album-art
Reading Time: 5 minutes [871 words]

The Atlanta Constitution,

Tuesday, 7th October 1913,

PAGE 1, COLUMN 2.

Made His Remarks

About

Leo Frank After Trial

and

Not Before, Says

Juror Ac-

cused of Prejudice.

A. H. Henslee, juror in the Frank case, who has been

declared prejudiced against the prisoner in a number of affidavits

fled with the clerk of the superior court, yesterday sent the

following letter to The Constitution, in which he denies many of

the statements made by Messrs, Holmes, Johnson and Gray, of

Sparta, Ga.

Editor The Constitution: Replying to your article in today's

issue, October 6, in reference to Messrs. Holmes Johnson and

Gray. I will say I am sorry to think that they would go ahead and

make such a statement over their signatures that I discussed and

tried Leo Frank in their office on July 27.

Having read their depositions, in Solicitor Hugh Dorsey's

office, I will say that I spoke of the case freely, and met their

many friends in the office on September 2, which was Tuesday

morning.

Frank Case Not Mentioned.

I am sorry to think they would express themselves and dare

their opposition as they did, either July 27 or June 27. I will say

that I was in this office on June 27, but the Frank case was never

mentioned.

As for branding them all liars, I have never done so, but

they have miscalculated the date.

I did willingly express myself freely regarding the Frank

case on September 2, which was after Frank was convicted.

Tuesday morning, met many of their friends to whom they

introduced me, and did say and express to these friends and to

them, that Leo M. Frank, judging from the evidence of Jim Conley,

was really a prevent.

I made a statement to one of the Atlanta papers that I

almost positively knew that the depositions received from Sparta,

Ga., would not contain anything that I had said prior to the case"

that they would be similar to those from Blakely, Ga.

Regarding the statement that they knew me and my family

for years, I wish to state that I hold these gentlemen in the

highest esteem, as men whom I believe would defend and honor

me and my family regardless of public sentiment.

Surprised at Action.

I wish to state further, however, that after reading their

depositions in Solicitor Dorsey's office, I am surprised that men of

their intelligence should come out in a newspaper and request a

reply in such a way as they have. As to branding them liars I have

never done so. They got their dates wrong, that's all.

In conclusion, considering this as a reply to each one of

them personally, instead of branding them as liars, I would gladly

defend them at all times.

Mr. Julius A Lehman, of the firm of Floyd & Lehman, of the

city Atlanta, makes an affidavit, I understand, to the effect that I

stated to him, on either June 2 or 6, while on the train between

Atlanta and Experiment, Ga., that I believed Frank guilty. This

statement also, I brand as false, as on

Continued on Page Nine.

PAGE 9, COLUMN 3

Continued From Page One.

June 2, 1913, I was on the train between Edison and Arlington, Ga.

On June 6, I was on the train between Tifton and Ashburn, Ga.

Will Ask Indictment.

Regarding his statement and affidavit, I brand them as

absolutely false, and furthermore, I wish state that I called on Mr.

Lehman personally on Saturday afternoon. October 4, at his place

of business, and stated to him, personally, that the only reason I

came by was to inform in that I would get a bill of indictment

against him when the next grand jury convened in Fulton county

for trying to make me out a perjurer. That was all I had to say to

him, and I then left his place or business.

Regarding all of the foregoing statement, I will say that the

proof is on record at the Franklin Buggy company's place of

business in Barnesville, Ga.

(Signed) A. H. HENSLEE.

Barnesville,

Ga.

Macon, Ga., October 6.

SOLICITOR AND

ASSISTANT

TO STUDY CASE IN

VALDOSTA

Solicitor General Hugh M. Dorsey and his assistant. Attorney

E. A. Stephens, have left for Valdosta, where they will spend the

week quietly studying the 115 reasons cited by attorneys for Leo

M. Frank as basis for a new trial for the murder of Mary Phagan, of

which Frank was convicted after a long trial in the summer.

The idea of the solicitor in leaving Atlanta came from his

desire to devote his entire time to the matter which is due to be

taken up on Saturday. He also had some business to attend to in

Valdosta, and so chose that town as the place for studying the

case.

Several new affidavits attacking Juror A. H. Henslee were

made public Monday afternoon by Attorneys Luther Z. Rosser and

Reuben R. Arnold, for the condemned man. J. J. Nunnally and

Virgil Harris, buggy dealers of Monroe, Ga., and Dr. W. L. Rickert,

a dentist of the Walton county seat, signed them. They accuse Mr.

Henslee of having expressed belief in the guilt of Frank between

the time of the murder and July 28, the day upon which he was

chosen as a juror.

Mr. Henslee is busy preparing an answer to these attacks

made upon him, as is Juror Marcus Johenning, also accused of

bias. The former has conferred with the solicitor in regard to the

matter, and, denying all the charges, declares his intention to

disprove them, if possible.

That Judge L. S. Roan will hear the motion when it is taken

up was made practically certain on Monday when arrangements

for a term of the criminal division of the superior court for October

13 were cancelled.

Tuesday, 7th October 1913 Henslee Answers Sprata Citizens
atlanta-constitution-october-07-1913-henslee-answers-sprata-citizens

Download PDF document here: atlanta-constitution-october-07-1913-henslee-answers-sprata-citizens

Related Posts