SUPREME COURT OF GEORGIA APPEALS

  • 0001 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    The visible text in the image is: REEL NO. 6.3911
  • 0002 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image:---**Top Left Section:**FOR PHOTOGRAPHERS AND LABORATORY USE ONLYFilm this "TEST PATTERN" at the beginning of the book, volume or pages being microfilmed, after each "volume" and "to be continued". Center the Test Pattern at the reduction being used. Insert the reduction and the exposure ("red." and "exp.") with photocopy.Filmer ce "MODULE TEST" au commencement du livre, volume ou pages que l'on microfilme, après chaque "volume" et "à suivre". Centrer et filmer à la réduction utilisée. Inserer la réduction et l'exposition ("red." et "exp.") avec photocopy.Filme diesen "Prüf-Muster" (Test-Pattern) zum Beginn eines jeden Buches,
  • 0003 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image:---**Department of Archives and History****330 Capitol Avenue****Atlanta****Georgia****30334****MICROFILM LAB****Georgia - Supreme Court****Supreme Court Case File****Leo Frank V. The State**Due to a high reference rate in the past and an anticipated high rate in the future, these portions of a much larger record series are filmed as a protection and as an aid to researchers.**Feb. 17, 1914 First Appeal 14162435**Bill of Exceptions or Enumeration of ErrorsBrief of EvidenceRecord of case**Oct. 14, 1914 Second Appeal 1423617**Brief of Evidence, original and amendedRecord of case including copy of first appeal**Nov. 14, 1914 Third Appeal 1426741**Record Group: Georgia Supreme
  • 0004 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    The visible text in the image is:**BEGIN**Given the context of the image, which appears to be a title card or a screen from a film or video, it is likely that this image is from the beginning of a movie, video, or presentation. The word "BEGIN" suggests the start of something, possibly indicating the commencement of a film, a chapter, or a segment within a larger work. The style and presentation also hint at a vintage or retro aesthetic, which might suggest it is from an older film or a modern production aiming for a nostalgic feel.
  • 0005 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: No. 8008Oct. Term, 1918.CRIMINAL
  • 0006 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: State of Georgia, Fulton County.Be it remembered that at the July Term, 1913, of FultonSuperior Court,--His Honor, L. S. Roan, one of the Judges of theSuperior Court of the State of Georgia presiding--there came on tobe tried the case of the State of Georgia vs. Leo M. Frank,same being an indictment for murder. On the trial of said casethe jury found the defendant guilty without any recommendationfor imprisonment and the court imposed the death sentence upon thedefendant.At the same term at which said verdict was rendered,and in due and legal time, defendant
  • 0007 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: R. L. Cremer makes the following affidavit, deposing and saying as follows: That he is a resident of Albany, Georgia; that he is acquainted with Mack Parkas, who works for Mr. Sam Parkas, who operates a livery stable and sales barn in Albany; that between the time of the murder of Mary Phagan and the trial of Leo M. Frank, exact date this deponent cannot state, deponent was standing in front of Mr. Sam Parkas' place of business on Broad Street, in the presence of Mack Parkas and others, including a party
  • 0008 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: Julian A. Lehman, makes the following affidavit, deposing and saying as follows: that he is personally acquainted with A. H. Henslee, one of the jurors in the above case; that on June 2, 1915, between Atlanta, Ga., and Experiment, Ga., the said Henslee expressed his opinion that Frank was guilty of the murder of Mary Phagan, and that this was in deponent's presence and hearing; and in the hearing of other persons on the train at the time; the words used to the best of deponent's knowledge and recollection were-"Frank is as
  • 0009 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: trial in said case ; that since the trial of said case and the verdict and sentence therein, it has come to their knowledge that two of the jurors who sat on said case, to-wit: M. Johenning and A. H. Henslee, were prejudiced, partial and biased against Leo M. Frank, the defendant as evidenced by affidavits attached to motion and hereinafter referred to; that said prejudice, partiality and bias were present on their part, when said Johenning and Henslee qualified as jurors in said case as shown by said affidavits, but that
  • 0010 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: with H. Johenning, one of the jurors who served in the trial of LeoM. Frank for murder of Mary Phagan; that during May, 1915, said M.Johenning met deponent and deponent's daughter on Forsyth Street,Atlanta, Georgia, and then and there deponent said M. Johenning expressedto the deponent and deponent's daughter the firm belief that Leo M.Frank was guilty of the murder of Mary Phagan. This statement wasmade by M. Johenning forcefully and positively and as his profoundconviction.H. Q. Loevenhart makes the following affidavit, deposingand saying as follows: that for some eighteen months prior
  • 0011 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: no knowledge whatsoever as to H. Johenning and A. H. Henslee, two ofthe jurors, being prejudiced, partial and biased in said case, asevidenced by the affidavits of B. B. Lovenhart, Mrs. J. C. Lovenhart,Miss Marian Lovenhart, S. Amon, Max Farkas, R. L. Gruner, John W. Holmes,S. H. Grey, S. M. Johnson, J. C. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I. I.
  • 0012 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: no knowledge whatsoever as to H. Johenning and A. H. Henslee, two ofthe jurors, being prejudiced, partial and biased in said case, asevidenced by the affidavits of H. B. Lovenhart, Mrs. J. D. Lovenhart,Miss Marian Lovenhart, S. Aron, Max Marks, R. L. Grenary, John W. Holmes,S. H. Grey, S. H. Johnson, J. A. Innis, W. W. Walker, J. W. Coleman and C. B.Stough. Affiant did not know either of said jurors and had never seenor heard of them before; that he did not know until after the trialand did not have any
  • 0013 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: room, he was sitting on the front row of the spectators benches; thatduring the course of the trial deponent saw the jury pass to thejury box from the rear of the court room, the jury passed immediate-ly by this deponent and also by a man, whose name is unknown tothis deponent, but who was a spectator in the court room, who wassitting about three feet from this deponent, just across an aisle, noone being between this man and deponent; as the jury passed this man,at the time specified, this man took hold
  • 0014 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: the automobile approached the corner of South Pryor and East HunterStreets, he observed the Jurymen in the Frank case turn into SouthPryor from the east, out of East Fair St. Street, and deponent stoppedhis automobile to look at the jury, and while doing so noticed thatwalking alongside the jury were some six or seven other men. De-ponent was on the west side of South Pryor Street while the jury inthe above entitled case was walking north along the east side ofSouth Pryor Street. Deponent's brother, Sampson Kay, got out of theautomobile stating
  • 0015 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: room there was also cheering in said court room. There was alsoapplauding in the course of Mr. Dorsey's speech a couple of times onsaid date.Miss Martha Kay makes the following affidavit, deposing andsaying as follows: that she is a resident of the City of Atlanta, liv-ing at #264 South Pryor Street; that on Monday morning, August 25,1913, the last day of the trial of the said Leo M. Frank, in the abovestated case, she was present in the court room in company with Mrs. A.Shurman, of #240 Central Avenue, before time/court to
  • 0016 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: Samuel A. Boorstin makes the following affidavit, deposingand saying as follows: that on Friday evening, on the 22nd day ofAugust, 1915, at about 5 or 5:30 P.M., he was present at the courtroom of Fulton Superior Court, Judge H. Stonean presiding, during thetrial of the State vs. Leo M. Frank; and after adjournment, and whenthe jury had been taken from the court room, and shortly thereafter,the Solicitor General, Hugh M. Dorsey, had passed out of the courtroom, there was a large crowd waiting outside, through which the jurypassed, comprising, perhaps, no less
  • 0017 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: had him. I could not see the man that was carried on the shoulders of the men very well, but was told that it was Dorsey. There was a this time fully three thousand men gathered around the court house, filling the streets on all sides of the court house. I only know Col. Dorsey by sight.J. H. Cochran makes the following affidavit, deposing and saying as follows that he is a resident of Atlanta, Georgia; he remembers the close of the trial of Leo M. Frank, and was present in front
  • 0018 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: feet from the Kiser Building, and that both outside of the Cafe and in the Cafe, the cheering of the Solicitor General could be heard by any person.H. G. Williams, makes the following affidavit, deposing and saying as follows: that on the 26th day the Frank trial closed, and verdict of guilty was found by the jury against Leo M. Frank, accused of the murder of Mary Phagan, this deponent was on South Pryor Street, in front of the court house;This deponent saw Solicitor General Dorsey come from the Court House and
  • 0019 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image:---Friday noon, before the above stated case went to the jury on Monday, he was present in the court room where the trial of Leo M. Frank was being held; that when court adjourned and the jury had left and gone to lunch he came out of the court house and there was loud cheering for "Dorsey", which lasted for several minutes. Deponent walked from the court house to his office on seventh floor of Temple Court Building, and when he reached his office some one asked deponent what all the racket or
  • 0020 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: thenetary come out of the court house about six P. M.; that a fewminutes after the jury came out of the court house, Mr. Dorsey ap-peared in the entrance, whereupon a great cheer arose from the peoplecrowding in the streets and around the court house entrance; that atthat time deponent saw the jury about fifty feet from the entranceof the court house, the jury at the time crossing the street diagon-ally toward the German Cafe; that in the opinion of deponent the yellsand cheers would have been heard several blocks away; that
  • 0021 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: Charles J. Moore makes the following affidavit, deposing and saying as follows: that he is an attorney at law, occupying room 301 on the 3rd floor of the Kiser Building, at the corner of Hunter and So. Pryor Streets; that on Friday, August 22nd, deponent was in his office and saw the jury come out of the court house entrance at about 6 P.M. that soon after Mr. Dorsey appeared in the court house entrance and a great cheering and yelling occurred by the crowd immediately opposite the entrance, and afterwards the
  • 0022 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: in the Frank case, admits having made certain statements as to Frank'sguilt of the murder of Mary Phagan, but says these statements weremade after the trial of Leo M. Frank, and not before; they say thatso far as they know, the said Henslee has not been in Monroe, Georgia,since the trial of Leo M. Frank, and they reiterate the statementthat all statements made in their hearing by said Henslee, and testi-fied about by these deponents on September 27, 1915, were made beforethe commencement of the trial of Leo M. Frank for the
  • 0023 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: the time, which was shortly after the Mary Phagan murder, almost everyone was discussing the murder, and this deponent was very much interested in the matter, as was everyone else; this deponent heard the man with Hemslee say to Hemslee "I don't believe Frank committed that murder; if he did, he is one Jew in a million, not one Jew in a million would commit such a crime"; and to this statement said Hemslee replied in deponent's hearing: "I believe he did kill the girl, and if by any chance I got
  • 0024 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: that they are personally acquainted with Julian A. Lehman; and that said Lehman is a man of the highest personal and moral character, and reputation, and that he is entirely trustworthy, and worthy of belief, as to any statement made by him.G. W. Hasell and R. P. Spencer, Jr., make the following affidavit, deposing and saying as follows: that they are personally acquainted with Julian A. Lehman, and that said Lehman is a man of the highest personal and moral character, and reputation, and that he is entirely trustworthy and worthy of
  • 0025 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: Frank, which is now pending in the Superior Court of Fulton County,Georgia.Leo M. Frank makes the following affidavit, deposing andsaying as follows; that he is.the defendant above.named; that he didnot know, nor has he ever heard until the end of his.trial in theabove stated case, that A. H. Henslee and Marcellus Johenning hadany prejudice or bias against deponent, nor that they, or either ofthem, has ever said or done anything indicating that they believedin deponent's guilt, or had any prejudice or bias against deponent.Shi Gray deposes and states by interrogatories issuedunder Section
  • 0026 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: showing a picture of the jury in the above stated case,and showing a likeness of Juror A. H. Henslee. I know A. H.Henslee by sight. I have heard A. H. Henslee discussing the questionof whether or not Leo M. Frank was guilty of the murder of MaryPhagan, between the death of said Mary Phagan and the commencementof the trial of Leo M. Frank charged with the murder of Mary Phagan.Several parties were talking. Some said they thought Leo M. Frankwas guilty of the murder of Mary Phagan, others said they did not.Henslee
  • 0027 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: I know A. H. Henslee, who served on the jury in the above stated case at the trial commencing July 28, 1913. I have known him about six or seven years. About the time that Conley was reported to have made a statement, I was coming into the city on a street car from the home of my daughter. Henslee was on the car, I heard him say this, in reference to Leo M. Frank's guilt of the murder of Mary Phagan: "I think he is guilty and I would like to
  • 0028 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: 1912, and particularly the likeness of A. H. Henslee. I know A.H. Henslee. A. H. Henslee was in Monroe, Georgia, between the timeof the murder of Mary Phagan, as reported in the papers, and thetime of the commencement of the trial of Leo M. Frank for themurder of Mary Phagan, to-wit: July 28, 1913. What impressed mewas that Henslee was the most vehement in his expression as to theguilt of Leo M. Frank of the murder of Mary Phagan, of anyperson I had heard talk about it. The Phagan murder was, atthe
  • 0029 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: The court also considered the following affidavits as acounter showing presented by the State, to-wit:F. E. WINBURN, makes affidavit deposing and saying as follows:That I was a juror on the Frank case; I did not knowpersonally either A. H. Henslee or M. Johenning, who were also jurorstrying this case, until after we were sworn in on said jury; I hadoccasion to and do know the conduct of these two men on the jury;at no time did either of them express themselves in a way to indi-cate that they were in the least
  • 0030 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: connected with the case, at any time, or that there had been any cheering in any way growing out of or connected with the Frank case, until after the verdict was rendered, and I was told about said incidents; the jury left the courtroom every time before the Judge, lawyers, and audience were permitted to leave, and there was never any applause or cheering either inside the court or outside of the court, within my knowledge, while the case was being considered; the jury, in leaving were always attended by the deputy
  • 0031 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: THAT this cheering did not in anywise influence or affect theverdict which had already been made, nor did it have any influencewhatsoever. THAT deponent remained absolutely unaffected and un-influenced by the cheering or the surroundings and in answeringon the poll, deponent truthfully answered after he had heard thecheering that it was his verdict and in so answering sustainingthe verdict, he discharged his duty and now subscribes to the cor-rectness of the verdict as rendered. THAT neither on Saturday,August 23, 1913, nor on any other day or date, did any man or menother
  • 0032 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: D. TOWNSEND makes affidavit, deposing and saying as follows:THAT he was one of the jurors who served on the abovestated case and heard the cheering which followed soon after thereading of the verdict of guilty in open court and which saidcheering was by parties outside of the court, and which cheeringoccurred during the time the jury were being polled in court;THAT at the time the cheering was heard, no objection whatsoever wasmade by anyone representing Leo M. Frank, or by Leo M. Frank himselfnor was any motion made at the time by
  • 0033 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: -5-the said A.H.Henslee of the said M.J.Ochenning believed that Frankwas guilty until after the entire case had been heard and con-cluded and submitted to the jury, they at least did not so expressthemselves, or give vent to any other expression within my hearingor knowledge, indicating any bias or prejudice against the saidFrank; I did not know how A.H.Henslee stood on the issue untilafter the first ballot had been taken; then said Henslee made atalk and stated that he had cast a doubtful ballot; there wasone ballot marked "doubtful"; he explained to the
  • 0034 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: --6--the roarTHAT we were usually taken direct from the courthouse to theGerman Cafe, located midway of the block on Pryor Street, op-posite from the courthouse, and it took us a very short timeto go there - I should estimate about three minutes at the outside.Upon reaching the German Cafe, we were taken directly to a privatedining room in the rear of the building and the door immediatelyclosed; after being shut up in this room, we never heard any soundsthat in the slightest resembled cheering or applause; the onlycheering that was heard at
  • 0035 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: by the side of the Jury, and neither did anybody within myknowledge, ever speak to any juror at any time or place outsideof the presence of the court. THAT if any man evergrabbed any juror by the hand or held any conversation with anyjuror, the same was not in my presence; no man ever grabbed me bythe hand at the place referred to by W. P. Neill in his affidavitnor did I see or hear or know anything about any man grabbing anymember of the jury by the hand or saying anything
  • 0036 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: --8--been heard and concluded and submitted to the jury, they atleast did not so express themselves or give vent to any otherexpression within my hearing or knowledge, indicating any biasor prejudice against the said Frank; I did not know how A.H.Henslee stood on the issue until after the first ballot had beentaken; then said Henslee made a talk and stated that he had cast adoubtful ballot; there was one ballot marked "doubtful"; he ex-plained to the jury why he cast this doubtful ballot and sub-mitted some suggestions with reference to the evidence;
  • 0037 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: ---9---opposite from the courthouse, and it took only a very short timeto go there - I should estimate about three minutes at the outside.Upon reaching the German Cafe, we were taken directly to a privatedining room in the rear of the building and the door immediatelyclosed; after being shut up in this room, we never heard anysounds that in the slightest resembled cheering or applause; theonly cheering that was heard at any time while the case was beingconsidered was the cheering that arose shortly after the verdictof guilty was read, when there
  • 0038 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: was, so far as I am concerned, and as to the other jurors, sofar as their deportment shows, I believe was rendered froman honest opinion, based on the law and evidence of the case.A. L. WISHEY makes affidavit, deposing and saying asfollows:THAT I was a juror on the Frank case; I did not knowpersonally either A. H. Henslee or M. Johenning, who were alsojurors trying this case, until after we were sworn in on saidjury; I had occasion to and do know the conduct of these two menon the jury at no
  • 0039 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: ---11---of Henslee and likewise of each and every man on the jury:THAT I did not at any time, while a Juror, hear any applauseexcept such as occurred in open court, and which was heardby the Judge, jury and attorneys in the case; I did not knowthat there had been any cheering or anybody connected with thecase at any time or that there had been any cheering in any waygrowing out of or connected with the Frank case, until afterthe verdict was rendered, and I was told about said incidents.THAT on one occasion
  • 0040 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: anything that had the slightest resemblance to cheering, andI never heard any applause except that heard by the judge and onlyheard about the cheering after having been discharged from thecase; THAT neither on Saturday, August 23, 1913, nor on any otherday or date, did any man or men other than the bailiffs in chargeof the jury ever walk with or by the side of the jury, and neitherdid anybody within my knowledge, ever speak to any juror at anytime or place outside of the presence of the court; THAT if at anytime
  • 0041 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: -13-in a way to indicate that they were the least bit prejudicedor biased, but each of these men, as did I and every othermember of the jury, deported themselves as honest, upright,prudent and impartial jurors; if either the said A.H.Hensleeor the said M.J.Chenning believed that Frank was guilty untilafter the entire case had been heard and concluded and sub-mitted to the jury, they at least did not so express themselves,or give vent to any other expression within my hearing orknowledge, indicating any bias or prejudice against the saidFrank; I did not know
  • 0042 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: -14-were permitted to leave, and there was never any applause orcheering either inside of the court or outside of the courtwithin my knowledge, while the case was being considered;the jury, inclosing, were always attended by the deputysheriffs or bailiffs, one always going in front and one al-ways in the rear; we were usually taken direct from the cour-house to the German Cafe, located midway of the block on PryorStreet, opposite from the courthouse, and it took only a veryshort time to go there - I should estimate about three minutes -at the
  • 0043 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: --15--or saying anything to any juror, or attempting to say anythingto any juror, and within my knowledge, there was no communi-cation at any time or place or in any shape, manner or formwith any juror, with any party on the outside; all communicationshad by the jury with outsiders, so far as I know, were throughthe bailiffs and said communications were authorized by thecourt and known to counsel on both sides of the case: THATso far as I am personally concerned, and so far as I know asto each and every juror on
  • 0044 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: --16--doubtful ballot, and submitted some suggestions with reference to the evidence; up to that time, so far as I know, said Henslee had not intimated or expressed any opinion whatsoever with reference to any feature of the case; and I did not at any time while a juror, hear any applause except such as occurred in open court, and which was heard by the Judge, Jury and attorneys in the case; I did not know that there had been any cheering of anybody connected with the case at any time or that
  • 0045 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: that arose shortly after the verdict of guilty was read, whenthere was cheering both on Hunter and Pryor Streets, and saidcheering was loud and long; with the exception of this cheering,I never heard anything that had the slightest resemblance tocheering, and I never heard any applause except as heard bythe Judge and only heard about the cheering after having been dis-charged from the case; THAT neither on Saturday, August 23, 1913,nor on any other day or date, did any man or men other than thebailiffs in charge of the jury, ever walk
  • 0046 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: --18--Mrs.Jernie G.Lovenhart and Miss Miriam Lovenhart, both made before the same Burk aforesaid and on the day aforesaid, THAT the facts are these with reference to this: THAT I never having expressed to the said Lovenhart or any one else any opinion with reference to the guilt or innocence of said Frank, except as hereinafter set out: THAT some time about two weeks before the Frank case was/set for trial - which, if my memory serves me right, was about the latter part of June, 1913 - I had a casual conversation
  • 0047 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: --19--J.T. OZBURN makes affidavit, deposing and saying asfollows:THAT I was a juror on the Frank case; I did not knowpersonally either A.H.Henslee or M.Joehenning, who were alsojurors trying this case, until after we were sworn in on saidjury; I had occasion to and do know the conduct of these twomen on the jury; at no time did either of them express themselvesin a way to indicate that they were in the least bit prejudicedor biased, but each of these men, as did each and every othermember of the jury, deported themselves as
  • 0048 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: had been any cheering of anybody connected with the case at anytime, or that there had been any cheering growing out of or con-nected with the Frank case, until after the verdict was rendered,and I was told about said incidents; the jury left the courtroom every time before the Judge, lawyers, and audience were per-mitted to leave, and there was never any applause or cheeringeither inside of the court or outside of the court, within myknowledge, while the case was being considered; the jury, in leaving,were always attended by the deputy sheriffs
  • 0049 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: any man grabbing any member of the jury, by the hand or sayinganything to any juror, or attempting to say anything to any jurorand within my knowledge there was no communication at any time orplace or in any shape, manner or form, with any juror, with anyparty on the outside; all communications had by the jury with out-siders, so far as I know, were through the bailiffs, and saidcommunications were authorized by the court and known to counselon both sides of the cases TFAT so far as I am-personally con-cerned, and so
  • 0050 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: --22--a talk and stated that he cast a doubtful ballot; there was oneballot marked "doubtful"; he explained to the jury why he castthis doubtful ballot, and submitted some suggestions with referenceto the evidence; up to that time, so far as I know, said Hensleehad not intimated or expressed any opinion whatsoever with re-ference to any feature of the case, except as above; THAT as toM.J.Schenning, so far as I was able to judge from his conduct anddeportment, said J°Schenning was an upright, honest, fair, pru-dent, impartial and conscientious juror, imbued with only
  • 0051 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: --23--when there was cheering both on Hunter and Pryor Streets, andwild cheering was loud and long; with the exception of thischeering, I never heard anything that had the faintest re-semblance to cheering, and I have never heard any applauseexcept that heard by the Judge and only heard about THIRTYother cheering after having been discharged from the case.THAT the cheering which occurred just after the reading ofthe verdict in said case occurred during the time the jurywere being polled by the Court: THAT at the time the cheeringwas heard no objection whatsoever was
  • 0052 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: --24--other juror, or attempting to say anything to any juror, exceptas above and within my knowledge there was no unauthorized com-munication at any time or place or in any shape, manner or form,with any juror, with any party on the outside, all communicationshad by the jury with outsiders, so far as I know, were throughthe bailiffe, and said communications were authorized by thecourt, and known to counsel on both sides of the case; THAT sofar as I am personally concerned, and so far as I know, as to eachand every juror on
  • 0053 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: --25--or bias, either for or against the said Leo M.Frank, and thatwas absolutely true; furthermore I stated that my mind wasperfectly impartial between the State of Georgia and Leo M.Frank, accuse of Murder; that answer given under oath, wasabsolutely true; my attitude toward the case was that of an im-partial, unprejudiced man, seeking only to do my duty as a citizenand as a Juror, with a due appreciation of the fact that a man'slife or liberty must not be taken except the State produce evi-dence to overcome the presumption of innocence which
  • 0054 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: --26--committed the crime ought to be hung, whether Frank or any other person; the conduct of the entire jury after they were empannelled and sworn, was that of honest, upright, and impartial jurors; no member of the jury, including myself, while knowledge, ever expressed an opinion of the guilt or innocence of Leo M.Frank during the trial, until after all the evidence was in, speeches in and the court had charged us to render a verdict; as illustrating the attitude which I occupied in this case, I will say that when it
  • 0055 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: -277-doment give any date when I was supposed to have made the re-marks attributed to me; but I was not in Albany from June 2nd.,and 3rd., 1913 at which time I was there, until September 18th.,1913;if at any time between April 26th. 1913, and July 28th., 1913, Iever saw Moak Farkas in Albany or elsewhere and had a conversation withhim, I have absolutely forgotten it; I do know that I did not seethis man Moak Farkas on my trip to Albany June 2nd., 1913 and June 31913; I did see Sam Farkas
  • 0056 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: --28--Ga., spending the night of June 2nd., at the New Albany Hotelin Albany, Ga. THAT said Lehman does not state where it was thatthe said statement was made by me on June 20th.,1913. I unqualifiedlystate, that I never on June 20th.,1913, or on any other date, madeany such statement to Lehman or to anyone else; On June 19th., 1913,I was at Opelika, Ala, and Columbus, Ga., and on the 20th., I wasat Columbus, Chipley and Cataula, Ga., and drove from Cataula toWaverly Hall by private conveyance and from Waverly Hall I went
