka there."

"On Monday I went to the police station with Darley and he said he would like to talk to Newt Lee alone. We were shown the two notes found by the side of the slain girl."

Frank then described the notes.

"Now, on one of the notes there was an erasure, but the tracing was still discernable. It was January 11, 1912. The order number was very indistinct, but it was evidently an old serial number."

"Returning to my home at 4:15 I met Mr. Haas and he asked me about the murder. Several people on the street also asked me."

"I remained at home until 5 o'clock, then I went to Mr. Montag's home and made a report of the tragedy to him. From there I went to the home of Mr. Marous where I had received a telephone message from my wife, and I went by there to get her."

"At supper that night the conversation was again about the murder. After supper I read the paper. After supper I read the paper, I called up Mr. Marcus and asked him if he would come down. He said he could not. "Mr. and Mrs. Selig had a party that night. About 10 o'clock, my wife and I went up to bed. Next morning before I had finished dressing, the door bell rang. It was Detectives Black and Hazelett. They said they wanted me to go to the police station with them."

Kept in Ignorance of

Charge Against Him.

"I went and the way I asked them what was the trouble. They said Chief Lanford would tell me."

"I arrived at the police station and sat in an outer office for probably an hour without seeing Chief Lanford. Near 9-o'clock Mr. Sel Montag and Mr. Herbert Haas came down. Near 10 o'clock I saw Mr. Rosser. He came in and said, Hello boys, what's the trouble.'"

"Mr. Haas took him off to one side. Chief Lanford came out and said to me Come in here.'"

"I went into his office. He handed me one time slips and if I am not mistaken this same time slip has the figures still un-erased: 8:26 a. m.'"

"I took the slip and examined it closely, discovering the slips. There seemed to be some altercation about Mr. Rosser getting into the room with me. I heard him say, I am going into that room. That man is my client.' Chief Beavers asked me if I would give him a statement.

"I heard Mr. Rosser say: "Why, it's preposterous. The man who did that would have signs on his body," I jumped up and, opening my clothes, let the detectives see for themselves.

"I then gave them a statement, willingly and freely and without any reluctance. Then one of them said something about examining my linen at my home. I knew that none of it had gone to the laundry at that time and invited the detectives to make a search, which they did. Mr. Herbert Schiff went with them. They were very well satisfied with the search, or rather, they found nothing."

Employed Pinkertons

To Aid the Police.

"That afternoon I telephoned Mr. Schiff to get Mr. Montag's permission to employ the Pinkertons to aid the position. I told him I would be down about 3 o'clock."

"I went around to Mr. Wolfsheimer's, get into his automobile and wasn't down town. I saw Mr. Schiff, Mr. Darley and a number of others including Mr. Quinn."

"Mr. Quinn said he wanted to take her back to the metal room where it was claimed bloodspots had been discovered and where the hair on the lathe was discovered by Mr. Barrett."

"I examined them closely, particularly the spots. I did not examine them standing up. I got down on my knees and examined them with a strong electric flash flight and I arrived at certain conclusions."

"That floor is grass, soap and dirt covered to a thickness varying from a quarter to half an inch."

"To return to that spot, I don't claim it was not blood. The space where these spots were adjoins the ladies dressing room. There have been accidents which may not have been brought out in this trial. We do not report every time one of the employees cuts his finger."

"There are all sorts of paints around the factory. I have seen girls drop bottles in the hall, not exactly at that point, but near there. But the point about bloodspots is that when I examined them there waws over them an accumulation of dirt not of days or weeks, but of at least three months."

Phoned to Prevent

Alarm of Family.

"The white stuff was not fresh it was dry. And another thing if that compound had been put on the blood fresh, it would have been pink and not the white that it was."

"I returned after making this examination from which I noticed two or three or four chips had been knocked up, the boys told me, by the police that morning; I returned to my office and gathered up what papers I had to take over to Montag Brothers, and I took over the financial report which I had made out the Saturday afternoon previous, and I talked it over with Mr. Sig Montag.

"I had a good long conversation with Mr. Montag with reference to the occurrences that morning, and we decided that since the papers had stated that I was being detained at headquarters. It would be best to tell my uncle, who was ill and who is an elderly man, being over 70 years of age, and who was on the point of taking a trip to Europe, and whom I didn't want unnecessarily alarmed by seeing in the papers that I was detained."

"So I wrote a telegram to Mr. Adolph. Montag informing him that I was no longer in custody, that I was all right and that he could communicate that to my uncle. That was so that my uncle should not get hold of an Atlanta paper and see that I was in custody and be unnecessarily alarmed."

"I returned from Montag Brothers' to the pencil factory, being accompanied by one of the traveling man, Mr. Hines (Mr. Sol Hines), and on my arrival at the factory I went up into the office and distributed the various papers all over the factory to be acted on the next day. In a few minutes Mr. Harry Scott, of the Pinkerton detectives, came in and I took him aside into my office, my private office, and spoke to him in the presence of Mr. M. V. Darley and Mr. Herbert Schiff."

Told of Mrs. White

Seeing a Negro.

"I told him that I expected that he had seen what had happened at the pencil factory by reading the newspapers and knew all the details. He said he didn't read the newspapers and didn't know the details, so I sat down and gave him all the details that I could, and in addition I told him something which Mr. Darley had that afternoon communicated to me, viz, that Mrs. White had told him that on going into the factory at about 12 o'clock noon on Saturday, April 26, she had seen some negro down by elevator shaft. Mr. Darley had told me this and I just told this to Mr. Scott."

"After I told Mr. Scott all that I could, I took him around the building, took him first back to the metal room and showed him the place where the hair had been found, looked at the machinery and at the lathe, looked at the table on which the lathe stands, and the lathe bed and the floor underneath the lathe, and there wasn't a spot, much less a blood spot underneath. I showed him the other spot in front of the dressing room, and I took him to the fourth floor and showed him where I had seen White and Denham a little before 1 the first time and about 3 the second time."

"Then I took him down into the basement and made a thorough search of the basement, and that included an examination of the elevator well which was at the bottom of the elevator shaft."

"I noticed Mr. Scott was foraging around down there and he picked up two or three
or maybe four articles and put them in his pocket and one of them I specially noticed was a piece of cord exactly like that which had been found around the little girl's neck.

Showed Where

Girl's Hat Was Found.

"We then went back and I showed him where the officer said the slipper had been found, the hat had been found and the little girl's body was located. I showed him, in fact, everything that the officers had showed us. Then I opened the back door and we made a thorough search of the alleyway and went up and down that alleyway to Hunter street and down Hunter to Forsyth and up Forsyth in front of the Pencil Factory.

"In front of the pencil Factory I had quite a little talk with Mr. Scott as to the rates of the Pinkerton Detective Agency. He told me what they were and I had Mr. Schiff to telephone to Mr. Montag to find out if those rates were satisfactory. He phoned back the answer that he would engage them for a few days at any rate. Mr. Scott then said: Well, I don't need anything more,' and he said: The Pinkertons in this case, according to their usual custom in ferreting out the perpetrator of this crime, will work hand in hand with the city officers.' I said: All right, that suits me,' and he went on his way."

"About that time my father-in-law joined the group over in front of the factory, and after talking for some time my father-in-law and I left and we arrived home about 6:30. I should judge, and found there my mother-in-law and my wife and Minola McKnight, and we had supper. After supper my two brothers-in-law and their wives came over to visit with us and they stayed until about 10 o'clock, after which my wife and I retired."

Tells of His

Arrest as Suspect.

"On Tuesday morning I arose some time between seven and seven-thirty, leisurely dressed and took my breakfast and caught the 8:10 car coming toward town, the Georgia avenue car, and when I went to get on the car I met a young man by the name of Dickler, and I remember paying the fare for both of us."

"When I arrived at the pencil factory, about 8:30, I immediately entered upon my routine work, sending the various orders to the various places in the factory where they were due to go, and about 9:30 I went on my usual trip over to Montag Brothers to see the general manager. After saying over there a short while I returned, in company with another one of their travelling men, Mr. Jordan. At the corner of Forsyth and Hunter street I met up with a cousin of my wife's, a Mr. Selig, and we had a drink in Cruickshank's soda fount, at the corner of Hunter and Forsyth."

"Then I went up into the factory and separated the papers I had brought back with me from Montag Brothers, putting them in the proper places, and sending the proper papers to the different places. I was working along in the regular routine of my work, in the factory and about the office, and a little later Detectives Scott and Black came up to the factory and said: Mr. Frank, we want you to go down to headquarters with us,' and I went with them.

"We went down to headquarters, and I have been incarcerated ever since. We went down to headquarters in an automobile, and they took me up to Chief Lanford's office."

"I sat up there and answered any questions that he desired, and I had been sitting there sometime when Detective Scott and Detective Black came back with a bundle under their arm. They showed me a little piece of material of some shirt, and asked me if I had a shirt of that material. I looked at it, and told them I don't think I ever had a shirt of that description."

Lee Said He

Had Shirt Like It.

"In the meantime they brought in Newt Lee, the night watchman brought him up from a cell and showed him the same sample. He looked at it and immediately recognized it. He said he had a shirt like that, but he didn't remember having worn it for two years; if I remember correctly, that is what he said. Detectives Scott and Black then opened the package they had and discussed the full shirt of that material that had all the appearances of being freshly stained with blood, and had a very distinct odor. Newt Lee was taken back to the cell."

"After a time Chief Lanford came over to me and began an examination of my face and of my head and my hands and my arms. I suppose he was trying to hunt to see if he could find any catches. I stayed in there until about 12 o'clock, when Mr. Rosser came in and spoke to the detectives or to Chief Beavers."

