Newspaper Page Text
PAGE TEN
shown to be what those .witnesses proved
Frank to be. And the terrible significance of
the unimpeached and unquestioned witnesses
consisted of this:
They proved Frank to be just the kind of
animal to commit that bestial crime.
In spite of all this, “the Great Detective”
offers SI,OOO reward for any evidence of
Frank’s lewdness! Since when, did Detec
tives take all the people for fools?
This man Burns richly deserves a coat of
tar and feathers, plus a ride on a fence-rail.
He has been engineering a campaign of syste
matic lies tending to blacken the citizens of
this State, tending to bring our Courts into
contempt, and tending to provoke an outbreak
of popular indignation.
With all the bravado of a shallow" bluffer,
and with all the insolence of irresponsibility,
he has gone to the extreme limit of
toleration. Tim Uw-abiding people of
Atlanta will deserve the greatest credit, if
they can refrain from laying violent hands
upon that tamperer with witnesses, that paid
detainer of a great State, that fake detective
who came here to conceal crime, and to defeat
the ends of Justice.
If Burns were an honest man, legitimately
seeking to uncover crime, no one could criti
cise him. But when he comes to Georgia,
and begins to work on witnesses who have
already testified under oath, and when he uses
threats, tF NOT BRIBES, to prevail on them
to change their sworn evidence, he makes
himself a criminal, AND HE SHOULD BE
DEALT WITH AS A CRIMINAL.
There may not lie away by which the law
can reach him, but there is away to reach
him.
This enemy of the law has exerted all of
his clumsy efforts to entrap Montine Stover,
one of the State’s most material witnesses.
IF/izz/ right did Burns Ivane to try to per
suade, or intiniAdate, that young woman into
committing perj ary ? •
What right did he have to <ret her into
Samuel Boorstein’s office? What right did
Burns have to thrust himself upon the girl
while she was there? When she refused to
stay in Boorstein’s office, after learning who
Burns was, why did Boorstein’s stenogra
pher catch hold of Mon tine, and try to keep
her in the office?
Hare the working girls of Atlanta no
rights at all?
Pursuing this young woman "with his law
less methods, William J. Burns intruded him
self upon her home, after Rabbi Marx had
tried in vain to influence the girl’s mother.
What right did Rabbi Marx have to try to
tamper with lawful evidence?
Who commissioned him to cover guilt, and
make murder safe?
Shame upon such a Rabbi! Shame upon
the “Detective” who can prostitute the most
sacred of callings to secure immunity for the
worst of criminals.
After Burns has tried nersuasion on the
girl and her mother, and had met the rebuff
he merited, the booby and coward threatened
them, saying—
“lVw will have to bear the thorn."
What thorn? Did Burns mean to threaten
those humble people with {he persecution
of rich Jews?
When M iss Stover and her mother told the
Rabbi, and Frank’s wife, and William
Jackass Burns that her evidence in court was
the truth, and she could not change it, why
didn’t they let her alone?
WHY THREATEN HER?
The Burns Agency has been furnishing
thugs to do criminal work for the Colorado
and the Michigan mine owners', cnief of whom
is John D. Rockefeller and his hopeful son.
The Burns Agency is a menace to law and
order.
William J. Burns himself is now engaged
in criminal work in Atlanta, and the people
ought not to stand for it.
THE JEFFERSONIAN
Such witnesses as Montine Stover ought to
be protected from such bulldozing methods as
those of Luther Rosser, Reuben Arnold and
William J. Burns.
Leo Frank is guilty of the foulest crime
ever committed on a Georgia girl, and he
should not be allowed to escape.
The legal evidence on which he stands con
victed is far stronger than that on which the
three poorer Jews of New York have been
executed— executed with the emphatic
approval of rich Jews like Ochs and the
Pulitzers.
The people of Georgia are squarely up
against this question—
Can unlimited money buy immunity for
unprecedented crime?
That the Geat Detective is working to sup
press evidence and defeat the law, nobody
doubts. His unscrupulous conduct proves it.
He has no “Report:” he has no new evi
dence that is true: he has no criminal at large
waiting to be arrested. It’s all a sham, a
fake, a brazen series of shameless falsehoods.
The Atlanta papers have been muzzled,
scared off, or bought off. Everybody knows
it.
The conspiracy of Big Money against the
law, against the courts,, and against the poor
little victim of hellish passion, is wide-spread,
powerfid, insolent, defiant and desperate.
SHALL IT BE ALLOWED TO SUC
CEED?
Here Is How “Fattier” Knoll
Educates His Readers About
the Protestants.
