Wednesday, 6th August 1913 Conleys Main Story Still Remains Unshaken

Search for:

Reading Time: 40 minutes, [6912 words]

GRILLED 12 HOURS BY LUTHER ROSSER JIM CONLEY INSISTS FRANK GUILTY MAN

Declaring That "I Don't Remember," or, "No, Sir; I Didn't Say That," or Simply Affirming Blandly That He Had Lied on a Previous Occasion, Negro Sweeper Sticks to Story Told on the Witness Stand on Monday Morning Despite Most Rigid Cross-Examination of Trial.

AFFIDAVIT BY MINCEY OF CONLEY CONFESSION IS DENIED BY WITNESS

Apparently Despairing of Breaking the Negro, Attorneys for Defense Appeal to Judge Roan to Strike All Evidence Relating to Alleged Previous Conduct of Frank Before Day of Murder on Ground of Irrelevancy State Vigorously Protests Against Such Action and Judge Roan Will Decide Today.

Twelve and one-half hours under the merciless cross-questioning of Luther Rosser, than whom no lawyer at the Atlanta bar has more terrors for the average witness; twelve and one-half hours saying, "I don't remember," "No, sir, I didn't say 'dat,'" or simply affirming blandly that he had lied on a previous occasion; twelve and one-half hours staring fixedly on a crowded court room; twelve and one-half hours without the solace of a cigarette; twelve and one-half hours during which time the perspiration or sweat if you like that word better failed to dot his brow

That is the record of Jim Conley, former negro sweeper at the National Pencil factory.

No such record has ever been made in a criminal case in this county.

On Monday Conley was on the stand five hours and a half, and the able attorneys for the defense failed to break him down; failed to rattle him. On Tuesday, after a good night's sleep at the Tower, Conley resumed the stand and Luther Rosser questioned him for seven hours. Still he did not shake him.

Conley may be telling the truth in the main or he may be lying altogether. He may be the real murderer or he may have been but the accomplice after the fact. Be these things as they may, he is one of the most remarkable negroes who has ever been seen in this section of the country. His nerve seems unshakable. His wit is ever ready.

Lawyers Work In Vain.

As stated in Tuesday's Constitution, Luther Rosser managed to get Conley to admit he had lied in his previous affidavits; that he had been in jail seven or eight times he could not tell how often; that he could not remember certain dates; that he tripped himself in regard to his ability to read and write, but that is about all the defense has succeeded in doing. His main story remains unshaken. Of course no one can tell what will come today or what effect Conley's story and his admissions will have on the jury.

Fails To Break Him.

Apparently despairing of breaking the negro, the attorneys for the defense shortly after court had met for the afternoon session moved that all that part of Conley's statement relating to the previous times he had watched for Frank and the incident of the young woman whom he claims to have seen in a compromising position with Frank be stricken out.

Luther Rosser had for hours cross-questioned Conley on the times he had watched out for Frank, and he failed to budge him. When this testimony for the state was introduced it was the big sensation of the trial, particularly that part relating to the young woman Conley claims to have discovered with Frank. Second only to the surprise this testimony created was the fact that the attorneys for the defense allowed it to go in without any objection. Apparently they had taken the bridle off and were willing for him to go the limit, depending on breaking him down later on and discrediting the whole story.

Solicitor Hugh Dorsey shaped this part of the proceedings in a manner that was masterful. He knew that in allowing Conley to go ahead and tell of these various times he had "watched for Frank" he was paving the way for a possible breakdown of the negro or that he was giving the defense an advantage which they accepted gladly, but were unable to make anything of.

Judge Roan reserved his ruling on this point until this morning, when he will decide whether the testimony shall go in or be stricken out.

Interest Is Keen.

Interest on this point is keen. The defense, by asking that the testimony be eliminated, virtually admit their failure to break down Conley. If it is left in it will be a signal victory for the state, and Solicitor Dorsey will introduce several witnesses to prove the statements made by Conley. On this point he has already declared his intention.

When court adjourned Tuesday Conley was still on the stand and he will be on the stand today when court opens.

Just how long he will be kept on the stand is a matter of speculation. When adjournment hour came Tuesday Luther Rosser had gone all over Conley's testimony time and again and was asking questions about his treatment at the jail and other matters having little bearing on his main story.

From present indications the trial will run for fully ten days, and possibly two weeks longer. The state will have other witnesses to introduce after Conley leaves the stand, and he may be on the stand for some days yet.