"After talking with Chief Beavers he came over to me and said to me that Chief Beavers thought it better that I should stay down there. He says: He thinks it better that you be detained at headquarters, but if you desire, you don't need to be locked up in a cell; you can engage a supernumerary policeman who will guard you and give you the freedom of the building.' I immediately acquiesced, supposing that I couldn't do anything else, and Mr. Rosser left."

"Now, after this time it was about this time they took me from upstairs down to the district sergeant's desk and Detectives Starnes (John N. Starnes, I think his name is) came in and dictated from the original notes that were found near the body dictated to me to get a sample of my handwriting. Have you got those photographs there? (Photographs handed to the defendant). I wrote this note at the dictation of Mr. Starnes, which was given to me word by word, and, of course, I wrote it slowly. When a word was spelled differently, they usually stopped take the word buy' for, instance, the detective told me how that was spelled so they could see my exact letters and compare with the original note."

Photograph of

Note Is Shown.

"Now, I had no hesitation in giving him a specimen of my handwriting. Now, this photograph is a reproduction of the note. You see J. N. Starnes in the corner here: that is Detective Starnes, and then is dated here I put that there myself so I would be able to recognize it again in case they tried any erasures or anything like that. It is a photographic reproduction of something that was written in pencil, as near as one can judge a photographic reproduction of the note that I wrote. Detective Starnes then took me down to the desk sergeant, where they searched me and entered my name on the book under a charge of suspicion."

"Then they took me back into a small room, and I sat there for a while, while my father-in-law was arranging for a supernumerary policeman to guard me for the night. They took me then to a room on the top of the building, and I satt in the room there and either read magazines or newspapers and talked to my friends who came to see me until I was about to retire at midnight."

"I had the cover of my cot turned back and I was going to bed when Detective Scott and Detective Black, at midnight, Tuesday, April 29, came in and said: Mr. Frank, we would like to talk to you a little bit. Come in and talk to us.' I says: Sure, I will be only too glad to.' I went with them to a little room on the top floor of the headquarters. In that room were Detective Scott, Detective Black and myself. They stressed the possibility of couples having been let into the factory by the night watchman, Newt Lee."

"I told them that I didn't know anything about it; that if I had, I certainly would have put a stop to it long ago. They said: Mr. Frank, you have never talked alone with Newt Lee. You are his boss and he respects you. See what you can do with him. We can't get anything more out of him. See if you can.' I says: All right; I understand what you mean. I will do my best,' because I was only too willing to help."

"Black says: Now, put it strong to him, put it up strong to him and tell him to cough up and tell all he knows. Tell him that you are here and that he is here and that he better open up and tell all he knows about happenings at the pencil factory that Saturday night, or you will bath go to hell.' Those were the detective's exact words."

Tells of Questioning

Newt Lee Alone.

"I told Mr. Black I caught his meaning, and caught his meaning, and in a few mi
nutes afterward Detective Starnes brought up Newt Lee from the cell room. They put Newt Lee into a room and handcuffed him to a chair. I spoke to him at some length in there, but I couldn't get anything additional out of him. He said he knew nothing about couples coming in there at night, and remembering the instructions Mr. Black had given me, I said: Now, Newt, you are here and I am here, and you had better open up and tell all you know, and tell the truth, and tell the full truth, because you will get us both into lots of trouble if you don't tell all you know.'"

"He answered me like an old negro: Before God, Mr. Frank, I am telling you the truth and I have told you all I know.' And the conversation ended right there."

"Within a minute or two afterwards the detectives came back into the room, that is, Detective Scott and Detective Black, and then began questioning Newt Lee, and then it was that I had my initiation into the third degree of the Atlanta Police Department."

"The way that fellow Black cursed at the poor old negro. Newt Lee, was something awful. He shrieked at him, he hollowed at him, he cursed and did everything but beat him. Then they took Newt Lee down to a cell and I went to my cot in the outer room."

"Now, before closing my statement, I wish to touch upon a couple of insinuations and accusations other than the one on the bill of indictment that have been leveled against me so far during the trial."

Why He Didn't

Talk to Sleuths.

"The first is this, the fact that I would not see Jim Conley. Well, let's look into the facts a few minutes and see whether there was any reason for that, or if there be any truth in that statement."

"On Sunday morning I was taken down to the undertakers' establishment to the factory, and I went to headquarters: I went to headquarters the second time, going there willingly without anybody coming for me. On each occasion I answered them frankly and unreservedly, giving them the benefit of the best of my knowledge, answering all and any of their questions and discussing the matter generally with them."

"On Monday they came for me again. I went down and answered any and all of their questions and gave them a statement which they took down in writing, because I thought it was right and I was only too glad to do it. I answered them and told them all that I knew, answering all the questions."

"Tuesday I was down at police station again, and answered every question and discussed the matter freely and openly with them, not only with the police, but with the reporters who were around there; I talked to anybody who wanted to talk with me about it, and I have even talked with them at midnight when I was just about to go to bed. Midnight was the time they chose to talk to me, but even at such an outlandish hour I was still willing to help them, and at their instigation I spoke to Newt Lee alone, but what was the result: They commenced and they grilled that poor negro and that I never said, and twisted not along the English, but distorted my meaning."

"I just decided then and there that if that was the line of conduct they were going to pursue I would wash my hands of them. I didn't want to have anything to do with them. On the afternoon of May 1, I was taken tot eh Fulton County Tower.

How Detectives

Drove Him to Silence.

"On May 3 Detectives Black and Scott came up to my cell in the Tower and wanted to speak to me alone without any of my friends around. I said all right, I wanted to hear what they had to say that time. Then Black tore off something like this: Mr. Frank, we are suspicious of that man Darley. We are watching him; we have been shadowing him. Now, open up and tell us what you know about him.' I said: Gentlemen, you have come to the wrong man, because Mr. Darley is the soul of honor and is as true as steel. He would not do a crime like that; he couldn't do it.' And Black chirped up: Come on, Scott, nothing doing,' and off they go."

"That showed me how much reliance could be placed in either the city detectives or our own Pinkerton detectives, and I treated such conduct with silence and it was for this reason, gentlemen, that I didn't see Conley, surrounded with a bevy of city detectives and Mr. Scott, because I knew that there would not be an action so trifling, that there was not an action so natural but that they would distort and twist it to be used against me, and that there was not a word

that I could utter that they would not deform and twist and distort to be used against me, but I told them through my friend Mr. Klein, that if they got the permission of Mr. Rosser to come, I would speak to them, would speak to Conley and face him or anything they wanted-if they got that permission or brought Mr. Rosser. Mr. Rosser was on that day up at Tallulah Falls trying a case."

"Now, that is the reason, gentlemen, that I have kept my silence, not because I didn't want to, but because I didn't want to have things twisted."

"Then that other implication, the one of knowing that Conley could

write, and I didn't tell the authorities."

Tells of Showing

Conley Could Write.

"Let's look into that."

"On May 1 I was taken to the tower. On the same date, as I understand it, the negro Conley was arrested. I didn't know anybody had any suspicions about him. His name was not in the papers. He was an unknown quantity. The police were not looking out for him; they were looking out for me. They didn't want him, and I had no inkling that he ever said he couldn't write."

I was sitting in that cell in the Fulton County jail it was along about April 12th, April 12th or 14th that Mr. Leo Gottheimer, a salesman for the National Pencil Company, came running over, and says "Leo, the Pinkerton detectives have suspicions of Conley. He keeps saying he can't write; these fellows over at the factory know well enough that he can write, can't he?"

"I said: Sure he can write.'"

"We can't prove it. The nigger says he can't write and we feel that he can write."

"I said: I know he can write. I have received many notes from him asking me to loan him money. I have received too many notes from him not to know that he cannot write. In other words, I have received notes signed with his name, purporting to have been written by him, though I have never seen him to this date use a pencil.'"

"I thought a while and then I said: Now, I tell you; if you will look into a drawer in the safe you will find the card of a jeweler from whom Conley bought a watch on the installment. Now, perhaps if you go to that jeweler you may find some sort of a receipt that Conley had to give and be able to prove that Conley can write.'"

Pinkertons Found

Conley's Contract.

"Well, Gottheimer took that information back to the Pinkertons. They did just as I said; they got the contract with Conley's name on it, got back evidently to Scott and then he told the negro to write. Gentlemen, the man who found out or paved the way to find out that Jim Conley could write is sitting right here in this chair. That is the truth about it."

"Then that other insinuation, an insinuation that is dastardly that it is beyond the appreciation of a human being, that is, that my wife didn't visit me; now the truth of the matter is this, that on April 29th, the date I was taken in custody at police headquarters, my wife was there to see me, she was downstairs on the first floor; I was up on the top floor. She was there almost in hysterics, having been brought there by her two brothers-in-law, and her father."

""Rabbi Marx was with me at the time. I consulted with him as to the advisability of allowing my dear wife to come up to the top floor to see me in those surroundings with city detectives, reporters and snap shotters; I thought I would save her that humiliation and that harsh sight, because I expected any day to be turned loose and be returned once more to her side at home."

"Gentlemen, we did all we could do to restrain her in the first days when I was down at the jail from coming on
alone down to the jail, but she was perfectly willing to even be locked up with me and share my incarceration."

Says He Knows

Nothing of Crime.

"Gentlemen, I know nothing whatever of the death of little Mary Phagan. I had no part in causing her death nor do I know how she came to her death after she took her money and left my office. I never even saw Conley in the factory or anywhere else on that date, April 26, 1913."

