Author: Historical Librarian

Our Supreme Court, after carefully considering the evidence as to demonstrations made by spectators, declared them without merit, and in this regard, the orderly processes of our tribunals are not subject to criticism.Racial Prejudice.The charge against the State of Georgia of racial prejudice is unfair. A conspicuous Jewish family in Georgia is descended from one of the original colonial families of the State. Jews have been presidents of our Boards of Education, principals of our schools, mayors of our cities, and conspicuous in all our commercial enterprises.The Facts in the Case.Many newspapers and non-residents have declared that Frank was convicted

The State's Case.The State proved that Leo M. Frank, the general superintendent of the factory, was in his office a little after 12 o'clock on the 26th day of April, 1913, and he admitted having paid Mary Phagan $1.20, being the wages due her for one day's work. She asked Frank whether the metal had come, in order to know when she could return for work. Frank admits this, and so far as is known, he was the last one who saw her alive. At three o'clock the next morning (Sunday), Newt Lee, the night watchman, found in the basement

which would enable her to arrive at the factory within the neighborhood of about thirty minutes. The element of exact time will be discussed later.Dr. Harris, the Secretary of the State Board of Health, and an expert in this line, examined the contents of Mary Phagan's stomach ten days after her burial and found from the state of the digestion of the cabbage and bread that she must have been killed within about thirty minutes after she had eaten the meal.Newt Lee, the Negro night watchman, testified that Frank 'had told me to be back at the factory at 4

dropped his head and stated, "If you keep that up, we will both go to hell."On Sunday morning at about 3 o'clock, after Newt Lee, the night watchman, had telephoned the police station about the discovery of the dead body, and the officers had come to the factory, they endeavored to reach Frank by telephone but could not get a response. They telephoned at 7:30 Sunday morning and told Frank that they wanted him to come down to the factory. When they came for him, he was very nervous and trembled. The body at that time had been taken to

The cook's husband testified that on Saturday, the day of the murder, he visited his wife at the home of Mr. Selig, defendant's father-in-law, where Frank and his wife were living, and that Frank came in to dinner and ate nothing. The Negro cook of the Seligs was placed upon the stand and denied that her husband was in the kitchen at all on that day. For purposes of impeachment, therefore, the State introduced an affidavit from this cook taken by the detectives, and as she claimed under duress, which tended to substantiate the story of her husband and which

that some punches had been missed. The suggestion was that he had either manipulated the slip to place the burden on Lee or was so excited as to be unable to read the slip correctly.The State introduced a witness, Monteen Stover, to prove that at the time when Mary Phagan and Frank were in the metal room, she was in Frank's office, and he was absent, although he had declared he had not left his office. The State showed that the hair of Mary Phagan had been washed by the undertaker with pine tar soap, which would change its color

Where I have not mentioned the more prominent ones, an inspection of the record fails to maintain the contention.It is contended that a lawyer was engaged for Frank at the station house before he was arrested. This is replied to by the defense that a friend had engaged counsel without Frank's knowledge, and the lawyer advised Frank to make a full statement to the detectives.Jim Conley.The most startling and spectacular evidence in the case was that given by a Negro, Jim Conley, a man 27 years of age, and one who frequently had been in the chain gang. Conley had

Conley described Frank as having been in a position which Conley thought indicated perversion, but the facts set out by Conley do not demand such a conclusion. Conley says that he found Mary Phagan lying in the metal room some 200 feet from the office, with a cloth tied about her neck and under her head as though to catch blood, although there was no blood at the place. Frank told Conley to get a piece of cloth and put the body in it, and Conley got a piece of striped bed ticking and tied up the body in it

and told him, 'Here is $200,' but after a while requested the money back, and got it.One witness testified she saw some Negro, whom she did not recognize, sitting at the side of the elevator in the gloom. On the extraordinary motion for a new trial, a woman, who was unimpeached, made an affidavit that on the 31st of May, through a newspaper report, she saw that Conley claimed he met Frank by agreement at the corner of Forsyth & Nelson Sts., on the 26th of April, 1913, and she became satisfied that she saw the two in close conversation

citizens of Atlanta, college mates at Cornell, and professors of that college.The defendant was born in Texas, and his education was completed at the institution named.The admission of Conley that he wrote the notes found at the body of the dead girl, together with the part he admitted he played in the transaction, combined with his history and his explanation as to both the writing of the notes and the removal of the body to the basement, makes the entire case revolve around him. Did Conley speak the truth?Before going into the varying and conflicting affidavits made by Conley, it