  • 0057 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: in the City of Atlanta, say "I am glad they indicted the Goddamn Jew", they ought to take him out and lynch him, and if Iget on that jury I will hang that Jew sure." I emphaticallydeny that I used any such expression at any time or place; I am amember of the Elk's Club; said Club has among its members a largenumber of Jewish people, many of whom are my friends. I neverentertained any prejudice or animus against the Jewish people, oragainst any one of them, and I did not make
  • 0058 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: at this time, anything more than the headlines of the newspapersand I had not formed any opinion based on newspaper reports orcasual rumor as to whether or not Frank was the man guilty of thecrime, and I did not express myself in the language attributedto me by the said Ricker or any other language; nor did I knowthat the public sentiment was so strong against Frank that he wouldnot be able, if acquitted, to get out of the City of Atlanta alive, andI positively and emphatically deny that I ever made use
  • 0059 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image:---- 31 -H.Shi Gray, S.M.Johnson, and John M.Holmes on rendering the verdict of "Guilty"; I was introduced by Mr.Holmes to their many friends and acquaintances as having been one of the jurors on the Frank case; I furthermore stated on this occasion which I refer to, namely, September 2nd., 1913, that said Frank was a moral degenerate and apervert; I based this statement on the evidence adduced upon the trial; before that I did not have any knowledge or information whatsoever which would have warranted me in surmising that Frank was a degenerate
  • 0060 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: Stated in my recollection, until September 2nd, 1915, that Ihave ever expressed any opinion, anywhere, at any time priorto this trial, that Leo M. Frank was guilty. I do not remember;I never had any prejudice against the said Leo M. Frank, and Inever had any fixed opinion, or entertained any kind of opinionof the merits of the case until I heard the evidence; and Iqualified as a juror with an unbiased mind, and with a disposi-tion to readily yield and conform to the evidence, and to be con-trolled absolutely by the law
  • 0061 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: outside of the courthouse; I did not hear any applause in thecourtroom that I now recall, except as above stated; I do not re-call what occasioned any laughter, except that occasioned by thecross examination of Jim Connelly by Mr.Rosser, counsel for Frank;I laughed myself, as did the audience and all of the jury, whenConnelly told Mr.Rosser how he spelled certain brands of pencilsand other words; I laughed and the audience laughed when B.Daltontold Mr.Rosser when and where he was born, stating that he wasthere but could not remember; also in conjunction with
  • 0062 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: anything about it if anything like that took place and I didnot hear the sheriff speak to anyone about it; there was no com-munication at any time or place in any shape, manner or formwith me from the outside after the jury was empaneled and so faras I know, there was no communication with any juror except let-ters which came through the sheriff or bailiff and which were bythe court permitted; and I never read any letter, or communicationof any character that had not been opened before it came to methrough the
  • 0063 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: walking two abreast, said jury following immediately behinddeponent Pennington: THAT Deponents have read the various affi-davits which deal with alleged cheering of the Solicitor General ashe left the court house on said Friday afternoon August 22, 1913;opponents under oath they did not hear any demonstration of any kind on said afternoon, nor did theyhear any applause for the Solicitor General or for any one else;THAT when court adjourned on Saturday, August 23, 1913, soonafter the noon hour, deponents took the jury from the court-house northward along Pryor street; they did not, on
  • 0064 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: said six or seven men or any other number of men talk to thejurors or any of them, on South Pryor Street, or the German Cafe,or at their rooms at the Kimball House, or elsewhere, at anytime, between the time the jury was impanelled and the time whenit was discharged after having finally rendered its verdict inthe said case, so far as deponents know or believe; at no timeand in no place did deponents see any member of the jury in thiscase communicate with, or attempt to communicate, with any one ex-cepting
  • 0065 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: he occupied an anteroom to the court-room in which said case was tried directly across the hallway from the jury room; that in leaving the jury box, and retiring to the jury room, it is necessary to pass through three doors; that deponent knows of the occasion of the applause in the court room when the Judge declined to rule out and exclude the evidence of Jim Conley as to two certain acts of degeneracy and perversion on the part of Leo M. Frank, the defendant; deponent was present in the court
  • 0066 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: M. Johenning makes the following affidavit, deposing and saying as follows: That he was one of the jurors who served on the above stated case and heard the cheering which followed soon after the reading of the verdict of guilty in open court, and which said cheering was by parties outside of the court, and which said cheering occurred during the time the jury were being polled by the court.At the time the cheering was heard no objection whatsoever was made by anyone representing Leo M. Frank or by Leo M. Frank
  • 0067 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: the reading of the verdict, while the jury was being polled, Deponentsays that at no time did he see any one appeal to or attempt to speakto any member of the jury, except officers of court in the dischargeof their duty. Deponent further states that he never at any timewitnessed or knew of any misconduct on the part of any member of thejury, but states, under oath, that at all times, when in his presenceeach member of the jury deported himself as an upright, honorable andconscientious juror, seeking to faithfully discharge his
  • 0068 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: to Judge, the jury at all times, when he was present, deported themselves as honest, honorable, conscientious, unbiased and unprejudiced jurors, and at no time were any of said jurors guilty of any misconduct, within his presence or knowledge.Drew Liddell makes the following aff. & vit, deposing and saying as follows: that he is a deputy sheriff of Fulton county, Georgia and was on duty constantly during the trial of the above stated case. On Friday, August 22nd, and Saturday, August 23, 1913, deponent, with other deputies, accompanied the jury to and
  • 0069 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: C.J.Bosshardt makes affidavit as follows: I have read the affidavit of J.T.Osburn, executed on Oct.16,1915,and hereby adopt said affidavit of said Osburn, and that the said allegations contained in said affidavit are true and correct. C.J.Bosshardt makes affidavit as follows: I am one of the jurors who sat on the above stated case, and heard the cheering which followed and after the reading of the verdict of guilty in open court,and which said cheering was by parties outside of the court, and which cheering occurred during the time the jury was being
  • 0070 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: W. H. Howard, J.C.Gallier, T.W.Cochran, P.L.Cordy, J.E.,Howard, J.D.Lookridge and C.O.Summers each make affidavit that theyknow A. H. Henslee, one of the jurors who served in the case of theState of Georgia, vs. Leo M. Frank; that each of the witnesses is ac-quainted with the general character of the said A. H. Henslee, andthat the general character and reputation of the said Henslee is good,and from his general character and reputation, each of deponents wouldbelieve the said A.H.Henslee on oath.H. Pitts & L. Lyle, T. J. Webb, and John H. Kelley, each makeaffidavit
  • 0071 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: I was aiding the Sheriff, and as a deputy was stationedimmediately in the rear of the jury box. I was in positionto hear all that the jury could hear in the court room, andat no time did I hear any applause, except what occurred inopen court, in the immediate presence of the Judge presidingand which was officially noticed by him: No cheering from theoutside was heard, excepting during the polling of the jury,after their verdict had been read. I observed no misconducton the part of any Juror, and no communication or attempt
  • 0072 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: member of the jury individually or the jury collectively fromthe time the jury was impanelled until they had rendered their vverdict and had been discharged. I am the Deputy Sheriff regular-ly assigned to the Criminal division of Fulton County SuperiorCourt and was on duty and in charge of the courtroom during theentire time Leo M. Frank was on trial; I have read theaffidavit of Mrs. A. Shurman and others with reference to thecheering on the outside of said courtroom during Friday andSaturday and Monday, the last three days of the trial. I
  • 0073 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: xxk any spectator or person at or around the said courthouse, duringthe trial of Leo M. Frank other than the officers of the law, tohave in their possession or on their person any pistol or armsof any kind or character.W. F. Medcalf, makes affidavit, deposing and sayingas follows:I was a Juror on the Frank case. I did not knowpersonally either A. H. Henslee or L. L. Johenning, who were alsojurors, trying this case, until after we were sworn in on saidjury. I had occasion to and do know the conduct of these
  • 0074 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: conscientiousness of Johenning is true of Henslee and likewiseof each and every man on the jury; I did not at any time, whilea juror, hear any applause except such as occurred in open court,and which was heard by the Judge, jury and attorneys in the case;I did not know that there had been any cheering of anybodyconnected with the case at any time or that there had been anycheering in any way growing out of or connected with the Frankcase, until after the verdict was rendered, and I was told aboutsaid incidents;
  • 0075 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: my presence. No man ever grabbed me by the hand at the placereferred to by W. P. Weill in his affidavit, nor did I see orhear or know anything about any man grabbing a member of the Juryby the hand or saying anything to any juror, or attempting tosay anything to any juror, and within my knowledge, there was nocommunication at any time or place or in any shape, manner, or form,with any juror, with any party on the outside. All communicationhad by the Jury with outsiders, so far as I know,
  • 0076 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: for new trial and said amendment to the motion for new trial beingparts of the record in said case, and reference being hereby had tothe same; and movant further specifies as to each error complainedof that the court failed and refused to grant a new trial upon eachand every ground contained in said motion for new trial and theamendment thereto, reference being hereby had to the same as if fullyembodied herein, the same being of record.Defendant further excepts to said judgment overruling themotion for new trial and alleges error therein in not
  • 0077 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: 9th. The Judgment of the Judge refusing a new trial insaid case.This ____ day of ____ 1913./s/ Reuben R. Arnold/s/ Leonard HaasAttorneys for Leo M. Frank,Plaintiff in Error,Address, Atlanta, Ga.I do certify that the foregoing Bill of Exceptions is trueand contains and specifies all of the evidence and specifies all ofthe record material to a clear understanding of the errors complainedof; and the Clerk of Fulton Superior Court is hereby ordered to makeout a complete copy of such parts of the record in said case asare in this Bill of Exceptions specified,
  • 0078 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    The visible text in the image appears to be handwritten and somewhat difficult to decipher due to the quality of the image. However, I can make out the following: 12 of November 1847Received of Wm. H. English
  • 0079 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: GEORGIA, Fulton County.I Hereby Certify, That the foregoing Bill of Exceptions, hereunto, attached, is- the true original Bill of Exceptions in the case stated, to-wit :Leo M. FrankPlaintiff in Error.VSThe State of GeorgiaDefendant in Error.and that a copy hereof has been made and filed in this office.Witness my signature and the seal of Court affixedthis the 15th day of November 1913.Clerk Superior Court Fulton County, Georgia.Ex-Officio Clerk City Court of Atlanta.
  • 0080 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: Filed in officeClerk. 191Filed in officeClerk. 191Bill of ExceptionsState of GeorgiavsWill FrankCase No.Albany Circuit,Term, 191
  • 0081 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: BILL OF EXCEPTIONSTHE STATESUPREME COURT OF GEORGIA.OCTOBER TERM, 1898.CRIMINAL DOCKET NO. 1052FILED IN OFFICE NOV 15 1898CLERKFRANK
  • 0082 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: FileNo. Atlanta Circuit Term, 191Leo M. FrankVERSUSThe State of GeorgiaTranscript of RecordFiled in office. 191 Clerk.DAILY REPORT CO., PRINTERS, ATLANTA
  • 0083 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: 10852Frank & State(INDEX.)Bill of Indictment.............................1Plea...........................................1Verdict.........................................3Sentence........................................3Motion for New Trial...........................4Amended Motion for New Trial...................5Certificate of Court...........................7Order Overruling Motion for New Trial..........237Charge of the Court............................238Approval of the Court..........................239Brief of the Evidence..........................244
  • 0084 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: (BILL OF INDICTMENT.)The State, No. 9410,Vs. Fulton Superior Court,Leo M. Frank. May Term 1913.True BillL. H. Beck, Foreman,24th day of May 1913.Hugh M. Dorsey, Sol. Gen'lJ. N. Starnes, Prosecutor.STATE OF GEORGIA,FULTON COUNTY.The Grand Jurors, selected, chosen and sworn for the County ofFulton, to-wit;1. J. H. Beck, Foreman,2. A. D. Adair, Sr.,3. F. P. H. Akers,4. B. F. Bell,5. J. G. Bell,6. Sol. Benjamin,7. Wm. E. Besser,8. C. M. Brown,9. O. A. Cowles,10. Walker Dunson,11. Geo. A. Gershon,12. S. C. Glass,13. A. L. Guthman,14. C. M. Kains,15. R. R. Hubbard,16. R. R. Hash,17.
  • 0085 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: and there choking her, the said Mary Phagan with a cord placedaround her neck, contrary to the laws of said State, the goodorder, peace and dignity thereof.Hugh M. Dorsey, Sol. Gen'l.J. N. Starnes, Prosecutor.Fulton Superior Court 1913.WITNESSES FOR THE STATE.J. W. Hurt, Dr.L. S. Dobbs, (Police)J. N. Starnes "R. P. Barrett,W. W. Rogers,Harry Scott,B. B. Haslett,Grace Hicks,E. F. Holloway,N. V. Darley,H. L. Parry,J. M. Gantt,William A. Gheesling.Copy Bill of indictment and list of witnesses before GrandJury, waived before arraignment. Full panel Waived.Roeser and Brandon,R. R. Arnold,Herbert Haas, Deft's Att'ys.2.
  • 0086 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: (P L E A.)July Term 1913.The defendant Leo M. Frank, waives being formally arraigned, and pleads not guilty.F. A. Hooper,E. A. Stephens andRush W. Dorsey,Sol. Gen'l.Rosser and Brandon,R. R. Arnold,Herbert Haas,Deft's Att'ys.-------------------(VERDICT.)We, the jury, find the defendant guilty.Date August 25th, 1913.F. E. Winburn, Foreman.
  • 0087 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: (SENTENCE.)The State, No. 9410.Vs. (1.) Indictment for Murder. Fulton SuperiorLeo M. Frank. (1.) Court, May Term, 1913, Verdict of (1.) Guilty, July Term, 1913. Aug. 25, 1913.Whereupon, it is considered, ordered and adjudged by the Court that the defendant, Leo M. Frank, be taken from the bar of this court to the common jail of the county of Fulton, and that he be safely there kept until his final execution in the manner fixed by law.It is further ordered and adjudged by the Court that on the 10th day of October, 1913,
  • 0088 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: (MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL.)State of Georgia,Vs.Leo M. Frank.(1). Conviction of Murder.(1). In Fulton Superior Court.(1). Motion For New Trial.And now comes the defendant in the above stated case and moves the court for a new trial upon the grounds following, to-wit:1. The verdict is contrary to the evidence.2. The verdict is contrary to the law.3. The verdict is against the weight of the evidence.4. The court, over the objection of the defendant, heard evidence of other transactions and tending to establish other crimes and offenses, wholly separate and distinct from the charge
  • 0089 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: In the meantime let the execution of the court's sentence besuspended. It is further ordered, that until such time as thismotion may be heard and decided, that the movant have fullleave to amend this motion for new trial.This 26th day of August, 1913.L. S. Roan,Judge S. C. St. W. Ct. PresidingFiled in office this the 26th day of August, 1913.F. V. Myers, D. ClerkGEORGIA, FULTON COUNTY.Service acknowledged, copy received all other andfurther service waived. This Aug. 27th, 1913.F. A. Hooper,Hugh M. Dorsey,E. A. StephensSolicitor General Fulton County, Georgia.We further agree to the
  • 0090 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: (AMENDED MOTION.)GEORGIA, FULTON COUNTY.State of Georgia, No.Vs. Fulton Superior Court.Leo M. Frank. July Term, 1913.And now comes the defendant in the above stated cause, LeoM. Frank, and amends his motion for new trial heretofore filed inthis case, and says:That the verdict in the above stated case should be set asideand a new trial granted for the following reasons, to-wit:1. Because the Court erred in permitting the solicitor to proveby the Witness, Lee, that the detective Black talked to him, thewitness, longer and asked him more questions at the police stationthan did Mr.
  • 0091 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: jailer, had interviewed Lee just before the present trial.The solicitor, over the objections of Frank's atty's that the evidence offered was immaterial, irrelevant, and the expression of an opinion, was permitted by introducing said evidence to draw a comparison of the time occupied by Frank and Arnold to their respective interviews, and, in doing so, the Court erred because the evidence offered was immaterial, irrelevant and the expression of an opinion.3. Because the Court permitted the solicitor, over the objection of defendant made at the time, evidence was offered that the same
  • 0092 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: were, also, Greek crosses on the picture. It was conceded by theState that these dotted lines and crosses were no part of norrepresented any part of the building, but were put in the picturefor the purpose of illustrating the theory of the State, as show-ing where the body was found and where it was carried.The admission of the picture in evidence, with the lines andcrosses thereon, was, when offered, objected to because, asmovant contends, it was argumentative, representing andillustrating the State's view of the case by means of red linesand crosses, which
  • 0093 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: 8. Because the Court refused to permit the witness Black totestify on cross examination that when he found a bloody shirt inthe bottom of a barrel in Newt Lee's house, that he carried theshirt to the station house showed it to Lee, and, when Leewas asked by the witness if the shirt was his, the solicitorobjected that the witness should not be allowed to answer thequestion: "Did he (Lee) say that the shirt was his?"The Court would not permit the witness to give Lee's answerthat the shirt was his.This answer of Lee's
  • 0094 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: (up to her waist) and Mr. Frank was down on his knees, and shehad her hands on Mr. Frank and I found them in that position."Q. "When you came into the office before Thanksgiving day, now,when the lady was sitting in the chair?"A. Yes, sir; he saw me when he came out of the office, he saw me."Q. What was said when they saw you?"A. "When Mr. Frank came out of the office Mr. Frank was holler-ing 'Yes, that is right, that is right' and he said, 'That is allright, it will
  • 0095 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: tion with women than he had not seen any other man in that haschildren; that he had seen Frank in the office of the Pencil Co.,about two or three times before Thanksgiving, and a lady was inthe office and she was sitting down in a chair and she had herclothes up about her privates, and Frank was down on his knee,and she had her hands on Frank; that Frank saw Conley when he cameout of the office, that when Frank came out of the office he washollering "Yes, sir, that is right,
  • 0096 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: open the door. When the first question was asked by the solicitorseeking to elicit whether witness had ever seen Frank up therein his office doing anything with young ladies before April 26,1913, the defendant objected on the ground that the evidencesought was irrelevant and immaterial. The Court ruled that theevidence would be immaterial, but further questions were askedby the solicitor and elicited the evidence here complained of.While Conley was still on the stand, and after cross examina-tion a day and a half on other subjects, defendant's counselmoved to rule out, exclude and
  • 0097 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: A. I would sit down on the first floor and watch the door for him.Q. And watch the doors for him? A. Yes, sir.Q. How many times did you watch the door previous to Saturday, the 28th of April, 1913?A. Well, I couldn't exactly tell you; it has been several times I watched for him.Q. Who was there when you were watching the door? A. Well, I don't know, Sir, who would be there when I watched the door, but there would be another young man and another young lady there during
  • 0098 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: was in the office, and she was sitting down in a chair, and she had her clothes up to here (indicating), and Mr. Frank was down on his knees, and she had her hand on Mr. Frank, and I found them in that position.Q. Well did you ever see him on any other occasion? A. Yes, I have seen him another time there.Q. What other occasion? A. I have seen Mr. Frank in the packing room one time with a young lady laying on the table.Q. How far was the woman on
  • 0099 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: CROSS EXAMINATION.Q. Now, you said you watched for Mr. Frank? A. Yes, sir.Q. When was the first time you ever watched for Mr. Frank?A. The first time I ever watched for Mr. Frank alone andknew he was in the office------Q. When was the first time you ever watched for Mr. Frank aloneor with somebody else? Don't make any difference. A. I couldn'texactly give you the------Q. Tell us the best you can? A. Some time during last summer,when I was watching for him.Q. That was the first time, now? A. Yes, sir.Q. Whereabouts
  • 0100 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

    Here is the extracted text from the image: there when he called me and talked to me about the work.Q. And that was on Saturday A. Yes, sir, that was on a Saturday.Q. About what time, now A. I don't know, somewhere about threeo'clock, though.Q. Sometime about three o'clock A. Yes, sir.Q. What was your Saturday hours, Jim A. I always generallyhave to work from the time I get back there until half pastfour that evening.Q. What time would you usually get back there A. I would leaveaway from there about half past two, ring out the clock, andcome back
  • 0101 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Q. How come you to know she lived there? A. Because I passed herhouse every morning.Q. And the man was named Dalton? A. Yes, sir.Q. Who was with Mr. Frank? A. The lady that was with Mr. Frankwas Miss Daisy Hopkins.Q. Where did she live? A. I don't know, sir, where Miss DaisyHopkins lived.Q. Where did she work? A. She worked up on the fourth floor.Q. Do you know where she is now? A. No sir.Q. Now, what time of day was that? A. It would always be some-where about three or
  • 0102 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Q. Was there a woman in there with him? A. Yes, sir; alady was in there with him.Q. Called you in the presence of the lady? A. Yes, sir.Q. Talked to you in the presence of the lady? A. Yes, sir.Q. He talked to me in the lady's presence.Q. And that was Miss Daisy Hopkins? A. Yes, sir.Q. And that was about three o'clock? A. Or half past three.Q. In July last? A. Yes, sir.Q. What did Mr. Frank say to you in that lady's presence? That'sthe time (first) time he ever
  • 0103 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Q. When this young lady went off and came back and broughtDalton back, where did you see her again? A. I saw her and Mr.Dalton when the come in at the door.Q. You were watching them? A. Yes, sir.Q. Then where did they go? A. Upstairs to Mr. Frank's office.Q. Did you see them go to Mr. Frank's office? A. I heard themwalking in Mr. Frank's office.Q. Then how long did they stay in Mr. Frank's office? A. Theydidn't stay in there long, ten or fifteen minutes I reckon.Q. Then where did
  • 0104 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: elevator? A. No, sir; there isn't a door back of the elevator; there's a big wooden door, just a step there.Q. I know, but it goes back in the back there. A. Yes, sir.Q. Then you opened that door? A. Yes, sir.Q. Then came back and opened that trap door? A. I came and pulled up the trap door.Q. And then they went down there? A. Yes, sir.Q. She said "All right, James"? A. Yes, sir.Q. Then you went and opened that door? A. Yes, sir.Q. She didn't tell you to open
  • 0105 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: I couldn't give you what time they came back up.Q. It was after 3:30 when this window raising started? A. Yes, sirIt was after 3:30 when this window raising started.Q. He told you to go down, they came up after a while?A. Yes, sir, they came up after a while.Q. Came up the same way they went down? A. Yes, sir.Q. Up through the same door? A. Yes, sir.Q. You kept that door locked all the time? A. No, sir, I didn'tkeep it locked, I just kept it shut and stayed there
  • 0106 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: say: "That's all right", and then left.Q. Then he came out behind you and left? A. Yes, sir.Q. Now, that's the first time? A. Yes, sir.Q. Now, when was the next Saturday? A. The next Saturday was mighty near the same thing.Q. Well, what was the next Saturday; I didn't ask you whether it was the same thing or not? A. That was about two weeks after that.Q. Was that in August or in July? A. Well, it was about the last of July or the first of August.Q. Well, do you
  • 0107 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Q Where did he tell you that? A. In the box roomQ. Anybody else present? A. No, sir, not as I knows of.Q. What were you doing in there? A. What was I doing in there, I was looking after the boxes.Q. What did he tell you then? A. He told me, "Now you know what you done for me last Saturday" -Q. He told you: "You know what you done for me last Saturday"?A. The other Saturday, I says: "Yes, sir, I remember". He says: "I want to-put you wise to
  • 0108 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Q. Where were you at? A. I was standing there by the clock.Q. He popped his hand? A. No, sir, he popped his finger.Q. He popped his finger and bowed to you? A. Yes, sir.Q. Then you went down? A. Yes, sir, then I went down.Q. And stood by the door? A. Yes, sir.Q. Didn't look it? A. No sir, I didn't look it; I shut it.Q. Then what next happened? A. I don't know, sir, what next happened.Q. Did you hear Mr. Frank come out of his office at all?A. No,
  • 0109 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: 50001110sat there at the door until he notified me to do that.Q. I'm talking about the time you went and got that man and came back? A. I was standing by the door, yes, sir.Q. Stood there from that on? A. No, sir, I didn't stand there from that on.Q. What did you do? A. I stood there about the trash barrel then.Q. On the first floor? A. Right there by the side.Q. And then you heard them going back? A. I heard them go to Mr. Frank's office, yes, sir.Q. When
  • 0110 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: watched for him and Mr. Dalton, too, before that Thanksgiving day.Q. Give us the best you can, of the next time? A. That was somewhere along in the winter time; I don't know, sir, the exact time.Q. Well, Thanksgiving time is winter time, ain't it Jim?A. Yes sir, but this is before Thanksgiving.Q. How many time before Thanksgiving? A. I watched for him there three times before Thanksgiving Day.Q. Well, you've given me two of these times? A. Yes, sir.Q. When was the the next one--about when? A. I don't know, sir;
  • 0111 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Q. About what time? A. I don't know, sir, I couldn't tell you exactly.Q. Where was you when he told you? A. Right at the elevator.Q. Was it before twelve o'clock? A. I don't know, sir, whether it was twelve o'clock or not.Q. After twelve? A. I don't know whether it was after twelve or not.Q. You don't know anything about that; you can't remember that? A. No sir.Q. Anybody standing around there then? A. There was Gordon Bailey standing there.Q. That's Snowball? A. Yes, sir.Q. Anybody else there? A. Not to
  • 0112 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: A. Yes sir, the three time he said: "I want to put you wise"Q. And that was the three times--say it the three times up tothat time? A. Well, yes sir, to my remembrance it was.Q. You don't know that then? A. No sir, I don't know that.Q. Well, you said that though. A. Yes, sir, I said it.Q. Did he say anything else to you but "I want to put you wise"at that time and place? A. Yes, sir, "I want to put you wiselike I been doing the other Saturdays
  • 0113 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Q. What kind of eyes did she have? A. I don't know, sir, I never paid no attention to hereyes.Q. What kind of hair? A. I don't know, sir, exactly-had hair like Mr. Hooper there got.Q. How do you know Mr. Hooper so well; you seem to know him pretty well, don't you Jim? A. No, sir, I don't know, sir, I have seen Mr. Hooper before.Q. He had a good deal to do with you down there? A. No sir, I seen him once when he come down to the cell
  • 0114 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Thanksgiving Day had on white shoes and stockings.Q. Now, the next day what did she have on? A. The next dayshe had on the same thing, black skirt and white waist.Q. She had on exactly the same thing? A. Yes sir.Q. And this other---There was a girl dressed in green all over?A. Yes, sir, there was a girl dressed in green all over, thislast one.Q. And you don't know who she is? A. No sir; she worked upthere on the fourth floor, but don't know her name.Q. You don't know whether she
  • 0115 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: sweeping up there ever since last January.Q. You saw that little girl every day, that went to meet Mr.Frank, didn't you? A. This last one?Q. Yes. A. I didn't see her every day but I seen her there.Q. Saw her many times and didn't ask who she was? A. No sir,I didn't ask who she was.Q. Don't know who she was? A. No sir, I don't know who she was.Q. Now, when she came in, did she see you when she came in?A. Yes sir, she seen me as she come in.Q.