"The statement of the witness Dalton is utterly false as far as coming to my office and being introduced to me by the woman Daisy Hopkins is concerned. If Dalton was ever in the factory building with any woman, I didn't know it. I never saw Dalton in

(Continued on Page 6.)

PAGE 24

FRANK HIS OWN

BEST WITNESS,

SAYS COUNSEL

State Fights Hard to Overcome

Impression Accused Made by

Calm Statement.

Continued from Page 5.

my life to know him until this crime."

"In reply to the statement of Miss Irene Jackson, she is wholly mistaken in supposing that I ever went to a ladies' dressing room for the purpose of making improper gaze into the girls' room. I have no recollection of occasions of which she speaks but I do not know that that ladies' dressing room on the fourth floor is a mere room in which the girls change their outer clothing."

"There was no bath or toilet in that room, and it had windows opening onto the street. There was no lock on the door, and I know I never went into that room at any hour when the girls were dressing. These girls were supposed to be at their work at 7 o'clock. Occasionally I have had reports that the girls were flirting from this dressing room through the windows with men."

"It is also true that sometimes the girls would loiter in this room when they ought to have been doing their work. It is possible that on some occasions I looked into this room to see if the girls were doing their duty and were not using this room as a place for loitering and for flirting."

Says Negro's Story

Is Tissue of lies.

"These girls were not supposed to be dressing in that room after 7 o'clock and I know that I never looked into that room at any hour when I had any reason to suppose that there were girls dressing therein."

"The statement of the negro Conley is a tissue of lies from first to last. I know nothing whatever of the cause of the death of Mary Phagan and Conley's statement as to his coming up and helping me dispose of the body, or that I had anything to do with her or to do with him that day is a monstrous lie."

"The story as to women coming into the factory with me for immoral purposes is a base lie and the few occasions that he claims to have seen me in indecent positions with women is a lie so vile that I have no language with which to fitly denounce it."

"I have no rich relatives in Brooklyn, N. Y. My father is an invalid. My father and mother together are people of very limited means, who have barely enough upon which to live. My father is not able to work. I have no relative who has any means at all, except Mr. M. Frank who lives in Atlanta, Ga. Nobody has raised a fund to pay the fees of my attorneys. These fees have been paid by the sacrifice in part of the small property which my parents possess."

"Gentlemen, some newspaper men have called me "the silent man in the tower," and I kept my silence and my counsel advisedly, until the proper time and place. The time is now; the place is here; and I have told you the truth, the whole truth."

Frank bowed slightly to the twelve to whom he had addressed this remarkable statement and then stepped down from the stand. Court adjourned until 9 o'clock Tuesday morning.

PAGE 25

ATTACK FRANK'S OWN STORY

State Hits at Many Links In Prisoner's Defense

CONDUCTOR'S EVIDENCE

CONTRADICTED; STATE

DEFENDS JIM CONLEY

Harry Scott, Pinkerton detective, was recalled in an attack on Frank's own story, at the afternoon session Wednesday.

W. T. Dobbs, a member of the city fire department, directly contradicted W. N. Matthews, one of the defense's witnesses and motorman of the car on which Mary Phagan came to town April 26, in the course of his testimony in the Frank trial Wednesday afternoon.

Dobbs testified that he saw Matthews about three days after the crime and that Matthews told him that Mary Phagan, had ridden with him that day, that she got off at Marietta and Forsyth streets, and that the Epps boy was with her.

Matthews testified when on the stand that the Phagan girl did not get off at Marietta and Forsyth streets, but rode on to Broad and Hunter streets, and that he did not see the Epps boy with her.

D. S. Kendrick, who was night watchman at the pencil factory before Newt Lee was engaged, testified that he had gone to the factory frequently on Saturday afternoon, and on occasions had seen Jim Conley as well as other negroes hanging around on the first floor. Kendrick also said he had run a tape through the time clock since the murder making a record upon it, and that it had required only three or four minutes to do it. The tape was placed in evidence.

Ivy Jones, a negro drive, testified to seeing Jim Conley between 1 and 3 o'clock the afternoon of the murder. He said that he walked with Conley toward Conley's home and left him at Hunter and Davis streets.

J. D. Reed, a tile layer, was called for the purpose of impeaching the testimony of W. T. Hollis, conductor on the car on which Mary Phagan came to town. Reed and Hollis had told him that Epps had go on that car with the girl and that the two had talked together as though they were sweethearts.

Progress in Attack

On Frank's Character.

Solicitor Dorsey renewed his determined attack upon the character of Leo M. Frank Wednesday, and for the first time since the testimony of Jim Conley and the insurance man, Ashley Jones, was able to make a little progress in the introduction of this sort of testimony.

Having found the opening, the Solicitor made the most his advantage, and before the noon recess had arrived ten witnesses, most of them young girls, had arrived ten witnesses, most of them young girls, had sworn that Frank's general character was bad and that his moral character was the same.

The most sensational bit of testimony involved one of the foreladies. Two of the girls who formerly had worked in the factory, Miss Myrtice Cato and Miss Maggie Griffin, testified that they had seen Frank go into the dressing room on the fourth floor with Miss Rebecca Carson, who was a witness for Frank only a few days ago.

Miss Cato said she had seen the two go into the dressing room on two occasions. Miss Griffin testified it had occurred three or four times to her knowledge.

Miss Carson was called by the Solicitor and indignantly denied that such an occurrence ever had taken place.

Saw Frank Lay Hand

On Mary's Shoulder.

Of even greater importance, although of less sensational interest was the testimony of Miss Dewey Hewell, who swore that Frank was in the habit of talking frequently to Mary Phagan; that he called her by name, and that he stood close to her and laid his hand familiarly on her shoulder. She was not able to relate the subject of the conversations when she was cross-examined. She did not know but that Frank might have been talking about her work.

Miss Ruth Robinson corroborated the Hewell girl in her testimony. Miss Rawal was brought from the Home of the Good Shephard in Cincinnati to testify against Frank.

PAGE 26

DORSEY FIGHTS HARD TO BOLSTER UP DR. HARRIS' EVIDENCE

Calling of More Medical Experts by State Materially Lengthens Frank Trial

MARY PHAGAN VICTIM OF

CRIMINAL VIOLENCE, SAYS

DR. JNO.FUNKE ON STAND

Continued from Page 1.

Neither was able to say that there had been anything improper or unusual in Frank's talk with Mary.

N. Kelly, an employee of the street railway company, said that he stood at Forsyth and Marietta streets April 26 and took the English avenue car at 12:02 to
Alabama street. He said he knew Mary Phagan and that she was not on this car from Forsyth and Marietta streets. His testimony if believed by the jury is extremely important to the State, as it supports the State's contentions in two respects first, that Mary Phagan go off the car at Forsyth and Marietta streets, and, second, that the car was considerably ahead of time. Other street car employees testified that 11 was not unusual for the English avenue car, due at 12:07, to come in ahead of the Fair street car, which is due at 12:05.

Experts Corroborate

Harris Evidence.

Solicitor Dorsey, successful in his endeavor to re-open the question of the time Mary Phagan met her death as judged by the condition of the food found in her stomach, gathered a brilliant array of stomach and intestinal specialists Wednesday to lead in an onslaught against the testimony of the experts called by the lawyers for Leo Frank.

Dr. Clarence Johnson, a well-known Atlanta specialist, on being asked a hypothetical question embracing the condition in which the cabbage in Mary Phagan's stomach was found, gave it as his opinion that the girl came to her death within an hour after the digestion began.

This corroborated in a measure the testimony of Dr. Harris, who estimated the time at from half to three-quarters of an hour after the cabbage had been eaten.

Dr. George M. Niles, who holds the chair of gastro-enterology at the Atlanta Medical College, swore that digestion could not have progressed more than an hour under the conditions described. He was quite positive digestion had progressed less than an hour.

Dr. John Funke, professor of pathology and bacteriology at the Atlanta Medical College, testified that he had been shown sections of the organs of Mary Phagan by Dr. Harris, a circumstance which had not been made known until this point in the trial. The defense had made his experiments and analysis in secret and had consulted no other expert.

Dr. Funks later admitted that he had not made the examination until about a week ago after the charges had been made and he had been asked by Dr. R. T. Dorsey, brother of the Solicitor, to inspect the specimens.

Asserts Girl Was

Criminally Attacked

This expert corroborated Dr. Harris in his declaration that Mary Phagan was a victim of criminal violence, but he fell somewhat short of substantiating Harris on the time the cabbage had been in the stomach before the digestive processes had been stopped by death.

Being pressed for a definite answer on this point, he said:

"One can not say positively, but it is reasonable to assume that digestion probably had progressed an hour, maybe a little more, maybe a little less."

Dr. Johnson was extremely cautious in his answers. He dictated his replies slowly and studiedly to the court stenographer and picked his words and phrases most carefully.

He said first in reply to questions by the Solicitor that it was his scientific opinion that the digestion of the cabbage and bread in Mary Phagan's stomach had stopped within an hour after they were eaten. Attorney Arnold, however, got the expert to change his answer to "within an hour after digestion had begun," forcing Dr. Johnson to admit that the beginning of digestion many times is delayed by poor mastication or overdilution of the gastric fluids. The witness would not undertake to say how long it was before the first processes of actual digestion had begun in the case of Mary Phagan.

Much surprise was occasioned when it was learned that Jim Conley had been brought to the courthouse at the command of Solicitor Dorsey. It was rumored that he would go on the stand, but Solicitor Dorsey insisted that he had him brought over merely to have him identified by persons who could swear to his good character.

Defense Puts Up

Hard Battle.

