1230 Sheet – Supreme Court Georgia Appeals of Leo Frank, 1913, 1914

Search for:

Reading Time: 4 minutes [638 words]

Visible Translated Text Is As Follows:

189
duction for April 18th, 19th, 22nd and 23rd, but he had omitted the entry for the 24th, and the 24th not being there, of course it was not totaled or headed, so it became necessary to look in this bunch of daily reports (Defendant's Exhibit 4a, 4b, 4c, 4d,) which was handed in, and then place them in, forelady, sort out the various pencils noted on there, and place them in their proper places. Before proceeding further on that, I want to call your attention to the fact that we use this sheet (Defendant's Exhibit 7) for two weeks. You notice two weeks ending down there April 27th, April 17th, and one ending the week later, April 24th, Mr. Schiff, I notice, put April 17th at the top and the date corresponds to the entries here on the side; these are the dates alongside of each entry. Now where we have any special pencil, as a general rule—for instance, take two 10-X special up there; we manufacture two 10-X special for the Cadillac Motor Company. Now, there is a 660-X pencil (Defendant's Exhibit 7); that 660-X pencil we call Panama, but in this entry—it is called Cracker-Jack. Now, here is another 660-X special (Defendant's Exhibit 7), ours being Panama and that Universal 660-X special. In other words, gentlemen, we put the name of the customer, if he wants business in a sufficient quantity. Well, I had to go through this report for Thursday (Defendant's Exhibit 4a), handed in by Miss Flowers, the forelady of the packing department, as she said, on Friday; I had to go through it and make the entries. Now, after I made the entries, I had to total each number for itself; that is, the number of 10-X, 20-X, 30-X, etc. Now, I notice that both of the expert accountants who got on the stand, pointed out two errors. While those errors are trivial, yet there is enough of human pride in me to explain that those errors were not mine. Those errors, one of one and a half gross and one of one gross, in totaling up, these totals here on the 18th and 19th—those entries were made by Mr. Schiff. I don't expect he meant to make an error, but they happen to be in his handwriting. Those totals were already down there for the various days when I got the sheet and I always take them as correct without any checking of his figures. The only figures that I check are my own figures. I add my correct figures to his figures and of course, the "having" checked the figures, I had to assume he entered it correctly, so I would not have known it. As a part of my usual method is to take his figures as correct per se. Now, after I had added them in the total, the next thing I did was to make out the job sheet; the job or throw-outs. Now in regard to these jobs, if I recall it correctly, was the only error that the expert accountant found in my work on the financial sheet for that day, but it really was not an error, as I will show you. He didn't know my method of doing that, and therefore, he could not know the error. When I explain to you fully the method in which I arrived at these figures you also will see they are not in error. Now among the packing reports that are handed into the office just like Miss Eula May handed this (Defendant's Exhibit 4a) in from the packing room proper, there is another room where pencils are packed, viz.: the department under the foreladyship of Miss Fannie Atherton, head of the job department. The jobs are either seconds or throw-outs