  • 0116 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: what hour? I met Mr. Frank there that morning about eighto'clock.Q. Anybody else there? A. I didn't see anybody else there.Q. Where did you meet him then? A. At Mr. Frank rightat the door; I was sitting on the box when he come in.Q. That's when he mentioned it to you again? A. That's whenhe taken me on the inside and told me---Q. Tell me the words? A. After he went on the inside, he says:"How are you feeling?" I says: "I'm feeling all right, Mr.Frank". He says: "Come here" he says,
  • 0117 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Q. Now, you had, you say, seen her there a few nights before?A. Yes sir.Q. Sitting in Mr. Frank's office, was she? A. Yes sir.Q. What time? A. Somewhere between eight o'clock,Q. What did you have to do that? A. I had to stack some boxesup on the fourth floor.Q. Eighth floor? You had to stack some boxes? A. No sir, Isaid fourth floor.Q. That was about Thanksgiving Day? A. Yes sir.Q. Was it the same week of Thanksgiving you saw her up there?A. I don't know sir, whether it was the
  • 0118 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: into his office.Q. Where was he standing? A. Standing by the trash barrel, smoking a cigarette.Q. She went upstairs and went into Mr. Frank's office, and you heard her? A. I heard her going towards Mr. Frank's office.Q. You heard her go in there? A. I couldn't hear them go in; I heard her going towards it.Q. Didn't you say you heard those others go in? A. No sir, I said I heard them going towards the office.Q. You didn't say you saw them go in? A. No sir, I said I
  • 0119 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: that you stayed there? A. I reckon so; I don't know how longexactly it was.Q. Then the lady came down? A. No sir. Mr. Frank says: "I'llstamp after this lady comes, and you go and close the door and turnthat right latch"Q. That was the first time he ever told you about the night lock?A. Yes sir.Q. The other times, he told you just to close it?A. Yes sir.Q. But that time he told you to put the night lock on? A. Yes sir,and he says: "I'll stamp, and if everything is
  • 0120 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: and he says: "Yes", and she says: "Well, does he talk much", andhe says: "No, he's the best nigger I've ever seen."Q. She stopped there and looked at you? A. No sir.Q. Didn't you say she stopped and asked Mr. Frank: "Is thatthe nigger?" A. She asked Mr. Frank that.Q. She stopped and said to Mr. Frank: "Is that the nigger?"A. No sir, she didn't stop.Q. She just kept walking? A. Yes sir.Q. Neither stopped, neither one of them stopped?A. No sir, neither one of them stopped at all; she just said
  • 0121 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Q. Then went home? A. No sir, I went to Peters Street and stayed a good while.Q. Drank some more beer over there? A. No sir, I didn't drink no beer over there.Q. Didn't drink but one beer that day? A. I don't know, sir, how many I drank at that saloon on Forsyth and Hunter.Q. About what time did you leave the factory? A. I don't know, sir, it was a little before twelve o'clock, but I don't know what time.Q. So the girl didn't come out of the factory that
  • 0122 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: How long was that after Thanksgiving? A. That is somewhere afterChristmas, way after Christmas, when I watched for him.Q. That was in the dead of winter, then? A. Yes sir, in thedead of winter.Q. About when? A. About January, I reckon.Q. About the middle of January, or when? A. I don't know, middlefirst or last, I can't say--somewhere in January.Q. How do you know it was somewhere in January? A. Because itwas right after the first of the year.Q. Well, if it was right after the first of the year you know
  • 0123 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Q. You can't remember what he told you except he was going to have a man and two ladies after awhile? A. Said; "A man and two ladies will be there this evening" and I said I may can make some money off this man.Q. Said what? A. That I could get to make a piece of money off this man.Q. That was all he said to you about that? A. Yes sir.Q. Didn't tell you when they would come? A. Said be there this evening about the same time.Q. You didn't
  • 0124 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Q. Broad, open daylight? A. Yes sir.Q. What time did the man and the ladies come? A. Somewhere abouthalf past two or three o'clock.Q. About half past two or three o'clock, they came? A. Yes sir.Q. They come right in? A. No sir, they didn't come right in.The two ladies stayed back; the young man, he come in. He askedme was Mr. Frank in the office; he says: "Mr. Frank put you wise?I says: "Mr. Frank put me wise, how?" He says: "Didn't he tellyou to watch the door, two ladies and
  • 0125 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Q. Give me a description of those young ladies?A. Well, I disremember what the ladies did have on.Q. Can't you remember what either one of them had on?A. No sir, I can't remember what either of them had on; I didn't pay much attention.Q. Can't described either one of those women at all, can you?A. No sir.Q. What sort of looking man was he? A. He was tall, slim built, heavy man.Q. Ever see him before? A. I have seen him there talking to Mr. Holloway.Q. Did he work there? A. No
  • 0126 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Q. Well, I am talking about January. Is that the last time you watched for him until this time? A. Yes sir, I think it was----if I am not mistaken.Q. Well you ain't mistaken about it, are you Jim? A. I don't know sir, I couldn't tell you about that.Q. You have no recollection of any other time? A. No sir, no recollection of any other time.Q. You have got no recollection, you can't remember it, if you did? A. Well, I don't know sir-----Q. Now let us take that time about
  • 0127 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Q. You mean you watched for him one Saturday and then the secondSaturday you watched for him again? A. Then on the second Saturdayafter that, I watched for him.Q. You missed a Saturday? A. Yes sir.Q. And then you watched the next Saturday? A. Yes sir.Q. That is what you say about it now? A. Yes sir, that is what Isay now and what I said before.Q. Now the Saturday after you watched for him the second time,what did you do? A. I don't know sir, I disremember what I did.Q. You
  • 0128 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: best recollection? A. Yes sir.Q. Of course, you don't know except from you best recollection.Then you didn't watch for him until Thanksgiving Day?A. Until Thanksgiving Day.Q. What did you do the Saturday before Thanksgiving Day? A. Idon't remember what I did.Q. What did you do the Saturday after Thanksgiving Day?A. I don't know what I did.Q. And the next Saturday? A. Well, the next Saturday, I couldtell you what I did that Saturday.Q. And the next Saturday? A. Well, I don't know, sir, what Idid the next Saturday.Q. And the next? A.
  • 0129 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: A. Yes sir, after Thanksgiving Day.Q. About the last of September? A. After Thanksgiving Day,yes sir.Q. About the last of September? A. After Thanksgiving Day, yessir.Q. Now Jim, you don't remember any of these dates?A. No sir, I don't remember any of these dates. I can't tellabout them.Q. Let us see how much money, you drew that Saturday that you watchedfor him? how much money did you draw that day?A. I don't know, sir.Q. What time did you draw it? A. I don't know, sir, what time Idrew it.Q. Did you draw
  • 0130 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Q. How much did you draw? A. I don't know, sir.Q. Now, that third time, on the day before Thanksgiving, thatis, three times before Thanksgiving, according to your recol-lection? A. Yes sir.Q. Now did you draw your money that week? A. Before ThanksgivingI couldn't tell you about that.Q. You don't know whether you drew your pay or whether somebodydrew it for you? A. No sir.Q. Or how much you drew? A. No sir.Q. You don't remember that, do you? A. No sir.Q. When did you draw your pay, before or after Thanksgiving,that
  • 0131 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Q. When did you leave that day? A. I don't know, sirQ. Who did you see at the factory that day, that you remember?A. Well, I saw, I reckon, most everybody there.Q. Well, who do you remember seeing there? A. I remember seeingMr. Frank.Q. Do you remember seeing Mr. Frank? A. Yes sir.Q. The day before Thanksgiving? A. Yes sir.Q. Did you see him the day after Thanksgiving?A. Yes sir, I saw him the day after Thanksgiving.Q. You remember those two facts well? A. Yes sir, I rememberthose two.Q. You saw Mr.
  • 0132 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Q. Well, you know that was $1.50? A. No sir, I said it was $1.25.Q. Well, outside of the factory, do you remember what you gotfor your services? A. Outside of the factory, I remember onceI got a half a dollar, then, again, I remember getting half adollar.Q. That is when you were watching for him, you say?A. Yes sir.Q. And you got how much on Thanksgiving Day? A. I got $1.25.Q. The day before that? The day just before that, I don'tremember just how much I got from him that day.Q.
  • 0133 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Thanksgiving morning? A. I didn't see him Thanksgiving morning,but I saw him the day before Thanksgiving.Q. That is the time when you heard him talk talking in thepresence of Snowball? A. Yes sir.Q. He didn't hesitate to talk for Snowball? A. No sir.Q. He talked before Snowball just like he did before you?A. Yes sir.Q. The first time he did that was Thanksgiving Day, that he talkedbefore Snowball? A. Not Thanksgiving Day, no sir.Q. The day before Thanksgiving? A. Yes sir, the day before.Q. When was that when you and him and
  • 0134 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Q. How long had Snowball worked at the factory? A. I don't knowsir ____Q. Now, that time when you watched in January, was Snowballthere that day--I believe you said it was in January?A. Yes sir, I said I watched one time in January.Q. Well, was Snowball there? A. I don't know whether he was ornot.Q. Now, the only time you ever heard Mr. Frank say anything infront of Snowball was that time you have just mentioned?Thanksgiving is that what you said? A. Yes sir.Q. You heard him say something before Snowball then?A.
  • 0135 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: you watched for him? A. I couldn't give you the date. I couldn't tell you the date about it at all______Q. How long was that before the day you watched for him?A. I don't know, just directly after Mr. Frank had come there.Q. That was after he had that talk with you that you are talking about? A. After he had what talk with me?Q. The one that he had with you in the elevator?A. Yes sir, that was after that time.Q. The first time you ever saw him have any talk
  • 0136 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Q. When did Miss Daisy Hopkins work there? A. Oh, she worked in 1912.Q. 1912? A. Yes sir.Q. You are certain of that? A. Yes sir, I am certain she worked there in 1912.Q. What floor did she work on. A. She worked on the fourth floorQ. The fourth Floor? A. Yes sir.Q. And she worked there in 1912? A. Yes sir.Q. What time in 1912 did she quit there? A. I don't know what time.Q. About when, Jim? A. I don't know when she quit there.Q. What time of the year
  • 0137 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Q. You don't remember when she left? A. No sir, I don't remember that.Q. Was she married or a single lady? A. I don't know.Q. Now, describe Miss Daisy to us? A. Well, Miss Daisy, she was a low lady, kind of heavy, and she was pretty, low, chunky, kind of heavy weight, and she was pretty.Q. Can't you give a better description of her than that? A. No sir, that is the best I can give of her.Q. What sort of color hair did she have? A. Well, I don't remember
  • 0138 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Q. You say she was a white lady? A. Yes sir, and she was low and ohunky.Q. How old was she? A. I don't know how old she was.Q. How old did she look to be? A. She looked to be like about 23 years old.Q. About 23 years old? A. Yes sir.Q. Was she working there when you went there or not?A. I don't know.Q. You don't know? A. No sir.Q. The only time you can remember was that she worked from June, 1912, until Christmas, 1912? A. Yes sir, about
  • 0139 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Q. You don't remember the date now? A. No sir.Q. You don't remember his name? A. I know his name was Dalton.Q. What else besides Dalton? A. No sir, I don't know his first name.Q. You don't know where he lived? A. No sir.Q. Or where he works? A. No sir.Q. Describe Mr. Dalton to me? A. Do what?Q. Tell me what kind of a looking man Mr. Dalton was?A. He was a slim looking man, and tall with it.Q. A slim looking man, and tall with it? A. Yes sir.Q. And
  • 0140 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Q. Then he was about the size of Mr. Arnold, Mr. Dalton was? A.Yes sir, just about that size.Q. How old a man did Mr. Dalton look to be? A. He looked to be aman somewhere about 35 years old.Q. About 35 years old? A. Yes sir.Q. You don't know where he lived? A. No sir.Q. You don't know anything about that? A. No sir. I don'tknow where he lived at.Q. How many times did you ever see him? A. I don't know aboutthat.Q. Did you see him around the factory? A.
  • 0141 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Q. What date was that, about when? A. I don't know, it was on aSaturday, I disremember the time.Q. That is the time you have already told about. You havedone told about that? A. Yes sir, I have done told about it.Q. This morning? A. Yes sir.Q. What month was that? A. I don't know, somewhere about thelast of August, I reckon.Q. About the last of August, you reckon? A. Yes sir.Q. When did you see him again? A. I didn't see him no more, Idon't reckon, until along up to about
  • 0142 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: seen Mr. Dalton now in about a month or more.Q. Where did you see him the last time? A. The detectivesbrought him down there to the station house, and said had Iever seen him about in there.Q. And you told them what you knew? A. Yes sir, I told them aboutwhat I knew.Q. And you haven't seen Mr. Dalton since then? A. No sir.Q. Now Jim, how was Mr. Dalton dressed the first time you eversaw him? A. Well, I disremember how he was dressed.Q. Can't you give us any help about
  • 0143 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Q. Did he have any whiskers? A. No sir, he didn't have any whiskers.Q. And you don't remember whether he ever had any mustache? A. No sir, I can't remember whether he had a mustache or not.Q. You wouldn't want to say about that? A. No sir, I wouldn't want to say about that, because I don't remember about that.Q. Now, take the first day you said you waited there for Mr. Frank. Did you see anybody, Mr. Darley, that day about the factory, or Mr. Holloway? A. The first Saturday?Q. Yes,
  • 0144 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Q. You don't think you saw him? A. No sir, I don't think I saw him.Q. He was sick? A. He was sick that Saturday.Q. He was sick on that Saturday? A. Two Saturdays in June.Q. He was sick one Saturday when you watched? A. Yes sir.Q. About what date was it; about what date was it, when you watched, when he was sick? A. It was somewhere about three o'clock I reckon.Q. What month was it that old man Holloway was sick when you watched? A. I don't know whether he
  • 0145 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Q. About what time? A. Well, it was somewhere about the last ofAugust.Q. Last of August? A. Yes sir.Q. Well, now, did you see anybody that day? Was Mr.Holloway sick that day, too? He was sick that day, too, wasn'the? A. No sir, he wasn't sick that day.Q. Did you see him. A. Yes sir, I saw him that day.Q. What time did he leave that day? A. I don't know; he leftabout two o'clock I reckon.Q. Don't reckon, please, Jim, tell us if you have any memoryabout it, say so, and
  • 0146 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Q. Yes that is right, Well now, that day Mr. Darley was there that day? A. Yes, sir I remember seeing him there that day.Q. Was Mr. Schiff there? A. Yes sir. Wolf was there that day.Q. What time did Mr. Darley leave? A. I don't know what time he left.Q. What time did Mr. Schiff leave? A. I don't know what time he left.Q. What time did Mr. Holloway leave? A. Mr. Holloway left away from there about half past two.Q. Do you remember that? A. Yes, sir, I can remember
  • 0147 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Q. The next time you watched was right after Christmas?A. No sir, the next time I watched was Thanksgiving Day, then--Q. You said awhile ago September was after Thanksgiving?A. Yes sir, after Thanksgiving day.Q. All right. Well, now Thanksgiving Day, the day you have told about in January, who did you see there in January, I mean who of the force? A. I disremember now who I did see in January when I was there that morning.Q. You disremember? A. Yes sir, I disremember.Q. Can you remember anybody you saw there? A.
  • 0148 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Q. You can't remember whether he was there or not?A. No sir.Q. You wouldn't swear that he was not there? A. I will swearI didn't see him; I will swear he wasn't in the office withMr. Frank.Q. You swear to that? A. Yes sir.Q. Will you swear he wasn't there that day? A. I will swearMr. Irby was working in the office.Q. Thanksgiving-Day? A. No sir, he wasn't working in theoffice on Thanksgiving.Q. The next time, was there any ladies working on the fourthfloor? A. I don't remember.Q. You don't remember whether
  • 0149 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Q. didn't you say he always gave you that signal? A. No sir,I didn't say he always gave me that signal.Q. Gave it to you Thanksgiving? A. Yes sir.Q. And repeated it to you that day again, the 26th? A. Yes sir.The witness Conley was examined by the solicitor, who broughtout the direct questions and answers supra, and was then cross-questioned by the defendant, when counsel brought out thecross-questions-and-answers supra.Thereafter, and while the witness Conley was still on thestand, Defendant's counsel moved to rule out, exclude, andwithdraw from the jury each and
  • 0150 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: he had committed murder, but because he was accused of depravity and degeneracy.When the third of the direct questions here sought to be excluded was asked by the solicitor the defendant objected because the evidence sought would be immaterial. The Court sustained the objection but the solicitor continued with the balance of the direct questions and answers here objected to and the cross questions were thereafter asked and the answers given. The Court therefore erred in not excluding and withdrawing all of said testimony.14. Because the Court erred in not ruling out,
  • 0151 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Mr. Dalton---The lady that was there was a tall built lady, heavy weight, she was nice looking, had on a blue looking dress with white dots in it, had on a greyish looking coat with kind of tails to it, white slippers and white stockings.Cross Examination------The first time I watched for Mr. Frank was sometime during last summer, about in July. I would be there sweeping and Mr. Frank come out and called me in the office. That was on a Saturday, about three o'clock. As to what Mr. Dalton would do,
  • 0152 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: what you done for me last Saturday. I want to put you wise, thisSaturday". I says: "All right, what time". He says: "Oh, abouthalf past". He got back from lunch about a quarter past two,then Mr. Holloway left, and then Miss Daisy Hopkins came into hisoffice. Mr. Frank came out, popped his fingers and bowed to me-bowed his head to me, and then went back in the office. Then, Iwent down and stood by the door. I didn't look it; I shut it.I don't know what happened next! I didn't hear him
  • 0153 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: came out and stamped right above the trash barrel. I was downstaire about the trash barrel. He told me he was going tostamp two times; then he stamped, and I opened the door, andthen I came back and sat on the box about an hour and a half.Mr. Frank says: "I'll stamp after this lady comes, and you goand shut the door and turn that night latch" That's the firsttime he told me to lock the door, and he says: "If everything isall right, you take and kick against the door". And
  • 0154 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: room when he told me to watch for him that time. I don't knowif he knew Snowball was there or not. The day before Thanksgivingwhen he talked to Snowball, we were on-the elevator. Snowballcould have heard anything that was said. Mr. Frank saw Snowballstanding there-----Miss Daisey Hopkins, worked at the factory fromJune 1912 until Christmas. I worked on the same floor with her.I am sure she worked there from June until about Christmas. Shewas a low lady, kind of heavy, she was pretty, chunky, kind ofheavy weight. I remember that she was
  • 0155 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: I think some ladies were working up on thefourth floor. I don't know about the third time, and I don'tknow whether anybody was working there Thanksgiving afternoonor not, I didn't see Mr. Schiff at all that day. I will swearhe wasn't in Mr. Frank's office that day. I don't rememberwhether any ladies worked there the other times I was watch-ing, or not......I don't know whether I told them (detectives)about watching for Frank at that time - I haven't got anyopinion about it, I haven't got any recollection. He told meabout stamping and
  • 0156 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: The Court ruled that such evidence would be immaterial, butafter this ruling the solicitor brought out the direct testi-mony and excluded. After the direct testimony supra had been brought outand excluded. After the direct testimony supra had been brought outthe cross testimony supra, here sought to be withdrawn was alsobrought out in an effort to modify or explain the directevidence. Under the circumstances the Court ought to havegranted the motion to exclude and withdraw all such evidenceand for failing to do so committed error.Movant assigns as error the action of the Court
  • 0157 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image:---17. Because the Court permitted, over the objection of defendant's counsel made when the same was offered, that the same was irrelevant and immaterial, the State, by Mangum, to testify that Conley and another party went down from the pencil factory to the jail, that he had a conversation with Mr. Frank about confronting Conley, Frank then being on the fourth floor of the jail; that Chief Beavers, Chief Lanford, and Mr. Scott, with Conley, came to the jail to see Frank, and they asked him if they could see him; that he
  • 0158 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: "I discovered, as I say, at that time, that our ideas about howquickly cabbage digested were rather erroneous, and as Iremarked a moment ago, I observed that the stomach freed itselfof a mixture of cabbage and bread just about as quickly as weonly gave bread alone; the amount of recovery on the part ofthe mucous membrane in the way of sufficient gastric juiceswas about the same practically or probably a little bit morerecovery with cabbage."It is the only way I can get at it, it is the only realknowledge I have on
  • 0159 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: certain that this girl either came to her death orpossiblythe blow on her head at any rate, a very short time, perhapsthree quarters of an hour or half an hour or forty minutes,or something like that, before death occurred. I then began anumber of experiments with some gentlemen who had normal stom-ache with a view of judging of the time." I had the mother of the girl to cook some cabbage and itwas given to people with absolutely normal stomachs; that Iknow from investigations of their stomachs." I will state in general
  • 0160 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: indicated in every instance,from 38 to 70 minutes in every single instance, the cabbagewas practically digested, practically altogether so.Over objections made as is above stated, the Court permittedthis testimony to go to the jury and in doing so committed prejudicial error. Experts can testify from the given state of anyscience, but cannot explain the process or results of particularexperiments made by themselves.20. Because the Court permitted the witness Harris to tes-tify as follows:"I wish to say that I made a microscopic examination of thosecontents of the stomachs, and while I found in
  • 0161 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: an average of something like anywhere from 50 to 60 or 70 cubiccentimeters, or, say from a half to a third of what was foundin this case, and it was plainly evident that none of this materi-al, had gone into the small intestine, because that wasexamined for it from the mouth out to the beginning of thelarge intestine, which is many feet away from it in the neigh-borhood of something like 25 feet away, and there was verylittle food found in the small intestine, none at all, as a factin the small
  • 0162 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: basement; that he saw Conley there when he went there; thatsometimes when he saw him in his office there would be ladiesthere, sometimes there would be two and sometimes one; hedid not know how often he saw Conley there, but sometimes he wou-ld give him a quarter, that he did that a half dozen or more timesthat he went to the factory about once a week for a half dozenweeks, that he saw Frank there in the evenings and in the daytimes, sometimes he would see cold drinks in the office,Coco Cola,
  • 0163 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Q. How many times?A. I don't know; three, or four, or five times.Q. Were you ever in the office of Leo M. Frank?A. Yes sir.Q. On what occasion?A. I have been there two or three times with Miss Daisey.Q. Where was Frank when you were there?A. He was in the office; I don't know whose office it was, but he was in the office.Q. Were you ever down in the basement?A. Yes sir.Q. What part of the basement did you visit? Can you tell me on that diagram (indicating).A. I have been
  • 0164 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Q. What else?A. Some beer, some times.A. Some beer?A. Yes sir.Q. Were those ladies doing any stenographic work up there?A. I never seed them doing any writing. I never stayed there long, but I never seed them doing any writing.Q. You never saw anything of that kind going on?A. No sir.The court permitted these questions and answers to be heard by the jury, over the objection of the defendant, aforesaid, and committed error, for the reasons aforesaid. His evidence was particularly prejudicial to the defendant, because the solicitor insisted in his argument
  • 0165 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: the motion of defendant's counsel to rule out the testimony ofthe witness Conley tending to show acts of perversion on thepart of the defendant and acts of immorality wholly discon-nected with and disassociated from this crime. (Such evidencebeing set out and described in grounds 13 and 14 of this motion)The Court declined to rule out said testimony, and immediatelyupon the statement of the Court that he would let such testimonyremain in evidence before the jury, there was instant, pro-nounced and continuous applause throughout the crowded courtroom wherein the trial was being had,
  • 0166 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: witness Harris was upon the stand, the crowd laughed jeeringlywhen Mr. Arnold, one of the defendant's counsel, objected toa comment of the solicitor, and that, too, in the presence ofthe jury.And again,during the trial, when Mr. Arnold, one of thedefendant's course, objected to a question asked, the followingcolloquy took place:" Mr. Arnold: I object to that you Honor; that is, enteringthe orders on that book merely; that is not the questions heis asking now at all.The Court: What is the question he is asking now?(Referring to questions asked by the Solicitor General).Mr.
  • 0167 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: The Court admitted these samples of partly digested cabbagetaken from the stomach of others, as aforesaid, and in doing so,committed error for the reasons above stated, and for the further reason that there was no evidence, as the defendant's counselcontend, that the same circumstances and conditions surroundedthese other parties in the eating and digestion of the cabbageas surrounded Mary Phagan in the eating and digestion on herpart and no evidence that the stomachs of these other partieswere in the same condition as was Mary Phagan's.26. Because the Court, in permitting the witness,
  • 0168 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: above stated. This was prejudicial to the defendant, because itwas contended by the State that this witness, Harry Scott, whowas one of the Pinkerton detectives, and had been employed toferret out the crime, by Frank acting for the National PencilCompany, had not promptly informed the officials about the factof Mrs White's seeing this negro and that such failure was evidencepointing to the guilt of Frank.This witness was one of the investigators for the PinkertonDetective Agency, who was employed by Frank acting for theNational Pencil Company to ferret out this crime.28. Because the
  • 0169 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: crime he accompanied Mary Phagan from a point on Bellwood Ave.,to the center of the City of Atlanta, by showing that on April27th at the house of Epps, he asked George, together with hissister, when was the last time they saw Mary Phagan. In reply,the sister of Epps said she had seen Mary on the previousThursday, but the witness Epps said nothing about having come totown with Mary Phagan the day of the murder but did say he hadridden to town with her in the mornings of other days occasionallyUpon cross examination,
  • 0170 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: it was wholly immaterial as to what his custom previous to thattime had been.31. Because, during the trial the following colloquy took placebetween the solicitor and the witness Schiff:-Q. Isn't the dressing room back behind these doors?A. Yes, it is back behind these doors.Q. That is the fastening of that door, isn't it?A. Yes.Q. And isn't the dressing room back there then?A. That isn't the way it is situated.Q. It isn't the way it is situated?A. It is not, no, sir.Q. Why, Mr. Schiff, if this is the door right here and---A.