A lively argument over the State's proposal to call three or four prominent physicians to controvert the testimony of the defense's medical experts marked the opening of the Frank trial Wednesday.

Luther Rosser and Reuben Arnold vigorously fought the introduction of witnesses for this purpose in the State's rebuttal. Solicitor Dorsey maintained he had a perfect right to develop as much testimony along this line as he wished.

The defense took the attitude that all of their medical experts were called only for the purpose of rebutting the testimony of Dr. H. F. Harris, secretary of the State Board of Health, who will go down in the history of the Phagan case as the witness who professed to determine the time that intervened between the time that Mary Phagan left home and the time she was killed by the condition Umme she was killed by the condition of some undigested cabbage in her stomach.

Attorney Arnold argued that if the State had wished to obtain the testimony of other medical experts to corroborate the statements of Dr. Harris, they should have been called in the original presentation of the State's case instead of in the rebuttal.

He said that the defense had not attempted to cover any new points through the physicians they had on the stand and that these experts were questioned solely with the purpose in view of discrediting Dr. Harris.

Endless Process

Seen by Arnold.

"If this is to be allowed," said Arnold, "it will mean that it is to be simply an endless process. I never heard of such a thing before. If Mr. Dorsey is permitted to call all the medical experts he wishes to bolster up the testimony of Dr. Harris, I shall call back all of the experts we had on the stand."

The argument had its beginning late Tuesday afternoon when Dr. Clarence Johnson, a well-known Atlanta specialist, was called to the stand just before adjournment. Rosser and Arnold entered their objections the instant that Solicitor Dorsey began questioning the witness along the same line that he had questioned Dr. Harris when the State presented its case against the defendant.

"I just want to question this man in rebuttal of the defense's witnesses," insisted the Solicitor. "They testified that Dr. Harris was making a wild and reckless guess when he declared that Mary Phagan was killed within three-quarters of an hour after she ate and left home. I want to prove by Dr. Johnson and the other experts that I will call that this declaration of Dr. Harris was base don scientific principles that are well known to the physicians who specialize along those particular lines."

The Solicitor said that he had plenty of authorities to uphold him in his stand on the admissibility of the testimony in rebuttal and asked the judge to adjourn until Wednesday morning so that he might have time to look them up. The Solicitor got Dr. Johnson to buy before he left the stand that Dr. Harris was premising his statement upon substantial physiological principles and that it was in no sense a wild guess. It was the plan to recall Dr. Johnson to the stand again as soon as court opened Wednesday.

Expert Permitted to

Answer State's Query.

Dr. Clarence Johnson was called the Solicitor Dorsey resumed his argument on the admissibility of evidence supporting Dr. H. F. Harris.

"I have this authority," said Dorsey. "It has been the well-recognized practice to follow this course. I have not been able to put my hand on a specific authority, though I have looked for it for some time. However, I think your honor will recall that it is the uniform practice to allow the State to make out a prime facie case and go into the whole thing later. It is within the discretion of the court to allow a case to be reopened even after the State and the defense have rested."

"What I want to know is," said Judge Roan, "If you want to reopen this whole case."

"I have a right to do that," said Dorsey.

"Where would this thing end?" asked the judge. "They would have the right to rebut."

"Of course the court would not allow anything absurd."

"What is more absurd," asked Arnold, "than for the State to bolster up it's testimony after the matter is closed? I know some judges who have
been elevated from the office of Solicitor General who would allow the State to bring in anything on rebuttal. If this is to be reopened, we are going to ask to be allowed to bring our experts to go over the rebuttal. If Dr. Harris' testimony needs bolstering, he should have put up the doctors at first."

"As a matter of right," said Judge Roan, "you (Dorsey) have not any. As a matter of discretion of the court you have. I will exercise that discretion in your favor, Mr. Dorsey. You may go on with the question."

Girl Died Within Hour

After Eating Cabbage.

Solicitor Dorsey had the court stenographer read the hypothetical question about the length of time the cabbage Mary Phagan ate had been in her stomach and whether a doctor could determine anything definite about the time of death or whether it would be a wild guess.

"The answer was:"

"To answer that question under the pain I have taken I would have to know whether the pathologist was thoroughly capable and employed the most modern scientific methods."

Q. Well, assume that he was, doctor? A. If a capable pathological found there was only combined hydrochloric acid with due consideration of other conditions as possible factors. I would express in my opinion scientifically that the digestion of the bread and the cabbage was stopped within one hour after eating.

The witness the addressed the court:

"Your honor, I would like to have my answer read to me by the stenographer." The request was granted.

Q. Is every stomach a law unto itself? A. No.

Arnold took the witness on cross-examination.

Q. What are some of the other possible factors? A. I didn't say that.

Q. What did they say then? A. I said there were probably factors in the cut of the bead and strangulation.

Q. Well, how would that affect digestion? A. Anything that disturbs the circulation of the blood would affect digestion.

Q. What did you mean by mechanical conditions? A. The thickness of the stomach, the size and the general appearance.

Q. Do you consider the color test reliable? A. Yes.

Q. It depends entirely on the eye of the man? A. Not exactly.

Q. If a man were color blind would it affect the test? A. Why, of course.

Says Digestive Juices

Disappear After Death.

Q. Now this acid has an ascending and descending scale, hasn't it? A. Yea.

Q. What is the highest degree of activity? A. Do you want my experience?

Q. No, the science. A. I think it varies from 30 to 40.

Q. What becomes of the pancreatic juices of the stomach after death? A. There are no pancreatic juices of the stomach. They are in the intestines.

Q. Well, what becomes of them after death? A. They would lose the chemical property in time, but the physical pancreatic juice would remain.

Q. What becomes of free hydrochloric acid after death? A. When the stomach disintegrates it disappears.

Q. But tell me, doctor, what becomes of the free hydrochloric acid after death regardless of time? A. It eventually disappears.

Q. What delays the beginning of the digestive process? A. If mastication was not good, or rather very bad, it would be delayed.

Q. Would walking delay it? A. Not unless it was a tiring walk.

Q. Well, when you answered Mr. Dorsey's question, you only meant one hour from the time digestion started and not how long it had been in the stomach? A. Yes.

Q. You said, as I remember it, that digestion began within an hour and was arrested? A. I prefer to have my answer read.

Q. The stenographer is taking every word you are saying. He will do you justice A. It is not justice for myself I want. I want to do justice to all.

"Yes, I know that," said Arnold, and, continuing:"

Q. Could you tell by looking at that cabbage how long digestion had been delayed? A. In my laboratory I could tell exactly. Here it would only be an estimate.

Witness Declines to

Guess at Anything.

Q. You mean a guess? A. I don't guess at anything.

Q. You never made any test on Mary Phagan's stomach? A. No.

Q. You are simply testifying what possibly might have been done? A. I am simply testifying to scientific truth.

The witness was excused and Dr. G. M. Niles, another stomach and intestinal specialist, and a professor at the Atlanta Medical College, and also author of a book on pellagra, was summoned. Dorsey questioned him?

Q. Does science recognize that every stomach is a law unto itself? A. Every healthy normal stomach has certain fundamental relations to all other healthy normal stomachs.

In answer to the hypothetical question embracing the case of Mary Phagan. Dr. Niles answered: "In the orderly process of the course of digestion, there should be purse hydrochloric acid in the course of on hour. I am answering my question regard to any psychic or physical shock. I am not going so much by the appearance of the cabbage as the statements of the results of the laboratory tests."

Q. What have you to say about

LEO FRANK'S MOTHER

ON HER WAY TO COURT

MRS. REA FRANK.

variations of diseased stomachs? -

A. There are wide variations. Stomachs have idiosyncrasies, but where they are very marked I would not call them normal.

Q. There is nothing that differs as much as individual digestion, is there? A. I would say that a man's temperamental view of life differs more than that.

Q. How long does it take cabbage to digest? A. I can not answer that question absolutely.

Q. Don't you know what the books say from four to four and one-half hours? A. I can not answer that specifically.

Q. What is the longest time you have known cabbage to remain in a fairly normal stomach? A. Four or five hours.

Q. You found it there in a normal stomach five hours, haven't you? A. The remains of it.

Q. Is starch one of the carbohydrates? A. Yes.

Cabbage Had Not Been

In Stomach Three Hours.

Q. Then the digestion should begin in the mouth? A. That is the preliminary mechanical process.

Q. Well then, in a normal stomach, if the cabbage were not well masticated it would be there some time before the stomach started work, wouldn't it? A. No, I would say the stomach got busy immediately.

Q. You would not say how long that cabbage was in that little girl's stomach, would you? A. I would not.

Q. Now, look at that cabbage and tell me whether it might not have been there three hours or more.

Dr. Niles looked at the cabbage several minutes and said: "No, if it had been in the stomach three hours, it would have been more pulverized."

Q. Now, if this little girl ate that cabbage bolted it down in a hurry to get to town and see the parade, would you say that the circumstance delayed digestion? A. Well, if she was hungry and took any pleasure in eating the metal, the mastication or lack of it would not make any great difference.

Q. Then mastication does not make any great difference? A. It certainly does.

Q. Did you make any examination of the stomach? A. No.

Q. You made none of the tests? A. No.

Q. Do you know that the doctor who made the examination did not save any of the contents of the stomach? A. I read it.

Q. Did you know that he did not call any physician in to help him? A. Yes.

Q. That he did not divulge any of the findings until he came here? A. Yes.

Q. That he kept those findings secret? A. Yes.

Q. That we only have his plain unsupported statement? A. Yes.

Dr. Harris Not Guilty

Of Breach of Ethics.

