Friday, 3rd October 1913: Frank Trial Juror Denies Charge Of Bias, The Atlanta Georgian

Reading Time: 34 minutes [6198 words]

The Atlanta Georgian,

Friday, 3rd October 1913,

PAGE 1, COLUMNS 1, 3, 4, 5 & 7.

PAGE 1, COLUMN 1

PAGE 1, COLUMN 3

Slaton Sets

Days

For Clemency

Pleas

Governor Slaton has promulgated a rule that hereafter

petitions for clemency will be heard in the executive offices on

the fourth Thursday and Friday of each month.

The Governor is forced to the adoption of this rule in order to

find time for other public business.

PAGE 1, COLUMNS 4 &

TWO FRANK

JURORS

CHARGED

WITH BIAS

J. A. HENSLEE

MARCELLUS JOHENNING

PAGE 1, COLUMN 4

Court to

Relieve

Congestion

at Jail

In order to alleviate the crowded condition of the Fulton

County jail. Judge Calhoun of the Criminal Court of Atlanta, will

open court next Monday in the room occupied by Judge Bell.

Judge Bell will retire to his chambers and there hear cases in

which juries are not necessary.

Judge Hill will open the Superior Court in the Thrower

Building.

PAGE 1, COLUMN 7

SOLICITOR

CERTAIN TO

GET DELAY IN

WHICH

TO PREPARE

EVIDENCE

With the prospect Thursday of a postponement of the

hearing of the Frank motion for a new trial when it comes up

Saturday, there came also the positive assurance that Solicitor

Dorsey would have absolute denials from the two jurors charged

with prejudice in the motion.

Marcus Johenning, No. 161 Jones avenue, one of the jurors,

declared Thursday that the accusation was a complete falsehood.

I served on that the jury because I did not want to try to be

out of doing so, said Johenning, even though I would gladly

have escaped the work. And now, to accuse me of having told a

falsehood in secure the month's service is rank injustice.

I lost money through neglect of my business, and there was

not a man on the jury who had anything to gain, other than to do

his duty as a citizen. If there are any persons who have made

affidavits that we did not do Frank justice, they have lied

outright.

I don't know anything about the affidavit but what I saw in

the papers, added Johenning. Solicitor Dorsey has not notified

me that there was any such affidavit. If there is one it is

absolutely false.

I made no utterances before the trial that would disqualify

me for jury service. Friday before the case was called, I was

informed that I had been drawn as a talseman. I did not mention

that to anyone but my business partner, and that was for

business reasons.

I went to the trial absolutely impartial. My mind was

unprejudiced. I was in the attitude of demanding that the State

prove its case.

I would have gladly avoided serving that month on the jury,

and the only reason I did serve was because I did not want to lie

out of it.

As soon as I can see the affidavit we will show that is

flimsier than the paper on which it is written.

Henslee's Friends Tell of Denial.

J. A. Henslee, a travelling salesman and second juror charged

with having been prejudiced, has moved to Barnesville since the

end of the Frank trial. However, his Atlanta friends Thursday

declared that he had made strenuous denials to them of the

accusation when became public some time ago.

The last doubt about the postponement was removed

following a statement of Solicitor Dorsey, who declared that it

would take him from new until Saturday and perhaps longer to

check up the brief of evidence alone.

The Solicitor added however, that he would plunge into the

subject immediately with the view of preparing his answer at the

earliest possible moment. Although he refused to venture an

assertion as to the length of the delay, it is believed that the

hearing will be postponed longer than one week.

The judge has it in his power to proceed with the hearing

regardless of the many requests of the Solicitor or the defense

but it is certain the no such ruling will be invoked Saturday.

The motion has not been served on me, said Mr. Dorsey

Wednesday morning, but without regard to the amended motion,

it will take me from now until Saturday, even longer to check up

the brief of evidence alone.

The evidence is quite a bulky affair, as it is contained in

nine volumes, each one of which must be examined with the

utmost care.

Huge Task Checking Evidence.

Although it had been announced that the amended motion

would be placed in the Solicitor's hands Wednesday at noon, this

was found to be impossible because of the magnitude of the work

of checking up the evidence. Attorney Rosser's clerks worked all

the afternoon in an effort to get in to the Solicitor Thursday

morning. It probably will be in Mr. Dorsey's hands before noon

Thursday.