  • 0171 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: 32. Because the Court erred in declining to allow the witnessMiss Hall to testify that on the morning of April 36th, andbefore the murder was committed, Mr. Frank called her over thetelephone, asking her to come to the pencil factory to do stenographic work, stating at the time he called her that he had so muchwork to do that it would take him until six o'clock that day toget it done.The defendant contends that this testimony was part of theres gestae and ought to have been heard by the Court, and fail-ure
  • 0172 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: A. No sir.Q. With J. M. Gantt, the man who was bookkeeper and was turned off there?A. No sir, I never told him any such thing.Q. No such thing ever happened?A. No sir.Mr. Arnold: Before the examination progresses any further, I want to move to rule out the witness said there wasn't any truth in it, but I want to move to rule out the questions and answers in relation to what he said Frank proposed to do to him right now. I think it is grossly improper and grossly immaterial; the
  • 0173 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: everybody knows are incompetent.The Court: Well, I sustain your objection.Mr. Arnold: If the effort is made again, your Honor, I amgoing to move for a mistrial. No man can get a fair trial withsuch innuendoes and insinuations as these made against him.The Court: Have you any further questions, Mr. Dorsey?Mr. Dorsey: That is all I wanted to ask him. I will bringGantt in to impeach him.The Court: Well, I have ruled that all out.Mr. Dorsey: Well, we will let your Honor rule on Gantt too.The assertion by the solicitor that this witness
  • 0174 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: sation with Mrs. Freeman and Miss Hall; this testimony was stronglydisputed by the solicitor. Lemmie Quinn's statement that he wasin Frank's office just before going into the rear, that wasof the greatest moment to the defendant, because it strongly tend-ed to dispute the contention of the State that Mary Phagan was kill-ed between twelve and half past.The Court erred in ruling out and declining to hear this, forthe reasons above stated. The testimony was relevant, material,and part of the Res gestae and should have been sent to the jury.35. Because the Court
  • 0175 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: The Court, over the objections of the defendant, on the groundsstated, permitted this testimony to go to the jury and in doingso erred.This was prejudicial to the defendant because the solicitorinsisted that the finding of the envelope and stick were con-cealed from the authorities.37. Because the Court erred in permitting the witness Leech,a street car inspector, at the instance of the solicitor andover the objections of the defendant that same was irrelevant,immaterial, and incompetent, to testify that he had seen streetcar men come in ahead of their schedule time. That he hadseen
  • 0176 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: This was prejudicial to the defendant, because the crew on the English Ave., car upon which the little girl, Mary Phagan, came to town, testified that she got on their car at ten minutes to twelve. That under their schedule they should reach the corner of Broad and Marietta Street at 7-1/2 minutes past twelve. That they were on their schedule time on April 26th and did reach that place at 12-07 or 12-07-1/2. What other crews did at other times or even what this crew did on other occasions was wholly
  • 0177 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: "When the witness Conley was brought to the jail Mr. Roberts came to the cell and wanted Frank to see Conley. I sent word through Mr. Roberts that Frank didn't care to see him. Mr. Frank knew that the detectives were down there and afterwards they brought Conley up there and of course Mr. Frank knew he was there. I knew and Mr. Frank knew he was there. Mr. Frank was at once side and I acted as spokesman. Mr. Frank would not see any of the city detectives. Frank gave as
  • 0178 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: absence of his own counsel, was evidence of guilt.46. (j). Because the court permitted Miss Mary Pirk to be askedthe following questions and to make the following answers oncross examination made by the Solicitor:Q. You never heard of a single thing immoral during that fiveyears--that's true? (Referring to the time she worked at thePencil Factory)A. Yes sir, that's true.Q. You never knew of his (Frank's) being guilty of a thing thatwas immoral during those five years--is that true?A. Yes sir.Q. You never heard a single soul during that time discuss it?A. No
  • 0179 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: ould acts of immorality with women be heard, even on crossexamination, as evidence of bad character, and reputation, uponFrank's trial for the murder of Mary Phagan.Lasciviousness is not one of the character traits involved in acase of murder and can not be heard in a murder trial, evenwhen the defendant has put his character in issue.41. Because the Court permitted the witness W. D. WcWorth totestify, at the request of the Solicitor General, over theobjection of the defendant made at the time the testimony wasoffered, that the same was immaterial." Mr. Pierce
  • 0180 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: defendant, made as above stated and in doing so committederror, for the reasons herein stated.This was prejudicial to the defendant, because the SolicitorGeneral, contended that his failure to sooner report the findingof the club and the envelope to the police were circumstances ag-ainst Frank. These detectives were not employed by Frank, but byFrank for the National Pencil Company, and movant contends thathe is not bound by what they did or failed to do.The Court should have so instructed the jury.43 (66) Because the Court permitted the witness Irene Jack-son, at the instance
  • 0181 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: A. I didn't time him; he just came and looked and turned andwalked out.Q. Came in the dressing room?A. Just came to the door.Q. Came into the door of the dressing room?A. Yes.Q. How was Miss Ermille Mayfield dressed at that time?A. She had off her top dress, and was holding her old dress inher hand to put it on.Q. Now, you reported that to the forelady there?A. I did not but Ermille did.Q. Now did you talk or not to anybody or hear of anybody ex-cept Miss Ermille Wayfield talking about
  • 0182 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Q. Now when was it that he run in there on Miss Ermile Mayfield?A. It was the middle of the week after we had started to work,I don't remember the time.Q. The middle of the week after you had started to work?A. Yes sir.Q. Was that the first time you ever heard of his going in thedressing room, or anybody?A. Yes.Q. That was the first time?A. Yes sir.Q. Then that was reported to this forelady?A. Yes sir.Q. Then when was the second time that you heard he went in there?A. He went
  • 0183 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: that room and stand and stare at them?A. Yes sir, I have heard something, but I don't rememberexactly.Q. You heard that, how often did you hear that talked?A. I don't remember.Q. You don't remember how often you heard them say he walkedin there and stood and stared at them?A. I don't remember.Q. You don't remember that; well now, you said about three timesthose things occurred, and you have given us two, MissWayfield and your sister, what was the other occasion?A. Miss Mamie Kitchens.Q. Miss Mamie Kitchens?A. Yes sir.Q. Mr. Frank walked in
  • 0184 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: A. No sir.Q. He didn't come in the room?A. He pushed the door open and stood in the door.Q. Stood in the door, what kind of dressing room was that?A. It was----just had a mirror in it, you mean to describe the inside?Q. Just describe it, was it all just one room?A. Yes sir, and there were a few lockers for the ladies.Q. A few lockers around the walls, a place where the girls changed their street dress and got into their working dress, and vice versa?A. Yes sir.Q. Now, what else
  • 0185 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: A. No sir.Q. Was that before or after he had been in the dressing room?A. I don't remember.Q. Well, he pushed the door open and stood in the door, did he?A. Stood in the door.Q. Looked in and smiled?A. Yes sir.Q. Didn't you say that?A. I don't remember now, he smiled or made some kind of a face which looked like a smile, like smiling at Ermile Mayfield.Q. At Ermile Mayfield, that day she was undressed?A. But he didn't speak, yes sir.Q. He didn't say a word, did he?A. No sir.Q. Did
  • 0186 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: of Mary Phagan was taken from the office floor to the cellar ofthe factory?Q. Now, Mr. Branch, take this exhibit and that picture, and takeup Conley now, and give every move he made?A. Am I to give you the time he arrived there? (Pencil Factory)Q. Yes, give the time he arrived.A. I will have to give that approximately; I was to be thereat 12 o'clock, and I was a few minutes late, and Conley hadn'tarrived there then, and we waited until they brought himthere, which was probably ten or fifteen minutes later,
  • 0187 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: A. No sir, I know the time I arrived there and the time Ileft the factory.Q. First, I want you to state what he said he did, and what hesaid Mr. Frank did, and then come to the time business?A. I don't quite understand what you told to do.Q. Just go ahead and tell what Conley said he said, and whatConley said Mr. Frank said, and show what Conley did the dayyou were over there, take it up right back here where the bodywas and go on with it, leaving out, however,
  • 0188 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: and carry it back, and he put the body on his shoulder and car-ried it back to this sawdust which is away back here, and thathe came on back and there was something else there which he saidhe threw on this trash pile, and Mr. Frank was up, he said, inthe cubby hole, he said, somewhere back there, and later helead us up there, and that Mr. Frank told him to run the elevatorup, so Conley and the officers and the rest of us who werewith him came up on the elevator,
  • 0189 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Q. What time was it when Conley got there?A. I should judge it was about a quarter past twelve, I didn't look at my watch.Q. A quarter past twelve, what time did you get there.A. I must have gotten there five minutes before he did.Q. Then what time did you leave?A. I left about one o'clock.Q. What time did he begin?A. They rushed him right up the steps and probably two or three minutes after he got up there, he began this enactment, and he went very rapidly, in fact, we sort
  • 0190 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Q. How much after one?A. I do not know, probably five or ten minutes.Q. One-ten then, now, how much of the time during that time you were there did it take Conley to act what he acted, leaving out the conversation he had with the different men?A. That would be a difficult thing for me to estimate, while he was acting, he was acting very rapidly, he kept us on the run.Q. All right, now, leave out now the time that it took this man to answer the questions that were put
  • 0191 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: to go and illustrate that affidavit when he says now on thestand that much of it was a lie, and that it did not happen thatway at all; that this evidence was of another transaction, not binding on this defendant.45. Because the Court declined to allow Dr. David Vaxx togive testimony in behalf of the defendant as to the character ofthe Jewish organization known as B'Nai Brith. Defendant's counselstated at the time that Dr. Vaxx would testify that while the B'Nai Brith was an international Jewish charitable organization,its charity did not extend
  • 0192 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: A. No sir.Q. You say you have never heard of any act of immorality on the part of Mr. Frank prior to April 26, 1913?A. No sir, I did not.Q. You never talked with Herne Stanton or H. V. Baker, the conductor or motorman?Q. I will put it that way then: you never heard that the Saturday before little Mary Phagan met her death, Mr. Frank went out on the Hapeville car on which Herne Stanton and H. W. Baker were in charge, and that he had his arm around the little
  • 0193 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: showed me where to put the pencils. Nobody was in there but Mr.Frank and Mary at the time I went in there. Mary was going to herwork when Mr. Frank stopped to talk to her. Mary told him thatshe had to go to work. Mr. Frank was talking about he was theSuperintendent of the pencil factory. He told her that hewas the Superintendent of the pencil factory and that hewanted to speak to her and she told him she had to go to workand I never did hear any more replies from
  • 0194 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: "The President ( of the Board Dr. Westmoreland) then addressedthe Board at length on his reasons for thinking that the Sec-retary should be requested to resign, the subjects dealt withbeing too numerous and too lengthy to be included here in theirentirety. After the President's address, the Board adjournedand reassembled again at four O'clock in the afternoon, at whichtime Dr. Harris' side of the controversy was heard."" The Secretary not having been present at what transpiredfollowing this was not in a position to take note as to theproceeding, but was informed by the
  • 0195 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: tion, which had been unanimously adopted by the Board on motion of Dr. Harbin, seconded by Dr. Brown--the resolution having been drawn by a committee appointed by the Board, consisting of Drs. Benedict, Taylor and Doughty.-" That the committee appointed to frame a resolution expressing the opinion of the Board with regard to the charges preferred against the Secretary by the President of the Board in a report to the Governor, and upon which they are called upon to act, beg to report as follows:" Resolved; That the members of the Board
  • 0196 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: President of the State Board of Health and Dr. Harris who hadbeen and was its Secretary. This row between the doctors statedis utterly immaterial and irrelevant and was harmful to thedefendant because it tended to discredit the testimony of Dr.Westmoreland who resigned from the Board and to sustain the testi-mony of Dr. Harris who remained as Secretary of the Board after Dr.Westmoreland's resignation.- 49. Because the court permitted the witness E. H. Pickettto testify over the objection made when the testimony was offeredthat it was wholly and entirely irrelevant, immaterial incom-petent, illegal
  • 0197 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: " I am a motorman for the Georgia Railway and Power Company,running on April 26, 1913, on Marietta to Stock Yards andDecatur street car. The Cooper and English ave., run is on thesame route from Broad and Marietta Street to Jones Ave., Prior toApril 26, 1913, the English Ave. car run by Waches and Hollis onit did run to Broad and Marietta streets ahead of time, howmuch ahead I cannot say positively. About April 28th and subse-quent thereto Waches and Hollis, in charge of the English Av-car, about twelve o'clock when they
  • 0198 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: the hour and the Cooper Street car is due seven minutes afterthe hour. In order for the English Ave. car to cut off theWhite City car, the Cooper Street car would have to be ahead oftime, that is the English Avenue car would have to be ahead oftime. If the White City car was on time at 12:05, the EnglishAve. car would have to get there before that time to cut itoff. That happens quite often. I do know that the car thatMathis and Hollis were running did come into town ahead
  • 0199 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Fair Street car, which is due at 12:05 at the junction of Marietta and Broad Sts., the Fair street car would be on its schedule. I have compared my watch with Mathis' watch prior to April 26th. There was at times a difference of from 20 to 35 or 40 seconds. We are both supposed to carry the right time. When I compared my watch with Mathis' I suspect mine was correct, as I just had left it the day I looked at Mathis' watch, and mine was 20 seconds difference and
  • 0200 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: three weeks and the fact that the clocks were not keeping accuratetime three weeks before the trial was immaterial, and the evidencethereon tended to mislead and confuse the jury. Gantt did notwork at the factory during the three weeks just prior to thecrime, and his testimony as to the clocks related to the time hedid work at the factory.54. Because the Court permitted the witness Scott to testifyin behalf of his Agency, over the objection of the defendant,that the same was irrelevant, immaterial and incompetent, sub-stantially as follows:"I got hold of the
  • 0201 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Myrtle Cato, Mrs. C. D. Donegan, Mrs. H. R. Johnson, Miss MarieKaret, Miss Nellie Pettie, Miss Mary Davis, Mrs. Mary E.Place, Miss Carrie Smith and Miss Estelle Winkle to testifythat they were acquainted with the general character of LeoM. Frank prior to April 26, 1913, with reference to lasciviousnessand his relations to women and girls and that it was bad.The Court admitted this evidence over the objections abovestated, and in doing so erred for the reason herein stated.In determining general character in cases of murder, lascivious-ness or misconduct with women is not
  • 0202 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: " I know Miss Rebecca Carson, I have seen her go twice into theprivate ladies dressing room with Leo M. Frank."The Court permitted this testimony over the objection of thedefendant made as is aforesaid and in doing so committed error.The Court stated that this evidence was admitted to dispute thewitness they had called.It was wholly immaterial to the issues involved in this casewhether Frank did or did not go into a private dressing roomwith Miss Carson. It did, however, prejudice the jury as indicat-ing Frank's immorality with reference to women.59. Because the
  • 0203 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Court before the jury had retired to consider of their verdict andbefore the Court began his charge to the jury.This request was a legal and pertinent one, particularlyadjusted to the facts of the case and should have been given, andthe Court in declining to give it committed error, although thegeneral principle involved might have been given in the originalcharge.51. Because the Court refused to give the following pertinentlegal charge in the language requested:"If the jury believe from the evidence that the theory orhypothesis that James Conley may have committed this crimeis just
  • 0204 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: this is sufficient to acquit him and it is not necessary that heshould go further in his proof and exclude every possible idea ofhis guilt. No such burden is upon the defendant.This request was submitted in writing and was handed to thecourt before the jury had retired to consider of their verdictand before the court began his charge to the jury.This request was a legal and pertinent one, particularly adjustedto the facts of the case and should have been given, and thecourt in declining to give it committed error, although the gen-eral
  • 0205 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: and I wish the stenographer to take it down, and we propose toprove every fact stated in the motion unless the Court willstate that he knows the facts and will take cognizance of themwithout proof.First, that counsel requested before this trial began thatthe court room he cleared of spectators.Second, when the Court declined to rule out the evidence asto the other alleged transactions with women, by Jim Conley,the audience in the court room, who occupied nearly every seat,showed applause by the clapping of hands and stamping of feetand shouting in the presence
  • 0206 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image:---The court admonished the people that if the applause was repeated, he would clear the court room.Now, we move upon those facts, which tend to coerce and intimidate and unduly influence this jury, that the court here and now declare a mistrial, and we stand ready to prove each and every fact there and we offer to prove them. Now, if your Honor will take cognizance of those facts as stated, then, of course it will dispense with proof. If your Honor does not take cognizance of them, we are ready to prove
  • 0207 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: they were about 100 feet from the court house, entering theCafe. That he heard the applause but did not hear the crowdhollo "Hurrah for Dorsey; he heard the holloing and cheeringand the 'jury could have heard what he did. That the applause heheard was outside of the Cafe, he did not hear the cheering fromthe inside of the Cafe. That he did not remember how many peoplecame up in front of the Cafe. No one came in the Cafe into theroom where the jury was, that is in the room in the
  • 0208 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: love for my friend to meet all the approbation that he may getfrom the public, I did think that it was an outrage, the cryingand shouting; that is what I thought. If the juror were whereMr. Deavours said they were, they could hear no trouble abouthearing it, if they had good ordinary hearing. On Friday Iwas in the court room when I heard most of the crying, I do notknow where the jury was then.Charles F. Huber, testified. I was in charge of the jury whenthey left the court room Friday afternoon.
  • 0209 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: facts, movant contends, olearly show that the defendant was nothaving a fair trial by reason of the great excitement of thecrowd. The court room was in an exceedingly small building, onthe ground floor, and was crowded during the trial, and defendant contends that this prejudice and animosity of thecrowd against him, as shown by the frequent applause, necessarilyreached the jury box and prevented him from having a fair trial.As permitted by the Court, in his order just aforesaid, weattach hereto in support of this motion for new trial the affida-vits hereto attached,
  • 0210 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: (Referring to questions asked by the Solicitor General).Mr. Arnold: He is asking how long it took to do all this work connected with it. (Referring to work done by Frank the day of the murder.)The Court: Well, he knows what he is asking him. (Referring to the Solicitor General.)Upon this suggestion of the court that the solicitor knew what he was doing, the spectators in the court room applauded by striking their hands together and by the striking of feet upon the floor, creating quite a demonstration Defendant's counsel complained of the
  • 0211 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Dorsey."(f). On the last day of the trial, Monday, August 25th, 1913a large crowd, including many women, had assembled in thecourt room before court opened, taking up every seat in thecourt room. The jury were in their room about 20 feet from thecourt room, and as Mr. Dorsey entered the room, the crowdapplauded loudly by clapping of hands and stamping of feet,which the jury perhaps could have heard. The court did nothingbut admonish the people that if the applause was repeated, hewould clear the court room.(g). On Monday the last day of
  • 0212 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: attending court was such as to inevitably affect the jury.The exhibits hereto attached marked J to AA inclusive are made a part of this ground.66. Because the fair and impartial trial guaranteed him by the constitution of this State was not accorded the defendant for the following reasons:The court room wherein this trial was had was situated at the corner of Hunter and Pryor streets. There are a number of windows on the Pryor street side looking out upon the street and furnishing easy access to any noises that would occur upon
  • 0213 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: poll of the jury, which was then in progress, and notfinished. Indeed, so great was the noise and confusion withoutthat the Court heard the responses of the jurors during thepolling with some difficulty. The court was about 15 feet fromthe jury. In the court room was the jury, lawyers, newspaper men,and officers of the court, and among them there was no disorder.The polling of the jury is an important part of the trial. Itis inconceivable that any juror, even if the verdict was not hisown, to announce that it was not, in
  • 0214 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: I don't remember how much she paid me, and the next week theypaid me $3.50 and the next week they paid me $6.50, and thenext week they paid me $4. and the next week they paid me $4.One week, I don't remember which one, Mrs. Selig gave me $5, butit wasn't for my work, and they didn't tell me what it was for,she just said "Here is $5, Minola."The Court permitted this part of the affidavit to be read tothe jury over the objections above stated, and in doing so erredfor the
  • 0215 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: in so doing, committed error, for which a new trial should begranted.70 (qqq) Because the Solicitor General, in his argument tothe jury, stated, as follows: "The conduct of counsel in thiscase, as I stated, in refusing to cross examine these twentyyoung ladies, refutes effectively and absolutely that he hada good character. As I said, if this man had had a good character,no power on earth could have kept him and his counsel from askingwhere those girls got their information, and why it was they saidthat this defendant was a man of bad
  • 0216 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: need not-in similar instances be repeated, but that the Courtwould assume that similar objections had been made and overruled.This argument of the Solicitor was not only illegal, but prej-udicial to the defendant, in that he, in substance, urged uponthe jury that a cross examination of female witnesses for theState, who testified to Frank's bad character for lasciviousness,would, upon cross examination, have testified as to specific actsof immorality against him.71. (rr). Because the Court permitted the Solicitor, over theobjection of defendant's counsel, to argue before the jurythat the wife of the defendant did
  • 0217 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: in arguing the relative value of the expert testimony delivered bthe physicians called for the State and defense, to intimatethat the defense, in calling its physicians had been influencedby the the fact that certain physicians called were the familyphysicians of some of the jurors. In discussing it, the solici-tor said: "It would not surprise me if these able, astutegentlemen, vigilant as they have shown themselves to be, didnot go out and get some doctors who have been the family phy-sicians, who are well known to some of the members of thisjury, for
  • 0218 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: 74. Because the juror Johenning was not a fair and impartialjuror, in that he had a fixed opinion that the defendant wasguilty prior to, and at, the time he was taken on the jury andwas not a fair and impartial and unbiased juror. Affidavits showingthat he was not a fair and impartial juror are hereto attached andmarked Exhibits E, F, G, and I, and made a part of this motionfor new trial.The opinion, conduct and state of mind of this juror priorto, and at the time of, his selection as a juror
  • 0219 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: solicitor, and the crowd laughed at him, and Mr. Arnold appealed to the court.On Saturday, prior to the rendition of the verdict on Monday, the Court was considering whether or not he should go on with the trial during Saturday evening, or what hour he should extend it in the evening, the excitement in and without the court room was so apparent as to cause apprehension in the mind of the Court as to whether he could safely continue the trial during Saturday afternoon; and, in making up his mind about the
  • 0220 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: When it was announced that the jury had agreed upon a verdictcrowds had thronged the court room to such an extent that the Courtfelt bound to clear the court room before receiving the verdict.This the Court did. But, when the verdict of the jury was rendered, a large crowd had thronged the outside of the court house;some one signaled to the outside what the verdict was, and the crowdon the outside raised mighty shouts of approval. So great was theshouting and applause on the outside that the Court had somedifficulty in hearing
  • 0221 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: such transaction, Mary Phagan met her death, then Conleywould be an accomplice of Frank, although he had no personal partin her killing.The Court, under proper instructions, ought to have left itto the jury to say whether Conley was or not an accomplice ofFrank; and, in failing to do, and because he failed to do so theCourt committed error.77. The Court erred in not charging the jury that if, underinstructions given them, they found that Conley was an accompliceof Frank, they could not convict Frank under the testimony ofConley alone; but that, to
  • 0222 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: she had them on a stool, I believe. She was dressed. I don'tremember how her dress was; I didn't look. I paid no attention tohim, only he just walked in and turned and walked out; looked atthe girls that were sitting in the window and walked out. Therewas something said about this, but I don't remember. I have heardsomething about him going in the room and staring at them, but Idon't remember exactly. Mr. Frank walked in the dressing room onMiss Mamie Kitchens. She and I were in there. I have heard
  • 0223 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: incidents at the Pencil Factory, wherein Conley, after having madethe third affidavit, purported to re-enact the occurrence of themurder between himself and Frank, wherein the body of Mary Phaganwas taken from the office floor to the cellar of the factory,the testimony permitted by the Court being substantially as follows:"I will have to give you the time of Conley's arrival at theFactory approximately. I was up there at twelve o'clock, and Iwas a few minutes late. Conley had not arrived there then. Wewaited until they brought him there, which was probably ten orfifteen
  • 0224 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: said he said he went back, and he did go back, led us back, and told about taking up the body, how he brought it up on his shoulder, and then, in front of a little kind of impression on the wall, he said he dropped it, and he indicated the place, and then he come up and told Mr. Frank about it—that he would have to come and help him or something like that—and that Mr. Frank came back and took the feet. I believe he said, and he took the
  • 0225 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: two desks (indicating); that Mr. Frank sat down in the chair at that desk, and he told him to sit at the other desk, and Mr. Frank told him to write some notes; he was asked by some of the officers to write what Mr. Frank told him to write, and he sat down there and wrote one note, and I believe---I know the note he wrote, and I don't know whether he wrote one or two and that Mr. Frank handed him some money and that later he took it back,
  • 0226 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: (a). This so-called experiment made with Conley was solely an endeavor on their part to justify his story;(b). The sayings and actings-of Conley, as aforesaid, not under oath, had and made without cross examination, and reported by the witness to the court, the net result of which is a repetition of Conley's statement, without the sanction of an oath.(c). That Conley went to the factory immediately after making his last affidavit, that that last affidavit is not the way he tells the story on the stand; that he tells it wholly differently
  • 0227 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: for lasciviousness; that is, his relations towards women?A. Yes sir.Q. Is it good or bad?A. Bad.The Court admitted the above question and answers, over objection of the defendant as above stated, and thereby erred, for the reasons stated.82. (ggg) Because the Court over objection of the defendant, made at the time the evidence was offered, that the same was immaterial, incompetent, illegal and prejudicial to the defendant permitted the Solicitor General to ask the following questions, and the witness, Mrs. H. P. Johnson, to make the following answers:Q. Now, are you acquainted
  • 0228 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: 84. (eeeo) Because the Court, over the objection of the defendant, made at the time the evidence was offered, that the same was immaterial, incompetent, illegal and prejudicial to the defendant, permitted the solicitor general to ask the following questions, and the witness, Miss Nellie Potts, to make the following answers:Q. Are you acquainted with his (Frank's) general character for lasciviousness; that is, with women prior to that time?A. Yes sir.Q. Is it good or bad? A. Bad.The Court admitted the above questions and answers, over objection of the defendant as above
  • 0229 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: The Court admitted the above questions and answers, over the objection of the defendant as above stated, and thereby erred, for the reasons stated.87 (hhhh). Because the Court over the objection of the defendant, made at the time the evidence was offered, that the same was immaterial, incompetent, illegal and prejudicial to the defendant, permitted the solicitor general to ask the following questions, and the witness, Miss Estelle Winkle, to make the following answers:Q. Are you acquainted with his (Frank's) general character for lasciviousness, that is, his relations with girls and women?A.
