HOW MUCH LONGER WILL THE
PEOPLE OF ATLANTA ENDURE
THE LAWLESS DOINGS OF
WILLIAM J. BURNS?
■■■ ■ •
What Right Has This Sham Detect
ive to Tamper with the Witnesses
Who Told the Truth on Leo Frank,
the Foul Degenerate Who Mur
dered Little Mary Phagan ?
(continued from page one.)
“the tender hearted,” “the overscrupulous,”
“misguided sympathy,” “the pleas of mere
hysteria,” and the “vindication of our legal
processes.”
‘W legal processes”— whose?
“Trial by jury is a safe and fair method of
dealing, even with the issues of life and
death”—• when?
Adolph Ochs eulogizes the firmness and
“wisdom of Gov. Glynn and all the other
officials concerned in resisting the pleas of
mere hysteria,” the pleas of the Rabbis, the
pleas of the lawyers, the pleas of perjured
“new witnesses,” the pleas of relatives, the
pleas of mothers and fathers, the frantic pleas
of the gunmen themselves: but that was in
New York.
' Down in Georgia, and in the case of Frank,
Ochs demands a different standard and pro
cess. 'Why?
In another editorial, the worthy Adolph
Ochs said:
THE FOUR “GUNMEN.”
All efforts to stay the course of the law in the
case of the four murderers of Rosenthal have
been defeated. Late yesterday the Governor
refused, for the thrid time, to interfere with the
carrying out of the sentence. He has been sub
jected to quite needless strain, and it is to be
hoped that the well-laid plans to prevent justice
in this case may lead to a modification of criminal
procedure.
Two main lines of approach toward their object
were used by the persons interested in the efforts
to secure a stay, a reprieve, or a pardon for the
condemned men after the Court of Appeals, with
much deliberation, had confirmed the verdict of
the jury in the trial court. By appeal to the
courts they managed to secure consideration of
alleged new evidence, which upon examination
proved to be valueless. In effect, this was little
better than trifling with the dignity of the court.
Justice Goff’s decision on Saturday was marked
by sound and convincing reasoning. By the accus
tomed appeal to the sentimentalists a show of
sympathy was secured for the prisoners, which
it was hoped might influence the Governor and
the court. But no murderers ever punished were
less entitled to sympathy than these hired slayers
of Rosenthal.
Instead of wasting words over their fate, the
sentimental people, who contrive to put so many
obstacles in the way of the punishment of mur
derers in this country, would do well to use such
influence as they possess toward the reform of
young men of this class who have not yet fallen
under the ban of the law. The desperate and
determined quality of the attempts to secure a
stay in the case of the gunmen was shown in the
discovery yesterday that the dynamo at Sing Sing
had been damaged. The discovery wias made,
however, in time to prevent a delay.
* , •
I have quoted this editorial at length,
because it so exactly fits the “lines of
approach” in the Frank case. There are the
very same methods in both tragedies. After
appeal to the highest court from the jury’s
verdict, comes “alleged new evidence,” the
“trifling with the dignity of the court,” and
“the desperate and determined quality of the
attempts to secure a stay in the case.”*
As to “sentimental people who contrive to
put so many obstacles in the way of the pun
ishment of murderers,” we not only had the
Atlanta Journal ordering a new trial, and the
negro paper demanding a new trial, and two
or three' asinine preachers denouncing the
courts, but they had to import an opinion
out of Miss Jane Addams of Chicago, the
white lady who is so much one of the “senti
mental people” that she believes in the inter-
THE JEFFERSONIAN
marriage of negroes and Caucasians—
though she has not as yet married a black
man, herself.
Let, me quote, also, the editorials of those
intelligent Jews who own the New York
ITF orld*
JUSTICE GOFF, THE GUNMEN AND THE
GOVERNOR.
The final hearing before Justice Goff Saturday
in the case of the gunmen who killed Rosenthal
produced nothing but a tissue of worthless testi
mony which was easily riddled. Nothing else, of
course, was expected; no honest man, knowing
facts that would save four men condemned to
death, would have delayed so long in coming for
ward. Yet the hearing was justified if it has
aided Gov. Giynn in one of the most difficult and
trying duties of his administration.
The gunmen were fairly convicted. The Court
of Appeals unanimously affirmed the conviction.
The enforcement of the laws against major crimi
nals encounters too many delays and difficulties
as it is. Between proved murderers and the pub
lic, Gov. Glynn has decided justly and wisely.
Again The World said:
WHAT IT MEANS.
Not since the execution of the Chicago Anarch
ists has any American city had so impressive a
lesson in law and order as New York received
yesterday when the four “gunmen” convicted of
the murder of Herman. Rosenthal followed one
another to the death-chair in Sing Sing.
No city has more imperatively needed such a
lesson.
Those four “gunmen” had no personal griev
ance against Rosenthal in his quarrel with Becker.
They were simply hired to murder Rosenthal, and
they shot him down as they might have shot a
dog, relying on police influence and political influ
ence to protect them. They would have killed
anybody else in the same manner if they were
paid for it and had been assured of their “get
away.”