AT Huntingdon, Indiana, there is published
The Sunday Visitor, a Roman Catholic
paper edited by Rev. John F. Noll, and
endorsed By John Bonzano, the Pope’s ambas
dor to Wilson, Bryan & Co.
The paper is also endorsed by H. J. Alerd
ing, Bishop of Fort Wayne, Indiana.
In a recent issue the Bureau of Informa
tion, in Noll’s paper contains the following
question and answer:
Question: Are the Lutherans considered Pro
testants? I am under the impression they are.
However, recently when I so stated, I was flatly
contradicted.
Answer: The Diet of Spires, 1529, resolved
that the Lutheran princes should not hinder their
Catholic subjects from practising their religion.
The Lutheran princes “protested.” On that
account they were called Protestants.-
You will never see in print a bigger lie
than that.
’ Noll says that the Lutheran princes pro
tested, because the Diet resolved that the
Catholics must be permitted to practise their
religion; and that because of this protest,
these Lutherans were called Protestants!
May the Lord have mercy on that liar’s
soul.
In the Diet of Spires, the Lutheran princes
were peremptorily commanded to uncondi
tionally submit to the Emperor and the Ital
ian Pope, who were uniting their powers to
crush the Lutherans into abject obedience to
popery.
The Luthernan princes, led by the Elector
John of Saxony, protested against surrender
to the Italian pope, and for that reason were
called “Protestants.”
Their noble Declaration of Independence,
against the paganism of popery is to be found
in all the standard histories of the Reforma
tion.
Elector John read the paper to the Diet,
on April 19, 1529; and it was a magnificent
appeal for religious liberty.
There isn’t a word in it, against “their
Catholic subjects practising their religion.”
The boot was on the other foot. The pope
and emperor wanted to stamp out the practise
of the Lutheran religion. The Lutheran’s
were altogether too weak and liberal to even
desire to interfere with Catholic worship.
The Lutheran princes closed their splendid
address to the Diet, by saying—
“For these reasons, most dear lords, uncles,
cousins and friends, we earnestly entreat you
to weigh carefully our grievances and our.
motives.
If you do not yield to our request, we
PROTEST by these presents before God
and our Savior . . . that we, for us and
for our people, neither consent nor adhere .
. . to the proposed decree in anything that
is contrary to God, to His Holy Word, to our
right consciences, to the salvation of our souls,
and to the last decree of Spires.” *
The first decree of Spires allowed the
Lutherans to practise their religion. “The
proposed decree,” against which they pro
tested ordered them to give up their religion
and submit to popery.
The Lutherans refused to worship a man,
and declared their purpose to worship God.
The emperor and the pope commanded
them to accept the pope’s law as supreme:
they refused, and said they would accept the
Bible, as interpreted by their own consciences.
Because they protested against slavish sub
mission to the Italian pope, they became
known as PROTESTANTS.
Father Noll knows this: Bishop Alerding
knows it: Bonzano knows it: and it is a
shame that they should try to deceive those
millions of Americans who do not have time
to read history, and who have to depend for
information upon such falsifiers as Noll,
Alerding and Bonzano.
Growing out of the Lutheran demand for
religious liberty and Bible Christianity, came
the Thirty Year War, in which the Italian
popes and the Catholic princes of Germany
and Spain did their utmost to kill out the
Protestants.
Unfortunately, the Protestants of today
have forgotten how much bloodshed it cost to
wring from popery the right to read the
Bible, to exercise freedom of conscience, and
to speak and write without a special permit
from the Italian priests.
Apparently, we have got to learn it all over
again.
The Sunday Visitor: A Weekly
Performance in the Baboon
Department.
SPHERE is a paper published in Hunting
-1 ton, Indiana, that gets my Ebenezer.
The name of the paper is, The Sunday Visi
tor. It claims great sanctity and circulation.
It is conceded to be a most amusing paper,
especially in its Baboon Department, alias,
its “Bureau of Information.”
In this department, weak-minded people
ask questions which are answered by men who
have no minds at all.
That’s my reason for calling it The Baboon
Department.
The Sunday Visitor comes to my house,
regularly, but not on Sunday. If it came on
Sunday, it would not see yours truly—Sun
day being my day for visiting the North
Pole.
As I was saying, the Sunday Visitor has
some queer monkey doings in its baboon
department. For instance, a person whose
name is not given, wrote to inquire—
What becomes of those prayers, sacrifices and
good works which we perform for a soul that
no longer stands in need of them, or is beyond
all help?
You can see for yourself that the question
came from a person who has very little mind.
The answer shows that it was written by a
man who has no mind at all. Here it is—
The merit of such prayers and works go to the
treasury of the church which is made up of the