Dorsey took the witness.

Q. Is there any setting of ethics that prohibits those things? A. I never heard of it.

The witness was excused and Dr. John Funkie, who holds the chair pathology and bacteriology at the Atlanta Medical College where he graduated twelve years ago, was called to the stand. Dorsey questioned him concerning an examination made of Mary Phagan's body, and then pronounced his usual hypothetical question about the cabbage. A. About the cabbage, I would not like to say positively that wi
th the conditions found in the laboratory test taken into consideration, that the first six feet of the small intestines were clear, and if there was found 32 degrees of combined hydrochloric acid. I would say the cabbage had been there an hour, maybe a little more or less.

Arnold took the witness.

Q. When did Dr. Harris come to you in regard to this examination? A. He didn't come to me. I was asked to look into it last Saturday.

Q. Who asked you? A. Dr. Dorsey, the brother of the Solicitor.

The witness was excused and Dorsey tendered a telegram from Leo M. Frank to Adolf Montag, in New York, on April 28, as evidence. This telegram read:

Atlanta, Ga., April 28, 1913. Adolph Montag, Imperial Hotel, New York. You may have read in Atlanta papers of factory girl found dead Sunday morning in cellar of pencil factory. Police will eventually solve it. Assure my uncle I am all right in case he asks. Our company has case well in hand. LEO M. Frank.

O. M. Battie, manager of the Postal Telegraph Company was called. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. Up to April 29 did either Frank or the National Pencil Company do business with you? A. I could not say.

Q. Did Frank send a telegram through your company on April 26? A. I have one dated April 28.

"I made a mistake," said Dorsey, "It was April 28. It was received April 29. I just got him up because he said he could not divulge anything except in court." The witness was excused.

W. G. Peeples of the Western Union Telegraph Company, was called.

Q. Did the Western Union Telegraph Company have any telegrams sent by Leo M. Frank on April 26, 27, or 28? A. Yes.

Q. Did your company have any on the dates covered by the subpoena duces tecum? A. Yes.

Q. Let me have them.

Dorsey looked at the telegrams and said:

"Your honor, these are not signed by Frank and I don't care to Introduce them."

Girl Says Frank's

Character Is Bad.

Miss Myrtice Cato was the next witness called Dorsey questioned her.

Q. Are acquainted with the general character of Leo M. Frank? A. I am.

Q. Is it good or bad? A. Bad.

Q. Did you work at the National Pencil Company? A. I did.

Q. When? A. For about three and one-half years up to April 28, 1913.

Q. On what floor did you work? A. Fourth.

Dorsey turned to Rosser.

"She is with you," he said coolly.

"Come down," said Rosser.

Miss Maggie Griffin was called to the stand. Dorsey questioned her.

Q. Were you acquainted with the general character of Leo M. Frank prior to April 26? A. Yes.

Q. Was it good or bad? A. Bad.

Q. Did you work at the National Pencil Factory? A. Yes, for two months.

Q. On what floor? A. Fourth

Rosser took the witness on cross-examination.

Q. Where did you work now? A. At No. 59 Tumlin street.

The witness was excused and Mrs. Marion Dunning was called to the stand. Dorsey questioned her.

Q. Are you acquainted with Leo M. Frank's character? A. Yes.

Q. Is it good or bad? A. Bad.

Q. Are you acquainted with his general character for lasciviousness his relations with women? A. No.

Q. When did you work at the pencil factory? A. About two years ago.

Q. For how long? A. Two weeks.

Not Much Acquainted

With His Character.

The witness was not cross-examined. Mrs. H. R. Johnson, of Stonewall, was called to the stand. Mrs. Johnson declared she worked at pencil factory for two months in 1910. Dorsey questioned her.

Q. Are you acquainted with Frank's general character? A. Yes.

Q. Is it good or bad? A. Yes.

Q. Is it good or bad? A. Bad.

Q. Are you acquainted with his general character for lasciviousness? A. Not very well.

Dorsey Answer yes or no.

Rosser She has answered.

Dorsey All right, she has said not very much.

Rosser took the witness on cross-examination.

Q. Where is Stonewall? A. One the street car line.

Rosser Come down.

Dorsey Just a minute. What floor did you work on? A. The fourth floor.

The witness was excused and Miss Karst, of No. 191 Kelly street was called. Dorsey questioned her.

Q. Have you ever worked at the pencil factory? A. Yes. On the second floor about two years ago.

Q. Are you acquainted with Frank's character? A. Yes.

Q. Is it good or bad? A. Bad

The witness said the general character of Frank for lasciviousness was bad.

She was not cross-examined.

Mrs. L. T. Corsey was called but did not answer. It was stated that she was sick. Miss Nellie Pettis was called. Dorsey questioned her.

Q. Do you know Leo M. Frank? Yes.

Q. How long have you known him? A. I didn't know whim exactly, except I knew him when I saw him and knew about him.

Q. Was his character good or bad? A. Bad.

Q. Did you know his general character for lasciviousness? A. Yes.

Q. Was it good or bad? A. Bad.

Q. Where did you work at the pencil factory? A. I didn't work there. My sister-in-law worked there. She hardly ever went there on Saturday and I went there to get her max.

Q. Who did you see there?

Rosser interposed an objection, but was overrated.

A. I saw Mr. Frank once.

Rosser took the witness on cross-examination.

Q. Who is your sister-in-law? A. Mrs. Lillie May Pettus.

Q. Where did she live? A. No. 9 Oliver street.

Q. Does she work there now? A. No; she quit working there about three weeks before the murder.

Witnesses Fail to

Answer When Called.

The witness was excused and the following were called, but failed to answer. Mrs. T. C. Harrison, Miss Pearl Dobson and Thomas Blackstock. Miss May Davis, No. 8 Louis Avenue, an employee of the pencil company and Frank's character was bad. Rosser cross-questioned her, adding but one question:

Q. Where do you work now? A. I am not working now.

Mrs. Mary B. Wallace, an elderly woman in mourning, was called. Dorsey questioned her.

Q. Did you ever work at the National Pencil Factory? A. Yes; three days.

Q. When? A. July, 1912.

Q. Did you know Leo Frank's general character? A. Yes.

Q. Was it good or bad? A. Bad.

So witness declared that Frank's general character as to lasciviousness was bad. The witness was not cross-examined.

Estelle Winkle was next called to the stand. She said that she worked at the pencil factory for one week in March 1919. She said that Frank's character was bad. On cross-examination, she said she was not working now, and gave her residence as being twelve miles from Griffin.

Miss Carrie Smith was the next witness. The rapidity with which she chewing gum created a ripple of laughter in the courtroom, and deputies were forced to rap for order. The witness testified that she worked on the fourth floor of the pencil factory, and that Frank's character was bad. She was not acquainted with his character for lasciviousness. On cross-examination she said she resided at No. 237 Simpson, and that she worked for the factory off and on for three years, working there the last time about three weeks after Christmas.

Miss Ruth Robinson was the next witness. Dorsey questioned her.

Saw Frank Speak to

Mary About Her Work.

Q. Did you ever work at the pencil factory? A. Yes.

Q. Did you know Mary Phagan? A. Yea.

Q. Did you know Frank? A. Yes.

Q. Did you ever see Frank talking to Mary Phagan? A. Yes.

Q. What were they talking about? A. Her work.

Q. Well, how often did he talk to her? A. Several times.

Q. What would he do? A. Show her how to fix pencils.

Q. How would he do it? A. Just take pencils and show her.

Q. Did you ever hear him speak to Mary Phagan? A. Yes.

Q. What did he call her? A. Mary.

Rosser took the witness on cross-examination.

Q. Are you sure of that? A. Yes.

The witness was excused and Miss Dewey Hewell was called. Dorsey questioned her.

Q. Where are you located now? A. In the courthouse.

Q. I mean, where were you before you came here? Do you mean whe
re my parents live?

Q. Yes; where do you live? A. No. 8 Porter street.

Q. Where are you living now? A. In Cincinnati at the Home of the Good Shepherd.

Says Frank Put Hand

On Mary Phagan's Shoulder.

Q. What sort of a home is that no, never mind that. Did you work at the National Pencil factory during February and March, 1913? A. Yes.

Q. Did you ever see Frank talk to Mary Phagan? A. Yes.

Q. How did he act? A. He would come to her machine and put his hand on her shoulder.

Q. What would he say? A. He would put his face close to hers and call her "Mary."

Rosser took the witness on cross-examination.

Q. You didn't work in the metal room very long, did you? A. About two weeks.

The witness was excused and Miss Rebecca Carson was recalled. Dorsey questioned her.

Q. Did you ever go into the dressing room on the fourth floor with Mr. Frank? A. I never did.

Dorsey-Come down.

Miss Myrtice Cato was recalled. Dorsey requested her not to answer the question he was going to put until the court ruled upon it.

Q. Did you ever see Frank go into the drawing room on the fourth floor with Miss Rebecca Carson?

Rosser interposed with an objection, but the witness answered "Yes," before he could stop her.

"That Ain't All I

Know," Says Witness.

The objection was not forced.

Q: How often did you get it? Three or four times, and that ain't all I know.

Rosser took the witness on cross-examination.

Q. Who was on the floor when you saw that? A. Several women.

Dorsey took the witness again.

Q. How did you see it ??? A. I was in that cot of the building.

The witness was excused and Miss Maggie Griffins was recalled in rebuttal of Miss Carson's testimony. Dorsey questioned her.

Q. Did you ever see the defendant and Miss Rebecca Carson go into the dressing room on the fourth floor? A. Yes: three or four climax.