PAGE 1, COLUMN 2

WOMEN ARE PLAYING BIG PART IN TRIAL OF FRANK

From left to right: Striking photograph of Mrs. Leo Frank as she entered the courtroom Tuesday afternoon; grandmother of Mary Phagan. Two women spectators, who were excluded from the trial during Jim Conley's testimony.

Photos by Francis E. Price, Staff Photographer.

PAGE 2, COLUMN 1

Conley Remains Calm Under Grilling Cross-Examination

ROSSER ADOPTS NEW TONE MONDAY

Jim Conley, upon whose story practically the entire result of the Frank case is believed to rest, went on the stand at 9:05 o'clock and when court adjourned for lunch at 12:30 he was still being cross-examined by Luther Rosser for the defense.

The lawyer had reached that point in his cross-fire of questions where he had begun to hector the witness and to take him up whenever he made a mistake, but it appeared that he was only about half through with his work. When the adjournment was taken Conley was still sticking to the main points of his story in a way that was considered remarkable, although he had admitted discrepancies in many of the minor points and had grown confused over them.

When Attorney Rosser started out Monday his manner was mild, but only throughout the afternoon he worked up to a slightly harsher manner. When he began Tuesday he was using his usual rather abrupt tone of voice.

Solicitor Hugh Dorsey and Frank A. Hooper, his colleague, made frequent objections to the manner in which the cross-examination was being conducted and did, to a certain extent, restrain the defense.

"Jim, you made your second statement to Mr. Black and Mr. Scott on a Saturday, didn't you?" was the first question Mr. Rosser asked.

"I disremembers the day, boss," replied Conley.

"You told them, though, that you wrote those notes on Friday?"

"Yes, sir, I tole 'em dat."

"They told you that that wouldn't do, didn't they?"

"No, sir; dey didn't say nothing about that."

"Didn't they tell you that it wouldn't fit in?"

"They didn't say them words."

"Are you sure, Jim?"

"Yes, sir; I'm sure."

"Didn't Black and Scott tell you it was all rot, that Frank had never had you there Friday?"

"No, sir."

Not Asked to Change Story.

"Didn't they try their best on May 27 to make you change your story?"

"No, sir; they never said nothing to me about changin' my story."

"They didn't?"

"No, sir; they sho' didn't," protested the darkey.

"They didn't tell you anything about changing it?"

"No, sir."

"You swear to that?"

"Yes, sir, if you want me tuh."

The above list of questions and answers were only a starter to what followed, the attorney asking each question a dozen times or more, each time changing his wording a little, or compelling the negro to deny it again and again, and finally to say that he would swear to his statements.

By this means Mr. Rosser went over the question of how long the detectives had questioned the negro before he made his final affidavit. Conley never did say how long the detectives had grilled him. He said it was not a whole day, but he would not be more definite than that, although his interrogator mentioned nearly everything by which time is usually measured.

Then Mr. Rosser took up in the same way as before the reason the negro had for not saying right at first that he had got up at about 6 o'clock, instead of declaring that he had got up at 9 o'clock.

Conley Admits Lying.

Conley admitted that he had simply lied about it, and declared that at the time he did not see any use telling about his early rise and his first trip to the factory, as "there wasn't nothing doing there then and I didn't see no use mentionin' it."

Next came the discrepancies in what the negro had first said he had eaten that morning, and what he had later said he had eaten. According to Mr. Rosser's notes Conley had first told of eating sausage and in his final statement the negro had said there was sausage on the table, but that he didn't remember whether or not he ate of it.

By this time Mr. Rosser had worked up to a point where he was showing a sort of fretful impatience every time he caught a discrepancy between the statements even in the smallest detail, and Jim was apparently worried because he had caused this attitude towards himself.

Conley took refuge behind a plea of forgetfulness and Mr. Rosser made him feel that he was simply lying about his memory and by certain comments called the attention of the jury to it.

At this point Solicitor Dorsey objected to the commenting, and Judge L. S. Roan held that the cross examiner could not make any comment.

Mr. Rosser then went over with Conley the amount of beer he had drunk and Conley admitted certain differences in all of his stories about the beer. Then the shrewd attorney, seemingly casting aside all thoughts of the case at issue, entered into a discussion with Conley of the wonderful effect of a night in jail upon a man's memory and had apparently convinced Jim that the Monday night he had spent in jail was worth more to his mental development than a university education.

"I jes don't know what you'se talkin' 'bout a tall," interrupted the darkey, and then the attorney switched off on other things and had Jim agree without protest this time that in certain points his memory was not as good as on the second day's examination as it had been on Monday."