PAGE 2, COLUMNS 1 &

PAGE 2, COLUMN 1

FELLOW FRANK JURORS DEFEND

ACCUSED MEN

PAGE 2, COLUMN 8

ALL BRAND

CLAIM OF

BIAS AS

BOSH'

Trial Fair, Judge Impartial,

Cheers

Unheeded, Declare Panel

Who

Convicted Factory Head.

Fellow members of the jury which found Leo M. Frank guilty

of the murder of Mary Phagan at the National Pencil Factory on

April 26t and strongly Friday morning in defense of the jurors

accused of bias and prejudice by the defense in its question for a

new trial.

In the hearing of the motion of the defense, which is called

before Judge Roan Saturday, it is probable that Solicitor Dorsey, in

combatting the move for a new trial, will present statements and

affidavits from every member of the jury, denying the charges of

prejudice.

Brands Charges as untrue.

F. E. Winburn, claim agent for the Atlanta and West Point

Railroad, one of the Frank jury, brands as untrue the charges

made by the defense.

I do not believe there was a man on the jury that found

Frank guilty but who voted for the verdict because the evidence

made the guilt of the factory superintendent plain, Mr. Winburn

said. The charges that the jury was prejudiced are untrue. There

was no doubt in my mind when all the evidence had been heard.

I heard no cheering; neither was I prejudiced. When I served

on the jury I sacrificed my own interests, but I did my duty as a

citizen. The trial was fair. I thought Judge Roan more than fair in

his rulings. So far as I am concerned, I want to say that the verdict

was fair, and could not have been otherwise than what it was.

Defends Fellow Jurors.

I have tried to keep out of the argument because I was not

attacked personally by the attorneys for the defense, but I agree

heartily with the statements of Mr. Jenning as published in

yesterday's Georgian. While I did not know any of the other jurors

to the trial, my association with them for that 29-day period

satisfied me they all men of honor and integrity.

A. L. Wisbey, cashier at the Buckeye Cotton Oil company,

would make no extended comment on the case.

I was influenced no one, he declared. I heard no cheering.

I think the trial was as fair as was ever given to any man. I believe

Judge Roan was fair, and I think each man on the jury voted Frank

guilty because he could not do otherwise on the evidence

submitted.

Charles J. Bosshardt, an employee of the Foote-Davis

Company, characterized the charges of bias and prejudice as

bosh.

Denies He Was Prejudiced.

And I see no reason why Frank should be given a new trial,

he added. I heard none of the alleged cheering, and I was not

influenced in any way, by anyone or anything. The members of

the jury seemed to me to be gentlemen, and certainly they were

intelligent.

Judge Roan, I think, is a fine man, and I have never seen a

fairer judge. I never was prejudiced against Frank. I tried to give

him the benefit of the doubt in my own mind all the time. I say it

was all fair and square, and that the charges that some of the

jurors were influenced by this and that are all bosh.

PAGE 3, COLUMNS 1 &

PAGE 3, COLUMN 1

FRANK JURY DECLARES

TRIAL FAIR

PAGE 3, COLUMN 8

ALL

BRAND

CLAIM OF

BIAS AS

BOSH'

Trial Fair, Judge Impartial,

Cheers

Unheeded, Declare Panel

Who

Convicted Factory

Head.

Fellow members of the jury which found Leo M. Frank guilty

of the murder of Mary Phagan at the National Pencil Factory on

April 26 came out strongly Friday morning in defense of the jurors

accused of bias and prejudice by the defense in its motion for a

new trial.

The jury was a unit in declaring that Frank received as fair in

declaring that Frank received as fair a trial as any man ever

received in Georgia, in defending the rulings of Judge L. S. Roan"

which they declared vehemently were more than fair to Frank's

cause"and all of them denied emphatically that they were

influenced or prejudiced by the cheering and other incidents of

the trial on which the defense based its motion for a new trial.

In the hearing of the motion of the defense, which is called

before Judge Roan Saturday, it is probable that Solicitor Dorsey, in

combating the move for a new trial, will present statements and

affidavits from every member of the jury, denying the charges of

prejudice.

Brands Charges as Untrue.