Thus the Pulitzer owners of the World
strike the same note as the Ochs owner of the
Times.
Let us not suppose for a moment that these
editorials were at all influenced by the fact
that the murdered man was a Jew. Let us
rather assume, in good faith, that the Jewish
owners of those two metropolitan papers
gloried in the triumph of the law —THE OLD
MOSAIC LAW.
But how can their eulogy on trial-by-jury,
in those cases, be reconciled with the bitter
and slanderous crusade they have waged
against trial-by-jury in the Frank case?
If Mary Phagan had been a pretty little
Rose Pastor of the East-side Ghetto, deter
mined to preserve her purity for some good
husband, like J. G. Phelps-Stokes, would the
Pulitzers and the Ochs person have been as
quick to raise the false alarm of race-hatred,
police frame-up, and injured innocence? •
Lefty Louie and his Hebrew pals killed a
Jew; and the law exacts aii'eye for an eye.
“Good!” cry the Pulitzers and the Ochs per
son.
But Leo Frank, a lustful brute, goes from
woman to woman, girl to girl, until his
diseased sensuality maddens him with desire
for pure little Mary Phagan, “a factory girl”
—and in the struggle to enjoy her, either
naturally, or unnaturally, the lascivious
simian kills her.
Poor little girl! If ever the Lord God
Omnipotent must have yearned to unleash
the lightnings of His wrath on any defiler of
His image, it must have been when Leo Frank
was sinking that child into the horrors of
hell.
Better for her to die, perhaps, than to drag
that hideous remembrance through the heavy
hours of the long nights of after years.
* * sjc »Je * Sf; sjc
If ever a man was given every opportunity
to clear himself, it was Frank. If ever, an
accused met fair fight in the Solicitor, and
patient impartiality in a presiding Judge,
Frank was that man. If ever a man was
self j convicted, by circumstances with which
the prosecution had nothing to do, it was
Frank. If ever a man, and his lawyers, and
his detectives have deepened the conviction
of his guilt, after the Jury declared it, and
the highest court affirmed it, that man is Leo
Frank.
Nemesis fastened right on him, at the very
start; and Nemesis has followed him at every
step, since.
What innocent man has ever acted as
Frank did, on the very day of the crime?
What innocent man in Atlanta could not have
proved where he was, and what he was doing
that day?
There was no innocent man in Georgia who
could not have done it: you could have done
it: Mayor Moodward could have done it;
Judge Roan could have done it: Hugh Dor
sey could have done it: any innocent person
of the City and of the State could have dona
it.
Leo Frank could not do it.
Like those three Jews who killed the Jew
in New Tork, this Jew could not put himself
away from the crime, nor from its victim.
Inexorable fate placed him with the gid,
at the time she met her fearful doom, and,
like a body of death, she clung to the simian
who destroyed her—and she is clinging to
him yet.
Was any innocent man of Atlanta unable
to clear up his home-coming, that terrible
night? Did any Atlanta man, guiltless of
crime, have a servant whose tongue wagged
with a gruesome, story?
Mas there an innocent man of Atlanta,
suddenly and horrible accused, whose wife
would not have gone flying to him on the
wings of the wind, to throw her faithful arms
around him and say “All the world may for
sake you, but I—l, my love— l am here, by
your side.”
* sjs sfc $
That noisy jackass, William J. Burns,
comes rushing into the case, (at SSOO a day?)
after all the known and statutory methods of
discovering guilt have been exhausted.
Burns had the clues. Burns had the angles.
Burns knew that the guilty man had never
been arrested. Burns had his basilisk eye on
that guilty person. Burns would lay his
unerring hands on the murderer at the proper
time. Burns had put a spell upon this
unknown miscreant, and he couldn't possibly
get away. Burns’ “Report,” was in prepara
tion. Burns’ “Report” was well-nigh
finished. Burns’ “Report” would make
ashamed of the persecution of the
innocent' Frank.
Yet, every blood-hound that bayed in the
case, barked on the trail of Frank. It was
absolutely impossible to get away from Frank.
Just as the murdered girl clung to Frank, the
chain of evidence clanked round nobody but
him. There was absolutely no clue leading
away from this moral pervert, who had lusted
after the child, and who had been seen with
his hands on her shoulders, in the factory
where she came to her awful death.
Conley and Frank: Frank and Conley:
that was the case, and there was no getting
away from it.
Eight white witnesses testified to the las
civiousness of Frank, and his lawyers did not
dare to ask them a single question.
They were afraid they would go from bad
to worse.
They did cross-examine the negro for eight
hours, for they knew that, he had nothing ta
tell, worse than he had already told.
They failed completely in the labored effort
to break down the negro; and they virtually
admitted that they could not even hope to
shake the women who swore to Frank's simian
lewdness.
To make matters even more damning to the
accused, Miss Irene Jackson, a witness for the
defense, corroborated the other witnesses as
to Frank's bad character.
Whatsoever ye sow!
Isn’t it the truth? No other man of
Atlanta, innocent of crime, could have been
PAGE NINE
