Tuesday, 19th August 1913: New Witnesses Called Against Frank Former Employee Testifies Accused Knew Mary Phagan, The Atlanta Georgian

Search for:

Reading Time: 34 minutes, [5902 words]

PRETTY FACTORY WORKERS TELL JURY OF FRANK'S GOOD CHARACTER

Miss Lena Mc Murtrey, Monday on stand for Frank. Miss Magnolia Kennedy, below.

Mrs. W. R. Johnson, bride, who testified for Frank.

PAGE 59, COLUMN 7

INDIRECT TESTIMONY AGAINST PRISONER IS FORBIDDEN BY JUDGE

Here are the important developments Tuesday in the trial of Leo M. Frank, charged with the murder of Mary Phagan:

Judge Roan rules out all testimony bearing on particular acts of immorality which the State has been endeavoring to prove against the defendant.

Will Turner, former pencil factory employee, testifies he entered the metal room shortly before noon one day near the middle of March and saw Frank seeking to engage Mary Phagan in conversation. He says he cannot recall any other person he (Turner) knew in the factory.

Solicitor Dorsey devotes large part of forenoon in an endeavor to bolster the character of C. B. Dalton, a State's witness, and tear down that of Miss Daisy Hopkins, who was called by the defense.

George Gordon, called by the Solicitor, swears that the sensational affidavit of Minola Mc Knight, negro cook at the Selig home, was signed in his absence and that Solicitor Dorsey refused to order her release, saying he "would get in bad with the detectives" if he did.

Leo Frank found himself again the target for the attacks of Solicitor General Dorsey when the State took up its rebuttal Tuesday in the trial of the National Pencil Factory superintendent, charged with the murder of Mary Phagan.

By far the most damaging testimony brought out against Frank was that of Will Turner, who testified that he had entered the metal room and come upon Frank seeking to press his attentions upon the Phagan girl only a few weeks before the crime.

When Turner was put under the raking fire of Luther Rosser's cross-examination, the weight of his testimony suffered considerably. The youth, who admitted he had worked at the factory only a brief time, was unable to describe unable to tell the name of any other girl in the entire factory.

Tells of Frank Speaking to Girl.

"I went into the rear room on the second floor one day with some pencils," said Turner. "It was about the middle of March. Frank was walking from his office toward the rear of the factory. Mary Phagan was coming toward her machine. He told her to wait a minute, that he wanted to talk to her. She said she had to go to work."

"He said: 'I'm superintendent of the pencil factory and I want to talk to you.' She repeated that she had to go to work and he followed her as she backed away from him. A couple of girls came into the room and I asked them where to put the pencils and then I left. I didn't see any more."

On cross-examination young Turner admitted he did not know whether there were other girls around at the time or not. He did not know the names of the two girls, he said, who entered the room while Frank was trying to talk to Mary Phagan. The extent of his description of Mary Phagan was that she had light hair. The question of the admissibility of this evidence caused a long wrangle between the attorneys.

Rosser and Arnold objected on the ground that it was not at all material, proving absolutely nothing. They denied Dorsey's contention that it established that Frank had known Mary Phagan, in spite of his declarations that he did not know her. The lawyers said that it did not show that he knew her by name or that he was conversing with her on any other subject than her work.

Charges It Was First Step to Murder.

"We contend that Mary Phagan was killed right on that second floor," retorted the Solicitor. "We contend that Mary Phagan and Frank were the only persons in the metal department at the time that this incident took place, and that she was backing away and protesting that she had to go back to work. We contend that it was the beginning of the transaction which ended in the little girl's death. It should go in as contradicting Frank's statement that he did not know her."

Turner was allowed to tell his story.

That Solicitor Dorsey refused to take any step toward the liberation of Minola Mc Knight, cook at the Selig home, who was imprisoned until she made her sensational affidavit against Frank, on the ground that it would "get him in bad with the detectives," was the unexpected and highly interesting statement made by Attorney George Gordon late in the forenoon session.

Gordon was called by the State, but proved as good a witness for the defense. He declared that the affidavit made by the cook was signed in his absence, although the last paragraph stated that

PAGE 60, COLUMN 1

WITNESSES GIVE DALTON GOOD REPUTATION

Once Bad Man, but He Has Reformed, Old Acquaintances Testify for State.

Continued from Page 1.

it was signed in his presence.

