The evening herald. [volume] (Albuquerque, New Mexico) 1914-1922, 1915-04-19

Washington. April i9.-Loo M.
Frank, the brooklyn man under
death sentence for the murder OF
Mary Phagan. an Atlanta. Ga.,
girl, losi another fight for his
life In the supreme court of the
United States today. In dcci-
sion To- which Justices Holmes
and Hughes disscntcd. the court
dismissed Franks appeal from
the federal court OF Gcorgia,
which refused to release him ON
writ OF habeaa corpus.
Frank contcndcd that alleged
mob violence" az his trial and
the fact that he WIS absent from
the court room when the Jury
returned its verdict had removed
him from the jurisdiction OF the
courts Of Georgia
The majority opinion OF the
supreme court today rejected all
those contentious and declared
Frank enjoyed all his legal rights
In the Georgia courts.
Seemingly no other avenue of
escape from the death penalty Is
open TO Frank through tho
courts, Tho state pardon off,
cials might relieve him.
Justice pitaoy In the majority do
cislon stated that the obligation
rested upon the s0promo court To
look through tFo form and into the
very heart and substance of the NUT
ter, not only Of the nvcrmcnt in
Franks petition, but ln the trial pro-
coodinga Ia the state courts thom-
selves.
Essentials OF the Decision.
The petition contains a narrative
OF disorder. hostile manifestations
ana uproar." said tho justice. which
if it stood alone and was 90 be taken
as true may be conceded To have
been inconsistent with fair trial
and an impartial verdict iut a.
consider this ns standing alone N "a
take wholly superficial view: for
the narrative is coupled with other
from which Il clearly APP
pears that the same allegations oi
disorder were submitted first to tho
trial court OF Georgia as a ground
for avoiding the consequences ~ the
trial and these allegations were con
sidorcd by those courts succcsslycll
at times ana places aud under cir
wholly apart from the at
mosphcrc of the trial and free from
any suggestion of mob domination oi
tho like. Tho facts were examined
by those courts upon evidence sub.
mittcd on both Sides and both court
found Franks allegations 70 be
groundless. except with respect 10 9
q. ~ yss
fui to the defendant
"This court holds that such a do.
termination OF the facts cannot, IL
this collateral inquiry, he treated az
q nuliity but must be takon as set.
ting forth the truth of the mattel
until Hnmc reasonable ground q
shown for an Inference that the su
prcmo court OF Georgia either wa
wanting IN Jurisdiction or committed
error IN the ocXrciso Of its iurisdic
uon, and the mere assertion hy tn
prisoner that the facts of the mattel
arc other than the state courts. upOi
fun investigation. determined then
10 be, viii not be treated as rnisini
an issue respecting the correctness %
that determination, especially no
whore tho very evidence upon which
the determination rested is withheld
by him who attacks the finding.
Respecting the fact that Franl
was not present Ia the court room
when the verdict was rendered Chi
presence having been waived boy hi
counsel. but without his knowledg
or conscnD. the Georgia court he'll
that because Frank shortly after th'
verdict. was made fuzzy aware % TN
facts. and he then made mOtioi
FOR now trial upon over i0l
grounds. not including this a. one
aud had that motion heard by boil
the trial court ana the suprem
court. he could not, after this mo
tion had been finally adjudicate
against him. move 10 set aside IN
verdict as Hulliiy because Of hi