  • 0230 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: became material to determine what time this English Ave., carreached Broad Street on the day of the murder. The motorman Mat-thews and the conductor, swore that on that day the EnglishAve., car reached Broad Street at 12:07. The Court permittedthis and other like testimony to be introduced tending todiscredit their statements that the car was on schedule timethat day. In doing this the Court erred, for the fact thatthe English Ave., car was ahead of time as much as fourminutes on other days did not indicate that it was ahead of timeon
  • 0231 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: English Avenue car was ahead of time as much as four minutes, onother days did not indicate that it was ahead of time on theday of the murder.90. (kkkk). Because of the following colloquy which occurredduring the trial and while the witness, John Ashley Jones,was on the stand, during the cross examination of Jones by theSolicitor:Q. You never heard anybody down there say anything about Mr.Frank's practices and relations with the girls.A. Not in the Pencil Factory.Q. Not at all? You never did talk to any of these young girls,did you?A. No,
  • 0232 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Q: You never heard of that at all?A: I never heard that. I had been in Mr. Frank's---Q: You never talked to Tom Blackstock, then, did you?A: I haven't the pleasure of Mr. Blackstock's acquaintance.Q: Did you ever know Mrs. L. D.Coursey?A: I can't say that I ever heard of her.Q: Miss Myrtle Cato, you never heard of her, and that he wouldgo into the---A: Mr. Dorsey, I have been down thereQ: By the Court: He wants to know if you ever heard of thatbefore.Q: He made no apology and no explanation,
  • 0233 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: about Frank?A. No sir, I don't know her.Q. Did you ever hear C. D. Duncan, talk about Frank?A. No sir.Q. You never heard any of these factory people talk about him?A. No sir.The Court erred in permitting the Solicitor, although the witness denied hearing all of the remarks referred to, to say in the presence of the jury that he was not four-flushing, but that he was going to bring the witnesses there, thereby improperly saying to the jury that he had such witnesses and meant to bring them in.The Court erred
  • 0234 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: jury had the right to consider, and that is as to whether, even though they did not believe his plea of not guilty the truth, still if they had a reasonable doubt in their minds of his guilt they should acquit him.98. (qqqq) Movant further says that a new trial should be gr anted, because of the following:Mr. Dorsey, the solicitor general, in the concluding argument, made the following statement:"Now, gentlemen, ( addressing the jury) Mr. Arnold spoke to you about the Durant case. That case is a celebrated case; it was
  • 0235 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: - 000230 -" Mr. Dorsey: Mr. Arnold brought this in, and I telegraphedto San Francisco, and I want to read this telegram to the jury;can't I do it?""Mr. Arnold: If the Court please, I want to object to anyparticular letter or telegram, I can telegraph and get myinformation as well as he can. I don't know whether the infor-mation is true, I don't know who he telegraphed about it; I havegot a right to argue a matter that appears in the public printsand that's all I argued,-what appears in the papers,- it
  • 0236 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Mr. Arnold: Certainly he can, as a matter of public notoriety, but not as a matter of individual information or opinion"."The Court: You can state, Mr. Dorsey, to the jury, your information about the Durant case, to-wit, he did, but you can't read anything - don't introduce any evidence".Mr. Dorsey (resuming) "My information is that nobody has ever confessed the murder of Blanche Lamont and Minnie Williams. But, gentlemen of the jury, as I'll show you by reading this book, it was proved at the trial, and there can be no question
  • 0237 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: written, and that a new trial should be granted because theargument was illegal, unwarranted, not sustained by the evidence,and tended to inflame and unduly prejudice the jury's mind.Neither the letter from Piokett nor the telegram was read furtherthan is shown in the foregoing statement.93. Movant says that a new trial should be granted becauseof the following grounds:The Solicitor General having, in his concluding argument,made the various statements of fact about the Durant case, asshown in the preceding ground of this motion, the Judge erredin failing to charge the jury as follows, to-wit:The
  • 0238 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: he sued the Marquis for damages, which brought retaliation onthe part of the Marquis for criminal practices on the partof Wilde, this intellectual giant and when the Englishlanguage is read, the effrontery, the boldness, the coolness ofthis man, Oscar Wilde, as he stood the cross examination of theablest lawyers of England -- an effrontery that is characteristicof the man of his type, that examination will remain the subjectmatter of study for lawyers and for people who are interestedin the type of pervert like this man. Not even Oscar Wilde'swife, for he was
  • 0239 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: crimes, but a man of high intellect and wonderful endowmentswhich, if directed in the right line, bring honor and glory ifthose same faculties and talents are perverted and not controlled,as was the case with this man, they will carry him down. Look atVdue, the mayor of Charlottesville, a man of such reputationthat the people elevated him to the head of that municipality; butnotwithstanding that good reputation, he did not have rock bed cha-racter, and becoming tired of his wife, he shot her in thebath tub, and the jury of gallant and noble
  • 0240 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: killed his wife because of infatuation for another woman, and put her remains away where he thought as this man thought, that it would never be discovered but murder will out, and he was discovered, and he was tried, and he said at said to the glory of old England, he was executed."96. Voyant further says that a new trial should be granted, because of the following ground:The Solicitor General, in his concluding argument, spoke to the jury as follows:"But to crown it all, in this table which is now turned to
  • 0241 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: 91002241"Mr. Dorsey, I was arguing to the jury the evidence.""The Court: Did you make a statement to that effect?""Mr. Dorsey, I made a statement that those two young ladiessay they met Holloway as he left the factory at 11:05—I make thestatements that as soon as they track down to that Greekcafe, Quinn came in and said to them, 'I have just been in andseen Mr. Frank'.""Mr. Arnold: They never said that, they said they met Hollo-way at 11:45, they said at the Busy Bee cafe, but they met Quinnat 12:30""Mr. Dorsey, Well,
  • 0242 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: the solicitor general from making the erroneous statements offact objected to-by the defendant's counsel which the evidencedid not authorize, and in permitting him to proceed, and in notrebuking the Solicitor General, and in not stating to the jurythat there was no such evidence as the Solicitor General hadstated, in the case, and defendant says that for this improperargument, and for this failure of the Court, there should begranted a new trial.97. Movant further says that a new trial should be grantedbecause of the following:In his concluding argument Solicitor General Dorsey, referringto the
  • 0243 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Mr. Dorsey: You've had your speech"."Mr. Rosser: And we never had any such dirty speech as that either"."Mr. Dorsey: I object to his remark, Your Honor, I have a right to argue this case.""Mr. Rosser: I said that remark he made about Mr. Arnold, and Your Honor said it was correct; I'm not criticising his speech I don't care about that."Mr. Dorsey (resuming): "Frank said that his wife never went back there because she was afraid that the snapshooters would get her picture,-because she didn't want to go through the line of
  • 0244 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: I'm going to confront him, even before any attorney, nomatter who he is, returns from Tallulah Falls, and if not then,I tell you just as soon as that attorney does return, I'm goingto see that that negro is brought into his presence, and permit-ted to set forth his accusations. You make much here of thefact that you didn't know what this man Conley was going to saywhen he got on the stand. You could have known it, but you darednot do it."Whereupon the following colloquy ensued:"Mr. Rosser: May it please the Court,
  • 0245 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: "The Court: You can comment upon the fact that he refused to meet Frank or Frank refused to meet him, and at the time he did it, he was out of the City"."Mr. Arnold: We did object to that evidence, Your Honor, but Your Honor let that in"."The Court: I know, go on".Mr. Dorsey: (resuming): "They see the force of it"--"Mr. Rosser: Is that a fair comment, Your Honor, if I make a reasonable objection, to say that we see the force of it?""The Court: I don't think that, in reply to
  • 0246 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: the record, you have the right to do that".Mr. Dorsey (resuming): "This man Frank, with Anglo-Saxon bloodin his veins, a graduate of Cornell, the superintendent of thepencil factory, so anxious to ferret out this murder that he'phoned Schiff three times on Monday, April 28th, to employ thePinkerton Detective Agency, this man of Anglo-Saxon blood andintelligence, refused to meet this ignorant negro, Jim Conley.He refused upon the flimsy pretext that his counsel was out oftown but when his counsel returned, when he had the opportunityto know at least something of the accusations that
  • 0247 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: at it. Black says he didn't see him look at it", Whereupon the following occurred:" Mr. Rosser, He is misstating the evidence. Rogers neversaid he didn't look at the body, he said he was behind him,and didn't know whether he did or not, and Black says he didn'tknow whether he did or not."" Mr. Dorsey: Rogers said he never did look at that body"." Mr. Arnold: I think that isn't the evidence. Rogerssaid he didn't know, and couldn't answer whether he saw it or notand Black said the same thing".Mr. Dorsey (resuming)
  • 0248 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Mr. Dorsey: That's quibbling".Mr. Arnold: Is that correct, Your Honor?""The Court: No, that's not correct; whenever they object, Mr.Dorsey, if you don't agree upon the record, have it looked up,and if they are right and you know it, and - you are wrong, or ifthey are wrong and you also know it, if they are wrong theyare quibbling, and if they are right they are not quibbling. Now,just go on"."Mr. Rosser: Now, the question of whether Boots said hewent into that room is now easily settled", Mr. Rosser here readthat portion of
  • 0249 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image:---Solicitor General to proceed with his illegal argument which was not founded on the evidence, and erred and in not rebuking the Solicitor General, and in not stating to the jury that the Solicitor General had mis-stated the evidence in the particulars objected to, and erred in not telling the jury that there was no evidence in the case that Rogers had sworn that defendant did not look at the body of Mary Phagan or that Frank went in another room and because of the aforesaid errorous acting and failing to act, on
  • 0250 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: morning, and that isn't the evidence, there's not a line to thateffect.""The Court: Do you still insist that he had it in hispocket?""Mr. Dorsey: I don't care anything about that; the point ofthe proposition, the gist of the proposition, the force of theproposition is that old Holloway stated, way back yonder in May,when I interviewed him, that the key was always in Frank's office;this man told you that the power box and the elevator wasunlocked Sunday morning, and the elevator started without any-body going and getting the key.""Mr. Rosser: That's not the
  • 0251 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: and decisive ruling, upon the objection of the defendant, and inallowing the Solicitor General to proceed with said claim thatFrank had the key in his pocket, as a deduction, the same beingtotally unwarranted; and for said illegal and erroneous actionsand failure to act, by the Court, and for said illegal and im-proper argument, a new trial should be granted.101. Movant says that a new trial should be granted, becauseof the following:The Solicitor General, in his concluding argument, in referringto the testimony of the physicians introduced by the defendant,spoke as follows:"It wouldn't surprise
  • 0252 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: The Court: Well, I want to try it right, and I suppose you do.Is there anything to authorize that inference to be drawn?" Mr. Dorsey: Why, sure, why the fact that you went outand got general practitioners, that know nothing about the analysisof the stomach, know nothing about pathology.""The Court, Go on, then""Mr. Dorsey: I thought so."" Mr. Arnold: Does Your Honor hold that is proper, I thoughtso?""The Court: I hold that he can draw any inference legitimatelyfrom the testimony and argue it; I don't know whether or notthere is anything to
  • 0253 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: because of the following:The Solicitor General in his concluding argument, in referring to act of Judge Roan, discharging the witness, Conley, from custody, stated:"Judge Roan did it, no reflection on the Sheriff, but with the friends of this man Frank, pouring in there at all hours of the night, offering him sandwiches and whiskey and threatening his life, things that this Sheriff, who is as good as the Chief of Police but no better, couldn't guard against because of the physical structure of the jail, Jim Conley asked, and His Honor granted
  • 0254 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image:---"The Court: On motion of State's counsel, consented to by Conley's attorney, I passed the first order, that's my recollection Afterwards, it came up on motion of the Solicitor General, I vacated both orders, committing him to the jail and also the order, don't you understand, transferring him; that left it as though I had never made an order, that's the effect of it."Mr. Rosser: Then the effect was that there was no order out at all?""The Court: No order putting him anywhere" - "Mr. Rosser: Which had the effect of putting him
  • 0255 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: ommitted in the progress of any such attempt to commit sodomy,would be an accomplice; and the jury could not give creditto his testimony, unless corroborated by the facts and circumstances, or by another witness.Rouser and Braden,Herbert J. Haas,Reuben R. Arnold,Voyanta Attorneys
  • 0256 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: EXHIBIT A.GEORGIA,DOUGHERTY COUNTY.The State of Georgia, (1) Indictment for Murder.Vs. (1) In Superior Court, Fulton CountyLeo M. Frank. (1) Georgia, Motion for New Trial.Before me personally appeared R. L. Gremmer, who being duly sworn deposes and says that he makes this affidavit to be used on the motion for new trial in the above case.Further deposing he says that he is a resident of Albany, Ga., that he is acquainted with Mack Farkas, who works with Mr. Sam Farkas, who operates a livery stable and sale barn in Albany.Further deposing, he says
  • 0257 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: GEORGIA,DOUGHERTY COUNTY.EXHIBIT B.STATE OF GEORGIA,(1) - Indictment For Murder.Vs.Leo M. Frank.(2) - In superior Court Fulton County(3) - Georgia, Motion for New trialBefore me, personally appeared Vack Farkas, who being duly sworn makes this affidavit, to be used on the motion for a new trial in the above case.Deposing, he says that he is a resident of Albany, Ga., and is connected with Sam Farkas, Esq., who runs a livery stable and sale barn in Albany; further deposing he said that between the time of the murder of Mary Phagan, and the
  • 0258 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: EXHIBIT C.GEORGIA, FULTON COUNTY.State of Georgia, ( ) Fulton Superior Court.Vs.Leo M. Frank.Personally appears Julian A. Lehman, who being duly sworn makes this affidavit to be used on the motion for new trial in the above case.Further deposing he says that he is personally acquainted with A. H. Henslee, one of the jurors in the above case; that on June 2, 1913, between Atlanta, Ga., and Experiment, Ga., the said Henslee expressed his opinion that Frank was guilty of the murder of Mary Phagan, and that this was in deponent's presence and
  • 0259 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: EXHIBIT D.STATE OF GEORGIA,COUNTY OF FULTON,State of Georgia, In Fulton Superior Court.Vs.Leo M. Frank.Before me, the undersigned officer authorized by law to administer oaths, personally appeared Samuel Aron, who being first duly sworn, deposes and says on oath as follows:Deponent says that just after the indictment of Leo M. Frank for murder, as near as he can recall about two days after the indictment, this deponent was at the Elks Club on Ellis Street, Atlanta, Georgia, that at that time he saw one A. H. Henslee, not then known to this deponent
  • 0260 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: EXHIBIT E.STATE OF GEORGIA,COUNTY OF FULTON.State of Georgia,Fulton Superior Court.VS.Leo M. Frank.Before me personally appear L. Z. Rosser, Morris Brandon, R.R. Arnold and H. J. Haas, who, being duly sworn, deposes andsays that they are the sole counsel of defendant in the abovecase, and they make this affidavit to be used as evidence on themotion for new trial in said case.Further deposing they say that, since the trial of said caseand the verdict and sentence therein, it has come to theirknowledge that two of the jurors who sat on said case, to-witA.
  • 0261 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: obtaining the facts in connection with statements made by saidpersons, and all of them, and all of said statements have cometo their knowledge since the rendition of the verdict andsentence in said case, as is shown by the dates mentioned in thejurats to each affidavit, and deponents have brought same to theattention of the Court at the earliest possible moment atwhich the Court could take cognizance of said affidavits afterthe trial, which is the date on which the rule ni si is onreturn; that is, October 4, 1913, same being on that
  • 0262 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: EXHIBIT F.GEORGIA, FULTON COUNTYState of Georgia,Vs.Fulton Superior Court.Leo M. Frank.Personally appeared Mrs. Jennie G. Loevenhart, who makes this affidavit to be used on motion for a new trial in the above stated case.Deposing on oath she says that she is personally acquainted with W. Johenning, one of the jurors who served in the trial of Leo M. Frank, for murder of Mary Phagan.Further deposing she says that during May 1913, said W. Johenning met deponent and deponent's daughter on Forsyth Street, Atlanta, Georgia, and then and there the said W. Johenning expressed
  • 0263 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: EXHIBIT F.GEORGIA, FULTON COUNTYState of Georgia,Vs.Fulton Superior Court.Leo M. Frank.Personally appeared Mrs. Jennie G. Loewenhart, who makes this affidavit to be used on motion for a new trial in the above stated case.Deposing on oath she says that she is personally acquainted with M. Johenning, one of the jurors who served in the trial of Leo M. Frank, for murder of Mary Phagan.Further deposing she says that during May 1913, said M. Johenning met deponent and deponent's daughter on Forsyth Street Atlanta, Georgia, and then and there the said M. Johenning expressed
  • 0264 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: EXHIBIT-G.GEORGIA, FULTON COUNTY.State of Georgia,Vs.Fulton Superior Court.Leo M. Frank,Before me personally appeared H. C. Loevenhart, who makes this affidavit to be used on motion for a new trial in the above stated case.Deposing on oath he says that for some eighteen months prior to July 1913 he was connected with the Hodgee Broom Works in the City of Atlanta; that he is personally acquainted with M. Johenning one of the jurors in the above stated case, and that during the month of May 1913 said M. Johenning had a conversation with this
  • 0265 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: EXHIBIT H.GEORGIA, FULTON COUNTY.State of Georgia, Fulton Superior Court.Vs.Leo M. Frank.Before me personally appeared Miss Miriam Loevenhart,who makes this affidavit to be used on motion for a new trialin the above stated case.Deposing on oath she says that she is personally acquaintedwith M. Johenning, a juror, who sat on the above statedcase; she says that prior to the trial of Leo M. Frank, saidjuror, M. Johenning, had a conversation with this deponentand deponent's mother, and in their presence expressed hisprofound conviction that Leo M. Frank was certainly guilty ofthe murder of Mary
  • 0266 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: EXHIBIT-I.State of Georgia,Vs.Leo M. Frank(1.) In Fulton Superior Court(2.) Conviction of Murder(3.) July Term, 1913.(4.) Motion for New Trial.GEORGIA, FULTON COUNTY.Personally came before the undersigned, Leo M. Frank, who upon oath says that he is the defendant in the above stated case, and that his sole counsel in said case were L. Z. Rosser, Morris Brandon, R. R. Arnold and H. J. Haas.Affiant further says that at and before said trial was entered on, and during the whole of said trial that affiant had no knowledge whatsoever as to M. Johenning and
  • 0267 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: said facts were discovered after the verdict and sentence of thecourt in the case above stated, and the affidavits of saidwitnesses were taken on the dates shown in the jurat to eachaffidavit, and the same are brought to the attention of thecourt by being presented on the day for the return of the rulenisi, which is October 4th, 1913, and which is the earliesttime at which such affidavits could be brought to the attentionof the court.Affiant further says that had he known at the trial of anyfacts or statements which would disqualify,
  • 0268 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: GEORGIA, FULTON COUNTY.EXHIBIT J.State of Georgia, ( ) No. ......Vs. ( ) Fulton Superior Court.Leo M. Frank, ( )Personally appeared W. P. Feill who makes this affidavit to be used on a motion for new trial in the above stated case.Deposing he says on oath that he was present in the court room during the trial of Leo M. Frank, for the murder of Mary Phagan, for two full days during the trial and from time to time on other days; that at the time of the facts hereinafter stated, deponent was
  • 0269 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: heard Plennie Minor repeat to him that he, Plennie Minor, saw him the man, speak to the juror.Deponent further says that on two occasions, while he was sitting in the court room at the trial, at on time while he was about six to ten feet from the jury, this deponent heard shouts and cheering on the outside of the house from the crowds collected outside. One of said times were during Dorsey's speech.While this deponent does not say whether or not the jury heard this cheering, he does say that he,
  • 0270 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: EXHIBIT K.The State of Georgia, Fulton Superior Court.Vs. Leo M. Frank. GEORGIA, FULTON COUNTY.Personally appeared before the undersigned a Notary Public in and for said county, B. W. Kay, who on oath says that he is a resident of the City of Atlanta, living at #364 S. Pryor St. Deponent says further that on Saturday evening, August 23rd, 1913 about 8 or 8:30 o'clock P. M. he was driving on his father's automobile down South Pryor Street, going south, there being in the automobile with him his mother Mrs. Rose Kay, and
  • 0271 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: EXHIBIT-L.The State of Georgia,Vs.Fulton Superior Court.Leo M. Frank.Georgia, Fulton County.Personally appeared before the undersigned a Notary Public in and for said county Miss Martha Kay, who on oath says that on the last day of the trial of Leo M. Frank, in above stated case, August 25th, 1913, she was present in the court room and when the audience applauded, Judge Roan stated to the sheriff that the cheering and demonstration would have to be stopped or the court room would have to be cleared, to which the sheriff replied "Your Honor,
  • 0272 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: EXHIBIT W.The State of Georgia, Vs. Fulton Superior Court.Leo M. Frank.GEORGIA, FULTON COUNTY.Personally appeared before the undersigned a Notary Public in and for said county, Mrs. A. Shurman, who on oath says that on the last day of the trial of Leo M. Frank in above stated case, August 25th, 1913, she was present in the court room and when the audience applauded Judge Roan stated to the sheriff that the cheering and demonstrations would have to stop or the court room would have to be cleared, to which the sheriff replied
  • 0273 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: EXHIBIT N.The State of Georgia,Vs.Leo M. Frank.Fulton Superior Court.GEORGIA, FULTON COUNTY.Personally appeared before the undersigned a Notary Public in and for said county Mrs. A. Shurman, who on oath says that she is a resident of the City of Atlanta, living at #240 Central Ave., Deponent says that on Monday morning, August 25th, 1913, the last day of the trial of the said Leo M. Frank in the above stated cause, she was present in the court room in company with Miss Martha Kay of #264 S. Pryor Street, before time for
  • 0274 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: EXHIBIT O.The State of Georgia,Vs.Leo M. Frank.Fulton Superior Court.Georgia, Fulton County.Personally appeared before the undersigned a Notary Public in and for said county Miss Martha Kay, who on oath says that she is a Resident of the City of Atlanta, living at 264 S. Pryor street, Deponent says that on Monday morning August 28th 1913, the last day of the trial of the said Leo M. Frank, in the above stated case, she was present in the court room in company with Mrs. A. Shurman of 240 Central Ave., before time for
  • 0275 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: EXHIBIT PThe State of Georgia,Vs.Fulton Superior Court.Leo M. Frank,State of Georgia,County of Fulton.Personally appeared before the undersigned a Notary Public in and for said county, Sampson Kay, who on oath says that he is a resident of the City of Atlanta, living at #264 South Pryor street, Deponent further says that on Saturday evening, August 23rd 1913, about 8 or 8:30 o'clock P. M. he saw the jury in the above entitled case walking along South Pryor Street with a deputy sheriff in front and another walking in the rear of said
  • 0276 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: EXHIBIT Q.The State of Georgia,Vs.Fulton Superior Court.Leo M. Frank.State of Georgia, Fulton County.Personally appeared Samuel A. Boorstin, who, being duly sworn, on oath says: That on Friday evening, on the 22 day of August, 1913, at about 5 or 5:30 P. M., he was present at the Court room of Fulton Superior Court, Judge L. S. Roan, presiding during the trial of the State Versus Leo M. Frank; and after adjournment, and when the jury had been taken from the courtroom, and shortly thereafter, the Solicitor General Hugh M. Dorsey, had passed
  • 0277 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: EXHIBIT R.State of Georgia, ( ) Superior Court of Fulton CountyVs. ( ) Charged with Murder.Leo Frank. ( )Georgia Fulton county.Personally appeared before the undersigned officer, W. B.Cate, who being duly sworn deposes and says: That on Sept.,let, 1913, in the afternoon, I was standing at the corner ofAlabama Street and S. Pryor Street, and had intended to go downS. Pryor Street to the Court House where the Frank trial wasbeing conducted but was unable to get any closer to theCourt House on account of the crowd that had gathered in thestreet,
  • 0278 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: EXHIBIT 8.State of Georgia Vs. Leo M. Frank,In Fulton Superior Court.State of Georgia,County of Fulton.Personally appeared J. H. G. Cochran, who being duly sworn deposes and says that he is a resident of Atlanta, Ga., he remembers the close of the trial of Leo M. Frank and was present in front of the Court House in Atlanta, Ga., on the day that the case closed and on the day that the jury returned the verdict of guilty in said case.On the day aforesaid, to-wit: - that the jury returned the verdict, Mr.
