The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1914-04-17
Arguments to Be Heard
by Judge Hill on
April 22.
TO-DAY TIME SET
FOR EXECUTION
New Trial on Claim of Newly
Discovered Evidence Asked,
and Annulmcnt of Verdict
Sought Because Prisoner
Is Not in Court When
Verdict Is Given.

Atlanta. Ga. April 1e-Execution OF
Leo NJ. Frank, the young factory gu
pcrintendent sentenced TO be hanged to-
morrow for the murder OF Mary Pha-
gan, fourteen years DID, w3s stayed by
legal action to-day.
Two motions We're fled by counsel
In an effort to save the life OF the de-
fendant who is the central nEure In II
case that has caused national comment
one asks the annuluent OF the Suilty
verdict on the ground that the trial
judge erred IN allowing Frank to bc
absent from the courtroom when the
verdict was announced. The other asks
for Il mex trial the claim of newly
discovered evidence.
Arguments Oh both inotionr. which
be hcard by judge Hill on April 81
This octiou OF the court automatically
STAYS the hanging Of Frank until iiual
action is taken on the two motions
Violation Of the United States Con
Htitution is claimed hy counsel for tho
defcns. in the action OF Judge Roam.
Frank to be absent from the courtroom
when the verdict was returned. IL Is
basis OF ~! appeal TO the Supreme Court
Of the United states In case the State
courts finally decide against new
hearing.
New Attorney, In Cnse.
The motion for the nnnuiment OF The
yerdict was iiled by attorneys who
with the defense. IL raises the uucs-
ton OF the legality OF waivers or botn
The defense and prosecution, which per
be absent from the courtroom when
the jury returned its verdict
Absence of the young defendant from
the courtroom was agreed TO by the
trial judge and two OF the thre. law
ycrs then associated with the defense
ing OF tn. plan, II is said Judge Roam.
presiding, is said 10 have suggested
the absence and tho attorneys for both
sides agreed, fearing violence to Frank
m ~
turned and tho defendant was in court.
The defense attorneys also were ab-
sent.
in the motion TO set aside the verdict
holds The defense counsel had no right
70 ssree 70 r rahN absence at ne rem
Frank. the motion asserts, OF his righ,
10 counsel at that time and deprived
the factory superintendent of his legal
privilege 10 be in the courtroom.
Relative to thu agreement on Franks
absence at the time OF tho verdict, So
llc!,or-,ieucrai Hugh VI. Dorsey, chief
lowing statement late to-da3-:
Under the promise OF Franks at
Kosser, that no advantage would be
taken cf IL, and over my protest 10
The judge against proceeding under
that promise. Judse l.; ;; Roam. OF his
be absent from court when the verdict
WAS rendered.
10 correct w rOnS Done Him.
Thc two defense attorneys concerned
also ISSUED u lengthy statement regard
ing the agreement. After pointing cut
the feeling prevalent against the de-
fcudant at the time OF the trial. review
ing the suggestion OF the trial Judge
and their agreement 10 II. their state
mont says:
because OF our participation In the
agreement with ;hc judge, aS counsel.
We feel that We ought not to take part
as attorneys IN the motion TO set the
tSvv s.-fFl
Franks absence. This case however
Is an important one TO Mr.. Frank and
We have no right or desire to dictate
10 him what he ought to do under the
circumstances.
The case is his, not ours, and IT is
ms MS Ire, ana not our lives, a. stake.
court and was asked 10 make none.
II. as "a result OF what happened. he
mas been deprived OF his legal rights.
Frank asks the law 10 correct the
wrong done him.
The. circumstances worked in the
hun. as well as To his counsel. Of the
valuable right to be present when the
yerdiSt was received. This condition
va brought about by the unjust. en-
which made it impossible to conclude
this iri;. with legal regularity.
s,,c,, ! hdss ordinafy' sanY conditions no
thought OF by court or counsel The
agreement was made and carried out on
both sides with the utmost good faith
III promotion Of what was thought to be
IN the interest OF Franks safety and
public tranquility"
Discredit ConIey Evidence.
Afidavits included in the motion for
Il new trial discredit. 1t is claimed tes-
timony given by James Conley, the
negro faciory sweeper, who testified
that Frank killed the factory girl in
the plant Of the National Pencil Com
pany here, ana that he aided in the dis
posal OF the body in the basement.
Conicy IL under sentence OF ono years.
Imprisonnent rs an accessory after
The murder.
sworn statements also were included.
IN which witnesses against the defend
ant rrpudiated portions OF their cv;-
dcnce. especially that rejecting on his
character. Methods used bI- the prose
cution IN preparing the ease against
FRANK also were attacked.
The body of the murdered girl wne
found III the basement OF the National
Pencil Companys plant on the morning
OF April q. Authorities have failed
10 agree definitely as To whether dnntr
resulted from a blow she had rcccived
on the head or from strluSulution.
FRANK W:.i convicted on the first bal
lot OF the jury. The motion for a new
trial filed to-day was an extraordinary
one. previous motion was denied hy
the Supreme Court. and an appeal 10
the state Supreme Court also proved
futile, the latter affirming tho convic-