The negro had been subjected to an hour's questioning by this time, and Mr. Rosser had gradually worked up to the point where Frank got back from Montag's. Conley said this was about 10 o'clock. He also said that Darley had left the factory about 11:30. Mr. Rosser then questioned Conley in great detail about the comings and goings of all the people there that morning, and Conley showed a clear knowledge of this and stuck to his story of the day before.

Says He Made Mistake.

"Didn't you tell the officers that you saw Mr. Holloway go upstairs that morning, and that a lady in green followed him?"

"Yes," admitted the negro, "but I made a mistake."

"How long did you say the lady in green stayed upstairs?"

"A good while," said Conley.

"What do you mean by 'a good while'?"

"About ten or fifteen minutes."

Mr. Rosser then fired question after question relating to the negro's many varying statements to the officers, until finally the solicitor arose and objected to what he termed the "argumentative method" of the cross examination. The point was sustained, Judge Roan ordering that the "argumentative method" cease.

"Well, you just went on from time to time adding a little more each time to your statement?" said Rosser.

"Yes, sir, I'd jes tell a little more each time," admitted Jim.

"Why did you tell it this way?"

"Well, boss, I didn't want to tell any more than I had to."

"You talked to Mr. Dorsey seven times in all before you had taken back all the untruths and finally told the whole truth, didn't you?" urged the attorney, putting a slightly sarcastic emphasis on the "whole truth."

"No, sir, I told it all before that," said Conley, patiently.

The jury, the defendant and the witness were then allowed to leave the room for a five-minute recess. It was then 10:45.

"You first told the officers that you went to a moving picture show that Saturday, didn't you?" asked Mr. Rosser, when the cross-examination started again.

Solicitor Again Upheld.

Mr. Dorsey objected that if the defense wanted to impeach the witness or even trap him that they ought to produce the affidavits if there were any, or ought at least to state the specific time and place referred to in the conversation.

"Well, Jim," said Mr. Rosser when Judge Roan upheld the solicitor, "on May 28, in the presence of Messrs. Starnes and Campbell, in Atlanta, Ga., Fulton county, didn't you say that on the Saturday of the murder in the city, state and county above mentioned, you went to a moving picture show?"

The irony went over the negro's head, but caused even the state's attorneys to smile, and Conley solemnly answered:

"I told 'em I went and stood in front of a picture show and looked at what I could from the outside."

"You say Mr. Dorsey visited you seven times?"

"No, sir. I said he did about dat many times," replied Jim.

"Well, he either visited you or you visited him all together about seven times; you just paid each other calls, didn't you?"

"I reckon so, boss," said Conley.

"Well, of course, Jim, I don't mean that they were social calls, just calls for the purposes of the case."

"I spose you'se right," replied the negro.

Rosser Fastens on Discrepancy.

Then, after taking Jim up because he first said he and Mr. Frank went into the factory together and afterwards said that Mr. Frank went in and he followed right behind him, Mr. Rosser asked him a score of detailed questions about the locking of the front door.

"I locked it," said Jim.

"About what time?"

"I don't know, sir."

"Was it 12 o'clock?"

"I don't know, sir."

"Was it 1 o'clock?"

"Well, it couldn't have been 1 o'clock, because afterwards, when I got upstairs and looked at the clock it was four minutes to one."

Mr. Rosser then began to go over with the negro the latter's testimony on the previous day, and referring to a transcript from his direct testimony on the stand Monday, called his attention to certain discrepancies between his statement on the stand and the final affidavit he had made.

Mr. Hooper here entered the objection that the negro's testimony on the stand Monday had now become written evidence, and that the cross-examiner should be forced to allow the witness to read it or to read it to him, before he questioned him about it.

Mr. Hooper won his point, the judge holding that Mr. Rosser, however, could ask the negro what he had said about any particular thing.

"Well, your honor," said Mr. Hooper, "my brother here is asking this witness questions now on what he said yesterday, but he is asking what he said after this and what after that, and it would be a superhuman task for any person, let alone an ignorant one, to tell in regular sequence all that he said the day before."

"This witness stood up here yesterday and gave a parrot-like statement, and all I want to do is to show that he cannot repeat that parrot-like story again today," said Mr. Rosser, "and I've already shown it in one instance."

Judge Roan upheld Mr. Hooper.

Negro Causes Amusement.

After some further questions the attorney asked the witness what were the words that Frank had used when they met at Forsyth and Nelson streets that Saturday.