Conley testified that on the morning of April 26th, he went down into the basement to relieve his bowels and utilized the elevator shaft for the purpose.On the morning of April 27th at 3 o'clock, when the detectives came down into the basement by way of the ladder, they inspected the premises, including the shaft, and they found there human excrement in natural condition.Subsequently, when they used the elevator, which everybody, including Conley, who had run the elevator for one and one-half years, admits only stops by hitting the ground in the basement, the elevator struck the excrement and mashed

elevator shaft was in accordance with his testimony that he made water twice against the door of the elevator shaft on the morning of the 26th, instead of doing so in the gloom of his corner behind the boxes where he kept watch.Mary Phagan, in coming downstairs, was compelled to pass within a few feet of Conley, who was invisible to her and in a few feet of the hatchway. Frank could not have carried her down the hatchway. Conley might have done so with difficulty. If the elevator shaft was not used by Conley and Frank in taking the

which everybody admits could not have been before 12:05, Frank suddenly said, "Here comes Emma Clark and Corinthia Hall," and he put Conley in a wardrobe.The uncontradicted evidence of these two witnesses, and they are unimpeached, was they reached the factory at 11:35 A.M. and left it at 11:45 A.M., and therefore this statement of Conley can hardly be accepted.Conley says that when they got the body to the bottom of the elevator in the basement, Frank told him to leave the hat, slipper, and piece of ribbon right there, but he "took the things and pitched them over in

the head and reached the skull. Wounds of that character bleed freely. At the place Conley says he found blood, there was no blood. Conley says there was a cloth tied around the head as though to catch the blood, but none was found there.One Barrett says that on Monday morning he found six or seven strands of hair on the lathe with which he worked and which were not there on Friday. The implication is that it was Mary Phagan's hair and that she received a cut by having her head struck at this place. It is admitted that

Detective Black says, "Mr. Starnes, who was there with me, did not call my attention to any blood splotches."Detective Scott says, "We went to the metal room where I was shown some spots supposed to be blood spots."A part of what they thought to be blood was chipped up in four or five chips, and Dr. Claude Smith testified that on one of the chips he found, under a microscope, from three to five blood corpuscles; a half drop would have caused it.Frank says that the part of the splotch that was left after the chips were taken up was

Conley's Affidavits.The defense procured under notice one statement and three affidavits taken by the detectives from Conley and introduced them in evidence.The first statement, dated May 18, 1913, gives a minute detail of his actions on the 26th day of April and specifies the saloons he visited and the whiskey and beer he bought, and minutely itemized the denomination of the money he had and what he spent for beer, whiskey, and pan sausage. This comprehends the whole of affidavit No. 1.On May 24, 1913, he made for the detectives an affidavit in which he says that on Friday before

"second and last statement." In that, he states that on Saturday morning after leaving home, he bought two beers for himself and then went to a saloon and won 90 cents with dice, where he bought two more beers and a half pint of whiskey, some of which he drank, and he met Frank at the corner of Forsyth and Nelson Streets, and Frank asked him to wait until he returned.Conley went over to the factory and mentioned various people whom he saw from his place of espionage going up the stairs to Mr. Frank's office. Then Frank whistled to

