The Washington herald. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1906-1939, 1915-02-27
GEORGIA DENIES
| DISORDER STORY
Counsel Makes Reply to
Franks Legal Claims Be-
fore Supreme Court.
ASSERT JUDGE WAS KIND
No Coercion Of Prisoner to Keep Him
from Courtroom. Says Attorney
General Grices Argument.
ASSERT JUDGE WAS KIND

Counsel for the state of Georgia, in the
case of Leo NJ. Frank, the Atlanta factory
foreman, convicted of the murder OF
Mary Phagan attacked vigorously I'm the
Supreme Court yesterday the principle ar
gument made by attorneys for the &C.
cused that there We're mob disorders In
the court room during the original trial
of Frank. 1t was asserted by Frank S
attorneys that these disorders were ad-
| mitted hut this was fatty denied by
the legal representatives of the State yes
terday.
No other feeling existed, they declared,
| than such as naturally developed in a
| law abiding community" because of the
evidence as it was presented by the prose-
cution in the attempt to convict Frank.
Says Disorder Charge Grows.
| Attorneys for the State declared this
charge of disorder had grown materially
| since the trial itself and that more i'm
| portance was attached to 1t by the at
| torneys now conducting the case than by
| the lawyers who represented Frank when
! he was placed ON trial. notwithstanding
the fact that the latter witnessed the ell
| legged disorders with their own eyes.
Attorney General Grice and Solicitor
General Dorsey. of Georgia. pointed out to
the Supreme bench that the question of
disorder had been passed upon by the
appellate courts of Georgia, which had
ample jurisdiction. Attorney General
Grice quoted an opinion Of the Supreme
Court of Georgia in which it was said
that the procedure at the original trial of
Frank was regarded as satisfactory at the
time.
The two Georgia State attorneys
dwelt with especial emphasis on the point
that the counsel for the prisoner in re-
ferring to such incidental disorders as
had occurred. neglected to say that the
court had promptly reproved those caus-
ing the disturbance and forced q continu-
ance Of the trial in quiet.
Claim Disturbance Was Slight.
At the opening Of the address OF At
torney General Grice. Justice Holmes
pointed out that in Franks application
for a new trial he mentioned his alb
sence from the courtroom at the time
when the verdict was rendered Mr..
Grice declared in reply that this had not
been advanced as a reason for a new
trial Justice Hughes then questioned
Mr. Grice closely as to the details Of the
alleged disorders which had occurred dur
ing the original trial and as to the prac-
tice in Georgia. Mr.. Grice read from
the opinion of the Supreme Court Of
Georia to support his contention that
only two instances Of disorder in the |
court had occurred within the hearing
OF the jury.
THE action Of the court" Mr.. Grice |
read from the opinion Of the Georgia |
Supreme Court was deemed satisfactory !
at the time, and the orderly trial of the /
case was resumed without further ques-
tion"
We take the position" declared Mr..
Grice. that on the record presented to
the district Judge there is an absolute
denial of these allegations of disorder
continuing unrestrained.'
No Outcry Against Frank.
Solicitor General Dorsey. in conclud-
ing the case for the State, said:
Not in a single instance was there an
cutlery against Frank. We have had
cases in Georgia where the crowds
shouted: Hang Voolfolk and Hang
the defendant but no such outcry was
heard against Frank"
Chief Justice White interrupted at
this point to ask if there was any
thing in the record of the original
motion for a new trial which suggest
ed that there might be fear of mob
violence on the part of the trial judge.
Not a word" declared Mr.. Dorsey
promptly, "in that early procedure
reference was made to the effect of
fear on the jury. not on the Judge
The judge was not mentioned in this
until the procedure eight
months later. AS to the influence of
lear on the jury, as a matter of fact,
he records shows that the jury was
not in the jury room at the time Of
he disorder referred to by defendants
Counsel for the defense
omitted to state that every time the
courts attention was called to dis
,rder the crowd was cautioned and the I
sheriff was ordered to move the crowd !
back. Under the constitution of
Georgia the crowd could not be ex-
.luded." Il
Attorney General Grice in his con-
:lusion dwelt especially on the abb
ence of the prisoner from the court
Dom when the verdict was rendered. -,
There was no coercion of the pris- | ,
,ner," he said. 1T was simply the
ase of a kind-hearted judge suggest
ng to the counsel that their client
emain absent. There was no public =
'rejudice against the defendant at the
pening of the trial Such feeling as
vas aroused against him was aroused
" the character of the evidence =
gainst him the trial proceeded" :