Q. How long a period did that cover? A. Sometimes they would stay in there about fifteen minutes and sometimes about thirty minutes.

Rosser We must oppose that.

Judge Roan The objection is sustained.

Q. What time in the day was it? A. Sometimes in the morning and sometimes in the evening.

Rosser We are objecting to it all.

The court sustained the objection again.

Says Car Ran

Ahead of Schedule.

The witness was excused and Henry A. Hoffman, inspector for the Georgia Railway and Electric Company, was called. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. Do you know Matthews car runs on the English avenue there? A. Yes.

Q. Who is he under? A. He is under me from 11:39 until he goes to dinner.

Q. For what time? A. Thirty-seven minutes.

Q. Is there any set schedule such as 13.09 1-2?-A. None on the board.

Q. Prior to April 26, were you ever on his car when he cut off the Fair street car? A. Yes.

Q. What was the time the Fair street car was due to arrive? A. 12:08.

Q. At the time Matthews cut off the Fair street car, was the Fair street car on time? A. Yes.

Q. Did you ever compare watches with Matthews?

Arnold objected, but said he would not argue the point. His objection was overruled.

A. Yes.

Q. Did you ever see Matthews when his watch was not with yours? A. Yes.

Q. How far off was he? A. Thirty or forty seconds.

Q. Did you ever call his attention to remaining ahead of time? A. Yes.

Q. Do they come in ahead of time often? A. At launch and supper nearby always.

Q. Do they come in ahead of time or often? A. At lunch an supper, nearly always.

Three Minutes Ahead of

Time at Noon.

Rosser took the witness on cross-examination.

Q. You don't remember whether he was ahead of time April 26, or not, do you? A. No.

Q. Do you discharge a man for be-

Continued on page 2, column 1.

WOMEEN OF FACTORY SWEAR FRANK'S CHARACTER IS BAD

State Makes Headway With Testimony Hitting Standing of Prisoner

WITNESS SAYS SHE SAW

ACCUSED PLACE HAND ON

PHAGAN GIRL'S SHOULDER

Continued from page 2.

ing ahead of time? A. Not at first.

Q. Now, did you ever catch him ahead of time at 12 o'clock? A. Yes.

Q. How much? A. Three minutes.

Q. When was it? A. During the spring of the year.

Q. How many times have you known him to be ahead of time? A. Only twice, I think, in the short time he has been under me.

The witness was excused and N. Kelly, a motorman was called. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. Where were you April 28 before 12 and 12:05 o'clock? A. At Broad and Marietta streets.

Q. Do you know what time the English avenue car came in? A. It was 12:03.

Q. Do you know Matthews and Hollis? A. Yes.

Mary Phagan

Not On the Cars.

Q. Did you see them on the car? A. Yes.

Q. At what time? A. 12:02.

Q. Do you know Mary Phagan? A. By sight.

Q. Was she on that car when you saw it? A. She was not.

Rosser took the witness on cross-examination.

Q. How do you remember that? A. I looked at my watch to catch a car.

Q. Did you look at it yesterday at that time? A. I don't remember.

Q. Why did you not report about little Mary Phagan not being on that car? A. I did not want to get mixed up in this.

Q. When did you first tell the detectives? A. I didn't see the detectives. I told Mr. Starnes this morning.

Q. Who else was on that car? A. I don't remember.

Q. What did you do after that? A. I stood at Jackson & Wessels for a time and then went and caught the 12:10 car for College Park.

Q. You were not paying any particular attention to anything, were you? A. I was watching the crews being relieved.

Q. What is the schedule of the College Park and Hapeville cars? A. The College Park schedule is 8:20 to 8:50 and the Hapeville cars run on the hour and every twenty minutes.

Rosser Don't tell it so fast. What's the schedule? A. A car every ten minutes.

Says Car Often Is

Ahead of Time.

The witness was excused and W. D. Owens, a conductor on the White City line, was called. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. What time do you get to town at noon? A. 12:05.

Q. Do you remember seeing the English avenue and Cooper street car on April 26? A. No.

Q. Did you ever know that car to come in there ahead of you? A. Yes.

Q. How much? A. Two minutes.

Q. Ever more than that? A. I have known it to be three minutes.

The witness was excused and L. F. Ingram, a street car conductor, was called. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. Do you remember coming to town on an English avenue car Saturday, April 26? A. I do.

Q. What time was it? A. I don't remember.

Q. An English avenue car is due at Marietta and Broad streets at 12:07 o'clock: Do you remember that car ever coming in ahead of time? A. Yes; frequently. Sometimes they come in ahead of time and sometimes late. I saw one of those trippers come in this morning at 8:24 when it was due at 8:30 o'clock.

Q. How much have you known the English avenue car to be off schedule? A. Three or four minutes.

Rosser took the witness on cross-examination.

Q. It's against the rules of the company to come in ahead of time, isn't it? A. Yes.

The witches was excused and Miss Mamie Kitchens, an employee of the pencil factory on the fourth floor, was called. Dorsey questioned her.

Q. How long have you been at the factory? A. Two years.

Q. What floor? A. Fourth.

Q. Were you at the factory today? A. Yes.

Only Hearsay

About Superintendent.

Q. Do you know any woman on that, floor who was not been called as a witness here? A. Miss Eva Jones and Mrs. Howell.

Q. Are you acquainted with Frank's general character? A. Only by hearsay, and I don't want to testify.

Q. That's all right. I won't press the question. Now were you ever in that dressing room on the fourth floor with Miss Irene Jackson - when this defendant, Leo M. Frank, came in? A. Yes.

Q. Well, just tell the jury about it. A. I was back there one day when he ca
me back and stuck his head in the door. He laughed, and said something about us having no work to do, and then went out.

Rosser took the witness on cross-examination.

Q. Did he ask you if you girls had any work to do? A. Yes.

Q. Didn't he open the door and say: "Haven't you girls any work to do?" A. He didn't say it that way.

Q. Who else was there? A. Miss Ethel Stewart was in there for a time.

Q. Aren't you mistaken about Miss Jones and Mrs. Howell not being called as witnesses? A. I only have their word for it.

Q. I am going to ask you a question we have asked every woman who works on the fourth floor. Did you ever meet Mr. Frank for any improper purpose? A. I never did.

Dorsey: "Your honor, if that question is admissible, why can't we ask Miss Wood the question we have indicated?"

Judge Roan: "They claim their questions are only in rebuttal of Conley."

At this time, 1 o'clock, court recessed until 2, making the longest morning session yet held in the trial.

Motorman, Recalled,

Denies Talk of Case.

The first witness called at the afternoon session was W. M. Matthews motorman, who declared that the Phagan girl came into the city on his car on the morning of the murder. Solicitor Dorsey endeavored to show that he had feeling in this case which caused him to lean toward the defense.

Dorsey Do you know this man, W. C. Dobbs? A. I do.

Dobbs was sent from the courtroom.

Q. Didn't you have a talk with Mr. Dobbs about three days after the murder and say that Mary Phagan and George Epps got off your car at Broad and Marietta streets? A. I never told anyone that.

Q. Didn't you tell someone you owed a debt of gratitude to someone connected with this case?

Rosser interposed an objection." Let him give names," he said.

Dorsey How long since were a defendant in court? A. About two years.

Q. Who defended you? A. Mr. Moore and Mr. Branch, Mr. Colquitt and Mr. Conyers.

Rosser - You were acquitted, weren't you? A. Yes.

W. C. Dobbs Says He

Talked With Conductor.

Q. Does Mr. Branch live anywhere near you? A. No.

Q. Did you ever talk to me about this case? A. One time.

Q. Did you ever talk to this man (indicating Attorney Arnold)? A. No.

Q. No.

Q. You have no interest in this case? A. No.

Q. What were you tried for? A. Manslaughter.

Q. Did the jury acquit you? A. Yes.

The witness was excused and W. C. Dobbs was called to the stand. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. Did you ever have any conversation with Conductor Matthews about Mary Phagan and George Epps coming in on his car? A. Yes: he told me she came in on the car and that Epps was with her.

Q. Did he say anything about where they got off? A. Yes; at Marietta and Forsyth streets.

Rosser took the witness on cross-examination.

Q. Are the son of Police Sergeant Dobbs who is testifying in this case are you not? A. Yes.

The witness was excused.

J. W. Coleman, step-father of Mary Phagan, was called again. He did not answer and Solicitor Dorsey said that Coleman's wife was sick and it would be necessary to send for him.

W. W. (Boots) Rogers was recalling to the stand. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. Did you notice anything about the stairs and door that Sunday morning in the National Pencil Factory from the basement to the first floor? A. Yes; the stairs were dirty and dusty and the door could not be lifted.

Man Says He Saw

Negro In Alleyway.

The witness was excused without being cross-examined.

Sergeant L. S. Dobbs was called to the stand. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. Did you see Boots Rogers try to open that door to the stairway leading from the basement in the pencil factory the Sunday morning the body was found? A. Yes.

The witness was excused and Rogers recalled. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. Did you see anything by that cute? A. Yes; a large pile of shavings.

Rogers was excused and Oxel Tillanter was called to the stand. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. Were you at the pencil factory April 26? A. Yes.

Q. At what time? A. Just before 12 o'clock.

Q. Did you see anybody? A. Yes; when I went in I saw a negro coming through a dark alleyway. I asked him the way to the office and he showed me.

Q. Have you seen this boy Jim Conley? A. Yes.

Q. Where? A. In his office.

Q. What was he doing? A. Working.

Q. What did you say to him? A. I asked him for my daughter-in-law's pay and got it.

Rosser took the witness on cross-examination.