He said that he had told Solicitor Dorsey that the negro woman was being held illegally, but that the Solicitor had replied that it was necessary sometimes to do things of this sort in order to get the information wanted. He told of going to the police stating and finding Minola crying and hysterical in her cell.

The attorney for the colored woman said that he had not been permitted to enter the room where his client was being interrogated by the detectives and Ray Pickett and Arthur Sraven, the latter two men being employees of the Beck & Gregg Hardware Company. He was present, he said, when part of the notes were being read by G. C. February, but was not there when the affidavit was signed.

The Mc Knight affidavit told of alleged conversations at the Selig home of a nature very incriminating to Frank. The Mc Knight woman denied all of the statements in the affidavit to a Georgian reporter the night that she was liberated.

Indirect Evidence Against Frank Is Ruled Out.

A crushing blow was dealt the State by the refusal of Judge Roan to admit, either while the defense was completing its case or after the State had taken up the rebuttal, any evidence not directly and at first hand bearing upon the specific acts charged against the factory superintendent.

The ruling was a sweeping victory for the defense. It gave Frank's case, which had been aided materially the day before by the defendant's own statement, an added strength and heightened the prospects in Frank's favor.

Solicitor Dorsey tried first to cross-question Daisy Hopkins, one of the defense's witnesses, as to conversations she was supposed to have had in regard to incidents at the pencil factory in which she and a man undesignated except as her "foreman" were involved. Frank's name was not mentioned in the indicated charges.

The conversation was about a "foreman."

The Hopkins woman denied again that she ever had made visits to the factory for improper purposes or that she had had the conversations referred to by the Solicitor.

Dorsey encountered the same stone wall when he tried to draw testimony against the moral character of Frank from his own witnesses. From W. P. Merck and J. P. Floyd the Solicitor had expected to obtain a recital of the stories of happenings which they said had been related to them Merck, however, had mysteriously disappeared from the courthouse when his name was called, and Floyd was not permitted to go into the details of the testimony the Solicitor had hoped to bring out.

The Solicitor thereafter confined his efforts to bolstering up the character of C. B. Dalton, the State's witness who testified to seeing women in Frank's office, and attacking that of Daisy Hopkins. He called a number of witnesses, one of them a cousin of the Hopkins woman, who swore that her character for truth and veracity was bad and that they wouldn't believe her on oath.

Swear Dalton's Character Is Good.

Other witnesses testified that Dalton's character was good. They were asked by Attorney Rosser if they were acquainted with his court and chain-gang record. They replied, for the most part, that they were not.

The brown suit worn by Frank April 26 was identified by Mrs. Emil Selig, his mother-in-law, at the opening of court in the forenoon and the suit was placed in evidence.

The defense prepared to show by Wiley Roberts, inside jailer at the Tower, that Jim Conley had been reading since his incarceration there, but the Solicitor objected on the ground that no basis had been laid for the testimony.

Daisy Hopkins then was called and questioned, after which the State began its rebuttal, the defense having closed its case.

While waiting for a witness Solicitor Dorsey arose and made the unexpected announcement that he himself had erased the identification "Taken out at 8:26" on the time slip taken from the clock in the factory. Frank had made the charge he had written words as an identification of the slip and that they had been erased. The Solicitor declared that he thought the detectives had made the identification.

"Frank did not know who made the erasure," said Attorney Reuben Arnold.

The Solicitor had announced earlier that his first witnesses in rebuttal would be called to support C. B. Dalton and impeach Daisy Hopkins, who declared she had never visited the factory with Dalton or that he had ever introduced Dalton to the factory superintendent.

Wiley Roberts was asked:

Q. Has Jim Conley been in your custody during this trial? A. Yes.

Q. Has he ever asked for newspapers? A. Yes.

Dorsey interrupted.

"Your honor," he said, "I think the witness, Jim Conley, ought to have the privilege of denying or affirming that before he can be impeached."

"Conley said that he could only read certain words," said Arnold, "but probably Mr. Dorsey is right. I will have to call Jim Conley back again. Mr. Rosser will be back in a minute and we will close."

Daisey Hopkins Is Recalled by Dorsey.

The witness was excused and Dorsey made the announcement that four doctors of the following five would be called by the prosecution:

Drs. G. C. Mizell, F. L. Eskridge, Clarence Johnson, John Funke, S. E. Benedict of Athens, and J. C. Cramer, of Macon, the latter two president and vice president of the State Board of Health.