"Mr. Frank, he jes' say, 'Ha, ha, ha, ha; you'se here is yer,'" replied Conley.

For about six times the attorney made the witness repeat this, but Conley said it in the same words and even the same tone all the time, and finally Mr. Rosser asked how many "ha's" there were in that statement.

Conley repeated it again, and by this time the spectators were keeping the deputies busy, and Mr. Rosser asked the negro to count the number of "ha's." He could not say them and count them at the same time, and the lawyer repeated the words while Jim counted.

"Dey's two, boss," said Jim.

"I thought there was four 'ha's,' Jim," objected Mr. Rosser.

"Well, I count 'ha-ha' as one and 'ha-ha' as the other," replied Jim, "and that makes two."

"Oh, you count them as double words," replied the lawyer, and apparently a great light was arising in his mind.

"I don't know what no 'double words' is," replied Conley, "but you asked me to count de 'ha's,' and I counted dem."

Still the negro, while apparently puzzling his brain over all this business of "ha-ha's," did not appear rattled, and the attorney took up a detailed questioning about how Frank had showed Conley about locking the front door when he sat on watch duty for him.

Conley Remains Cool.

Then came the question for the second time in the morning of who the people were that were said to have visited the factory that Saturday before 1 o'clock, and, despite question after question, Conley remained cool, and again and again gave the same version of the comings and goings on that day.

Next Mr. Rosser entered into a discussion with Conley about the front door being left unlocked, and the attorney seemed to be paving the way for a claim that a third party had entered the building and committed the crime without either Frank or the negro sweeper being aware of their presence.

By the time of adjournment Mr. Rosser had got to the place in the negro's story where he and Frank were bearing away the body, and on each point he asked the negro scores of questions about the real happenings, and also about what he had declared about that point in his various affidavits.

PAGE 6, COLUMN 3

Mincey Affidavit Is Denied

SMITH ALLOWED ACCESS TO CLIENT

By Conley During Afternoon

After Judge Roan had ruled out the Conley testimony relating to alleged previous actions of Frank, the jury was returned to the courtroom, and Attorney Rosser resumed his cross-examination of Conley.

"Jim, you took the body of that girl, you say, and wrapped her in a cloth, didn't you?"

"Yes, sir."

"Was the cloth all around her?"

"No, sir, it didn't go over her whole body."

"Did it cover her head?"

"No, sir."

"Her feet?"

"No, sir."

"How much of her body was projecting out of the cloth?"

"I don't know, sir."

"You tied the cloth in a bundle around the body and put her on your shoulder, didn't you?"

"Yes, sir."

"Didn't her head stick out and lean back?"

"Yes, sir."

Negro Answers Yes.

The attorney arose and stood before the negro, illustrating the manner in which the negro carried the body, asking if he were not correct. The witness answered yes.

"You walked out with her that way, didn't you?"

"Yes, sir."

"Didn't she get so heavy you couldn't carry her?"

"Yes, sir, she fell."

"Didn't you say that it was because she was so heavy that she fell?"

"I said that was what I told Mr. Frank."

"Was she so heavy, or what was the matter?"

"She was kinder both ways."

A laugh spread over the courtroom at this unique expression. Conley laughed, and so did the accused man and his wife. His mother sat with mobile features.

"Now, tell us again why you let her drop."

"Because she was heavy and I was scared."

"Where was her head?"

"Toward the elevator."

"Her feet?"

"I don't remember at that time."

"Then it was, you say, that you called Mr. Frank?"

"Yes, sir."

"Where was he?"

"At the head of the stairs."

"Outside of this story, is there anything else you can answer without saying: 'I don't know'?"

Objection Is Sustained.

An objection by the solicitor to this question was sustained.

"You said, didn't you, that you called to Mr. Frank that the girl was dead?"

"I hollered to him."

"I thought you said you went up to him?"

"No, sir, I yelled."

"What did Frank do when you yelled?"

"He waved his hand and said 'Ssh.'"

"Then, when you heard him say 'Ssh,' you walked up to him, did you?"

"Yes, sir."

"What did you tell him?"

"I told him she was too heavy for me to tote."

"What did he say?"

"He said, 'Well, bring her on up here,' and I said, 'How'm I goin' to bring her when she's too heavy,' and he said 'Go back in the metal room and get some cotton bagging.'"

"How close were you to him?"

"I was walking toward him."

"Then you went to the metal room and got some black and white striped bagging?"

