Wednesday, 22nd April 1914: Lanford Declines To Show Affidavits, The Atlanta Constitution

William J. Burns left the city without seeing the documents he sought, charging perversion. Detective William J. Burns visited the police station late Tuesday afternoon to meet Chief of Detectives Newport Lanford, aiming to review perversion affidavits against Leo M. Frank, which were reportedly in Lanford's possession. However, Chief Lanford firmly declined Burns' request. Burns spent only a few minutes in Lanford's office before proceeding to meet the chief of police, James L. Beavers. During his meeting with Chief Beavers, Burns did not discuss the Frank case but mentioned that he was merely paying his respects to the head of the police department.

Chief Lanford explained to a reporter from The Constitution that he refused Burns' request to see the perversion affidavits because he believed it would be unjust to himself, the state, and Frank to publicize the affidavits before the hearing of the extraordinary motion for a new trial before Judge Ben Hill. Lanford noted that during Frank's trial, the issue of perversion was not raised by the prosecution but by Frank's lawyers. He emphasized that he did not want Burns to publicize the affidavits before the hearing, as it would unfairly prejudice public opinion. Lanford told Burns he could come back after the hearing to view the affidavits.

Burns remained silent about his interview with Lanford, though his disappointment was evident. He did not confirm whether he would revisit Chief Lanford and was expected to leave Atlanta that night. After leaving the police station, Burns, accompanied by Dan Lehon and Harry Alexander of the Frank defense, visited Leo Frank at the county jail. They spent over an hour consulting with the convicted pencil factory superintendent, in what is believed to be Burns' final visit to Frank. When questioned about a published statement claiming he declared Frank innocent of Mary Phagan's murder, Burns denied making such a statement and accused the afternoon paper of misrepresenting him. He refused to disclose his report's contents but mentioned that it would indicate whether the murderer was a white man or a Negro and whether Frank was guilty. Burns declared the crime typical of a pervert and stated that his report would show Frank was not a pervert.

On page 9, column 2, it was reported that Detective William J. Burns and Solicitor General Hugh M. Dorsey had a heated exchange. Dorsey requested a copy of Burns' report on the Frank case, which Burns had already shared with Frank's attorneys. Burns visited several key figures in Frank's prosecution, including Dorsey, Bill Smith (Conley's counsel), and Chief Newport A. Lanford. When Burns met Dorsey, the solicitor was busy with work on the Frank case, surrounded by detectives and private investigators. The initial greetings between Dorsey and Burns were cordial, but tension arose when Dorsey asked for a copy of Burns' report.

A discussion ensued, and as they moved toward the door, Burns stated he needed to consult his employers before sharing the report. Dorsey pointed out that Harry Alexander, a member of Frank's counsel, was present and asked for his opinion. Alexander agreed that Burns could share the report with Dorsey. Dorsey was pleased, but Burns hesitated, stating he had not intended to release the report before its official submission. He then declared that his report would assert Frank's innocence and provide corroborating proof. Dorsey responded that he would keep an open mind until all sides of the case were heard and suggested Burns should do the same. Burns retorted that he would return if Dorsey could convince him he was mistaken, to which Dorsey replied that he thought Burns was supposed to convince him. The exchange grew heated, and Burns suggested they not continue the discussion in the hallway. The meeting ended with Burns and his companions leaving Dorsey's office.

Burns later visited William Smith, counsel for Jim Conley, at 7 o'clock, likely to arrange an interview with Conley, the convicted accessory. Despite Smith's recent public criticism of Burns, the meeting was calm. Smith informed Burns that Conley was willing to meet under fair conditions and had never been hesitant to see the detective. Burns expressed his desire to see Conley but did not set a specific time. The interview lasted less than thirty minutes, with Burns accompanied by Dan Lehon. Smith told Burns that his mistake was not meeting with him upon arriving in Atlanta, as Smith was as interested in finding the truth as Burns. Burns acknowledged Smith's fairness and promised to return. He requested that any new developments in Conley's case be forwarded to him or Lehon. Burns reiterated that his report would conclusively state who killed Mary Phagan and described the murderer as a pervert of the rankest type. He also clarified that his report was not yet complete, contrary to earlier reports.

Due to the death of Herbert Haas's mother, one of Frank's attorneys, the hearing of the extraordinary motion for a new trial before Judge Ben Hill might be postponed.