Solicitor Dorsey asked that Daisy Hopkins be returned to the stand so that he might continue his cross-examination of her.

The witness took the stand.

Q. You say you knew nothing of the cot in the basement of the National Pencil Factory? A. No.

Q. Do you know anything at all of the basement? A. No.

Q. Are you acquainted with A. R. Floyd, of Redan, Ga.? A. Yes.

Q. Have you known him for a long time? A. Yes.

Q. Have you had a conversation with Floyd since the murder? A. No.

Q. Haven't you been to his house to get milk? A. I don't think I have since the murder.

Q. Didn't you go to the home of Floyd to get milk and tell him about that cot in the basement of the National Pencil Factory? A. No.

Q. Do you know Bob Goddard? A. Yes.

Q. Do you know Dr. R. S. Pound, of Redan? A. Yes.

Q. Do you know Mr. Smith, superintendent of the Nunnally-Mc Rae Company? A. On Mitchell street?

Q. Yes. A. Yes, I know him.

Q. Do you know Walter P. Merck? A. Where does he live?

Met Merck on Peachtree Street.

Q. You met him first at Stone Mountain, then you met him on Walker street? A. I met him at Redan. They used to live down there.

Q. You said something about being married. Have you two living husbands? A. No; only one.

Q. Have you seen him since the murder? A. Yes; at Redan.

Q. Do you remember meeting Walter P. Merck one Saturday afternoon on Whitehall street? A. I met him on Peachtree.

Q. Didn't you tell him that afternoon that you were going to the National Pencil Factory? A. No; I told him I had just left the factory.

Q. Didn't he make an engagement with you to go to the factory? A. No.

Rosser objected, declaring that a female witness could not be attacked in that way.

"Your honor," said Dorsey, "I want to show by Merck that this woman did make an engagement with him that afternoon."

"I understand," replied Rosser, "that when an argument of this kind is to be made the jury is to retire."

"It would be better to have the ladies retire also," said Dorsey. "I don't want to embarrass them."

Jury and Women Retire From Room.

The jury retired, and after a hurried conference, Frank's wife and mother also left the courtroom at the request of Attorney Arnold.

"This is their witness," said Dorsey. "We want to show that this man Merck had her Saturday afternoon, and she said she was going to the National Pencil Factory. It was cold weather. We want to show that he saw her that night and what she told him."

The witness interrupted:

"It was summer time," she said pertly.

"She has denied," said Dorsey, "in the impeachment of Dalton that she ever went to the pencil factory for any improper purpose."

"We object," said Rosser.

"I want to show that she told Merck about meeting her foreman at the factory," said Dorsey.

Then the Solicitor repeated a conversation involving the "foreman," which is unprintable, which he wanted to get before the jury.

"He does not mean to charge Frank is the foreman," said Arnold. "He is frank enough to state that."

"Merck in an affidavit," said Dorsey, "said foreman. He didn't say Mrs. Hopkins said her superintendent or that she named any names. I mean to let the jury draw its own conclusions."

"I knew when your honor refused to rule out the charges of Conley and Dalton," said Arnold, taking up the argument, "that you were opening the doors for new issues that would obscure the charge of murder. I knew it would lead to a situation in impeachments bringing us to the point where we would hardly know who we were trying. This woman never would have been put up as an original witness except for the aspersions cast on her by Conley and Dalton. Look how far afield we have wandered. Now, he wants to impeach this witness on something with which the defendant has no connection."

"You can rebut any of their direct testimony," said Judge Roan. "You can not bring any new criminal charge against this defendant. If it is against someone else, it is irrelevant."

"Your honor," said Dorsey, "I want to ask a question to let the jury hear that you rule it out."

"No; we object," said Rosser. "That's just why the jury was sent out."

"I'll let you assume that you ask it," said the court to Dorsey.

"Why, your honor," replied Dorsey, "it puts us in the position of not even trying to prove what we have indicated we would."

"I can not permit the question," said Judge Roan.

"Very well," said Dorsey, adding, in an undertone, "That shuts me off; that shuts me off."

Dorsey continued the examination:

Q. Didn't you meet Merck during the afternoon after working hours and tell him you were going to the pencil factory? A. No.