Q. You are not positive about its being Conley? A. No.

Q. You say you saw a darkey come yup from ad ark alley. Where was that? A. At the side of the factory.

Step-Father of

Dead Girl on Stand.

The witness was excused. E. K. Graham was called to the stand. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. On Saturday, April 26, were you at the pencil factory? A. Yes, about 20 minutes to 12 o'clock.

Q. Did you see a negro at the entrance? A.

Q. Have you seen Jim Conley? Yes, I saw him this morning.

Q. Was he the man you saw there? A. I couldn't say. I noticed a resemblance, though it seems to me that the man I saw was a little brighter.

Q. Did you say anything to him? A. No. The man with he asked him how to get to the office.

Q. Did he show you? A. Yes.

Q. Was he drunk or sober? A. I didn't see any signs of drunkenness.

Rosser took the witness.

Q. You say the negro you saw was brighter than Conley? A. Is seems to me he was.

The witness was excused. J. W. Coleman, step-father of Mary Phagan arrived at the courthouse at this time and was placed on the stand. Dorsey questioned him. Q. Do you remember a conversation you had with Inspector McWorth, of the Pinkertons? A. Yes.

Q. Did he or not exhibit an envelope found in the factory? A. He did.

Q. What figures if any did the envelope have on it? A. It had a figure 1 up in the corner. Then a figure 1 up in the corner. Then a figure was torn out; than a 5.

The witness was shown the envelope the detectives brought into court and he said it did not look like the one shown him.

J. M. Gantt Is

Recalled to Stand.

Rosser cross-questioned the witness.

Q. You don't know whether this is the same envelope or not, do you? A. It might be, but the figures are not the same.

Dorsey took the witness again.

Q. Did you say anything about this envelope not fitting in the case? A. yes, my wife spoke up and said

Rosser interrupted: "Never mind what your wife said."

The witness was excused. J. M. Gantt was called to the stand. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. Did you ever see Leo M. Frank up the financial sheet? A. Yes.

Q. How long would it take him? A. If he had the data, it would not take him more than one and one-half hours.

Q. Was that time clock accurate? A. No.

Q. How did it vary? A. Two to three minutes.

Rosser took the witness on cross-examination.

Q. Did you pay off those girls by it? A. Yes.

Dorsey took the witness again.

Q. How often was that clock regulated? A. Two or three times a week.

Arnold registered an objection but was overruled.

The witness was excused and Herbert Shiff was recalled. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. How much pay did Mary Phagan draw that last week? A. $1.80.

Q. Now I want you to show me on that book there where the $2 Frank loaned Arthur White appears. A. It appears as $4 because I advanced him $2 the next week and made the entry myself.

Q. Where is that ticket Frank made of it? A. I tore it up.

Says He Gave Haas

All the Papers.

Q. You tore it up? A. We always do.

Q. You were served with a duces tecum to bring to the court a paper signed by Charley Lee in regard to the injury of this man Dudley? A. I was.

Q. Did you bring it? A. I turned over to Mr. Haas all the papers I had.

Q. Did you ever show to Lee a written statement he had made about this accident? A. I don't think he ever wrote a statement. It was writt
en on a typewriter.

Q. Was it in the papers you gave Mr. Haas? A. It had no right to be there.

Q. Did you have the same time clock at the time of the murder that you had when Gantt was there? A. We have two time clocks.

Q. How much behind was the clock when you sent for Mr. Price to fix it? A. I don't think that was the trouble at all. I think it was clogged with the ribbon.

Rosser took the witness.

Q. You had $1,174.80 for the payroll except for the loans you were to pay out and every cent of that was in wages, was it not?

Dorsey: "This is his witness. He can not lead him as though it was a cross-examination."

Rosser: "What? I thought I could cross-examine him. Mr. Dorsey has brought in an entirely new matter of that time."

Judge Roan: "The uniform rule has been that when one side introduces a witness, he remains their witness."

Rosser: "Then, your honor, we have suffered grievously by this. (Turning to the witness) Mr. Schiff, I will now shift my method of examining you. Come down."

Negro Says He

Drank With Conley.

Ivy Jones, a negro, was the next witness. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. What do you do? A. Drive for Walker Brothers.

Q. On Saturday, April 26, did you see Jim Conley? A. Yes.

Q. Where? A. At Forsyth and Hunter streets.

Q. What time was it? A. Between 1 and 2 o'clock.

Q. Can you be more accurate than that? A. No.

Q. Was he drunk? A. No.

Q. Where did you go with him? A. To a saloon.

Q. Then where? A. Toward his home. I left him at the corner of Davis and Hunter streets about three blocks from his home.

Rosser took the witness on cross-examination.

Q. You and he drank beer at that saloon, didn't you? A. Yes, both of us got home.

Rosser: "Come down."

Harry Scott, Pinkerton detective, was recalled to the stand. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. building, did you see any blood around the scuttle hole on the first floor, which leads to the basement? A. No.

Rosser This has all been gone over before and is incompetent.

Dorsey We want to rebut. McWorth's evidence about the bludgeon and the blood.

The objection was overruled.

Q. When did the State learn of this bloody bludgeon? A. I told you personally about it on July 15.

Further objections caused Solicitor Dorsey to change his line of questioning.

Memory Not Clear on

Finding Piece of Cord.

Q. Mr. Scott, when you were going through the basement with Mr. Frank, did you pick up a piece of cord similar to that found around Mary Phagan's neck? A. I think I did.

Q. Did you pick it up, or Frank pick it up? A. My memory is not clear.

Q. Did Newt Lee ever recognize that bloody shirt? A. He did not.

Q. From whom did you learn Conley could write? A. I got the information from my office. I was out of town when they found it out.

Q. When did you learn of it? A. McWorth told me on Sunday

Rosser objected and was sustained.

Q. What did you do when you discovered Conley could write?

Rosser: "Then went into that on the direct."

The objection was sustained.

Q. What conversation did you have with Frank about Darley? A. We told him we believed Darley had been going with girls in the factory. He said, "No; Darley is the soul of honor. He could not know anything about it."

Q. Did Black say to you: Come on, there is nothing doing?" A. No.

The witness was excused, and L. F. Kendrick, former night watchman at the factory, was called to the stand. Dorsey questioned him.

Dorsey's Questions

Met With Objections.

Q. Did you have any conversation with Holloway about swearing that Frank called you up?

Rosser interrupted: "Holloway was their witness. They can not impeach him."

Rosser's objection was sustained.

Dorsey: "Well, can't I show in test and feeling, then?"

Judge Roan: "You can only impeach Holloway on points on which he has misled you."

Dorsey: "That is not the law."

Judge Roan: "Then what is the law?"

Dorsey: "I will get you the authorities."

Judge Roan: "Then I will rule later."

Q. Now during the two years you were working there, did you ever see women there on Saturday afternoons?

Rosser: "You have already ruled on that."

Judge Roan: "You can't ask that."

Q. Did you ever put a slip in the time clock? A. Yes.

Q. How long did it take you? A. About two or three minutes.

Q. Could you hear that elevator running when there was hammering and knocking? A. No.

Q. Have you ever seen Conley around the elevator on Saturday afternoons? A. I have seen Conley there on the way back from lunch.

Roser took the witness.

Q. You have seen all the negroes around there? A. I have seen some of them.

The witness was excused and Dorsey tendered as evidence the time slip made by the witness.

Little Girl Tells of

Visit of Reporter

Vera Epps, a little girl 11 years old, sister of George Epps, was called. Dorsey questioned her.

Q. Did you know Mary Phagan? A. Yes.

Q. Did you talk to a Georgian reporter, Mr. John Minar, the Sunday after the murder and tell him the last time you had seen Mary Phagan was the Thursday before the murder? A.Yes.

Q. Was your brother George Epps, there? A. He was in the house, but he wasn't there all the time this man was there.

Q. Had your brother told you he had seen Mary Phagan on Saturday? A. No.

The witness was excused, and C. B. Maynard was called to the stand. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. Do you know C. B. Dalton? A. Yes.

Q. Did you ever see him go into the pencil factory with a woman? A. Yes.

Q. When? A. In June, or July.

Q. What time of day? A. Between 1 and 2 o'clock.

Q. What day of the week was it? A. Saturday.

Rosser took the witness.

Q. You are sure of that? A. Yes.

The witness was excused and W.T. Hollis, conductor on the English avenue line on which Mary Phagan came to town the day she was murdered was recalled to the stand. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. Didn't you have a conversation with J. D. Reid on Monday after the murder? A. I don't know him.

Q. Didn't you tell him that you saw a little boy with her who looked like her sweetheart? A. I did not.

Recognizes Patron

But Doesn't Know Name.

Q. You say now, like you did the other day, that if George Epps was on the car you did not know it? A. Yes. Solicitor Dorsey had Reid brought into the courtroom. Dorsey then addressed the witness:

Q. Do you know this man? A. He rides on my car. I don't know his name.

Q. Did you tell him anything like I have suggested? A. I did not.

The witness was excused, and J. D. Reid was brought to the stand.

Q. On Monday, April 28, did you have a conversation with Conductor J. T. Hollis on the street car about Mary Phagan? A. No. I wasn't on the car with her.

A ripple of laughter ran around the room.

The witness continued: "I am a little deaf: will you come a little bit closer. Will you come a little bit closer."

Dorsey moved closer to the witness and repeated his question.

A. Yes. He told me it made him feel bad because the little girl rode on his car the last time. He said that a little boy named Epps, her sweetheart, rode in with her. He said they sat in the same seat and got off together.