On the 29th of May, 1913, Conley made another affidavit, in which he said that Frank had told him that he had picked up a girl and let her fall, and Conley hollered to him that the girl was dead, and told him to go to the cotton bag and get a piece of cloth, and he got a big, wide piece of cloth and took her on his right shoulder, when she got too heavy for him, and she slipped off when he got to the dressing room. He called Frank to help, and Frank got a key to

All of the affidavit down to this point is in typewriting, the original was exhibited to me. At the end of the affidavit in handwriting is written the following: "While I was looking at the money in my hands, Mr. Frank said, 'Let me have that, and I will make it alright with you Monday, if I live and nothing happens,' and he took the money back, and I asked him if that was the way he did, and he said he would give it back Monday."It will be noticed that the first question which would arise would be, what

for five or six hours again, endeavoring to make clear several points which were far-fetched in his statement. We pointed out to him that this statement would not do and would not fit, and he then made the statement of May 28th, after he had been told that his previous statement showed deliberation and could not be accepted. He told us nothing about Frank making an engagement to stamp and for him to lock the door, and told nothing about Monteen Stover. He did not tell us about seeing Mary Phagan. He said he did not see her. He did

In his evidence before the jury in the redirect examination, Conley thought it necessary to account for the mesh bag, and for the first time, said that "Mary Phagan's mesh bag was lying on Mr. Frank's desk, and Mr. Frank put it in the safe." This is the first mention of the mesh bag.The first suggestion that was made of Frank being a pervert was in Conley's testimony. On the stand, he declared Frank said "he was not built like other men."There is no proof in the record of Frank being a pervert. The situation in which Conley places him

Conley swears he did. The State says that the use of the word 'did' instead of 'done' indicates a white man's dictation. Conley admits the spelling was his. The words are repeated and are simple, which characterizes Conley's letters. In Conley's testimony, you will find frequently that he uses the word 'did,' and according to calculations submitted to me, he used the word 'did' over fifty times during the trial.While Conley was in jail charged with being an accessory, there was also incarcerated in the jail a woman named Annie Maude Carter, whom Conley had met at the court house.

water' just as they are used in the Mary Phagan notes.In Conley's testimony, he says the word 'hisself' constantly.It is urged by the lawyers for the defense that Conley's characteristic was to use double adjectives.In the Mary Phagan notes, he said 'long tall Negro, black,' 'long, slim, tall Negro.'In his testimony, Conley used expressions of this sort: 'He was a tall, slim build, heavy man.' 'A good long wide piece of cord in his hands.'Conley says that he wrote four notes, although only two were found. These notes have in them 129 words, and Conley swears he wrote them in

In reply to this, the State introduced on the extraordinary motion the testimony of Philip Chambers, who swears that unused order blanks entitled 'Atlanta, Ga.' were in the office next to Frank's office and that he had been in the basement of the factory and found no books or papers left down there for any length of time, but they were always burned up.This evidence was never passed upon by the jury and developed since the trial. It was strongly corroborative of the theory of the defense that the death notes were written, not in Frank's office, but in the

evidence of Police Sergeant Dobbs, who visited the scene of the crime on Sunday morning, as follows:"This scratch pad was also lying on the ground close to the body. The scratch pad was lying near the notes. They were all right close together. There was a pile of trash near the boiler where this hat was found, and paper and pencils were down there too."Police Officer Anderson testified:"There are plenty of pencils and trash in the basement."Darley testified: "I have seen all kinds of paper down in the basement. The paper that note is written on is a blank order

The evidence as to the probability of the blank on which the death note was written being in the basement, and the evidence as to the hair, would have tended to show that the murder was not committed on the floor on which Frank's office was located.The Time Question.The State contended that Mary Phagan came to the office of Leo M. Frank to get her pay at some time between 12:05 and 12:10, and that Frank had declared that he was in his office the whole time.It is true that at the coroner's inquest held on Thursday after the murder,