Q. Didn't he come to see you that night? A. No.

Q. Didn't you tell him that you had been to the factory that afternoon? A. No.

Men Say Woman's Character Is Bad.

Miss Hopkins was excused, and J. R. Floyd, of Redan, Ga., was called. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. Do you know Daisy Hopkins? A. Yes.

Q. Do you know how many husbands she has?

Rosser: "I object, your honor. I don't care if she has three hundred husbands."

The objection was sustained.

Q. Would you believe her under oath? A. I would not.

Q. Did you ever hear her say anything about a cot in the basement of the pencil factory? A. Yes.

The witness was excused. Bob Goddard, brother of C. M. Goddard, who was shot to death a few months ago by Elmer F. Darden, was the next witness called in rebuttal. Goddard resides near Redan. Dorsey questioned him.

Goddard testified to the bad character of Daisy Hopkins, and declared he would not believe her under oath.

Henry Carr, of Stone Mountain; N. J. Ballard, a second cousin of Daisy Hopkins, and J. L. Rice all followed each other in rapid succession and testified that they would not believe the Hopkins girl under oath.

Dorsey then addressed the court.

"Your honor," he said, "we want to offer indictments against Daisy Hopkins and also a bond forfeiture."

Rosser: "Your honor, they objected to the introduction of an indictment against Dalton and they objected rightly. An indictment is nothing against one's character."

Dorsey: "Dalton denied any knowledge of an indictment. This is a bond forfeiture."

Judge Roan: "I rule it out."

Dalton's Recent Past Good, Says J. T. Hearn.

Glenn Smith, superintendent of the Nunnally-Mc Rae Company, testified that Daisy Hopkins' character was bad and that he would not believe her on oath.

J. T. Hearn, of Walton County, said he had known C. B. Dalton since 1890. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. Is his character good or bad? A. The first part of his life was bad. The last part has been good.

Q. Would you believe him on oath? A. Yes.

Rosser took the witness on cross-examination.

Q. When was the last time you knew Dalton? A. 1903 or 1904.

Q. Did you hear about him being indicted for selling whisky in 1906? A. Yes, but he had joined the church about 1904 and I understood was leading a good life.

Dorsey took the witness.

Q. Do you know the instance of his being indicted for stealing years ago? A. Yes.

Rosser: "We object. He can't go into that."

Judge Roan sustained the objection.

Dorsey: "When they go into specific acts, can't I?"

Judge Roan: "No."

R. V. Johnston, another Walton County citizen, was called. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. When were you approached in regard to testifying to the character of C. B. Dalton?

Rosser interposed with an objection, but was overruled.

A. Last Friday, a week ago.

Q. Who approached you? A. Harry Gottheimer.

Rosser again objected, and was sustained.

Q. Are you acquainted with the character of C. B. Dalton? A. Yes.

Q. Would you believe him on oath? A. I would.

Rosser took the witness.

Q. You never heard that he was indicted for stealing and selling whiskey? A. No.

The witness was excused, and W. M. Cook, of Social Circle, Ga., a dairyman and farmer, testified as to Dalton's good character, and declared that he would believe him on oath.

W. J. Elder, of Decatur, followed Cook on the stand, and said that Dalton came to Decatur about five years ago and worked for him as a carpenter. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. Are you acquainted with Dalton's general character? A. I don't know as I am.

Q. That means what people say about him? A. Yes.

Q. Is his character good or bad? A. Good.

Rosser took the witness.

Q. Why did you say just now that you didn't know? A. I didn't know as I did.

Q. You said you didn't know because you didn't know yourself? A. Yes.

The witness was excused, and A. B. Houston, of Decatur, a farmer, who has lived there 41 years, was called. The witness said that he had known Dalton for eight years and that his character was good and that he would believe him under oath.

J. T. Borne, who formerly lived at Ingleside, in De Kalb County, and who now operates a cigar and soda fountain at Decatur, said he knew Dalton and would believe him on oath.

W. M. Wright, of Atlanta, general manager of the Independent Transfer Company, testified in behalf of Dalton's good character and declared that he would believe him on oath.

W. C. Hale, of No. 88 Kirkwood avenue, Atlanta, formerly of Walton County, testified to Dalton's good character and said he would believe him under oath.

L. L. Boyce, a city policeman, formerly of Walton County, testified that eighteen or twenty years ago Dalton's character was bad, but that now it was better and that he had heard nothing bad about him recently.