F. E. Winburn, claim agent for the Atlanta and West Point

Railroad, one of the Frank jury, brands as untrue the charges

made by the defense.

I do not believe there was a man on the jury that found

Frank guilty but who voted for the verdict because the evidence

made the guilt of the factory superintendent plain. Mr. Winburn

said, The charges that the jury was prejudiced are untrue. Thaws

noy mind when all the evidence had been heard.

I heard no cheering; neither was I prejudiced. When I served

on the jury I sacrificed my own interests, but I did my duty as a

citizen. The trial was fair. I thought Judge Roan more than fair in

his rulings. So far as I am concerned, I want to say that the verdict

was fair, and could not have been otherwise than what it was.

Defends Fellow Jurors.

I have tried to keep out of the argument because I was not

attacked personally by the attorneys for the defense, but I agree

heartily with the statement of Mr. Johenning as published in

yesterday's Georgian. While I did not know any of the other jurors

prior to the trial, my association with them for that 29-day period

satisfied me they are all men of honor and integrity.

A. L. Wisbey, cashier at the Buckeye Cotton Oil Company,

would make no extended comment on the case.

I was influenced by no one, he declared. I heard no

cheering. I think the trial was as fair as was ever given to any

man. I believe Judge Roan was fair, and I think each man on the

jury voted Frank guilty because he could not do otherwise on the

evidence submitted.

Charles J. Bosshardt, an employee of the Foote-Davis

Company, characterized the charges of bias and prejudice as

bosh.

Denies He Was Prejudiced.

And I see no reason why Frank should be given a new trial,

he added. I heard none of the alleged cheering, and I was not

influenced in any way, by any one or anything. The members of

the jury seemed to me to be gentlemen, and certainly they were

intelligent.

Denies He Was Prejudiced.

And I see no reason why Frank should be given a new trial,

he added. I heard none of the alleged cheering, and I was not

influenced in any way, by any one or anything. The members of

the jury seemed to me to be gentlemen, and certainly they were

intelligent.

Judge Roan, I think, is a fine man, and I have never seen a

fairer judge. I never was prejudiced against Frank. I tried to give

him the benefit of the doubt in my own mind all the time. I say it

was all fair and square, and that the charges that some of the

jurors were influenced by this and that are all bosh.

F. L. V. Smith, No. 481 Cherokee

PAGE 9, COLUMN 1

CHARGES OF

BIAS

BOSH,

ASSERTS

FRANK JURY

Fellow Members Unite in

Defense

Of Men Accused of

Prejudice

By the Defense.

Continued From Page 1.

avenue denied emphatically that the jury was prejudiced.

The charge that the Frank jury was prejudiced is utterly

untrue, said he. I can say with positive certainty, speaking not

only for myself, but for the entire jury, that each man did his duty

as he saw it, and that the verdict was reached fairly and

impartially.

We were not influenced by the cheering, and could not

have been, because we were always in the anteroom, and could

not tell which side was being cheered. The deputies told us

absolutely nothing. I am not versed in the technicalities of the

law, but it seems to me that Leo Frank had a fair trial as he

possibly had.

Higdon Also Emphatic.

J. F. Higdon, of No. 108 Ormewood avenue, was no less

positive in his denial that the jury was prejudiced against Frank.

The jury was certainly not prejudiced in any way, he said.

The trial was as fair as it could have been. We were not

influenced by the cheering, one way or the other. I can see no

reason why Frank should be given a new trial.

PAGE 4, COLUMNS 1,

5, & 8

PAGE 4, COLUMN 1

SENSATIONAL CHARGE IN

FRANK CASE

Says Juror Declared Eagerness to

Hang Accused

PAGE 4, COLUMN 5, 6,

& 7

CHARGES

PREJUDICE

AGAINST FRANK

JUROR

C. P. STOUGH.

PAGE 4, COLUMN 8

PREJUDIC

E DENIED

THOSE ON

PANEL

C. P. Stough Deposes That

A. H.

Henslee Showed

Animus Be-

fore Being Drawn.

With members of the Frank trial jury rallying to the defense

of their comrades accused of bias and prejudice, the revelation

was made Friday that, in a sealed deposition to be used by the

defense. A. A. Henslee, one of the jurors, is accused of having

made this statement before he was chosen as one of the twelve

men to try the factory superintendent:

I believe Frank is guilty, and would like to be in a position to

break his neck.

