The Birmingham age-herald. [volume] (Birmingham, Ala.) 1902-1950, 1915-04-20

first being unsuccessful and the second
resulting in the decision today.
The murder of 4-year-old Mary Pha-
gan, a factory e~ploye of Atlanta, which
at first appeared to be crime of only
local Importance, eventually developed into
a case of nationwide interest This was
due in large part to the efforts of Frank
and his friends to obtain for him new
trial or annulment of the verdict. Added
interest in Atlanta was given the case
because of its having been brought into
IA municipal political controversy, which
involved attacks on that citys police ana
detective departments and wrangles
among factions in the city administra-
ton.
Soon after the trial ended the case came
in for agitation which spread all over the
country
Mary Phagan was murdered April 2s,
1913 on a, southern holiday in observance
of Confederate Memorial day. Shortly
after noon of that day she was seen to en-
ter the pencil factory, in Atlanta, where
she had been employed and where she
went to obtain wages due her. Her body
was found next morning in the basement
of the factory, with cord tied about the
neck.
Leo M. Frank, young Jew, a college
graduate and married, whose home had
been in Brooklyn, n. Y, was superintend-
after the murder Frank was arrested on
suspicion and on May s. Frank and a
negro Waterman at the factory, Newt
Lee, were held by the coroner for the
grand jury's action. Lee subsequently
was released. Sixteen days later Jim
Conley, negro sweeper at the factory,
made a confession to the police, in which
he accused Frank of having killed the
Phagan girl, and declared he had helped
dispose of the body. Conleyt. who was one
of the chief witnesses for the state al
Franks trial, was convicted as an acces.
sorry after the murder in February, 1914,
and sentenced to one years Imprisonment.
He began his term last July.
Placed On Trial
Frank was placed on trial in the SUI
perior court, July Is, 1918, Judge l.. S.
Roam presiding. Judge Roam died March
%, 1915, in New York A verdict of guilty
was returned August %. Frank being sem
fenced to death. In his statement to the
jury at the close of his trial Frank said
he had seen Mary Phagan in his office in
the factory few minutes before the time
the state contended she was murdered;
that he paid the girl her wages ana that
| she left his office The theory of the de-
| Tense has been that Conley, who was
about the building when the girl entered
| and who had been drinking. attacked and
killed the girl after she left Franks Of
| flee.
| In October, 1918, Franks attorney filed
| a motion for new trial. alleging 1903 err
rors in admission of testimony and con-
| duct of the trial, and also charging that
| demonstrations by the crowd within and
| outside tire courtroom duGng the trial had
| interfered With lair verdict. Judge
| Roam denied the motion and the Georgia
supreme court affirmed his action Febru-
airy II, 1914 motion for rehearing of
the appeal was denied by the state SUI
preme court two weeks later.
An extraordinary motion for a new
1 trial and motion to set aside the
verdict were filed simultaneously in
superior court April 16, 1914. Among
| the grounds alleged in the motion for
| a new trial was that of newly dis
| covered evidence. The motion to set
aside the verdict was based on the
| ground that Franks constitutional
rights had been violated by the trial
| court His attorneys alleged that
Frank had not been given fair trial
because of the spirit of mob violence
| that pervaded in the court room" and
also that his constitutional rights had
been violated because Frank and his
attorneys had been absent from the
court room, without Franks consent
| when the verdict was returned. This
absence. it was claimed, was at the re-
quest of the presiding judge who was
/ quoted as saying he feared mob vio-
lence against Frank and his lawyers
| If verdict of acquittal We're returned.
Motion Denied
The extraordinary motion for new
trial was denied by the supreme court
May 6, and the decision was affirmed
by the state supreme court October
IA. The superior court on June 8, 1911,
dismissed the motion to set aside the
verdict on constitutional grounds, by
sustaining the states demurrer to the
motion. hTe supreme court affirmed
| this action November IA, 1914, and six
days afterward, the supreme court re-
fused to certify q writ of error to the
United States supreme court
To review that action, application
was made first to Justice Lamar, Their
to Justice Holmes and finally to the
| entire supreme court of the United
States, for a writ of error. All held
that the decision OF the Georgia SUI
preme court could not be reviewed be-
cause its action was based on grounds
of procedure, namely. that the plea
for setting aside the verdict should
have been advanced at the time the
motions for new trial were made.
Application was made December Il