M. Gordon Caldwell, of Atlanta; J. W. Hunt, of No. 18 Trinity avenue, and W. P. Patrick, of Atlanta, a member of the police force, testified to Dalton's good character and said that they would believe him under oath.

J. E. Dudley, a former employee of the pencil company, was called to the stand. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. Were you working at the National Pencil Factory about October, 1912? A. I don't remember.

Q. Do you remember a machinist named Charley Lee? A. Yes, he was working there.

Q. Were you hurt there? A. Yes.

Q. Where? A. On the second floor, the office floor.

Q. Just where were you hurt? A. On a metal machine. I hurt the forefinger of my left hand.

Mashed Finger But Kept Blood Off Floor.

Q. How were you hurt? A. This fellow Lee had put the metal on the machine. It dropped off. I picked it up and in putting it back I mashed my finger.

Q. What did you do then? A. There was some cotton waste there, which I put around my hand.

Q. Did any blood drop on the floor? A. A few drops.

Q. Did any blood drop near the ladies' dressing room? A. None.

Q. How long after this accident did you work? A. I quit then.

Q. What does this fellow Lee do besides working at his trade? A. I don't know.

Q. What did you do then? A. I went to the office to get it dressed, then went to the Atlanta Hospital.

Rosser took the witness on cross-examination.

Q. How badly were you hurt? A. Not very bad.

Q. You bled pretty freely? A. Yes, but I had my hand in the cotton waste.

Q. You didn't notice whether any blood was on the floor or not? A. Yes; none of it dropped except at the machine where I was working.

Dorsey took the witness.

Q. Was your finger outside of the cotton waste until you got to the office? A. No.

The witness was excused, and the witness Merck was called, but failed to answer. Willie Turner, of Sandy Springs, the 16-year-old son of E. M. -

Continued on Page 6, Column 1.

PAGE 64, COLUMN 1

FACTORY BOY SWEARS HE SAW FRANK ACCOST MARY PHAGAN

Dorsey Feared He'd 'Get in Bad' With Detectives, State Witness Says

INDIRECT TESTIMONY AGAINST PRISONER IS FORBIDDEN BY JUDGE

Continued from Page 2.

Turner, a farmer, was called to the stand. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. About March, of this year, where did you work? A. At the pencil factory.

Q. Do you know this man? (pointing to Frank) A. Yes.

Q. Did you know Mary Phagan? A. When I saw her.

Q. Did you ever see Mr. Frank talking to Mary Phagan? A. Yes; on the second floor.

Q. What time was it and how long before the murder? A. About the middle of March.

Q. Where was it? A. In the back part of the building.

Q. What time of day was it? A. Just before dinner.

Q. Who was in the room besides them? A. No one else. Two girls came down after I did.

Q. What was said? A. I heard her say she had to go to work.

Q. What did he say? A. He said he was the superintendent of the factory-"

Rosser: "We object and we want to argue this without the jury."

The jury was sent out.

Dorsey-Let the witness tell what it is.

Turner-Mr. Frank told the girl he was superintendent of the factory and wanted to talk to her. She told him she had to go back to work. Mr. Frank then went off.

Mary Backed Away From Frank.

Q. How was she acting? A. She backed off from him and he walked toward her.

Q. How far did she back? A. Three or four feet. That was all I heard. Mr. Frank turned away.

Judge Roan-You can go into this to this extent. You can show whether he knew Mary Phagan.

Rosser-This brother has nothing to do with it.

Hooper-If my brother will just keep still a little bit, we may be able to proceed further. This has another value. It shows familiarity or a desire for familiarity.

Rosser-If your honor is with us, I don't want to argue.

Judge Roan-The question is whether it can be shown just how this conversation took place.

Rosser-That is not the purpose of this evidence--

Hooper-Your honor--Judge Roan-Sit down, Mr. Hooper. The question is whether this will show whether he knew her well enough to know her name.

Rosser-This evidence doesn't show that.

Dorsey-Your honor, this witness says this meeting occurred in the same place and near the same spot where we have contended the murder occurred. It is the basis for further evidence.

Arnold-That last statement let the cat out of the bag. They want to bring out another charge. This whole case has been beclouded with every charge that could be imagined. We have gotten away from the charge of murder and have been made to answer every conceivable charge.

Hooper-I object to that, first because it is not true and second because it is not the point at issue.

There was smothered applause.