The evidence loses its pertinency if Mary Phagan had not arrived at the time Monteen Stover came. What is the evidence?The evidence uncontradicted discloses that Mary Phagan ate her dinner at 11:30 o'clock, and the evidence of the streetcar men was that she caught the 11:50 car, which was due at the corner of Forsyth and Marietta Streets at 12:07 1/2. The distance from this place to the pencil factory is about one-fifth of a mile. It required from 4 to 6 minutes to walk to the factory, and especially would the time be enlarged because of the crowds on

hardly seems possible under the evidence that Mary Phagan was at that time being murdered.Lemmie Quinn testifies that he reached Frank's office about 12:20 and saw Mr. Frank. At 12:30, Mrs. J. A. White called to see her husband at the factory where he was working on the fourth floor, and left again before one o'clock.At 12:50, according to Denham, Frank came up to the fourth floor and said that he wanted to get out. The evidence for the defense tends to show that the time taken for moving the body, according to Conley's description, was so long that it

found by her side, it was urged before me by counsel for the defense that ladies usually carried their handkerchiefs in their mesh bags.If the motive was assault, either by natural or perverted means, the physicians' evidence, who made the examination, does not disclose its accomplishment. Perversion by none of the suggested means could have occasioned the flood of blood. The doctors testified that excitement might have occasioned it under certain conditions. Under the evidence, which is not set forth in detail, there is every probability that the virtue of Mary Phagan was not lost on the 26th day of

It may be possible that his version is correct. The testimony discloses that he was in the habit of allowing men to go into the basement for immoral purposes for a consideration, and when Mary Phagan passed by him close to the hatchway leading into the basement and in the gloom and darkness of the entrance, he may have attacked her. What is the truth we may never know.Jury's Verdict.The jury which heard the evidence and saw the witnesses found the defendant, Leo M. Frank, guilty of murder. They are the ones, under our laws, who are chosen to weigh

In this connection, Judge Roan declared orally from the bench that he was not certain of the defendant's guilt that with all the thought he had put on this case, he was not thoroughly convinced whether Frank was guilty or innocent but that he did not have to be convinced that the jury was convinced and that there was no room to doubt that that he felt it his duty to order that the motion for a new trial be overruled.This statement was not embodied in the motion overruling the new trial.Under our statute, in cases of conviction of murder

Surely, if Judge Roan entertained the extreme doubt indicated by his statement and had remembered the power granted him by the Code, he would have sentenced the defendant to life imprisonment.In a letter written to counsel, he says, "I shall ask the prison commission to recommend to the governor to commute Frank's sentence to life imprisonment *. It is possible that I showed undue deference to the jury in this case when I allowed the verdict to stand. They said by their verdict that they had found the truth. I was in a state of uncertainty, and so expressed myself

In the case of Hunter, a white man charged with assassinating two white women in the City of Savannah, who was found guilty and sentenced to be hung, application was made to me for clemency. Hunter was charged together with a Negro with having committed the offense, and after he was convicted, the Negro was acquitted. It was brought out by the statement of the Negro that another Negro, who was half-witted, committed the crime, but no credence was given to the story, and he was not indicted.The judge and solicitor-general refused to recommend clemency, but upon a review of

at the time he was an escapee from the Fannin County jail under indictment for felony."I refused to interfere unless the judge or solicitor would recommend interference, which they declined to do. Finally, when on the gallows, the solicitor-general recommended a reprieve, which I granted, and finally, on the recommendation of the judge and solicitor-general, as expressed in my order, I reluctantly commuted the sentence to life imprisonment. The doubt was suggested as to the identity of the criminal and as to the credibility of the testimony of prejudiced witnesses. The crime was as heinous as this one and more

Judge Roan, with that awful sense of responsibility, which probably came over him as he thought of that Judge before whom he would shortly appear, calls to me from another world to request that I do that which he should have done. I can endure misconstruction, abuse, and condemnation, but I cannot stand the constant companionship of an accusing conscience, which would remind me in every thought that I, as Governor of Georgia, failed to do what I thought to be right. There is a territory 'beyond A REASONABLE DOUBT and absolute certainty,' for which the law provides in allowing