  • 0279 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: they proceeded up Pryor Street. Further deposing he says that onsaid day the jury took dinner at the German Cafe, on SouthPryor Street, a distance of approximately one hundred fifty (150)to two hundred (200) feet from the Bauer Building, and thatboth outside of the Cafe and in the Cafe, the cheering of theSolicitor General could be heard by any person.J. H. CochranSworn to and subscribed to before me,this September 15th, 1915.J. H. Porter, Notary Public, County of Fulton State of Ga.195
  • 0280 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: EXHIBIT T.State of Georgia, Vs. Leo M. Frank,In Fulton Superior Court.State of Georgia,County of Fulton.Personally appeared H. G. Williams, resident of Atlanta, Ga.,who deposes and says that on the day of the Frank trial closed,and verdict of guilty was found by the jury against Leo M. Frankaccused of the murder of Mary Phagan, this Deponent was onSouth Pryor Street in front of the Court House.This Deponent saw Solicitor Dorsey come from the Court Houseand cross the street to the Kiser Building in the presence ofexceeding five hundred (500) people, who cheered hisappearance
  • 0281 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Solicitor General.H. G. Williams.Sworn to and subscribed to before me,this September 15th, 1913.Robt. C. Patterson,Notary Public, Fulton County, State of Ga.
  • 0282 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: EXHIBIT U.State of Georgia,Vs. Fulton Superior Court.Leo M. Frank.Georgia, Fulton County.Personally appeared before the undersigned a Notary Public in and for said county, E. G. Pureley, who on oath say that he is a president of the City of Atlanta, residing at #30 Ponders Ave., with office at #700 Temple Court.Deponent says that on Friday noon, before the above stated case went to the jury on Monday, he was present in the Court room where the trial of Leo M. Frank has been held; that when court adjourned and the jury had
  • 0283 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: State of Georgia, EXHIBIT V.Vs.Leo M. Frank.Personally appeared Marcus Benbenisty, who on oathsays that he was standing outside of the court house on Fridayafternoon, August 23rd, at about 1:30, and I saw the jurycome out of the court room. Soon after the jury came out ofthe court room. Mr. Dorsey came out, and the crowd set up cheer-ing and yelling "Hurrah for Dorsey".At the time of the yelling and cheering the jury was justcrossing the street towards the Barbee Supply Company, whichis next to the Kaiser Building. That in the opinion of
  • 0284 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: EXHIBIT W.State of Georgia.Vs.Leo M. Frank.Personally appeared Isaac Haas who on oath says that he was standing outside of the court house on Friday afternoon, Aug. 22nd, at about 12.30, and I saw the jury come out of the court room. Soon after the jury came out of the court room, Mr. Dor- sey came out, and the crowd set up cheering and yelling "Hurrah" "Hurrah". At the time of the yelling and cheering the jury was just crossing the street toward the Barber's Supply Co., which is next to the Kiser
  • 0285 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: GEORGIA, FULTON COUNTY.EXHIBIT X.GEORGIA, FULTON COUNTY.Personally appeared John H. Shipp, who on oath says thaton Friday August 23, he was in room 301 of the Kaiser Building,corner Hunter and So. Pryor streets, that he saw the jury come outof the court house about 6 P. M., that a few minutes after thejury came out of the court house, Mr. Dorsey, appeared in theentrance, whereupon a great cheer arose from the people crowdingin the streets and around the court house entrance; that atthat time deponent saw the jury about fifty feet from the
  • 0286 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: EXHIBIT Y.The State of Georgia,Vs.Leo M. Frank.Personally appeared B. S. Lipshitz, who on oath says that he was out in front of the Court House, mingling with the crowd, at about one P. M., on Saturday, August 23, immediately after court adjourned; that deponent saw the jury come out and about one or two minutes thereafter, Mr. Dorsey came out, whereupon there was great cheering and yelling by the crowd; that at the time the yelling and cheering took place, the jury could not have been more than one minute's walk away
  • 0287 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: EXHIBIT 2.GEORGIA, FULTON COUNTY.Personally appeared Charles J. Moore, who on oath says that he is an attorney at law, occupying room 301 on the third floor of the Kaiser Building, at the corner of Hunter and So. Pryor sts., that on Friday, August 22, deponent was in his office and saw the jury come out of the court house entrance at about six P. M. that soon after Mr. Dorsey appeared in the court house entrance and a great cheering and yelling occurred by the crowd immediately opposite the entrance, and afterwards
  • 0288 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Sworn to and subscribed before me,this 26th day of August, 1913.C. A. Stokes, Notary Public Fulton County, Ga.
  • 0289 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: EXHIBIT A.A.GEORGIA, FULTON COUNTY.Personally appeared D. Rosinsky, who on oath deposes and states that on Friday, August 22nd and Saturday August 23, he was standing near the corner of Hunter and South Pryor Street, in the city of Atlanta, Ga., and that when the Solicitor General, H. W. Dorsey, came out of the old City Hall Building, now used as a court house, there was loud and vociferous cheering by the assembled crowd; that members of the crowd took the Solicitor in their arms and carried him across the street to the
  • 0290 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: EXHIBIT BB.Georgia DOUGHERTYROCKMART COUNTY.State of Georgia, In the Superior Court of Fulton County, Ga.Vs.Leo M. Frank.Before me personally appears Mack Farkas, who being dulysworn deposes and says that attached to his affidavit is a carboncopy of an order made by Sam Farkas, of Albany, Ga., toFranklin Buggy Company, Incorporated, of Barnesville, Ga.Said order is marked Exhibit "A" Said order was taken by A. HHenslee, a traveling salesman for said Franklin Buggy Co.,in person, said order was taken on the date same bears date,to-wit: on July 8th, 1913.This affidavit is made to be
  • 0291 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: GEORGIA, DOUGHERTY county.State of Georgia,Vs. In the Superior Court of Fulton County, Ga.Leo M. Frank.Before me personally appears B. W. Simon who being dulysworn deposes and says that attached to this affidavit is a car-bon copy of an order made by Sam Farkas, of Albany Ga., to Frank-lin, Buggy Company, Incorporated, of Barnesville, Ga.Said order is marked Exhibit "A". Said order was taken byA. H. Henslee, a traveling salesman for said Franklin Buggy Co.in person; said order was taken on the date same bears date,to-wit: on July 8th, 1913.This affidavit is made
  • 0292 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: GEORGIA, DOUGHERTY COUNTY.State of Georgia, Vs. In the Superior Court of Fulton County, Ga.Leo M. Frank.Before me personally appears Sam Farkas who being duly sworn deposes and says that attached to this affidavit is a carbon copy of an order made by Sam Farkas, of Albany, Ga., to Franklin Buggy Company, Incorporated, of Barnesville, Ga. Said order is marked Exhibit "A" said order was taken by A. H. Henslee, a traveling salesman for said Franklin Buggy Company, in person; said order was taken on the date same bears date, to-wit: on July
  • 0293 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Franklin Buggy Company, Inc.,Manufacturers of the"Improved Barnesville Buggy",Barnesville, Georgia.When Ship At Once- Ship to Sam Parkas-How Ship............ Albany, Ga.July 8, 1913.Terms: Oct. 1st, 2.50 per cent. discount ifpaid in 30 days from date of invoice;if not discounted in 30 days buyeragrees to give note to cover theaccount net 90 days, from date ofinvoice, note to be made payable toR. R. Barnesville, Ga. All goods F.O. B. Barnesville, Ga. No freightallowance. All notes due after 90days from invoice to bear interest at 8per cent. per annum.Quantity Cnt. Width Body Style Gear Spring Color
  • 0294 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: EXHIBIT OC.Georgia Walton County.State of Georgia,vs. In the Superior Court of Fulton County, Ga.Leo M. Frank.Before me, an officer authorized under the laws of Ga., to administer oaths, personally appear J. J. Nunnally and W. L. Ricker, of Monroe, Ga., who being duly sworn, depose and say on oath as follows:That they have seen in the public prints that A. H. Henslee, one of the jurors in the Frank case, admits having made certain statements as to Frank's guilt of the murder of Mary Phagan, but says these statements were made after
  • 0295 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: EXHIBIT DD.GEORGIA, FULTON COUNTYState of Georgia,In the Superior Court of Fulton County, Ga.Leo M. Frank.Before me personally appears Julian A. Lehman, who, being duly sworn deposes and says on oath that he makes this affidavit for use in motion for new trial in above stated case.Further deposing, he says on oath that he reiterates his statement heretofore made under oath that between the time of the murder of Mary Phagan, as reported by the newspapers, and the commencement of the trial of Leo M. Frank, on July 28th, 1913, he on two
  • 0296 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: EXHIBIT EE.GEORGIA, FULTON COUNTY.State of Georgia,Vs.In Fulton Superior Court.Leo M. Frank.Personally appeared Leon Harrison, who being duly sworn deposes and says that he makes this affidavit to be used on the motion for new trial in the above case.Further deposing, he says that he is not acquainted with Leo M. Frank, is not related to him, and has never seen him to know him; he says on oath that he is not personally acquainted with A. H. Henslee but he knows that said Henslee is the party about whom he makes this
  • 0297 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: THE ATLANTA GEORGIAN AND NEWSJURY THAT CONVICTED FRANK AS SLAYER OF MARY PHAGANJ.T. OSBURN. A.H. HENSLEE. F.W. WINBURN. F. MEDCALF. A.L. WISELY. W.M. JEFFRIES. M. JOHENNING.S.W. WOODWARD. F.V. L. WHITE. D. TOWNSEND. C.J. BOSSHARDT. J.F. HIGDON.DEPUTY HUBER. DEPUTY LIDDELL.
  • 0298 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: EXHIBIT FF.GEORGIA, WALTON COUNTY.State of Georgia,Vs. In the Superior Court of Fulton County,Leo M. Frank. Georgia.Before me, an officer authorized under the laws of Georgiato administer oaths, personally appears each of the undersignedpersons, personally known to me, who, being duly sworn, deposeand say on oath.That they are personally acquainted with J. J. Nunnally andW. L. Ricker, and that said Nunnally and Ricker are each menof the highest personal and moral character, and reputation, andthat they are each entirely trustworthy, and worthy of belief,as to any statement made by them or each of
  • 0299 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: EXHIBIT GG.Georgia, Hancock County.State of Georgia,Vs. In the Superior Court of Fulton County,Leo M. Frank. Georgia.Before me, an officer authorized under the laws of Georgia to administer oaths, personally appears each of the undersigned persons, personally known to me; who, being duly sworn, depose and say on oath:That they are personally acquainted with Jno. W. Holmes, Shi. Gray and S. W. Johnson, and that said Holmes, Gray and Johnson are each men of the highest personal and moral character, and reputation, and that they are each entirely trustworthy, and worthy of belief,
  • 0300 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: EXHIBIT HH.Georgia, Fulton County.State of Georgia, In the Superior Court of Fulton County,Vs. Georgia.Leo M. Frank,Before me, an officer authorized under the law of Georgia, to administer oaths, personally appears each of the undersigned persons, personally known to me, who, being duly sworn, depose and say on oath:That they are personally acquainted with Julian A. Lehman; and that said Lehman is a man of the highest personal and moral character, and reputation, and that he is entirely trustworthy, and worthy of belief, as to any statement made by him.W. F. UpshawC. E.
  • 0301 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Georgia, Muscogee County.State of Georgia, In the Superior Court of Fulton County,Vs. Georgia.Leo M. Frank.Before me, an officer authorized under the laws of Georgia to administer oaths, personally appeared each of the undersigned persons, personally known to me, who, being duly sworn depose and say on oath.That they are personally acquainted with Julian A. Lehman, and that said Lehman is a man of the highest personal and moral character, and reputation, and that he is entirely trustworthy, and worthy of belief as to any statement made by him.C. W. WozellR. P. Spencer,
  • 0302 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: EXHIBIT IIGeorgia, Fulton County.State of Georgia,Vs.In Fulton Superior Court.Leo M. Frank.Personally appeared the undersigned deponents, who, being duly sworn, depose and say that they are personally acquainted with C. P. Stough, of Atlanta, Fulton County, Georgia, and that they know him to be a man of high personal character, entirely trustworthy, and absolutely worthy of belief as to any statement made by him, whether on oath or otherwise.A. L. Guthman,L. P. Stephens,A. H. Van Dyke.Sworn to and subscribed before me,this 22nd day of Oct., 1913.C. W. Burke,N. P. Fulton Co., Ga.
  • 0303 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: EXHIBIT JJ.State of Georgia,County of Muscogee.Personally appeared before me, an officer duly authorized by law to administer oaths, the undersigned who, being sworn, deposes and says that he was head clerk at the New Albany Hotel (Albany Hotel Company, Proprietors), located at Albany, in said state and county, all during the months of June, July and August, 1913, and for several years prior to that time; and that attached hereto, marked "Exhibit A", is the register of guests at said hotel from the 20th day of June, 1913, to the 31st day
  • 0304 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: EXHIBIT KK.State of Georgia,County of Fulton.State of Georgia, No.Vs. MurderLeo M. Frank. Fulton Superior Court.Personally appeared Leo M. Frank who on oath deposes and states that he is the defendant above named that he did not know nor has he ever heard until the end of his trial in the above stated case that A. H. Henslee and Merceius Johenning had any prejudice or bias against deponent nor that they or either of them had ever said or done anything indicating that they believed in deponents guilt, or had any prejudice or
  • 0305 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: EXHIBIT M MGeorgia, Hancock County.State of Georgia,Vs.Leo M. Frank.In Superior Court of Fulton County,Georgia.To the Honorable Clerk of the Superior Court of HancockCounty, Georgia.This application shows the following facts:Heretofore a verdict of guilty was rendered in said case,judgment was passed by the Court, and motion for new trialwas filed in said case, which said motion for new trial is setfor hearing on Oct., 4th, 1913, before Judge L. S. Roan, Judgeof the Stone Mountain Circuit.It is shown that there are three parties who reside in Sparta,Hancock County, Georgia, to-wit: John W. Holmes,
  • 0306 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Georgia, Hancock County.State of Georgia,Vs.Leo M. Frank,In Superior Court of Fulton County, Georgia.Questions to be propounded to Shem Gray of Sparta, Hancock CountyGeorgia.1. (Q). Have you examined clipping from the Atlanta Georgianof Aug. 26, 1913, hereto attached, showing a picture of thejury in the above stated case, and showing a likeness of JurorA. H. Henslee?(A). Yes.2. (Q). Are you personally acquainted with A. H. Henslee?(A). Yes.3. (Q). Did you or not hear A. H. Henslee, discussing thequestion of whether or not Leo M. Frank was guilty of the murderof Mary Phagan, between
  • 0307 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: 6. (Q). Did you not hear A. H. Henslee state in Sparta Ga., between the time of the death of Mary Phagan and the commencement of the trial of Leo M. Frank for the murder of Mary Phagan, that Leo M. Frank was guilty of the murder of Mary Phagan? (A). Yes.7. (Q). Did you not hear A. H. Henslee say that he believed Leo M. Frank was guilty of the murder of Mary Phagan, and further that he would bet one dollar or other sum, or would like to bet one
  • 0308 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Georgia, Hancock County.State of Georgia,Vs.In Superior Court of Fulton County,Leo M. Frank.Georgia.Questions to be propounded to T. W. Johnson of Sparta, HancockCounty, Ga.1. (Q.) Have you examined clipping from the Atlanta Georgianof Aug. 26, 1913, hereto attached, giving a picture of the juryin the above stated case, and showing a likeness of Juror A. H.Henslee?(A.) Yes.2. (Q.) Are you personally acquainted with A. H. Henslee?(A.) I know him by sight.3. (Q.) Did you or not hear A. H. Henslee discussing thequestion of whether or not Leo M. Frank was guilty of the
  • 0309 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: to bet one dollar or other sum, that he, the said A. H. Hensleewould be put on the jury to try Leo M. Frank for the murder ofMary Phagan?(A). He said he had been drawn as a juror and might have toserve.8. (Q). State in full what is your business occupation, or ifmore than one, what are your business occupations?Work for Walker and Holmes.T. V. Johnson.Georgia CountyBefore me personally appeared T. V. Johnson who beingfirst duly sworn true answers to make to the above and foregoingwritten questions answered same as above set
  • 0310 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Georgia, Hancock County.State of Georgia, In Superior Court of Fulton County,Vs. Georgia.Leo M. Frank.Questions to be propounded to John M. Holmes of Sparta, Hancock County, Georgia.1. (Q). Have you examined clipping from the Atlanta Georgian of Aug. 26, 1913, hereto attached, showing a picture of the jury in the above stated case, and showing a likeness of Juror A. H. Henslee?(A). Yes.2. (Q). Are you personally acquainted with A. H. Henslee?(A). Yes.3. (Q). Did you or not hear A. H. Henslee discussing the question of whether or not Leo M. Frank was
  • 0311 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Leo M. Frank was guilty of the murder of Mary Phagan, and further that he would bet one dollar or other sum, or would like to bet one dollar or other sum, that he, the said A. H. Henslee, would be put on the jury to try Leo M. Frank for the murder of Mary Phagan?(A). He stated that he had been summoned as a juror.8. (Q). State in full what is your business occupation, or if more than one, what are your business occupations?Member of the firm of Walker and Holmes,
  • 0312 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: JURY THAT CONVICTED FRANK AS SLAYER OF MARY PHAGANJ.T. OSBURN, A.H. HENSLEE, F.E. WINBURN, W.F. MEDCALF, A.L. WISBY, W.M. JEFFRIES, M. JOHENNINGDEPUTY HUBER, M.S. WOODWARD, F.W. L. SMITH, D. TOWNSEND, C.J. BOSSHARDT, J.F. HIGDON, DEPUTY LIDDELL
  • 0313 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: EXHIBIT-LL.State of Georgia,Vs.In the Superior Court of Fulton County,Leo M. Frank.Georgia.To the Honorable George L. Bell, Judge of the Fulton SuperiorCourt:This application is presented to the Court by Leo M.Frank, the defendant in the above stated case; and shows to theCourt the following facts:The above stated case of the State of Georgia, Vs. Leo M.Frank, indictment for murder, has been tried, a verdict found,and this defendant sentenced; and a motion for a new trial insaid case is now pending before Honorable L. S. Roan, Judge ofthe Stone Mountain Circuit, and hearing set
  • 0314 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: The foregoing application read and considered. It is orderedthat Sig Teitlebaum, act as Commissioner in said case, inaccordance with Section 5818 of the Code of Georgia of 1910.This Sept., 28th, 1913.Geo. L. Bell,Judge of Superior Court, Atlanta Circuit.
  • 0315 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Georgia,Fulton County.State of Georgia, Vs.Leo M. Frank.In Fulton Superior Court.Written questions to be propounded to C. P. Stough, a witnessfor the defendant in the motion for new trial pending in saidcase, set for hearing October 4, 1913, before Judge L. S. Roan,Judge of the Stone Mountain Circuit.1. Q. Do you know A. H. Henslee, who served on the jury inthe above stated case at the trial commencing July 28, 1913?A. Yes.2. Q. How long have you known him?A. About 6 or 7 years.3. Q. During the time between the murder of Mary
  • 0316 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Georgia, Fulton County.Personally appeared O. P. Stough who having been duly swornmade answer as above indicated and sworn to the foregoing writtenquestions 1 - 6 inclusive said answer executed, sworn to andsubscribed before me this Sept. 29th, 1913.Sig. Teitelbaum,Not. Pub. Fulton County, Ga. and Commissionto take testimony.Rory Judge
  • 0317 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Georgia,Fulton County.State of Georgia, In Superior Court of Fulton County,Vs. Georgia.Leo M. Frank.To the Honorable Clerk of the Superior Court ofWalton County, Georgia.This application shows the following facts:Heretofore, a verdict of guilty was returned in said case,judgment was passed by the Court, and a motion for new trialwas filed in said case, which said motion for new trial is setfor hearing on October 4th, 1913, before Judge L. S. Roan,Judge of the Stone Mountain Circuit.It is shown that there are three parties who reside in MonroeWalton County, Georgia, to-wit: J. J. Nunnally,
  • 0318 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Georgia Fulton County.State of Georgia,Vs.In the Superior Court of Fulton County,Leo M. Frank.Georgia.Written questions to be propounded to J. J. Nunnally, Esq.W. L. Ricker, Esq. Virgil Harris, Esq., andresidence Monroe, Walton County, Ga.1. (Q). Have you examined the attached clipping from theAtlanta Georgian of August 23, 1913, and particularly the like-ness in said clipping of A. H. Henselee?(A). Yes I have.2. (Q). Do you know A. H. Henselee?(A). I do.3. (Q). Do you recall whether or not A. H. Henselee was inMonroe, Georgia, between the time of the murder of Mary Phagan,as
  • 0319 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: positively and firmly; how did he make the statement? Give his language as well as you recollect it; if you do not recollect his language, what was the tenor of it?(A). Yes, he was bitter.7. (Q). Did you hear A. H. Henslee, of Monroe, Ga., between said dates, say anything about what the jury that tried Leo M. Frank for the murder of Mary Phagan would do if that jury did its duty; if so, what did he say, giving his language as nearly as you can recollect it, and if you
  • 0320 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Georgia,Warfon County.State of Georgia, Vs. In the Superior Court of Fulton CountyLeo M. Frank. Georgia.Written questions to be propounded to J. J. Nunnally, Esq.,W. L. Ricker, Esq., Virgil Harris, Esq., andx x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x1. (Q). Have you examined the attached clipping from theAtlanta Georgian of August 23, 1915, and particularly thelikeness in said clipping of A. H. Henslee?(A). Yes.2. (Q). Do you know A. H. Henslee?(A). Yes.3. (Q). Do you recall whether or not A.
  • 0321 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: 6 (Q). Did you hear A.H. Henselee, in Monroe, Georgia, between said dates, make any statements as to what he believed about the guilt of Leo M. Frank of the murder of Mary Phagan; if so, what were those statements?(A). Yes, he believed him guilty.6. (Q). Did A. H. Henselee, in Monroe, Georgia, between said dates, in your presence and hearing, say he thought Leo M. Frank was guilty of the murder of Mary Phagan; if so, did he state it positively and firmly; how did he make the statement? Give his
  • 0322 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: J. J. Nunnally and Virgil Harris, dealers in buggies, wagons andlive stock. Also Vice President W. H. Nunnally Co., generalsupplies and merchandiseJ. J. NunnallyGeorgia Walton County.Before me personally appeared J. J. Nunnally who, beingfirst duly sworn true answers to make to the above and foregoingwritten questions, answered same as above set forth, saidanswers executed, sworn to, and subscribed before me this Sept.27th, 1913.Clifford Walker.Notary Public Walton County, Ga.2.857
  • 0323 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Certificate of the Court.The recitals of fact contained in the original motion for newtrial, and in the one hundred and twelve grounds of the forego-ing amended motion for new trial (the same being all the groundsof said original and all the grounds of said amended motion) arehereby approved as true, and the court has identified all theexhibits and they are made part of said motion for new trial.Oct. 31st, 1913.L. B. Roan,J. S. C. St. Mt. Ct.Filed in office this Oct. 31, 1913.John H. Jones, Deputy Clerk.
  • 0324 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: (ORDER OVERRULING MOTION.)After considering the above and foregoing motion and amendedmotion and affidavits submitted by the State the motion for anew trial is hereby overruled and denied.This October 31, 1913.L. S. Roan,Judge Superior Court Stone Mountain Circuit,Presiding.
  • 0325 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: STATE OF GEORGIAVS.LEO M. FRANK.MURDER.Fulton Superior Court.Trial: July 28 to Aug. 21, 1913.CHARGE OF THE COURT.Gentlemen of the Jury:This bill of indictment charges Leo M. Frank with the offense of murder. The charge is that Leo M. Frank, in this county, on the 26th day of April of this year, with force and arms, did unlawfully with malice aforethought kill and murder one Mary Phagan by then and there choking her, the said Mary Phagan, with a cord placed around her neck.To this charge made by the bill of indictment found by
  • 0326 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: doubt, one conjured up by the jury, but a reasonable doubt.Gentlemen, this defendant is charged with murder. murder is defined to be the unlawful killing of a human being, in the peace of the State, by a person of sound memory and discretion, with malice aforethought, either express or implied.Express malice is that deliberate intention unlawfully to take away the life of a fellow-being, which is manifested by external circumstances capable of proof.Malice shall be implied where no considerable provocation appears, and where all of the circumstances of the killing show an
  • 0327 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Gentlemen, the object of all legal investigation is the discoveryof truth. That is the reason of you being selected, empanelled andsworn in this case - to discover what is the truth on this issueformed on this bill of indictment. Is Leo M. Frank guilty? Are yousatisfied of that beyond a reasonable doubt from the evidence in thiscase? Or is his plea of not guilty the truth? The rules of evidenceare framed with a view to this prominent end - seeking always forpure sources and the highest evidence.Direct evidence is that which immediately
  • 0328 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Gentlemen, the object of all legal investigation is the discoveryof truth. That is the reason of you being selected, empanelled andsworn in this case - to discover what is the truth on this issueformed on this bill of indictment. Is Leo M. Frank guilty? Are yousatisfied of that beyond a reasonable doubt from the evidence in thiscase? Or is his plea of not guilty the truth? The rules of evidenceare framed with a view to this prominent end - seeking always forpure sources and the highest evidence.Direct evidence is that which immediately
  • 0329 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 The visible text in the image is: P.236PICTUREMISSINGBLANK PAGE
  • 0330 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: by his good character, and to acquit him. (Stephens case 61 Ga. 569).The word "character" as used in this connection, means that general reputation which he bore among the people who knew him prior to the time of the death of Mary Phagan. Therefore, when the witnesses by which a defendant seeks to prove his good character are put upon the stand, and testify that his character is good, the effect of the testimony is to say that the people who knew him spoke well of him, and that his general reputation
  • 0331 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: the subject of the general character of the defendant, and it is forthe jury finally to determine from all the evidence whether hischaracter was good or bad. But a defendant is not to be convictedof the crime with which he stands charged, even though, upon a con-sideration of all the evidence, as to his character, the jury be-lieves that his character is bad, unless from all the other testimonyin the case they believe that he is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.You will, therefore, observe that this is the rule you will beguided
  • 0332 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: to make it under the law. It is not made under oath and he is not sub-ject to examination or cross-examination. It is with you as to howmuch of it you will believe, or how little or it. You may go to theextent, if you see fit, of believing it in preference to the sworntestimony in the case.In the event, gentlemen, you have a reasonable doubt from theevidence, or the evidence and the statement together, or either :s tothe defendant's guilt as charged, then give the prisoner the benefitof that doubt and
  • 0333 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: V. 10852 - 4Leo FrankState of GeorgiaTo conveyancen. ConleyNote to Clerk andDeputy ClerkPlease check all of theserecords when governmentis all returned together
  • 0334 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: WITNESSESAnderson, W. E. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
  • 0335 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Witnesses:Rener, Wm. .................................. 268Barnes, Miss Sarah .......................... 259Boehm, Julian V. ............................ 262Blair, Miss Mallie .......................... 262Campbell, Wade ............................... 169 169 169 169Cowan, Miss Cora ............................ 262Carson, Mrs. R. M. .......................... 168 168Carson, Miss Rebecca ........................ 262Childs, Dr. Leroy W. ........................ 251 253Cooper, V. .................................. 211Cullen, Nathan .............................. 265Carson, Miss Rebecca (recalled) ............. 167 168Chambers, Phillip ........................... 208Craig, Robert ............................... 211Craig, Ed M. ................................ 211Gaston, L. .................................. 262Garson, Miss Irene .......................... 262Opal, Nathan (recalled) ..................... 211Orr, Samuel ................................. 211Dittler, Alex ............................... 262Denham, Mrs. Georgia ........................ 262 175Denham, Harry ............................... 174Derley, N. V. ...............................