"There is another disturbance of some sort," shouted Arnold.

Judge Roan rapped for order and directed that the jury be brought in. He addressed Solicitor Dorsey.

"You may put your question and let him tell what he knows," said Judge Roan.

Q. What did you see? Tell it in your own way, telling everything that you saw. A. They were back in the rear of the building near the entrance. She was coming to her work just before dinner. Mr. Frank met her and said: 'I want to speak to you.' She said: 'I have got to go to work.' He said: "I am the superintendent of the pencil factory and I want to speak to you.' She backed off and he walked toward her.

Q. Is that all? A. Yes.

Rosser took the witness on cross-examination.

Q. What time was it? A. Just before dinner.

Q. How was it she was just going to work? A. She was returning to her work at the machine. It was just before the whistle blew.

Q. Lemmie Quinn's office was there, wasn't it? A. Yes.

Q. There were ten or twelve women there in the polishing department? A. I don't know.

Q. Well, what about those two girls in there? A. They came back and told me where to put the pencils.

Q. Do you know who they were? A. No.

Motorman Hits Daisy Hopkins' Character.

Q. They came back at the time this thing was going on? A. Yes.

Q. What kind of a looking girl was Mary Phagan? A. She had light hair.

Q. What else? A. I can't describe her.

Q. Do you really know her? A. Yes.

Q. How? A. Some boy who worked on the fourth floor pointed her out to me one morning when she came to work.

Q. Do you know any one else at the factory? A. No.

The witness was excused and Walter T. Merck was called.

Dorsey questioned him.

Q. What is your business? A. A street car motorman.

Q. Do you know Daisy Hopkins? A. Yes.

Q. Did you ever meet her on Saturday afternoons at the corner of Whitehall and Alabama streets? A. Yes.

Q. What did she say? A. I asked her where she was going and she said she was going to the pencil factory.

Q. Did you see her any more? A. Yes. I made an engagement to go to her room.

Q. Did you see her? A. Yes, about 8:30 o'clock in a room upstairs at the corner of Walker and Peters streets.

Q. Did she say where she had been? A. To the National Pencil Factory.

Q. Do you know her character? A. Yes.

Q. Is it good or bad? A. Bad.

Rosser took the witness on cross-examination.

Q. Does the company know your character? It's a beauty according to your own admission, isn't it?

Dorsey interposed with an objection and was sustained.

Rosser: "Come down, come down, come down."

Mc Knight Woman's Lawyer Called.

The witness was excused, and George Gordon, who said he had practiced law for thirteen years, was called to the stand. Dorsey questioned him.

Q. Were you present at the police station when Minola Mc Knight was brought there? A. Yes; or, rather, I was on the outside a part of the time. I went there in connection with getting a habeas corpus proceedings for her release. The detectives told me I could not go in just then. I decided to make a demand to see her, and it was granted. I went in and Stenographer Febuary read a statement to her from his notes, then went out to write it. Detectives Starnes, Campbell and Lanford, Chief Beavers and two men from Beck & Greggs' were there when the stenographer went out. I said that I didn't think that she ought to be held. They told me they could do nothing unless I got your (Dorsey's) permission. So I went to see you, and you told me that you could not let the woman go, because it would put you in bad with the detectives.

Q. Didn't I say that I had no right to hold her? A. No; you said you would not release her without a habeas corpus.

Q. Why did you not wait until she signed that paper? A. I went up to see you.

Q. Did you hear her say anything about the statement? Read over the notes and then answer the question. A. That is the substance of the notes that Febuary read over to her.

Q. What did she say? Did she deny or admit them? A. She said she believed that was about right.

Dorsey Feared He'd "Get in Bad."

Q. I told you I didn't have anything to do with locking her up, and that it would be meddling for me to order her release. A. You said you would not interfere because you would get in bad with the detectives. That is what my recollection is, Mr. Dorsey.

Rosser took the witness.

Q. You knew that she had been to Mr. Dorsey's office and had been taken away screaming? A. Yes; I heard that.

Q. That Mr. Dorsey, an officer of the peace, let the police take that woman away screaming?

Dorsey interrupted. "You say you know that?" he asked the witness.

Rosser: "Wait until I get through." Then he continued his question.

Q. Did you ever find out what charge they had against her? A. I had a habeas corpus to get her release, but could not get to her.