Rosser did not cross-examine the witness.

City Detective Tells

Of McKnight Story.

J. M. Starnes, city detective, who has been in the courtroom with Solicitor Dorsey since the trial began, was recalled to the stand. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. Did you see any stains of blood spots near the scuttle hole on the first floor of the pencil factory when you made your examination of the building immediately after the murder?

Rosser interrupted: "He answered that before."

Starnes: "I did not."

Dorsey: "Now we will jump to the arrest of Minola McKnight. Tell us about that, Mr. Starnes."

A. We had information about what her husband said she knew. We t
ook her to MR. Dorsey's office, and from there to the police station. I did not see her until the next day. We got Mr. Pickett and Mr. Craven from the Beck & Gregg Hardware Company to come up and see if they could get a statement from her. I asked Minola if she had rather make her statement to them or to us. She said to them. I said: "Minola, if this is not the truth, do not make it."

When she was about half through I asked her attorney, Mr. George Gordon, to come in. I had the stenographer read over what she had said. When he had finished she signed it.

Q. Was she held by my authority? A. She was not.

Q. Could I order you to release her? A. You told me over the phone you could not tell me what to do.

Rosser took the witness on cross-examination.

Q. Now, Starnes, you locked that woman up because she would not give you the kind of statement you wanted? A. No.

Q. Now, Starnes, you locked that woman up because she would not give you the kind of statement you wanted? A. No.

Locked Her Up Because

He Was on Murder Case.

Q. Well, why did you lock her up? A. I was working on a murder case.

Q. Answer my question. A. I am going to tell you.

Dorsey He has a fight to answer it.

Q. Well, by what authority did you lock her up? A. By the authority of an honorable officer working on a murder case.

Rosser That's all right. Now, who issued a warrant for that woman's arrest? A. There was none that I know of.

Q. Who arrested her? A. A bailiff or deputy from Dorsey's office went out and got her. He did not arrest her.

Q. Who locked her up? A. I turned her over to the desk man.

Q. And you kept her there twenty-four hours? A. Yes.

The witness was excused and the jury retired for five minutes to take their usual afternoon soft drink.

OBJECTION TO CHARACTER

ATTACK PUTS DEFENSE

IN ANOMALOUS POSITION

By JAMES B. NEVIN

The public, that is to say that section of the public willing to be fair and wanting to be convinced according to the facts, should remember, in seeking to steady itself in considering the Frank case that in the story of Jim Conley was the climax of the State's case, so the statement of Leo Frank was the climax of the defense's case.

It should remember that both statements are to be weighted carefully and analytically that conclusions are to be jumped at from neither.

The horror of the Conley story, coupled with its unspeakable details, temporarily swept the public mind into a seeming solidity of opinion hostile to Frank it carried instant conviction to hundreds of minds, through the sheer force of the sinister detail it contained.

By and by, however, the public rebounded in a way and it began taking counsel with itself. And then came a pause, followed by a swing back more or less to the normal.

That is the way it is with the public mind always wanting to be just and always sure to be just, if given time and opportunity yet prone ever to be crushed along heedless as in the beginning of terrible stories!

It is the immediate horror of the crime that not infrequently distorts the public's sense of proportion primarily, and makes it unfair to itself no less than to other persons concerned.

But the public in the end is just, and it is true to itself. All it asks or all it needs is a chance to regain its balance, after having been knocked this way or that by a stunning and unanticipated blow it was not able to ward off when delivered.

Leo Frank's remarkable statement to the jury Monday, certainly one of the most convincing statements, so far as surface indications go, that ever fell from the lips of a defendant in Georgia, still is not sufficient, within itself to warrant its public now in rushing to the conclusion that he is innocent.

Pendulum Will Come to Rest.

And so , as in the case of Conley, while the sentiment of the public swung heavily in the direction of the State following the Conley story, and then swung back in the direction of the defense following the Frank statement, it eventually will fight itself somewhere midway between the two, perhaps, and then look to the rest of evidence as filling the one or the other.

A woman correspondent writes me:

"I have read your articles daily. Tell, truly are you for Frank or against him? I can not tell from what you say."

Now, in a way, I consider that something of a compliment. I am glad this correspondent does not know whether I am for or against Frank, for I am neither the one nor the other.

I merely visit the courtroom daily, and "gather me a nosegay of other men's flowers: and naught but the string that binds them is mine own!"

When the storm signals have seemed fair for Frank. I have to set it down. When they have seemed ominous, I have to set that down.

In all the ideas and conclusions I have transferred to paper in respect of the Frank trial, the wish never has been falter to the thought save in that I always have preferred, and always shall prefer, to see a man prove himself a gentleman rather than a scoundrel, if he can.

What I do hope to stand for, and try to stand for, and try to stand for, and what none of us can afford NOT to stand for, is justice and right, fair play and no special favors, decency and civilization, and the supremacy of the law of the land!

I assure my correspondent that I am neither for nor against Frank, but that I am for truth and right, and in my own way and after my own fashion I undertake to stand by my ideals.

Justice the Real End.

Frank Hooper promulgated a platform all can afford to mount and fight upon, which he said, before this care came on for trial:

"It is not so much a matter of finding and convincing Leo Frank, as it is a matter of finding and convincing the murderer of little Mary Phagan!"

So long as you feel that way about it, you are on safe and solid ground but once you get away from that standpoint, you begin groping and listening to the persuasive plea of your prejudices and you preconceived opinions, no matter what they may be.

When a man is on trial for his life, you don't have to be FOR or AGAINST him but you DO have to be in favor of a fair trial for him!

Then, when everything has been done in order and according to the best teachings of a thousand years of Anglo-Saxon civilization even as imperfect as that yet is, the verdict finally recorded under the law will provide you a sheer anchor against error and wrong, and you then will be as right as human ingenuity and philosophy can make you right.

And after that, you should worry, I guess!

Since the Frank statement was delivered, and notwithstanding the fine impression it made upon the public, the State has succeeded in recovering a good deal of ground, nevertheless: and it probably is true today that it stands about as firm as it ever did, if not firmer.

It is conceded that the State lost heavily from a legal standpoint when the presiding Judge decided on Tuesday not to admit any evidence tending to break down Frank's character in specific instances not directly connected with the murder of little Mary Phagan.

When one comes to consider the matter of public opinion, however, it may be that the defense in this won nothing more than a Pyrrhic victory, at best, and that it might have been better to let the State go ahead and prove what it could, if it could prove anything.

The Solicitor General has said all along that he was prepared to establish his allegations of gross immorality against Frank and when Frank seemed to meet that challenge by injecting his general character in issue, the public was included to applaud and to say that was fair and square enough.

If the State was "four-flushing," which Dorsey solemnly affirmed it was not and the defense appeared to call its hand, the public was honest enough to grant Frank's right to do that, and to approve his diary to the State.

Effect Is Disconcerting.

When, however, the defense is permitted to enter its call, and Dorsey is then shut off on
the threshold of his attempt to make good on his position, the effect naturally is somewhat disconcerting, even to those who believe Frank not guilty.

The State stands now in the position of having said unqualifiedly, that it COULD make good its charges, and then, after having been challenged to do so, of being stopped from proceeding!

In all fairness to the State and to the defense, too, for that matter this seems rather a hardship upon it.

Frank made a brave showing of good character he seemed to challenge the State to do to worst, if it could. And now the State is shut off, upon the defense's own motion, from undertaking to do THE VERY THING THE DEFENSE HAS VEHEMENTLY PROTESTED COULD NOT DO.

There is not much difference to see it is having the important thing that the State COULD do good if given an opportunity and help did make good when given the opportunity.

The vital thing and the only thing, so far as public opinion is concerned perhaps is that the defense show that the State NEVER COULD MAKE GOOD IN ANY EVENT.

The court does not does not parrot the introduction of irrelevant evidence that maybe that is right, it is the law anyway but the public does particularly when it can not see the irrelevancy of the evidence.

The attitude of Frank personally has seemed to be that of inviting the closest and total searching investigation into every phase of the charge against him -but it seems to be said in another article that the most the defense can do for Frank is to let the impression become fixed that that there are some things against which he sadly NEEDS protection.

So far, Leo Frank himself has got the very best plea that has been entered in behalf of Leo Frank!

He has boldly thrown down the gauntlet and he says he must do instatement in his own way, after his own mind, and without even requesting his lawyers.

He delivered his defense there on stand in a most convincing manner. If it was the truth, it was given space by being simply told, and in apparent candor.

If it was an untruth, it was littered with consummate art. Only Frank and his God can know, for sure, whether it is the one or the other!

Willing To Be Cross-Examined.

He was reported willing to be cross-examined on his statement. If he might be thought repairable upon the part of the State but whether the offer actually was made there is the outspoken evidence.

Nevertheless, it probably will do Frank no good in the mind of the public to have it appear that he was professedly willing enough to let down the bars at every point but that for some reason, the bars were prevented from being let down and by Frank's own side!

The defense can not hope to get its cake and have it too lest one is it can not hope to have worn these things unprotested. It can not just say Frank's character is above reproach and then head on the State in an attempt to prove otherwise.

It can not do that injustice to Frank, I think-and certainly not injustice to the State!

Sometimes things are done among the forms of law that are seriously strategic mistakes, notwithstanding. There is no complaint as to feel local righteousness perhaps but there may be some complaint as to those illuminating the subject matter at hand.

Perhaps the initial mistake was made when the defense permitted Conley's first unspeakable right to go unchallenged-when it even cross-examined Conley soon. It may seem in the end to have been a far better policy to fight it out in the challenging/continuous/ongoing status along that line.