"I didn't say anything about white striped bagging it didn't have any white stripes."

"What color was it?"

"I can't exactly 'scribe the color."

"Was it the color of your shirt?"

His Shirt Was Blue.

"No, sir; my shirt's blue."

"Who gave you that shirt?"

"My old lady brought it to me."

"What did you do with the cloth when you got through with it?"

"Put it on the trash pile in the basement where I put the hat and slipper and ribbon."

"How much did the girl weigh?"

"I don't know, sir."

"You can carry 110 pounds, and, surely she didn't weigh more than that can't you, without any trouble?"

"I can carry it, maybe, but I don't know about the trouble."

"You say Mr. Frank packed her up on you; what do you mean by that?"

"Mr. Frank caught her by the head and shoved her up on my back. We was both nervous?"

"How were you nervous and excited?"

"I didn't say I was excited I said I was nervous."

"When you got down into the basement, you took the body out by the cloth, didn't you?"

"No, sir."

"How did you say you left her on the second floor; repeat that, will you?"

"Her head was toward Alabama street, her face towards Forsyth, and her feet towards Hunter street."

Front Door Was Locked.

"While you were going down in the elevator, the doors were open, weren't they?"

"I think the front door was locked."

"Did the girl have any scratches on her face?"

"Yes, sir; a few. It was dirty, too."

"What did you have in your hand when Frank told you to throw the things on the trash pile in the basement?"

"The cloth and the hat and the ribbon."

"Who ran the elevator as you went up?"

"I did, because Mr. Frank said he would meet me on the first floor when he went up the scuttle hole."

"When you got to the first floor, what did he say?"

"He said: 'Gee, but that was a hard job!' And I said that his job wasn't half as hard as mine."

"Is the elevator noiseless?"

"No, sir, it makes some noise."

"Now, Jim, how long did it take for you and Mr. Frank to do the entire job?"

"I don't know, exactly, about four or five minutes."

"Didn't you say yesterday that you never left the factory until 1:30 o'clock?"

"Yes, sir, I said I went to a beer saloon at Hunter and Forsyth streets, and looked at the clock and it was 2:20. I wasn't so sure of the time, yesterday."

"While you were in the office, you heard somebody coming, didn't you?"

Gave Him $200.

"Mr. Frank said he heard somebody coming."

"Mr. Frank gave you some greenbacks, didn't he?"

"Yes, sir, $200, but he took 'em back."

"Now, Jim, talking about this plan to burn the body, did you tell Black and Scott anything about it?"

"No, sir, they had been taken off the case when I told about it first."

"Then who was the first man you told about it?"

"Mr. Starnes and Mr. Campbell, I think."

"You say, that Mr. Frank told you that if you'd come back that night and burn the body he wouldn't put the notes down in the basement?"

"Yes, sir."

"When did you get your hair cut, Jim?"

"Last Saturday."

"Where?"

"Police station."

"Who cut it?"

"A barber."

"Who was with him?"

"My lawyer and a policeman."

"Jim, didn't you say one day that you didn't want a lawyer, and the next day you had one?"

"Yes, sir, Rena, my woman, brought me one."

"You've been locked up ever since you had a lawyer, haven't you?"

"Yes, sir."

"You say, too, that you found out Frank wasn't going to do anything for you and then you begun to talk?"

"Yes, sir."

"Didn't you know he was in jail?"

"I didn't know whether he had got out or not."

Didn't Read the Papers.

"On Monday after the murder, did you read any of the papers?"

"No, it wouldn't have done me any good I can't read."

"Didn't you go to Miss Julia Fuss and ask her for a paper and say Frank was as innocent as the angels in heaven?"

"No sir."

"Didn't you read a paper in the presence of Wade Campbell?"

"No, sir."

"Do you know Miss Georgia Denham?"

"Yes, sir."

"Didn't she accuse you of the killing, and didn't you drop your head and deny all about it?"

"No, sir."

There were numerous lulls in the examination as Attorneys Rosser and Arnold would investigate the records of Conley's previous statements, apparently seeking material for new questions.

"While you were watching for Frank that Saturday did you see two elderly men go up on the second floor?"

"No, sir."

"Did you meet a man named Mincey and he said you had promised to take some insurance with him?"

"No, sir; because I never saw any such man."

In rapid succession Mr. Rosser fired many questions pertaining to the alleged meeting of Mincey, to all of which he received the reply that Conley had never seen the insurance agent.

Denies Mincey Affidavit.

"Didn't you tell him that you could not take any insurance that you were in trouble?"