  • 0336 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: Witnesses:INDEX #8 continued.Name D C RD RGHencook, Dr. Thomas - - 255 256Hatfield, Miss Willie - - 257 258Holloway, C. C. (recalled) - - - -Holmes, Miss Ida - - - -Holloway, A. C. - - 262 -Hays, Miss Ida - - 258 258Hays, Isaac - - 257 257Hunter, Joel C. - - 160 160Hays, Miss Velma - - 262 262Hall, Miss Hattie - - 164 164Harris, Mrs. A. L. - - 166 167Hall, Miss Cornithia - - 262 -Hall, Dr. A. L. - - 263 -Hall, Mrs. Fred - - 262
  • 0337 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: INDEX #2- continued.Witnesses:Molurty, Miss Lena - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
  • 0338 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: INDEX #2 continued.Witnesses:Willett, T. H. D 262 O 262 RD 262 RQWord, Miss Lizzie - D 262 O 262 RD 262 RQWilson, Mrs. S. A. - D 262 O 262 RD 262 RQWestmoreland, Dr. Willis P. - D 242 O 242 RD 242 RQWeinrauf, Godfrey - D 262 O 262 RD 262 RQWood, H. - D 262 O 262 RD 262 RQWardlaw, Mrs. J. - D 261 O 261 RD 261 RQWolfheimer, Mrs. Hennie - D 164 O 164 RD 164 RQWright, Miss Maude - D 262 O 262 RD 262 RQWildsmer,
  • 0339 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: INDEX #3 continued.Witnesses: D O. RD R#Kelley, H. .......... 366 366Kitchens, Miss Mamie' 344 344Matthews, W. H. ...... 357 357Maynard, C. J. ....... 359 360Merr, W. E. .......... 346 346McCann, O. B. ........ 344 344McKnight, Albert .... 359 359Mowling, J. C. ....... 362 364Miles, Dr. G. M. ..... 364 364Owens, W. B. ......... 366 366Patrick, W. C. ....... 344 344Patrick, Miss Nellie .. 344 344Pickett, E. H. ....... 351 352Read, D. D. .......... 360 360Robinson, Miss Ruth .. 344 344Rogers, W. ........... 356 356Rose, Harry ......... 343 343Smith, E. ............ 368 369Smith,
  • 0340 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: STATE OF GEORGIA,VS.LEO M. FRANK.In Fulton Superior Court,Trial begun August 26th, 1913.Judge L. S. Roan presiding.Conviction of murder at July Term, 1913of Fulton Superior Court, and motionfor new trial.BRIEF OF THE EVIDENCE.MRS. J. W. COLEMAN, sworn for the state.I am Mary Phagan's mother. I last saw her alive onthe 26th day of April, 1913, about a quarter to twelve, at home,at 146 Lindsay street. She was getting ready to go to thepencil factory to get her pay envelope. About 11:30, sheate some cabbage and bread. She left home at a quarter totwelve.
  • 0341 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: 2from Mary Phagan's home. I have known her about a year. Thelast time I saw her was Saturday morning going to town on theEnglish Avenue car. It was about ten minutes to twelve when Ifirst saw her. I left her about seven minutes after twelve atthe corner of Forsyth and Marietta Street. She had on that hat,transfer and things when I left her. She was going to the pencilfactory to draw her money. She said she was going to see theparade at Elkin-Watson's at two o'clock. She never showed up.I stayed around
  • 0342 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: on Saturday evenings I have to come at five o'clock. On Fridaythe 25th of April, he told me "Tomorrow is a holiday and Iwant you to come back at four o'clock." I want to get off alittle earlier than I have been getting off." I got to thefactory on Saturday about three or four minutes before four. Thefront door was not locked. I pushed it open, went on in and gotto the double door there. I was paid off Friday night at sixo'clock. It was put out that everybody would be paid
  • 0343 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: It took him twice as long this time than it did the other timesI saw him fix it. He fumbled putting it in, while I held thelever for him and I think he made some remark about he was notused to putting it in. When Mr. Frank put the tape in I punchedand I went on down-stairs. While I was down there Mr. Ganttcame from across the street from the beer saloon and says, "Newt,I got a pair of old shoes that I want to get upstairs to havefixed." I says, "I
  • 0344 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image:---5lit it at six o'clock myself. On Saturdays I always lit it, but weekdays it would always be lit when I got there. On Saturdays I always got there at five o'clock. This Saturday he got me there an hour earlier and let me off later. There is a light in the basement down there at the foot of the ladder. He told me to keep that burning all the time. It has two little chains to it to turn on and turn off the gas. When I got there on making my
  • 0345 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Here is the extracted text from the image: 6and didn't say nothing while Mr. Darley was speaking to me.Boots Rogers, Chief Lanford, Darley, Mr. Frank and I were therewhen they opened the clock. Mr. Frank opened the clock and said -the punches were all right, that I hadn't missed any punches.I punched every half hour from six o'clock until three o'clock,which was the last punch I made. I don't know whether theytook out that slip or not. On Tuesday night, April 29th,at about ten o'clock I had a conversation at the station housewith Mr. Frank. They handcuffed me to a
  • 0346 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: before the coroner that he had been given one of the pair of shoes of Mr. Gantt to one of the boys, they got that wrong. On Saturdays I had to wake up usually and get to the factory at twelve o'clock. This time Mr. Frank told me to get back at four. I did say before the coroner that he was looking down when he came out of his office. I told them also that there was a place in that building where I could go to sleep, but they didn't ask me
  • 0347 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: 8a difficulty and I knew that Mr. Frank didn't want him inthere. Mr. Frank had told me "Lee, I have discharged Mr. Gantt,I don't want him in here, keep him out of here," and he hadsaid, "when you see him hanging around here, watch him." Thatis the reason I thought Mr. Frank was startled when he saw Mr.Gantt. Mr. Gantt is a great big fellow, nearly seven feet.When he went out I watched him as he went to the beer saloonand I went on upstairs. He left the factory about half pastsix. I went
  • 0348 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: between the body and the door, it was dark back there. Thebody was about sixty feet from that door. If the back door hadbeen open I could have seen that big light back there in thealley. The back door was closed when I found the body. Thefirst time I went down the basement that night was seveno'clock. I went just a little piece beyond the dark, so I couldsee whether there was any fire down there. That's what I waslooking for. Yes I could tell whether the door was open fromthere. No, I didn't
  • 0349 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: 10was down in the closet I had to go at least ten feet to see whether or not there was any fire in the dust bin. I would have gone further if I hadn't discovered the body. When I saw the body, the closest I ever got to it was about six feet. I was holding my lantern in my hand. I just saw the feet. When I first saw it I was about ten feet from it. As to how far the body was from where I was sitting in the closet, it
  • 0350 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: the way back in the basement, to a partition on the left, leadingfrom the elevator. The basement is about twenty feet wide.The negro lead the way back about one hundred fifty feet and weround the body. The girl was lying on her face, not directlylying on her stomach, with the left side on the ground, theright side up just a little. We couldn't tell by lookingat her whether she was white or black, only by her golden coloredhair. They turned her over and her face was full of dirt anddust. They took a piece
  • 0351 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION.The first time I saw Mr. Frank put my tape on, he didn't say anything about it being any trouble. The last time he put it on, he said something about that he wasn't used to putting it on. I was holding the lever there and he got in on twice and he had put it on wrong and he would have to slip it out and put it back. When Mr. Frank came out rubbing his hands, he came out of his inner office into the outer office and from there in
  • 0352 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: the way back in the basement, to a partition on the left, leadingfrom the elevator. The basement is about twenty feet wide.The negro lead the way back about one hundred fifty feet and wefound the body. The girl was lying on her face, not directlylying on her stomach, with the left side on the ground, theright side up just a little. We couldn't tell by lookingat her whether she was white or black, only by her golden coloredhair. They turned her over and her face was full of dirt anddust. They took a piece
  • 0353 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: Found and identifies different parts of the building on the diagram. Witness states that diagram 1-A (State's Exhibit A) is a fair representation of the parts testified by him, i.e., main floor and stairs, basement, boiler, partition in basement, spot where body was found, and of the entire building.CROSS-EXAMINATIONWe arrived at the factory about 3:30. Lee told us it was a white woman. It took us some time to determine whether it was a white woman or not. We didn't know until the dust was removed from her face and we pulled up the
  • 0354 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: 14enough of it to have seen what it looked like, coming up to it.I made an experiment in the day time to see whether he couldsee the body or not, and I found he could see the feet, youcould see the bulk. Unless he was looking directly for someoneI don't think he could see it. The place where I thought Isaw someone dragged was right in front of the elevator, directlyback. It began immediately in front of the elevator, right atthe bottom of the shaft. The hat was possibly nearer theelevator than the shoe.
  • 0355 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: to see whether Newt Lee could have seen the body from where hestood. We placed a bulk about the size of an ordinary bodyabout the same position that this body was found in and you couldsee the bulk of the body by looking carefully by standing at thespot Newt Lee said he had seen it. A man couldn't get down thatladder with another person. It is a difficult matter for oneperson to get through the scuttle hole. The signs of dragging thatI saw was right at the bottom of the elevator shaft, on the
  • 0356 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: The staple on the back door looked as if it had been pried out with a pipe pressed against the wall. There was a pipe there that fitted the indentation on the wood. I called Mr. Frank on the telephone, and told him I wanted him to come to the pencil factory right away. He said he hadn't had any breakfast. He asked where the night watchman was. I told him it was very necessary for him to come and if he would come I would send an automobile for him, and I asked
  • 0357 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: door which looked like they had bloody finger prints. I don't know when Frank was arrested. I don't think he was arrested on Monday. He was asked to come to the station house on Monday. It takes not over three minutes to walk from Marietta Street at the corner of Forsyth Street across the viaduct and through Forsyth Street down to the pencil factory. Lee was composed at the factory; he never tried to get away. The door to the stairs from the office floor to third floor was barred when I first went
  • 0358 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: W. W. ROGERS, sworn for the State.18I am now connected with Judge Giredean's court. I was at the station house Saturday night, April 26th, and went to the National Pencil Company's place of business. It was between five and five thirty that I heard Mr. Starnes have a conversation over the phone. I heard him say, "If you will come I will send an automobile after you." It took us five or six minutes to get out to Mr. Frank's residence at 68 E. Georgia Avenue. Mr. Black was with me. Mrs. Frank opened
  • 0359 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: 19he came through the curtains. He seemed about briskly. He asked questions in rapid succession, but gave plenty of time between questions to have received an answer. Mr. Frank and Mr. Black got on the rear seat and I took the front seat and as I was fixing to turn around, one of us asked Mr. Frank if he knew a little girl by the name of Mary Phagan. Mr. Frank says: "Does she work at the factory?" and I said, "I think she does." Mr. Frank said, "I cannot tell whether or not
  • 0360 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: look at the corpse. I don't remember that Mr. Frank ever followed me in this room. He may have stopped on the outside of the door, but my back was toward him and I don't know where he stopped. Mr. Gheesling turned the head of the dead girl over towards me and I looked around to see who was behind me and I saw Mr. Frank as he made that movement behind me. He didn't go into the closet as far as I could see, but he got out of my view. He could
  • 0361 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: to get her pay." He said, "I will tell you about the exact timeshe left here. My stenographer left about twelve o'clock, anda few minutes after she left, the officeboy left and Mary camein and got her money and left." He said she got $1.20 and heasked whether anybody had found the envelope that the moneywas in. Frank still seemed to be nervous like the first timeI seen him. It was just his quick manner of stepping aroundand his manner of speech like he had done at the house thatindicated to me that he
  • 0362 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: keys out, unlocked the door of the right hand clock and lifted out the slip, looked at it and made a remark then the slip was punched correctly. Mr. Darley and Newt Lee was standing there at the time Mr. Frank said the punches had been made correctly. Mr. Frank then put in a new slip, closed the door, locked it and took his pencil and wrote on the slip that he had already taken out of the machine, "April 26, 1913." I looked at the slip that Mr. Frank took out (Defendant's Exhibit
  • 0363 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: and the piece of undershirt was broke me her hair mouth. The cord around her neck was drawn so tight it was sunk in her flesh. I don't know whether Mr. Frank went upstairs or not after we reached his house. I think he called to his wife to get him his collar and tie. He got his coat and vest some place, but I don't know where. At the time Mrs. Frank was calling Mr. Darley, Mr. Frank was putting on his collar and tie down in the reception hall. We were at
  • 0364 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: to them and Mr. Gheesling was looking straight across the body at them. Mr. Frank had no difficulty in unlocking the safe when we went back to the factory. The elevator we went down on is a freight elevator, makes considerable noise. It stops itself when it gets to the bottom. I don't think it hits the ground. She was lying on her face with her hands folded up. Her face was turned somewhat toward the left wall. A bruise on the left side of her head, some dry blood in her hair. One
  • 0365 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: When the face was turned towards me, Mr. Frank stepped out of my vision in the direction of the cheseling's sleeping room.MISS GRACE HICKS, Sworn for the State.I knew Mary Phagan nearly a year at the pencil factory. She worked on the second floor. I identified her body at the undertakers Sunday morning, April 27th. I knew her by her hair. She was fair skinned, had light hair, blue eyes and was heavy built, well developed for her age. I worked in the metal room, the same room she worked in. Mary's machinewas right
  • 0366 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: year in the same department and I never saw Mr. Frank speak to Mary Phagan or Mary Phagan speak to Mr. Frank. When Mr. Frank came through the metal department he never spoke to any of the girls; just went through and looked around. The three times Mr. Frank spoke to me were as follow. He was showing a man around and I was laying on my arm mighty near asleep and he says you can run this machine asleep can't you, and I said, "Yes, sir." Then another time I asked him for
  • 0367 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: JOHN R. BLACK, Sworn for the State.I am a city policeman. I don't know the details of the conversation between Mr. Starnes and Mr. Frank over the 'phone. I didn't pay very much attention to it. I went out to Mr. Frank's house with Boots Rogers. Mrs. Frank came to the door. Mrs. Frank had on a bath robe. I stated that I would like to see Mr. Frank and about that time Mr. Frank stepped out from behind a curtain. His voice was hoarse and trembling and nervous and excited. He looked to
  • 0368 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: could tell by going over to the factory and looking at his oashbook. At the Pencil factory Mr.Frank took the slip out,lookedover it and said it had been punched correctly. On Monday or Tues-day following Mr.Frank stated that the clock had been mispunchedthree times. This slip was turned over to Chief Lanford on Monday.I saw Mr.Frank take it out of the clock and went back with it to-ward his office. I don't know of my own personal knowledge that itwas turned over to Chief Lanford Monday. When Mr.Frank was downat police station on Monday
  • 0369 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: When I said that Mr. Frank was released I spoke before I thought. I retractedit on cross-examination. I don't know that Mr. Roaser was at the police station between 8 and 8:30 Monday morning, I said that to the best of my recollection. I wouldn't swear Mr. Rosser was there. I heard Mr. Rosser say to Mr. Frank to give them a statement without a conference at all between Mr. Frank and Mr. Rosser. I said that we wanted to have a private talk with Mr. Frank without Mr. Rosser being present. I wanted
  • 0370 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: dressing upstairs or not, I couldn't see him when he went behind theoscurtain. We stayed at the Frank home about ten minutes. At the undertaking establishment I was right behind Mr. Frank. He was between me and the body. I saw the face when the undertaker turned her over. Yes, Mr. Frank being in front of me had an opportunity to see it also. No, 'r. Frank didn't go into that sleeping room, Mr. Frank went out just ahead of me. When we went back to the pencil factory Mr. Frank went to the
  • 0371 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: RE-DIRECT EXAMINATIONMr. Frank had told me that he didn't think Newt Lee had told all he knew about the murder. He also said after looking over the time sheet and seeing that it hadn't been punched cor rectly that that would have given Lee an hour to have gone out to his house and back. I don't know when he made this last statement. I don't remember whether that was before or after I went out to Lee's house and found the shirt. It was after Mr. Frank told me about the skips in
  • 0372 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: not told him her name. I used to know Mary when she was a littlegirl, but I have not seen her up to the time I went towork for the factory. My work was in the office and she workedin the rear of the building on the same floor in the tip depart-ment. After I was discharged, I went back to the factoryon two occasions. Mr. Frank saw me both times. He made noobjection to my going there. One girl used to get pay envelopesfor another girl with Mr. Frank's knowledge. There was an
  • 0373 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: said, "Well, I have a pair of black ones here too," and hekind of studied a little bit, and said "go ahead withhim and stay with him until he gets his shoes," and I wentup there and found both pair right where I had left them- Mr.Frank looked pale and nervous and kind of hesitated andstuttered like he didn't like me in there somehow or other.CROSS EXAMINATION.I testified at the coroner's inquest. I admit I did nottestify about Frank's knowing Mary very well there, that hasbeen recalled to my mind since I was arrested
  • 0374 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: five blocks from the factory. I got there a few minutes after one. Mr. Frank told Mr. White if I wanted to get out before 3 o'clock, to come on down because he was going to leave and lock the door, that I had better be ready to go as soon as he got his coat and hat. I went on out and as I passed he was sitting in the outside office writing at a table. As I was going on down the steps I saw a negro sitting on a box close
  • 0375 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: tors of this company and myself have had a conference andthought that the public should demand that wehave an inves-tigation made, and endeavor to determine who is responsiblefor this murder," and Mr. Frank then said he had just comefrom police barracks and that Detective Black seemed to sus-pect him of the crime, and he then related to me his move-ments on Saturday, April 26th, in detail. He stated that hearrived at the factory at 8 A.M., that he left the factorybetween 9:30 and 10 with Mr. Darley for Montag Bros. for themail, that he
  • 0376 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: out of the factory, as far as he knew, but on the way out, Mrs. White made the statement that she had seen a negro on the street floor of the building behind the boxes, and Mr. Frank stated that at 1:10 P.M. he left the factory for home to go to luncheon; he arrived at the factory again at 3 P.M., went to work on some financial work and at about four o'clock, the night watchman reported for work, as per Mr. Frank's instructions the previous day; that he allowed Newt Lee to
  • 0377 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: been found. From there we went down and examined the time clock and went through the south aisle and down the ladder into the basement, where I was shown that everything had been found. As to Mr. Frank's manner and deportment at the time we were in his office, he seemed to be perfectly natural. I saw no signs of nervousness. Occasionally between words he seemed to take a deep breath and deep sighs about four or five times. His eyes were very large and piercing. They looked about the same they do now.
  • 0378 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: and I saw white smeared where the chips had been cut out andthere were also some dark spots over the chipped out places.It was just as though somebody had taken a cloth and rubbedsome white substance around in a circle, about eight inchesin diam eter. This white stuff covered all of the dark spots.I didn't note any unusual sign of nervousness about Frank inhis office. There wasn't any trembling or anythingof that sort at that time. On Tuesday night, April 29, BlackMr. Frank and myself were together and Mr. Black told Mr.Frank that he
  • 0379 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: took place shortly after midnight, Wednesday, April 30. On Monday afternoon, Frank said to me that the first punch on Newt Lee's slip was 6133 P.M. and his last punch was 3 A.M. Sunday. He didn't say anything at that time about there being any error in Lee's punches. Mr. Black and I took Mr. Frank into custody about 11:30 A.M. Tuesday, April 29th. His hands were quivering very much, he was very pale. On Saturday May 3, I went to Frank's cell at the jail with Black and I asked Mr. Frank if
  • 0380 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: report that to you. I reported the active of our conference. - No, I did not say anything about Mr. Haas wanting us to do anything except locate the murderer. Yes, I talked to you afterwards and you also told me to find the murder, even if it was Frank. Mr. Haas had said to Mr. Pierce and me that he would rather that we submit our reports of evidence to him before we turned it over to the police. No, there was nothing said about not giving this to the police. I testified
  • 0381 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: mention his hanging his head. He always work with thepolice on criminal cases. No, I did not testify before theCoroner about any white stuff having been smeared over thesesupposed blood spots. I am not sure whether I got the state-ment about Mary Phagan being familiar with Gantt from Mr.Darley or Mr. Frank. Mr. Frank was present at the time. Mr.Frank told me when the little girl asked if the metal hadcome back that he said "I don't know." It may be true that Iswore before the Coroner that in answer to that question fromMary
  • 0382 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: 48in Mr. Frank's office. He was not there. I didn't see or hear anybody in the building. The door to the metal room was closed. I had on tennis shoes, a yellow hat and a brown rain coat. I looked at the clock on my way up, it was five minutes after twelve and it was ten minutes after twelve when I started out. I had never been in his office before. The door to the metal room is sometimes open and sometimes closed.CROSS EXAMINATION.I didn't look at the clock to see what time
  • 0383 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: factory. That spot was not there Friday. The spot was about 4 or 5 inches in diameter and little spots behind these from the rear--6 or 8 in number. I discovered these between 6:30 and 7 o'clock Monday. It was blood. It looked like some white substance had been wiped over it. We kept potash and haskolene, both white substances, on this floor. This white stuff was smeared over the spots. It looked like it had been smeared with a coarse broom. There was a broom on that floor, leaning up against the wall.
