The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1914-03-15
Woman Alleges That $1,000
Was Promised to Her to
Lie on Stand.
rOrR OTHER AFFIDAvITS
Bias and Suppression of Evi.
dence Alleged Against
Prosecutor.
ACCUSED MAKES DENIALS
Gives Out Statement With Cues
lions to Prove He Could
Not Be entity.
ACCUSED MAKES DENIALS


mo interes. Of Leo NJ Franks prosecutors
made her an OFFER OF $1,000 to swear to
A. Infamous story on the witness p,and
hss been given out by the convicted mans
counsel
Ms. Miller s~esrs she hatly refused the
orer commanding Colyar TO leave her
home. The AFFIDAVIT. which is In posses
sion Of Franks defence. Is considered per-
hans one Of the strongest arguments to
b. presented in the application for a new
trial before Judge Ben Hin next month.
-Four other aff,davits were revealed by
Franks attorneys to-day. One 10 by Miss
Nellie Wood. an ex-employee OF the Ma
tonal Pencil plant. who swears that So
HECTOR Hugh Dorsey once admitted to her
tina, he had been misled BY the detectives
Ia regard to her testimony.
She also accuses Detectives Bass Roescr,
Norris and Chewing OF seeking to frame
M scandalous testimony for her to In
toduce against Frank on the witness
Sand She says that on one occasion she
ras fairly surrounded by detectives. who
s,-ove 10 coercc her into agreeing to tell
this story of their Connection
Doe.n't Believe Her sister.
Another affidavit Is from Miss Lille
Mae pattis sister-in-law OF Nellie Pettis,
the latter of whom testified at the cor
on4rs inquest that Leo Frank had made
improper advances 10 her. Lille Pettis
asserts that she does not believe her sis
ters story and that Detective Bass Rosser
.rd.avored before the trial OF Frank -
&c, her TO swear to similar story against
the factory superintendent, which she re-
fused TO do
Tne important feature OF her afYidavn
however Is an alleged advance made oS
I'm Conley, the convicted negro accom-
rlcs She swears that at one time In
TIE pencil factory Conley approached her.
aying
Miss Lille, YOU sure Ii a pretty gal.
and wish | was a white man"
She also says that she and number
o. other girls while coming down the
stairway one day were accosted by the
n.xro, who said
Are you gals going 10 quit the fac
p-yr
He received the reply that they were
%.
L am sure glad" she says he az
Uered. because I'm going TO give all OF
You Christmas present"
Mrs Hattie M!ller's testimony 10 by far
,he most sensational yet disclosed by
the defence. She swears that A. =. Col
var went to her home In June. 1918. told
irving TO work up evidence against Frank.
asking her II she did not at one time
work IN the pencil factory.
Upon her reply that she had been en-
p'oyed by Frank she svears he made a
proposition to her 10 swear that Frank
had been intimate with her.
'Co.yar then made me an offer OF
$1,000 TO tell such a story" she swears In
her affidavit. which continues:
"Deponent became insulted and In
dgnant at Colyar's ofYer and promptly
tod him 10 leave her house. When
Colyar saw that she was angered ne
tod her not 10 get mad. as he was only
making her fair business proposition
H. further added that we want you 10
swear that Mr. Frank made improper
overtures to you in his Office, even II II
10 not true
He again said that we will give you
q 900 for such an affidavit. delivered on
tie witness stand Deponent again told
hin that under no circumstances would
che swear 20 lie for him or for any
ore else for any amount of money.
Then Colyar asked II she would mol
swear that Mr. Frank had at least at
tempted to become familiar with her, anc
Opponent told him that under no cir
tumstances would she swear to lie FOL
lin.
Just before Co!yar left her house h
esed her not to tell any one ne hat
oeea TO see her, but deponent did no
promise him not To tell It."
Mss Nellie Wood, formerly employed III
FRANKS factory, says in her afidaVt ina
detectives erdeavored to make her admi
mat Nj Frank had while talking to he
IN h's offioe grabbed her and attempted
s'is Of Violence or perversion. These In
oNlafItns she prnmntly denied. she al
f--s When these questions were beini
asked her they were asked In a confusini
manner by reason OF the fact that she wa
actually surrounded by detectives and tina
tFN' Jr". thcn another would ask her Ques
tors and depcu.nt cannot recall just how
~ questions were made by the detective
u srt her on record ana have her max
sa'eI,n,s that were not true, the am
tarit saws
Miss Wood said sns explained
no"'tor Dorsey that non" Of the insinua
tonS that h. told her he Understood ha
come from deponent were true. MI
b''se' said 20 her she alleged: We'll.
ta'' been mislcd and did not understan
H. situation"
~ the same time Mr.. Dorsey ex
pai1ed, continues tho affidavit. ITO de
pnn'nt that II was a great disappointment
| ~ nan from the standpoint OF witnesl
inc d"pohent explained to Mr.. Dorse
u
70 70 on the witness atand and swear I
sNNtHng against Mr.. Frank.
pNpouent says that at no time coul
.ne interpret the actions OF Mr.. Frank a
patiis on the shoulder which he di
.u'Hs conversations with her,
similarity Of an obnox ous kind, and MOI
V1N"Ies. as she has always believed, this
-, FRANK was perfect gentleman an
wa not Intend to convey to her the impre,
on mat he WAS trying to become ia
""tna'e with her at any time"
Frank Puts some Qssstiews.
frank answered some questions recent
earnng the care and ne gave out Il
.e,t list Of questions he asserted n
ts'Ic ought to answer before convicttn
..!1 ~ Mary Phagan's murder Frank
'altlntnt follows
nave answered a number OF que
IONS put to me In reference to varios
.'''N IN my case ] now wish In tuf
put the following questions. to
answered by the public. al Of which q