"No, sir."

"Didn't you say that you had killed a girl and that you didn't want to kill any more people?"

"No, sir."

"Didn't he say that one-a-day would be 365 a year?"

"No, sir."

"Didn't you, on May 31, make a statement to a Constitution reporter that Dorsey had come to you and said it was all right for you to come through that everything was all right?"

Solicitor Dorsey objected to this unless the name of the reporter was given.

Rosser asked again:

"On May 31, didn't you talk with Harllee Branch, of The Journal, and H. W. Ross, of the same paper, and tell them that in your opinion that Mary Phagan was murdered in the toilet on the second floor and was later carried to the metal room and that the body was stiff when you reached her?"

"No, sir; I don't remember telling it."

"Didn't you tell them that it took thirty minutes to get the body downstairs and for you to get back to the second floor?"

"No, sir."

"Didn't you tell them that you remembered Lemmie Quinn's visit?"

"No, sir."

"Did you talk with them at all?"

"Yes, sir, a little bit."

Rosser Reads Affidavit.

Mr. Rosser handed Attorney Arnold an affidavit of Conley's, which the latter started to read. The solicitor interposed an objection to change of counsel.

"Sit down, Hugh, sit down; I'll read it if I can. Don't know, though, whether or not I can. It's in a detective's handwriting."

The affidavit was read. It was one of those made by Conley at police headquarters, detailing parts of his history and actions on the day which preceded the murder. While reading the affidavit Rosser spoke sarcastically of some of the high-flown grammar interjected by detectives into the statement. Each remark caused a ripple of laughter throughout the audience.

As the jury left the room prior to adjournment, Attorney William M. Smith, counsel for Conley, arose, saying:

"I do not know by what legal procedure my client is held in the jail, as he is not held as a witness. I should have the right of counsel to talk and consult with him. I met with a good deal of trouble and unpleasantness last night in doing for him what I thought best.

Smith Wins Point.

"It is a reflection on the solicitor that he should be prevented from talking with a leading witness for the state. It is unheard of for a man to be put in solitary confinement without privilege of his attorney's audience."

The solicitor said:

"I think that it is just and right that Conley should have the rights of attorney."

"Reuben Arnold said:

"Since the solicitor and Lawyer Smith are in such harmonious accord over this witness, I do not think that Smith should be allowed to talk with the witness."

Judge Roan ruled that the attorney should not be deprived of his client, and could talk with him whenever he saw fit. Conley will resume the stand when court meets today.

PAGE 2, COLUMN 5

Defense Asks Judge Roan To Strike From Records Part of Conley Testimony

At the opening of the afternoon session, Attorney Reuben Arnold arose, asking that the jury be sent from the room. When the twelve men had passed into their room, he made a motion asking the court to exclude from Conley's statement that testimony pertaining to Conley having watched previously for Frank and to an unprintable scene the negro said he had witnessed between the superintendent and a young girl in Frank's office.

The motion was made on grounds of irrelevancy.

"First," said Mr. Arnold, "I desire to ask the court to rule out that testimony of Jim Conley's which pertains to his having watched for the defendant on occasions before the date on which the girl was killed. The defense proposes to withdraw all cross-examination on this point.

Asks Testimony Ruled Out.

"We also desire to withdraw from the records that part of Conley's statement in which he tells of Frank having told him at the head of the stairway on the second floor of the pencil factory that 'he was not built like other men,' the answer Conley made to Dorsey's question: 'What did he mean by that?' and the scene which the witness related.

"It is here in the court. I don't want to read it aloud before these ladies present, so I will show it to your honor. This, I want ruled out. This scene which the negro alleges he witnessed was brought into the case purely to prejudice the court against the defendant."

In reply, Attorney Frank Hooper, for the prosecution, said:

"On the first motion to rule out evidence pertaining to other cases of Conley's having watched for Frank, it comes too late, and to rule it out would give counsel opportunity to tamper with the courts. They have crossed the witness and brought out both direct and indirect testimony bearing on the particular phase. It's now too late for their objection.

"I agree that it should have been ruled out, but should have been ruled out at the proper time. In the motion made to rule out Conley's statement of the scene he declared he witnessed, I think it is a good motion, but I doubt their rights to come in at this late hour and make an appeal to bar testimony which was permitted twenty-four hours ago."

Dorsey Opposes Request.

"Solicitor Dorsey said:

"As an original proposition, this testimony is admissible. Is it just, as a matter of plain, common sense, to let these men give this negro a gruelling examination, and, after they have thrashed it out, to let them expunge his statement? Has it come to that?