  • 0384 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: in the metal department, then I suggested to search right away;that was the only spot I could tell I could tell it wasblood by looking at it. I can tell the difference betweenblood and other substances. I found the hair some few minutesafterward--about 6 or 8 strands of hair and pretty long.When I left the machine on Friday I left a piece of work inthere. When I got back the piece of work was still there, Ithad not been disturbed. The machine was in the same positionin which I left it Friday night. There
  • 0385 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: Next to the ladies' closet they are a lot of different things, mineral paints, barrels, etc, all sorts of things. That's part of the metal room where they are kept. I swept clear up to the doors of the toilets and clear up to the paint shop. It wasn't my duty to sweep where the machines are and where Mary worked but I did sweep there anyhow. I have done that several times before. There were paint spots in several different places up there when I swept up Friday. These blood spots were right
  • 0386 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: paint back in bottles. Of course if a bottle would breakthe paint would get all over the floor. The white stuffthere didn't hide the red at all. You could see it plainly.RE-DIRECT EXAMINATIONThe pencils are painted on the third floor. There isn'tany paint used at all in the factory only in the polishingroom, except on the third floor.B. B. HASLETT, sworn for the state.I went to Mr. Frank's house Monday morning after themurder about 7 o'clock. I went out there and got him andtook him to the station house. He was at the station
  • 0387 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: end out and people that come in and out. As to what I did to the elevator on that Saturday, I didn't do anything except that when Mr. White and Mr. Denham were working on the top floor, I started the elevator up and ripped up a plank for them. The elevator was locked when I sawed that plank for them but when I left it was un- locked. I looked it Friday night when I left there. But I went off from there Saturday and forgot to lock it. When I made that
  • 0388 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: ing. Anybody could have walked from the fourth floor tothe second floor all day long; there was no obstruction. Aman at the stairway on the third floor can see the secondfloor in front of the clock. The front doors were unlockedall the morning and they were still unlocked when I left.When Mr. Denham and Mr. White asked me to saw some timber forthem that morning, I went and got the key and unlocked themotor that runs the elevator. I left it unlocked after that.Anybody could have started the elevator running then by throw-ing in
  • 0389 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: that was discovered in the building, hair, blood, and pay envelope. That is what he said to me, I have never seen Mr. Frank speak to Mary Phagan. I was at the factory at 6:30 Saturday morning. I was the first man that got there. Denham and White came in about 7 o'clock and went up on the fourth floor. They were doing some work up there. I had to saw that plank for them. They told me that I would take them until about 8 o'clock. The office boy, Alonzo Mann, 13 or
  • 0390 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: 50have two clocks. One runs to 100 and the other runs from 100 to 200. Each employee has a number. That is the reason we have two clocks. When Miss Mattie Smith came in she discovered a mistake about her time by the time she reached the clock. Mr. Frank and Mr. Darley corrected it in the office and then she left. Mr. Frank got back from Montag's about 11 o'clock. He had with him the folder in which he carries his papers. Nobody was with him when he came back. He went right
  • 0391 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: Saturday morning and the fact that I moved those planks makes me know that I left the elevator unlocked. The elevator makes a good deal of noise when it starts and when it stops.RE-DIRECT EXAMINATIONI was on the second floor when all of these people came in the factory. Mr. Frank worked on his books until he got ready to go to Montags. I think it was about an hour. I checked freight with a one-legged draymen about 10:30, his wagon was right in front of the door.N. V. DARLEY, sworn for the State.My
  • 0392 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: murder was committed in the basement. Mr. Frank stated thatit looked easy for the staple to be pulled out and Iagreed with him, because the staple looked black and it lookedto me as if it had been pulled out before. On Monday Mr.Frank explained about why he was nervous on Sundaymorning. I heard him speak of the murder numerous times.When we started down the elevator Mr. Frank was nervous,shaking all over. I can't say positively as to whether hiswhole body was shaking or not, but he was shaking. Newt Leeseemed to be composed when
  • 0393 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: no blood spots on 1t. I don't think anybody could answerhow many strands of hair Barrett found. They were woundaround the lever. I don't think there were over 6 or 8 at theoutside. It was pretty hard to tell the color. It is myunderstanding that Barrett has been doing most of the discover-ing done in the building. He has lost quite some time sincethe murder, and buys quite some extras and reads them. Thewhite stuff particularly hid the spots. It looked like therehad been an attempt to hide them, but you could see the
  • 0394 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: factory; the production of the following different kinds of pencils that were produced. There are perhaps 75 or 80 different kinds, besides the special imprint pencils. Mr. Frank had to get all the data from the various departments of the factory, particularly the packing room. The cost of production was estimated most of the time as to the merchandise. The other figures were real figures. Merchandise is bought by the month and he had to figure it up at the end of the month to get the average. To arrive at the profit that
  • 0395 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: is cheap lead or good lead. The 2765 1/2 means 2765 1/2gross. Further on down you find the different items that makeup that figure under the head of wrappers, leads, tips, etc.The next figure is under rubber, 720 gross at 6 1/2 ₵. Thosefigures come from the plugging department or he can get themfrom the goods as they are delivered to the packing room, byknowing the styles and numbers, you can tell whether it is atipped or untipped pencil. You get that from the shippingroom and the other from the metal room. He arrives
  • 0396 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: sheet). There are 24 itemized items, and the word "jobs" impliesI don't know how many different kind of jobs. There are24 different kind of pencils. He puts them there as having beenproduced that week. He got the reports as to the quantity ofeach kind of pencil and had to tabulate all those reports andarrive at the total of each kind. No, I don't think he had tofigure out the cost of production of each kind, but he figuresthe quantity of each kind of pencil and shows its value on thesheet. Starnes and Black and
  • 0397 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: 57"Yes." I then asked her how was her father, and she said,"My father is dying, I think". Then she spoke to me aboutgetting some assistance from the office for burial expenses,and she commenced to cry and I walked down the steps with herto the front door. That was about 9:30. Mr. Frank stayed atthe factory until 9:40, when we left together. We went on upto the corner of Hunter and Forsyth, took a drink of sodawaterat Cruickshank's at the corner of Forsyth and Hunter. He leftme then and started towards Montag's. That's the last
  • 0398 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: cloudy most of the day. It was dark there around the elevatoron the first floor and we had big heavy boxes piled up there.One of them must have been almost as large as a piano box. Ifa man got between those boxes, we would have had to hunt tofind him. It is very dark on the second floor between theclock and the metal room. It is dark behind the ladies dress-ing room and on the side next to the ladies toilet. As you goto the stairs from the metal room, it is very dark.
  • 0399 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: me and sent for me one time. The first time I went there, ChiefLanford, Mr. Dorsey, Mr. Stephens and the stenographer wasthere. They all asked me questions, one would ask me aquestion and before I got that answered, another would ask mea question. The next time I went there, Mr. Dorsey, Mr. Starnes,Mr. Campbell and the stenographer were there. Mr.Dorsey did all the questioning this time. When Mr. Frankwas engaged on his work in the factory he was very intent onhis work, very earnest and industrious. I don't think a daypassed at the factory
  • 0400 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: found all over the building for this reason, they write an order, and sometimes fail to get the carbon under it, and other times they have to change the order and tear it out and throw it in the waste basket in the office and from there it gets into the trash. That kind of little pad is used all over the factory. The foreladies make their memorandum on that kind of tablet. You will find them all around. It is one of the biggest wastes around the place. They are all over the
  • 0401 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: it ran over a little child. He came in about 2:30 and he couldn't work any more on his books until a quarter after four. He trembled just as much on that occasion as he did on the Sunday after Mary Phagan was killed. Another time I remember when I went over to the main factory and he and Mr. Montag had a fuse on the fourth floor. Mr. Montag hollered at him considerably and he was very nervous the rest of the evening, he shook and trembled. He says "Mr. Darley I just
  • 0402 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: 62is a representation to show a full view from Frank's desk into the hall, as a matter of fact it is a single door, standard size. It looks like it was drawn to open up a space to give as much view as possible out into the hall. The safe is shown to be about half its real size on this picture. On the picture it is shown to be about one-third the width of the door, as a matter of fact it is about the same size. When the safe door is open,
  • 0403 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: was very nervous Tuesday after the extra came out saying thatthey were going to arrest him. That was about 15 or 20 minutesbefore they arrested him. As to who gets up the data for Mr.Frank for the financial sheets, Mr. Loeb sometimes, and Mr.Gantt used to get up some, and Mr. Schiff gets it up sometimes.Mr. Frank got it up himself, sometimes. No, I do not knowthat Mr. Schiff furnished it to him all the time. I never noticedwhether Mr. Lee was nervous or not at any time, but of course, helooked bothered and
  • 0404 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: being scattered around. I have soratoh pads of that shape soatter- ed around even in the basement. That soratoh pad is used all over the factory, everywhere there is a foreman or a forelady. No, not in the area around the elevator there, the trash is carried down- stairs right in front of the boiler, sometimes if they are in a hurry they leave it around the elevator for a little while, and when I go down I make the negro move it to the boiler. It is usually burned. Some of it may
  • 0405 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: - 65 -lady answered the telephone. I got them in a few minutes. Itried to get Mr. Frank again about five o'clock - Central saidshe rang and she couldn't get him. There was some blood onthe girl's underclothes.CROSS EXAMINATION.There was a wound on the left-hand side of the girl's headThe blood was dried up. It was wet right next to the skin.Lee said over the telephone that it was a white girl. Ittook us about three minutes to get to the factory from thepolice station, just as quick as the automobile could get usthere.
  • 0406 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: following answers at the coroner's inquest: "Q. Had you everseen him change that before? A. Well, he put the tape inonce before. Q. When was that? A. I don't know, sir, whenit was, it was one night. Q. How long did it take him thefirst time you ever saw him put the tape on? A. I neverpaid any attention to him. Q. Well, about how long did ittake him, five minutes? A. No, sir, it didn't take himthat long. Q. Did it take him a minute? A. I couldn'ttell exactly how long. Q. How
  • 0407 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: Chief Lanford at the end of the statement, xxxxx I wrote the statement out in longhand the same day. I don't remember exactly when.ALBERT MCKNIGHT, Sworn for the State.My wife is Minola McKnight. She cooks for Mrs. Seling. Between 1 and 2 o'clock on Memorial Day I was at the home of Mr. Frank to see my wife. He came in close to 1:30. He did not eat any dinner. He came in, went to the sideboard of the dining room, stayed there a few minutes and then he goes out and catches a
  • 0408 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: Birmingham, I told it to Mr. Craven of the Beck & GreggCompany. It was before Minola went down to the jail. Mr.Starnes, Mr. Campbell, Mr. Morse, Mr. Martin and Mr. Dorseyall talked to me. I didn't go down to see Minola at thestation house. I didn't see Mrs. Frank or Mrs. Seling thatSaturday through the mirror. I didn't keep my eye on the mir-ror all the time. I couldn't tell who was in the dining roomwithout looking in the mirror. Mr. Frank got there not laterthan 1130. Mr. Frank came on back to Pulliam
  • 0409 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: when I asked Mr. Frank for Mary's money. Some of the officeforce were there, but I can't recall their name. I worked inthe metal department about two years. I never saw little MaryPhagan in Mr. Frank's office. I don't think Mr. Frank knew myname, he knew my face. It has been some time since I asked forMary's pay by number. I do not believe that I ever saw Mr.Frank speak to Mary Phagan.RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION.I don't know who paid on Friday, April 25th.R. L. WAGGONER, Sworn for the State.I am a city detective. On Tuesday,
  • 0410 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: I DON'T know whether it was blood or not. It looked like blood.R. M. LASSITER, Sworn for the State.I am a city policeman. On Sunday morning, April 27th, I found a parasol in the bottom of the elevator shaft. It was lying about the center of the shaft. I also found a ball of rope twine, small wrapping twine, and also something that looked like a person's stool.CROSS EXAMINATION.I noticed evidence of dragging from the elevator in the basement. As I passed the rear door at 12 o'clock, the door was closed. The umbrella
  • 0411 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: told him I was not. He was not there when I went through the factory and when I told him about it, he said I bet you were scared. He walked around this way a little bit and he was kind of shaking like that (illustrating). His fingers were trembling.NELL STANFORD, Sworn for the State (recalled).The door in the rear part of the factory on the second floor on Friday evening was barred. There is no way in the rear of the building to come down to the second floor when the door is
  • 0412 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: some urine on her underclothes and there were some dry bloodsplotches there. The right leg of the drawers were split with aknife or torn right up the seam. Her right eye was very darklook-ed like it was hit before death because it was very much swollen;if it had been hit after death there wouldn't have been any swell-ing. I found a wound 2-1/4 inches on the back of the head. It wasmade before death, because it bled a great deal. The hair was mattedwith blood and was very dry. If it had been made
  • 0413 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: DR. CLAUDE SMITH, sworn for the state.I am physician and city bacteriologist and chemist. These chips (exhibit B-State) appear to be the specimen which the detectives brought to my office and which I examined, they had considerable dirt on them and some coloring stain. On one of them I found some blood corpuscles. I do not know whether it was human blood. This shirt (Exhibit B for State) appears to be the same shirt brought to my office by detectives which I examined. I examined spots and it showed blood stain. I got no
  • 0414 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: an inch through the teeth. There was a cord on the left knee, about 2 inches below the knee. There were some superficial scratches on the left and right elbow. There was a cord around the neck and this cord was imbedded into the skin and in my opinion she died from strangulation. This cord (Exhibit "C" for State) looks like the cord that was around her neck. There was swelling on the neck. In my opinion the cord was put on before death. The wound on the back of the head seemed to
  • 0415 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: brain nor the meninge were affected. There was a littlecontusion on the interlining of the skull. There was no bleedingon the brain tissues. I don't know whether it would produceunconsciousness or not. I was never asked before to examinethe inside of anybody's skull to determine the fact whetherdeath or unconsciousness resulted from the wound. It is myimpression that this lick did produce unconsciousness, but Iwon't swear it, I don't know. The hemorrhage which we dis-covered in the skull caused no pressure on the brain. That wasno sign that unconsciousness resulted. Where a person is
  • 0416 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: present when Dr. Harris made the post mortem examination of thisgirl. Cabbage is digested better by some people than others.It depends on the individual- very much. It is considered hardto digest. It depends largely on mastication. You can chew upso thoroughly that it would go down into the stomachalmost a liquid, but it would not be digested until the stomachtook up that chewed mass. It would take a much longer time todigest and assimilate unmasticated cabbage than if it had beenthoroughly chewed. It takes about 3 1/2 hours to digestcabbage properly masticated, and it
  • 0417 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: 77Q. (By Mr. Arnold) had been in the child's stomach. A blow onthe back of the head might blacken one or both eyes.RE-DIRECT EXAMINATIONI think excitement could produce flow from the uterus. Idon't think it would cause any discoloration of the walls ofthe vagina except from the blood.DR. H. F. HARRIS, sworn for the State.I am a practicing physician. I made an examination of thebody of Mary Phagan on May 5th. On removing the skull I foundthere was no actual break of the skull, but a little hemorrhageunder the skull, corresponding to the point
  • 0418 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: 78mediately beneath the surface and a great deal of hemorrhage in the surrounding tissues. The dilation of the blood vessels indicated to me that the injury had been made in the vagina some little time before death. Perhaps ten to fifteen minutes. It had occurred before death by reason of the fact that these blood vessels were dilated. Inflammation had set in and it takes an appreciable length of time for the process of inflammatory change to begin. There was evidence of violence in the neighborhood of the hymen. Rigor mortis varies so much
  • 0419 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: contents in Mary Phagan's case. It showed plainly that it hadnot begun to dissolve, or only to a very slight degree, andindicated that the process of digestion had not gone on to anyextent at the time that this girl was rendered unconscious. Ifound that the starch she had eaten had undergone practicallyno alteration. The contents taken from the little girl'sstomach was examined chemically and the results showed thatthere were only slight traces of the first action of the diges-tive juices on the starch. It was plainly evident that none ofthe material had gone into
  • 0420 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: sie of each cabbage varies, not only in the plant but from the way it is cooked. It is a very vague matter as to what influences retard digestion. Every individual is almost a law unto himself. To a certain extent different vegetables affect different stomachs different ways, but the average normal stomach digests anything that is eaten within reason. Some authorities claim that exercise will retard digestion. I don't know that mental activity would have very much effect in retarding the digestion. It is the generally accepted opinion that food begins to pass
  • 0421 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: visited the National Pencil Company three, four or five times.I have been in the office of Leo M. Frank two or three times.I have been down in the basement. I don't know whether Mr.Frank knew I was in the basement or not, but he knew I wasthere. I saw Conley there and the night watchman, and he wasnot Conley. There would be some ladies in Mr. Frank's office,sometimes there would be two, and sometimes one. May be theydidn't work in the mornings and they would be there in the eveningCROSS EXAMINATION.I don't recollect the
  • 0422 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: 82I lived in Walton County fortytwenty years. I now live right herefrom Walton County. I was absent from Walton County once fortwo or three years and lived in Lawrenceville. I have walkedhim from the factory with Miss Laura Atkins and Miss Smith.RE-DIRECT EXAMINATION.I gave Jim Conley a half dozen or more quarters. I sawMr. Frank in his office in the day time. Mr. Frank had Coca-Colalemon and lime and beer in the office. I never saw the ladiesin his office doing any writing.RECALLED FOR CROSS EXAMINATION.Andrew Dalton is my brother-in-law. John Dalton is afirst
  • 0423 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: S. L. ROS3ER, Sworn for the State.I am a city policeman. On Monday, April 26th, I went out to see Mrs. White. On May 6th or 7th was the first time I knew Mrs. White claimed to have seen a negro at the factory on April 26th. These are the same chips we had at factory. The club was not on floor by elevator the day I searched the place. I had a flashlight and searched for everything. I would have seen it had it been there.CROSS EXAMINATIONI made no inquiry of her about
  • 0424 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: they wanted to chat. When young ladies would come there, Iwould sit down at the first floor and watch the door for him. Icouldn't exactly tell how many times I have watched the floorfor him previous to April 26th, it has been several times thatI watched for him. I don't know who would be there when Iwatched for him, but there would be another young man, anotheryoung lady during the time I was at the door. A lady for himand one for Mr. Frank. Mr. Frank was alone there once, that wasThanksgiving day. I
  • 0425 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: "All right, Mr. Frank, I'll be right here." I don't know howlong he stayed at Montag's. He didn't see anything when hecome back from Montag's, but told me to come on. Mr. Frank comeout Nelson Street and down Forsyth street towards the pencilfactory and I followed right behind. As we passed up there thegrocery store, Albertson Brothers, a young man was up there witha paper sack getting some stuff out of a box on the sidewalk, andhe had his little baby standing by the side of him, and justas Mr. Frank passed by him,
  • 0426 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: time to get out." I says, "All right, I will do just as yousay," and I did as he said. Mr. Frank hit me a little blowon my chest and says, "Now, whatever you do, don't let Mr. Darleysee you." I says, "All right, I won't let him see me." ThenMr. Frank went upstairs and he said, "Remember to keep youreyes open," and I says, "All right, I will Mr. Frank." And Isat there on the box and that was the last I seen of Mr.Frank until up in the day sometime. The first
  • 0427 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: was Miss Mary Perkins, that's what I call her, this lady thatis dead. I don't know her name. After she went upstairs I heardher steps going towards the office and after she went inthe office, I heard two people walking out of the office andgoing like they were coming down the steps, but they didn'tcome down the steps, they went back towards the metal depart-ment. After they went back there, I heard the lady scream, thenI didn't hear no more, and the next person I saw coming inthere was Miss Monteen Stover. She had
  • 0428 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: down, and he says, "Well, that one you say didn't come backdown, she come into my office awhile ago and wanted to knowsomething about her work in my office, and I went back there tosee if the little girl's work had come, and I wanted to be withthe little girl, and she refused me, and I guess I struck her,too hard and she fell and hit her head against something, andI don't know how bad she got hurt, of course you know I ain'tbuilt like other men." The reason he said that was, I
  • 0429 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: and he said to go and get a piece of cloth to get around her, and I went and looked around the cotton mill and got a piece of cloth and went back there. The girl was lying flat of her back and her hands were out this way. I put both of her hands down, they went down easily, and rolled her up in the cloth and taken the cloth and tied her up, and started to pick her up, and I looked back a little distance and saw her hat and piece
  • 0430 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: turned around and went on up the ladder, and I noticed her hat and allipper and piece of ribbon and I said, "Mr. Frank, what am I going to do with these things?" and he said, "Just leave them right there," and I taken the things and pitched them over in front of the boiler, and after Mr. Frank had left I goes on over to the elevator and he said, "Come on up and I will catch you on the first floor," and I got on the elevator and started it on to
  • 0431 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: on the table to get a box of cigarettes and a box of matches,and he takes a cigarette and a match and hands me the box ofcigarettes and I lit one and went to smoking and I handed himback the box of cigarettes, and he put it back in his pocket andthen he took them out again and said, "You can have these", andI put them in my pocket, and then he said, "Can you write," andI said, "Yes, sir, a little bit," and he taken his pencil tofix up some notes. I was
  • 0432 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: and burn that myself." He looked at me then kind of frightened and he said "Let me see that money" and he took the money back and put 1 t back in his pocket, and I said "Is this the way you do things?" and he said, "You keep your mouth shut, that is all right." And Mr. Frank turned around in his chair and looked at the money and he looked back at me and folded his hands and looked up and said "Why should I hang, I have wealthy people in Brooklyn,"
  • 0433 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: the fellow that was with me, "I am going back to Peters Street,"and a Jew across the street that I owed a dime to called me andasked me about it, and I paid him a dime. Then I went onover to Peters Street and stayed there awhile. Then I went homeand I taken fifteen cents out of my pocket and gave a littlegirl a nickel to go and get some sausage and then I gave her adime to go and get some wood, and she stayed so long that whenshe come back I said,
  • 0434 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: giving day. I know the man's name was Mr. Dalton. When I saw Mr. Frank coming towards the factory Saturday morning he had on his raincoat and his usual suit of clothes and an umbrella. Up to Christmas I used to run the elevator, then they put me on the fourth floor to clean up. I cleaned up twice a week on the first floor under Mr. Holloway's directions. The lady I saw in Mr. Frank's office Thanksgiving Day was a tall built lady, heavy weight, she was nice looking, she had on a
  • 0435 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: I don't know about spelling "mother." I can spell "papa", I spell it p-a-p-a. I can't spell "rather" or "jury" or "judge" or "stockings." I never did go to school further than the first grade, I went to school about a year. I can spell "day", but not "daylight", I can spell "beer" but not "whiskey", I couldn't read the name "whiskey." No, I can't read any letter on that picture there (Exhibit A--State). I can't figure except with my fingers. I know the figures as far as eight, as far as twelve. I
  • 0436 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: 96what they were drawing. I wasn't drawing but $6.05. Snowballwas drawing $6.05. As to who it was I didn't want to see whatI was drawing, there was one named Walter Pride; he's beenthere five years. He said he drew $12.00 a week. Then there wasJoe Pride. He told me he drew $8.40 a week. They were down inthe basement and asked me how much I was drawing. I told themit wasn't none of their business. Then there was a fellownamed Fred. I don't know how much he drew. The next one wasthe fireman. I
  • 0437 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: sometimes that way and sometimes the other way. I would say,"I owe you fifteen cents, I buy three beers, and you owe mefifteen cents, and that be three beers." I say if I would be inthe beer saloon when they come in there, I would do that, but ifI could get out before they saw me, I would be gone. I neverdid know what time the watchman come there on Saturday, or anySaturday. I never have seen the nightwatchman in the factory.I have seen young Mr. Kendrick come and get his money. Healways comes
  • 0438 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: Frank would come and tell me I didn't take out that money for the time you lost this week. I don't know on what date he ever did that on. Yes, I always got my money in envelopes. As to how they would know how much to put in the envelope, when I didn't punch, they would come and ask if I was here every time I didn't ring in, and they would ask Mr. Holloway if I was here. If the clock didn't show any punch, they would ask me if I was
  • 0439 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: about half past four. He gave me a quarter and I left and thenhe left. The next Saturday I watched for him near the samething. It was about the last of July or the first of August.The next Saturday I watched for him about twelve o'clock he said"You know what you done for me last Saturday, I want to putyou wise for this Saturday." I said, "All right, what time?"He said, "Oh, about half past." After Mr. Holloway left, Mi ssDaisy Hopkins come on in into the office, Mr. Frank come outof the office,
  • 0440 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: thing to Mr. Herbert or Mr. Darley about what's going on around here."" Next time I watched for him was on Thanksgiving Day. I met Mr. Frank that morning about eight o'clock. He said "A lady will be in here in a little while, me and her are going to chat, I don't want you to do no work, I just want you to watch." In about half an hour the lady come. I didn't know that lady, she didn't work at the factory. I think I saw her in the factory two or
  • 0441 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: 101about the middle of January--somewhere about the first or middle. It was right after New Year, one or two, three or four days after. It was on a Saturday. He said a young man and two ladies would be coming. That was that Saturday morning at half past seven. I was standing by the side of Gordon Bailey when he come and told me, and he said, I could make a piece of money off that man. Yes, Snowball could hear what he said. The man and ladies came about half past two or
  • 0442 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: drew my money Thanksgiving Day or not, I don't know how muchI drew. I don't remember what time I got down or what time Ileft. I don't know when I got to the factory the day beforeThanksgiving, or how long I worked there. I don't rememberhow many hours I worked the first Saturday I watched for himor the second, or the third, or Thanksgiving Day. No, I don'tknow how much I drew on those days. The first time I was inprison was in September. The next time was sometime beforeChristmas, I can't remember the
  • 0443 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: niggers in all working in the factory. Snowball, the fireman and me did just plain manual labor, the rest of the negroes had better jobs. Snowball, the fireman and I were the last negroes to get jobs there. We were the new darkies; the others had been working before we went there. Mr. Frank used to laugh and jolly with me. I couldn't tell you the first time he did this. Mr. Darley has seen him jollying me. They would jolly me together. They would play and go on around there with me. It
  • 0444 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: be about twenty-three. I know she was there, in June, because she gave me a note to take down to Mr. Schiff and I remember that because the note had June on it. Mr. Schiff took it and had "June" on it when he read it. He read that note and he read "June" something," it was on the outside of the note. It was on the back of the note. "June" was written on the back of that note. She wrote the note and folded it up and he read "June" on the
  • 0445 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: I don't know anything about the plating room. I never have been in Mr. Quinn's office. I have put disinfectants in the ladies and gentlemen closets back there. I wouldn't go inside. I would only go to the door. I stood outside of the door and sprinkled it in them in a little way. Outside of that, and going to Mr. Quinn's office, I have never been on the left hand side of the factory. I have been there where they wash the lead at, and I have stuck bills in Mr. Quinn's office.
  • 0446 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: dollar for the watchman and stuck an extra dollar in my envelo/eand that made $3.75. I don't remember how many beers I drankthat day. Yes, I told Mr. Scott I got up at 9 o'clock thatmorning. That wasn't true. I ate breakfast about seven. Yes,I told Mr. Black I ate at 9:30. That wasn't true. I left myhouse between 7 and 7:30. I told Mr. Scott I left somewherebetween 10 and 10:30. No, that wasn't true. I got to PetersStreet about 25 minutes to 8. I don't know how long I stayedthere. Some things
  • 0447 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: 107I told them after I went home at 2:30, I went to Joe Carr'ssaloon and got 15¢ worth of beer. I don't remember tellingthem that I went there between three and four o'clock. Thedetectives talked to me nearly every day after I made my firststatement. Sometimes hours at a time. No, theydidn't cuss me. Yes. I sent for Black on May 24th. When thestatement came out in the papers that's the time I sent for him.As to how I knew it came out in the papers, I heard the boysacross the street hollering extra
  • 0448 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: didn't want them to know that I had written any notes for Mr.Frank. Yes, in that statement I told the officers I was goingto tell the whole truth. I told them that I got up at nine o'clockbecause there was nothing doing at the factory that day at thetime I said I was there at nine o'clock, because he had donetold me where to meet him at. Yes, I told them that I wasgoing to tell the whole truth. Yes, the reason I told them Ileft home at 9 or 9:30, because there was
  • 0449 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: out of jail. I don't know who the detective was I told aboutmy not leaving home at 9 o'clock. Four of them were talkingto me, all at the same time. I think one was Starnes and Camp-bell that I told that to, about changing the time. I don'tremember whether I told them that then that I was going to tell thewhole truth. I told them that after I got out of jail, afterI got back to headquarters. If you tell a story you know you'vegot to change it. A lie won't work, and you
  • 0450 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914 Visible Translated Text Is As Follows: the corner of Nelson and Forsyth Street before I went to the factory. Yes, I told them I went from Peters Street and met him at the corner of Nelson and Forsyth before I went to the factory. As to why I told them that story, because I did meet him there. No, I didn't go straight from Peters Street to the factory. I met him at the corner of Nelson and Forsyth as I told them. I went straight from Peters street to the pencil factory. I don't remember when the first time
Top