Q. They just held her because she would not give a statement to the police that Mr. Dorsey wanted?

Dorsey interposed an objection.

Rosser-I submit to this jury that the evidence in this case proves it is true.

Dorsey-I submit it is not true, I don't care what you argue to this jury.

Rosser-And you didn't care what you did to that poor negro woman.

Dorsey-I didn't do anything to that negro woman.

Judge Sustains Dorsey's Objection.

Judge Roan sustained Dorsey's objection. Rosser asked Dorsey for the affidavit that Minola made in Dorsey's office. He asked the witness if he had ever seen it before, and the witness answered, "No."

Q. Who was guilty of false imprisonment-was it Starnes or Beavers? A. Beavers said he knew about it, but that he could not let her out unless Dorsey ordered it.

Q. Did he have a warrant? A. No.

Q. Then they let her out the next day? A. Yes.

Q. Did you see her? A. I saw her that first evening. She was in a cell and crying hysterically. I asked Chief Beavers to let her out in the corridor and I guess he did.

Dorsey took the witness again.

Q. Didn't I tell you that I had absolutely no rights in the matter? A. Something like that, but if you will pardon me, Hugh, I will tell you exactly what was done. I went to you when the police told me they could not let the woman go without an order from you. You told me you had not had the woman arrested and was not having her held.

Q. Now, didn't Febuary read over to you a portion of that affidavit? A. Yes, he read something.

Q. Now, didn't he read a part of the statement, and she added to it the part about the money? A. She said something about money.

Q. Now, what else did she say? A. I don't recall.

Q. Didn't you question her yourself? A. I asked one or two little questions.

Q. What about? A. She said something about a bucket of water that was not very plain, and I questioned her about it.

Rosser took the witness again.

Q. You don't know what happened behind those doors? A. No.

At this point court adjourned until 2 o'clock.

President of State Board of Health Testifies.

When the afternoon session started Solicitor Dorsey announced that on account of some of the State's witnesses being out of the city he would vary his program. He called Dr. S. E. Benedict, of Athens, president of the State Board of Health, and a member of the faculty of the University of Georgia for 32 years, to the stand.

On the first question asked him, Attorney Arnold made strenuous objection and precipitated a long argument. The question was:

"Were you present at the meeting of the State Board of Health when Dr. Westmoreland preferred charges against Dr. Harris?"

"We object to going into that," said Mr. Arnold. "We would have to get the minutes of the board and all of that."

"I am not going into the matter further than to disprove Dr. Westmoreland's statement," said Mr. Dorsey, "that the State board found Dr. Harris guilty of scientific dishonesty."

"You can go into the question of the feeling of the witness," said Judge Roan.

"Suppose," said Rosser, sarcastically, "Mary had a little lamb, it's fleece was white as snow, would that have anything to do with this case?"

"I am not going into it further than to disprove Dr. Westmoreland's statement," insisted Dorsey.

"Well, I am going into it," said Arnold, "if you don't. I am going to ask him about a letter he wrote Dr. Westmoreland."

"Go ahead, Mr. Dorsey," said Judge Roan.

Frank Proves His Own Best Witness.

Frank had demonstrated that he was better than his lawyers and that he was his own best witness when he came down from the witness chair Monday night after talking almost continuously for four hours.

It is doubtful, as shrewd and eloquent as his attorneys are known to be, if anything more impressive, more convincing and more logical will be presented to the jury in his behalf before his fate is placed in the hands of the twelve men.

The young factory superintendent made no attempt at oratory or dramatics. He did not attempt an appeal to the emotions of the jurors. He probably was wise in this, as the memory of what he said and the manner in which he said it will remain with the jurors long after an emotion of pity would have passed away.

Although Frank seldom raised his voice above a conversational tone, his address was deeply impressive from start to finish. Its truth or falsity, of course, is problematical. But it had all the characteristics that are commonly accepted as accompanying the truth.

He did not ask for pity or mercy. He did not take the attitude of demanding anything to which he was not entitled. His mien throughout was that of a man seeking merely justice, and that alone. He was an innocent man or a consummate actor as he stood before the jury. These are the only two conclusions possible.

The matter-of-fact manner in which he delivered his long address only added to its impressiveness and eloquence. That a man with the burden of a foul murder on his conscience could talk easily, freely, fearlessly for four hours before the men whose word can send him to the gallows was hardly to be conceived.