"We expect to sustain Conley in all he has told. There is such a thing as fairness between the state and defense on the part of the court. Four able attorneys here have sat and let testimony enter the records without making protest, cross-examine him for two days, and twenty-four hours later, decide to complain.

"Our case, if this testimony is expunged, will have been done inestimable damage. There isn't a lawyer or layman who cannot see that such able counsel should have made a timely plea, and not one so absurd as this. They have found, after two days of cross-examination, the terrific force of this evidence and they seek to strike the state a blow. It isn't fair, and I appeal to your honor to protect the state.

Evidence Is Admissible.

"Aside from all that, this evidence is admissible. He has testified to Frank's course of conduct. The defense has shown Conley is the youngest negro in point of service in the pencil factory and have brought out testimony from all sides having direct bearing on the evidence against which they protest."

"Your honor himself must recollect a recent case in which you allowed the state to go back for a period of fifteen years to show a course of dealing characteristic of the defendant. This evidence of Conley's illustrates a motive for Frank getting the child into his office and his conduct toward her when he got her there."

The solicitor read numerous extracts from statutes.

"Anything," he continued, "revealing

PAGE 3, COLUMN 1

DEFENSE ASKS JUDGE TO STRIKE TESTIMONY

Continued From Page Two

practices or course of conduct is admissible. The value of this evidence certainly is apparent to your honor. This evidence, in all manner, will be amply corroborated. This evidence goes to show who killed little Mary Phagan.

Courts Slow to Progress.

"The courts are slow to progress, but this one law, which admits all testimony relative to the defendant's course of conduct, has moved them up a pace. It's the law, your honor, and it should be sustained."

At the close of the solicitor's speech, Attorney Arnold arose, saying:

"There is no use in getting wrought up over this matter. I could, if I wanted to, tear up a little turf myself. The person who is hurt is the defendant. He is done grievous injury by this vile evidence, which has been admitted by one of the state's attorneys to be irrelevant.

"In a criminal case, you can never try a man for but one offense. That's the good, old Anglo-Saxon law. I sympathize thoroughly with the mother of the murdered girl, and I think it was one of the most diabolical crimes ever committed, but, my friend Dorsey and the courts, if they do not give this trial a fair deal, will be just as red-handed as the man who slew little Mary Phagan.

"This miserable wretch, Jim Conley, gets on the stand and details another capital crime. I'm sorry for any white man who believes him. Sodomy is a capital offense. That's what he lays at Frank's door. We are not called on to try this issue, thank the Lord.

State Aware of Fact.

"It is not plain that the murder was premeditated. The state is well aware of that fact. They could not pick out, however, a better set of circumstances than the negro's previous watching which he alleges he did for Mr. Frank. (The attorney read a number of authorities pertaining to character of defendant in other actions irrelative to the crime for which he is being tried.)

PAGE 3, COLUMN 2

Conley Leaving Courtroom After Testimony

Photo by Francis E. Price, Staff Photographer.

Left to right: Chief of Detectives Newport Lanford, Jim Conley and Chief of Police James L. Beavers.

"If we were to go into all this, as the state strives, we'd be here weeks subpoenaing witnesses who could recount the Thanksgiving day and the other days of which this negro speaks. If the state can prove such incidents, why, we can rebut them. The testimony of this man Conley doesn't mean much, but it's the suggestion that hurts."

Judge Roan, in stating his attitude, said:

"There is no doubt in my mind but that this evidence, as an original proposition, is inadmissible. I rule out all except the watching which the negro says he did on the day of the murder. I will reserve my decision, however, until I consider it thoroughly. Also, I will postpone any statement to that effect before the jury."

PAGE 3, COLUMN 3

Ignorance of Negro Witnesses Helps Them When on the Stand

By Britt Craig.

Sometimes it is lucky to be ignorant. Most people don't believe this, but it has been proven true in the cases of Newt Lee and Jim Conley, in facing the nerve racking cross examination of Luther Rosser.

The average white man in Jim's fix would last just several minutes, it is likely; perhaps even less. And if he were a cigarette fiend

There have been many interesting features to the Frank trial, but chief of them all is the manner in which these two negroes have stood grilling of attorneys for the defense, proving themselves the sturdiest witnesses presented by the state.

Jim Has No Cares.