The man who swears that the accused juror made this

statement, in spite of the fact that he swore of being unprejudiced

when questioned as a talesman, is C. P. Stough, organize of the

Masons' Annuity and a well-known business man.

Affidavit To Be Feature.

His affidavit will play an important part in the fight for

Frank's life, which opens Saturday before Judge Roan, which very

likely will be postponed at that time. Solicitor Dorsey undoubtedly

will ask for time in which to examine the volumes of contentions

made by the defense in their plea charging 115 errors.

Mr. Dorsey, it is understood, will make an immediate

demand for the affidavits against Henslee and Johenning, who

also is alleged to have uttered remarks that showed prejudice

before the trial began.

Mr. Stough spoke reluctantly to a Georgian reporter as to the

contents of the affidavit he had made regarding Henslee.

Forced to Make Statement.

I dislike very much to be brought into it, and was really

literally forced into making it. I at first refused, but was

summoned and was compelled to make it. The affidavit tells of a

conversation I had with Mr. Henslee while riding to town on a

street car one morning several weeks before the trial. At that time

he, of course, did not know that he was to be summoned as a

juror.

He asked me what I thought of Frank, and I said I believed

he was guilty. I believe he is guilty, too, and would like to be in a

position to break his neck,' he replied.

Mr. Stough resides at No. 115 Holderness street, and says he

frequently rode to town with Henslee. Since the trial Henslee has

moved to Barnesville, but is said to have denied the words

alleged to have been spoken by him.

Kept the Matter Quiet.

When the Frank jury was selected I told my wife of Mr.

Henslee's remarks, but not wishing to get mixed in the matter,

kept it quiet and told no one else, continued Mr. Stough. Shortly

after the completion of the trial I was in Royston and told a friend

of mine and, without my knowledge, he informed Mr. Rosser. Two

of Mr. Rosser's men came to see me and worried me for two

weeks, but I declined to give them any information.

I then received a summons from Judge Bell's court

instructing me to go before S. N. Teitlebaum, commissioner, and

was compelled to go. I have known Mr. Henslee for a long time

and like him very well, but his words to me indicated prejudice.

His

PAGE 10, COLUMN 1

CHARGES OF

BIAS

BOSH,

ASSERTS

FRANK

JURY

Fellow Members Unite in

Defense

of Men Accused of

Prejudice

by the Defense.

Continued From Page 1.

words did not have the intimation that he would like to be on the

jury, but I took them to understand that he meant he would like to

be with a crowd who would take charge of Frank. He simply said,

I would like to be in a position to break his neck,' and that was

all.

Dorsey to Ask Publicity.

When the hearing of the motion for a new trial is called

before Judge Roan. Solicitor Dorsey, it is understood, will request

the court to require the defense to submit in open court the

affidavits of the alleged bias of jurors.

Following this request, Mr. Dorsey will request a two weeks'

postponement of the hearing in order to give him time to check

up the brief of evidence and examine the amendment to the

motion offered by the defense.

Mr. Dorsey declared Friday that he was looking into the

legality of having jurors the affidavits with him regarding their

alleged unbias in rendering the Frank verdict. This point probably

will be settled in court Saturday morning.

The court has it in its power to refuse this request and order

both prosecutor and defense to proceed with the hearing, but

there is little likelihood that this will be done in view of the fact

that the Solicitor has had but two days in which to examine the

evidence following the filing of the amended motion Wednesday.

Hooper Aids Solicitor.

Mr. Dorsey was busily engaged Friday in examining the brief

of evidence. This voluminous record, as pointed out by Mr.

Dorsey, is about 14 inches in height and is contained in seven

volumes. The entire record, including the amended motion, is

something like 22 inches in height.

Attorney Hooper, who assisted Mr. Dorsey in the prosecution

of Frank, is also relaying with the Solicitor in examining the brief

of evidence.

The jury was a unit in declaring that Frank received as fair a

trial as any man ever received in Georgia, in defending the rulings

of Judge L. S. Roan"which they declared vehemently were more

than fair to Frank's cause " and all of them denied emphatically

that they were influenced or prejudiced by the cheering and other

incidents of the trial on which the defense, based its motion for a