Atlanta Georgian. [volume] (Atlanta, Ga.) 1912-1939, 1913-10-07
De NAL
BY FRANK
JUROR
IensIee, in Letter to The Geor-
gian, Declares His Comment
Was Made After Trial.

The idea that there could have been
Inv mistake in the dates when they
law they overheard Juror A. H. Hem
lee make denunciatoW remarks
lgsinst Leo NJ. Frank was ridiculed
Euesdav by persons who have made
kepositions i'm respect to the nature
* Henslee's remarks.
All insist that the invectives of
|hIensIee against the defendant were
z ,tered before the trial began and
ienser was chosen a juror.
They scott at Henslee's reply to the
Aharges in which he seeks to establish
Nhat every one Of his remarks indi-
Batting prejudice and bias were made
liter the evidence was all in and the
lerdict returned.
Say They're Not Mistaken.
The atlantis declare that if it comes
In an issue Of veracity or accuracy Of
bates they have incidents by which
'they are able to fix the dates as be-
lore the trial Of Frank. They are pos
hive there is no opportunity of mis-
take.
Henslee in a letter sent to The
Georgian Tuesday, admitted that
BE- had made some of the re-
marks credited to him, but assert
ii that they had been uttered after
fhe trial and that he had stated ex-
bctly that he believed the testimony
+ b jim Conley made on the stand.
He also said that he proposed to
feek bill of Indictment at the next
Brand jury against Julius A. Lehman,
Pne Of the persons who made dep
.fsition, because of Lehman's alleged
tndeavor to represent Henslee as a
berjurer
Juror Henslee's Reply.
Here is Henslee's letter from
Gainesville:
Replying to your article in to-
days issue, October 6, in refer
ence to Messrs. Holmes, Johnson
and Gray. ! will say l am sorry
II to think that you would go ahead
and make such statements above
your signatures that | had re-
marked and tried Leo NJ. Frank
in your office per your date of
July p. Having read your dep
osition in Hugh Dorsey's office, l
will say that l spoke Of the case
freely and met your many friends
in your Office on September 2,
which was Tuesday morning.
Sorry to think that you would
express yourself, and dating
your deposition as you did, either
July y or June 81, l will say 1
was in your Office on June % be-
tween trains, but the Frank case
was never mentioned. AS to
branding YOU all liars. l have
ne'e never done so, but say that
you have miscalculated your
uate. did willingly express my
sell freely regarding the Frank
case on September ., Tuesday
morning; met many of your
friends, to whom you introduced
NE, and did say and express to
your friends and yourselves that
Leo NJ Frank, from the evidence
Vi Jim Conley, was really a per-
s Vert
maze statement to one of
we Atlanta papers that | almost
positively knew that from the dep
oS''lon received from Sparta,
I'd there would not be anything
Ua' ! had expressed prior to this
.aSe similar to that of Blakely,
"a Regarding the fact that you
@"e" me and my family for years,
WISH to state that you gentle
I Iien regard and hold in the
n'sAest esteem as men whom l
o''eVe would defend and honor
"'e and my family, regardless Of
public sentiment
Denies Calling Them Liars.
wish to state further from
deposition, after reading
1'ne IN Hugh Dorsey's Office.
-, Su' pfised that men with your