Equipped for the ordeal by a bath from a fire hose, a clean shirt and a shaved head, Jim Conley faced Mr. Rosser on Monday afternoon, without a nerve in his body, with hardly a worry and no idea of what would happen, save that he was going to tell the white folks all about the crime, and would have the center of the stage for awhile.

The formidable Mr. Rosser opened up on Jim with a voice on the order of a lady lobbyist trying to put through a pet scheme, and asked Jim simple, easy little questions like the spelling of cat and dog and apple.

No Worries for Jim.

Jim answered them all, readily, willingly and essayed to spell cat, but overlook the "c." In its absence, he used a "k." But that was immaterial, and Jim never worried. Mr. Rosser wheedled and coaxed and cajoled.

Jim sat in one position, head erect, never turning, eyes riveted on those of his questioner. He never used a handkerchief, never ran his hand across his brow, never twiddled his fingers, never shifted his legs. He sat there, immobile, impassive, waiting for whatever might happen next.

If he couldn't find answers he'd dart for his various havens of refuge: "I don't remember," "I don't think so," "maybe so, I don't know, exactly."

It is an ordeal that but few white men could undergo successfully. To sit in the same, cramped position in which he has remained throughout the proceeding is enough to stir any Anglo-Saxon to a spirit of restlessness. To remain for hours, cigaretteless, tobaccoless, is enough to tear the soul of those who indulge.

Long and Incessant Questioning.

Mr. Rosser dallied with him, taunted him, plumbed the depths of his nature, all the while he plied innumerable questions that seem as immaterial as the sands of a beach.

"Jim, did this man of whom you speak wear a hat?"

"Yes, sir."

"Did he take it off?"

"I don't remember."

"Was his head bald?"

"I think it was a little bit."

"Did you observe his head closely?"

"Did I do what?"

"Did you get up close so you could see his head?"

"No, sir, not exactly."

"Did he wear a black suit?"

"I think so."

"Did he have a vest?"

"I don't remember."

"Did he keep his hands in his pockets?"

"I don't remember."

"Did he have rings on his fingers?"

"I didn't notice."

And thus it went, all throughout the long and tedious hours. The brains of the learned white man pitted against the stupidity of the negro in an effort to entangle him.

Never Budged From Position.

One thing was remarkable about Conley. He never budged from his position. His hands seldom moved. Neither do his eyes. His feet are planted firmly on the floor and never change. There doesn't seem to be a nerve in his system.

But how would the average white man stand the pressure? Even though he were telling the truth the whole truth at that how would his nerves and strength and mental equipment bear up under Mr. Rosser's merciless bombardment for hours and hours at a time? Take John Black, for instance. He has been before Rosser before. He is an experienced, hardened detective, to whom courts and lawyers and cross-examinations are every-day affairs.

John went upon the stand and met his Waterloo. Ultimately, he was forced to say:

"I don't like to admit that I'm bumfuzzled, Mr. Rosser, but you certainly have got me all crossed up. I don't know where I stand."

But one can't blame him much. He's a white man a man of nerves, a man of the finer making, who fretted at the grilling.

A white man, in Conley's place by that is meant the average man would, no doubt, fret and chafe in his seat. His answers would be vague and shortcoming. Instead of meeting every question fairly and squarely with no view to what might be the consequence, he would plan and strive to foresee the effect his answer might have. He would work himself into a befuddled mental state, eventually losing all perspective.

No Longer Good Witness.

Once wrought up a man no longer is efficient as a witness. He then becomes a picnic for his questioner. A man of intellect, who sits and essays to meet each query with replies meant to gain his own ends, meant to produce a desired effect, soon loses out before the volleys of insignificant questions fired at him.

The result?

Well, in most cases, the victim would mortgage his soul for relief and a cigarette.

But with a man of Jim Conley's cast it's wonderfully different.

Jim doesn't strive to meet every question with an effective answer. He makes the first reply that enters his mind, it would appear. He doesn't look forward to what's going to happen next. His mind is centered on what is now going on, and, the future, matter not how near it be, must take care of itself. Consequently what little intellect he possesses isn't affected by worry. He takes what comes and what goes with whatever he has at his command, and lets it go at that.

Ignorance Wins Here.

Which shows, in the minds of many, the value of ignorance against intellect the brute against the finer nature, the savage against the civilized.

In the realms of business and society, civilization relegates ignorance to the dim ages, but on the witness stand it is sometimes different.

Jim Conley and Newt Lee have proved that much Jim Conley, the self-admitted accessory to Georgia's most hideous murder, and old man Newt Lee, its discoverer.