album-art
Reading Time: 5 minutes [925 words]

The Atlanta Constitution,

Saturday, 4th October 1913,

PAGE 1, COLUMN 1.

Many Sealed

Depositions Are

Filed With Deputy

Clerk

Assailing A. H.

Henslee and

Marcus Johenning.

SPARTA CITIZENS

SAY

HENSLEE

PREJUDICED

Members of Jury Deny

in In-

dignant Terms That

Any of

Their Number Was

Biased

In Any Way.

That one of the Sparta, Ga., citizens whose affidavits are now

sealed and lying in the safe of the clerk of the superior court, did

make the statement that A. H. Henslee had declared that he

believed Frank guilty and would like to see him hang, was the

statement made last night by another citizen of the Hancock

county seat.

The exact contents of the affidavits which were made before

J. W. Lewis, of Sparta, by three of the most prominent men in the

town are not known. It is claimed by the defense that Mr. Henslee

while travelling for his buggy concern and before he or anyone

else had been drawn on the venire for the Leo M. Frank jury, state

to several people that he believed Frank guilty of the murder of

Mary Phagan. The depositions were made by John M. Holmes, a

member of the firm of Holmes & Walker, dealers in insurance, real

estate and buggies; by S. M. Johnson, cashier of the firm, and by

Shi Gray, said to have been in the office when Mr. Henslee made

the alleged statement.

Wants Depositions Opened.

What is in the depositions will not be known until Deputy

Clerk John H. Jones opens them. Solicitor General Hugh M. Dorsey

will make an effort to have the court order them made public

today in order that he may know their contents and be in a

position to refute them, if possible.

Mr. Henslee, who is a travelling man, could not be located for

a statement, should he care to give one, in reply to the charge,

but others of the jury, and among them Marcus Johenning, also

charged with bias before he was sworn on the jury, bitterly denied

that any of the twelve men had been induced to convict Frank of

the Mary Phagan murder by anything but the evidence submitted

in open court.

The hearing of the motion for a new trial is due to come up

at 10 o'clock today before Judge L. S. Roan. That Solicitor General

Hugh M. Dorsey will ask a postponement in order that he may

have time to make answer to the 115 reasons cited as cause for a

new trial is known from an authentic source. It is believed that

this postponement will be granted and that the case will be reset

for a time within a week or two weeks, to be agreed upon by both

the defense and the state.

Since he was served Thursday with the motion for a new

trial, the solicitor has been working o n the answer and has been

aided by Attorney Frank A. Hooper, who made such a brilliant

fight with him or the conviction of Frank.

Affidavit by Stough.

Another deposition, also sealed, was filed in the superior

court Friday. It was named as being made by C. P. Stough and

taken before Commissioner S. N. Teitlebaum. Its contents have

not been made public, but in it is declared to be the statement

that Mr. Stough, who lives at 115 Holderness street, heard Mr.

Henslee make the remark that he believed Frank guilty and

would like to be in a position to break his neck.

The alleged remarks of the juror, which the defense will

claim made it impossible for him to give Frank a fair trial, are said

to have been made before the trial and at a time when no one

knew who would be drawn upon the venire of 144 men, or which

of that 144 would be selected as jurors.

The affidavits from Sparta were secured by Attorney Stiles

Hopkins, associated with the firm of Rosser, Brandon, Slaton &

Phillips, of which Luther Z. Rosser was senior counsel for Frank.

Attorney Hopkins also went to Blakely, Georgia, and secured

affidavits from citizens there. These men, however, denied that

Henslee had ever said anything in their presence before the trial

that would tend to show his opin-

Continued on Page Two.

PAGE 2, COLUMN 4

INTEREST IN

ATTACK

ON FRANK

JURORS

Continued From Page One.

ion, if he had one, in regard to the guilt of the young factory

superintendent, who is sentenced to hang on next Friday.

Two Members Prejudiced.

When the hearing is actually begun the defense, it is said,

will bring its affidavits to bear in an effort to show that at least

two members of the jury were prejudiced before they went into

the case, and will also declare that judge Roan erred in many of

his decisions of legal points, particularly in regard to the

admissibility of certain evidence against Frank.

It is expected that the arguments from both sides may

consume several days and that a great deal of the law points that

were threshed out during the trial and lost by the defense will be

gone over again.

Should Judge Roan see fit to deny a new trial the case is

certain to go to the supreme court and in the event that this body

affirms the superior court judge, it is said that an effort will be

made to carry the matter to the United States courts in a final

fight for the life of the condemned man.

Interest in Affidavits.

It is generally believed that on the legal points Judge Roan

will refuse to grant a new trial, but what will come from the

affidavits in regard to the alleged bias of the jurors is a matter

that cannot be determined until the contents of the affidavits are

made public and the opinion of the court is passed upon them.

Judge Roan has a record that few superior court judges have

in respect to having his decisions on points of law upheld by the

supreme court. It is said that only once in the past two and a half

eyras has the supreme court reversed his ruling upon a point of

law.

Saturday, 4th October 1913 Interest Centers In Attacks Made On Frank Jurors
atlanta-constitution-october-04-1913-interest-centers-in-attacks-made-on-frank-jurors

Download PDF document here: atlanta-constitution-october-04-1913-interest-centers-in-attacks-made-on-frank-jurors

Related Posts