El Paso herald. (El Paso, Tex.) 1901-1931, 1915-04-19

! appeals than in civil appeals, and
held where the questions Of law and
I tact were intermin-,led in civil cases,
{ as here, the United States supreme
court may review state courts Ilna-
I ing Of fact.
Justice Holmes delivered a dissenting
I opinion in which justice Hughes con-
J CURED.
Franks legal fight for lie has taken
! a place among the celebrated murder
cases Of recent years. Seven times
since his conviction in August. 1918,
the lower and supreme courts OF the
! state OF Georgia refused TO grant Frank
4 new trial or 10 set aside the verdict
| three times the sentence Of death was
l passed upon him and twice appeals
] were made to the United States supreme
! court, The frSC being unsuccessful and
| the second resulting in the decision
! today.
! Aroused Nations Interest.
/ The murder Of Il year old Mary
| Phagau, factory emplOye, OF Atlanta,
] Ca, which at first appeared 10 be a
| crime Of only local importance, eventu-
/ ally developed into a case OF. nation
4 wide interest This was due in large
part TO the efforts Of Frank and his
/ friends TO obtain for him q new trial
or annulment Of the verdict Added
/ interest in Atlanta was given the case
] because Of its having been brought
I into municipal political controversy,
| which involved attacks on that clty's
police and detective departments and
/ wrangles among factions in the city
administration
History OF Murder.
Mary Phagan was murdered April Z
&c, 1913, on q southern holiday in OBJ
servance Of confederate memorial day.
| shortly after noon OF that day she was
seen 10 enter the pencil factory, in
Atlanta, where she had been empIoyed
ana 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 NJ Frank, a young Jew, a coll
lege graduate and married, whose
home had been in Brooklyn, n. Y, was |
superintendent Of the pencil factory.
Three days after the murder, Frank !
was arrested on suspicion and on May |
s, Frank and negro Waterman at the 7
factory, Newt Lee, were held by the /
coroner for the grand jury's action. 1
Lee subsequently, was released Six !
teen days later Jim" Cohley. a negro |
sweeper at the factory. made a con-
fesslQn to the police in which he !
accused Frank OF having killed the ]
Phagan girl and declared he had |
helped dispose OF the body. COnley.
who was one Of the chief witnesses !
for the state at Franks trial, was con-
yicted as an accessory after the murder I
In February, 1914, and sentenced TO one 4
years Imprisonment. He began his
term last July
Frank Is Convicted.
Frank was placed on trial i'm superior
court, July IS. 1913. A verdict Of guilty
was returned August %, Frank being
sentenced to death. In his statement |
10 the jury at the close Of his trial Z
Frank said he had seen Mary Phagau
in his Office in the factory, q few min
utes before the time the state con- I
tended she was murdered, that ne paid I
the girl her wages and that she left
his Office The theory OF the defence
mas peen that Conley' who was about
the building when the girl entered. and
who had been drinking, attacked and
office
In October. 1918. Franks ATTORNEYS
Med motion for new trial. alleging
lO5 errors in admission OF testimony
and conduct Of the trial, and also
charging that demonstrations by the
room during the trial had interfered
with a fair verdict Judge Roam de-
MED the motion and the Georgia SUI
preme court affirmed his action Feb.
II, 1914 motion for rehearing OF
the appeal was denied by the state
supreme court two weeks later.
Mob Spirit Prevailed.
An extraordinary motion for new Z
trial and motion to set aside the YER I
dict were filed simultaneously in su-
pertor court April 16, 1914. Among the !
grounds alleged in the motion for a Z
new trial was that Of newly discovered /
evidence. The motion to set abide the I
verdict was based on the ground that
! ranks constitutional rights had been / |
violated by the trial court His attor-
neys alleged that Frank had not been |
given fair trial because Of the spirit ]
OF mob violence that pervaded the |
courtroom; and also that his Consti- l
tutional rights had been violated be-
cause Frank and his attorneys had 1
been absent from the courtroom. with
out Franks consent when the verdict /
was returned This absence il was /
claimed, was at the request of the pre- |
siulnB Judge who was quoted as saying |
he feared mob violence against Frank |
3nd ms lawyers u a verdict OF acquit-
tai were returned. u
The extraordinary motion for new l
trial was denied By the superior court
May s, and the decision was affirmed I /
~ the state supreme court October Il I /
Inc superior court. on June 6. 1914.
erdict on constitutional grounds. by
sustaining the states demurrer to the ] /
notion The supreme court affirmed I
ms action November IA, 1914. and six /
fused TO certify a writ Of error TO the /
United States supreme court.
Carried 10 Supreme Court.
10 review that action application
mar. then 10 Justice Holmes and
lnaily to the entire supreme court Of Il
ne United States for a writ of error. ]
All held that the decision Of the Gcor-
ia supreme court could not be re-
'iewed because its action was based on /
grounds OF procedure. namely, that the /
llea for setting aside the verdict I 4
mould have been advanced at the time
he motions for new trial were made
Application was made December 10 to /
Judge Newman Of the federal district | /
'ourt Of Northern Georgia for a writ Of /
iabeas corpus, alleging Frank had been
convicted without due process of law
hat the trial court had lost Jurisdiction /
'vcr him during tho trial because il L
vas dominated by a MOB hostile to the 3 /
prisoner" and that Frank had been
-bsent from the court room when the
erdict was returned. Two DAYS later
udge Newman refused the writ of ha.
'e2s corpus, holding that to grant IL ]
would mean that a federal court should !
eview the action Of the state courts in
manner not warranted BY the law of I
he country. and that too. after the su-
IRENE court OF the United States had Il
ecided no federal question remained i
or consideration in the case Judge 1