PAGE TWO
hearing; and that the employment of de
tectives, at that desperate stage of the game,
was notice to the world that desperate
methods were needed to save a guilty man
“-a man whose guilt had been proven in
the usual way, by those legal processes cre
ated by law for that very purpose.
And the reason why Burns and Lehon
aroused such intense indignatioii was, that
they intimidated and bribed the State’s wit
ness, George Eppes; that they intimidated
and bribed the State's witness, Duffy; that
they paid S2OO to a preacher to make a
false affidavit; threatened the girl wit
nesses with compromising disclosures of
their private lives, unless they perjured
themselves in behalf of Frank; offered to
buy off R. P. Barrett with "a barrel of
money” and a good position in New Or
leans; and used the most extraordinary
means in the effort to get rid of the damning
testimony of the State's witness, Miss Mon
teen Stover.
Let me give you the facts as to how
Burns and his crew went after that irre
proachable young lady: the information be
ing given to me by one of the oldest mem
bers of the Atlanta bar, a thoroughly reli
able gentleman:
I had an interview with Mrs. H. W. Edmond
son, the mother of Monteen Stover, who said:
At the request of Mr. Samuel A. Boorstein, at
torney at law, who had been taking an interest in
the case, about four weeks ago she and her
daughter. Miss Monteen Stover, went to his office.
After talking about things in general, the Mary
Phagan case was incidentally brought in. About
that time, Detective Burns made his appearance
in the room- As soon as she found out who he
was,,she arose from her chair and started to leave
the room with her daughter, when the lady ste
nographer immediately took hold of her
daughter and tried to detain her; that she jerked
the child aloose from her and started towards
the door; that the stenographer tried to prevent
her from going out, and that she pushed her
aside and led her daughter out, and returned
home.
About the middle of last week, the wife of Leo
Frank called at her home with Rabbi Marx. This
was in the morning, and took up with her the
matter of her daughter’s testimony; that she told
them that her daughter had sworn to the truth
in court, and told the same story that she told
her immediately after the killing of Mary Phagan;
that they then left.
Tn the afternoon of the same day they returned,
bringing Detective Burns with them. Detective
Burns remarked that he had come to apologize
for what had happened shortly before that time
in the office of Mr. Boorstein; that Mrs. Frank
said to her daughter, Monteen Stover, that one
little word from her would help her so much, and
she was again told, that what she swore in the
court was the truth and that she would not/
change it. Detective Burns said, “Well, you will
have to bear the thorn.”
I have some other infermation that I will get
the straight of about Daniel Lehon, the detective
that Burns bad to come here to take charge while
he was in New York, Chicago and Cincinnati, in
vestigating something about the case. I hope to
get this information and send t oyou at once. It
will be a copy of the statement sent here by the
Chief of Police of Chicago.
(This reference to Dan Lehon concerned
the Chicago police’ records, which showed
that Burns' lieutenant is as vile a scoundrel
as Bums himself.)
Now, ask yourself this question:
When two so-called detectives one
branded by the United States Government,
and the other by the Chicago police records
—are hired by the rich connections of a
criminal (whose conviction has been finally
confirmed by the unanimous voice of the
Supreme Court), to destroy evidence, on the
one hand, and to manufacture evidence, on
the other; and when these unscrupulous
rascals come into your community and
carry their lawless methods to such un
paralleled lengths as I have already indi
cated. what is the community to do* IN
SELF-DEFENSE?
Burns fled from Georgia, not because he
was Investigating, but because he was hir-
THE JEFFERSONIAN
ing some men, and trying to hire others,
to swear to lies, in order that an extraordi
nary motion for a new trial for Frank
might win in the courts.
Out in lowa, where he addressed the
bankers, Burns said, a few weeks ago:
“Frank is as innocent as I am, but the Atlanta
police are so determined to fix the crime upon
some one, after the many murderers that have
gone unpunished, that they are satisfied to con
demn an innocent man. They selected Frank as
their victim, because he was the last person
known to have seen the girl alive, and they knew
he was a Jew, and that on this account racial
prejudice would assist them.”
What does the official record show, on this
point ?
It shows, that the Atlanta police and de
tectives made every possible effort to trace
the crime away from Leo Frank', in this,
they were aided by Frank himself.
Because of the dark hints of Frank
against the negro night watchman, the At
lanta police and detectives arrested him,
and kept him manacled in jail.
Frank saw him, in that condition; and
went through the pretense of trying to get
the innocent negro, Newt Lee, to confess.
But Newt says that Frank hung his head
all the time, and used the expression,
“Newt, if you stick to your present story,
we will both go to hell.'’
(In his statement to the jury, Frank did
not deny this.)
The Atlanta police and detectives failed
to make progress against Newt Lee, al
though Frank suggested they search his
premises, where a bloody shirt was found
in the negro’s clothes barrel —placed there
by somebody who wanted to save Frank, by
finding “a nigger in the woodpile.”
(They are still trying that game.)
After the failure with Newt Lee, came
the effort to fix the crime on J. M. Gantt.
Why Gantt? Because Frank had hinted,
and insinuated to the Atlanta police and
detectives, that J. M. Gantt knew Mary
Phagan well, and was, perhaps, too inti
mate with her!
Because of Frank's hints and insinua
tions. the Atlanta police and detectives ar
rested J. NI. Gantt.
Here, then, we have the record showing
that nobody was after the Jew. but that the
Jew was after two perfectly innocent men.
So far from its being true that the At
lanta police and detectives “selected”
Frank, because “they knew he was a Jew,”
they exhausted every effort to get clues
leading away from him; and they were
eagerly willing to avail themselves of all
the help that Frank could give them in do
ing so.
The official record shows it!
It was not until after the complete break
down of the efforts to take the crime to any
other persons, That the police and detec
tives were forced to believe that Frank and
Conley were the guilty parties.
And when Frank’s own detective, Harry
Scott, had to give up hope of clearing
Frank; and the accusing hand was laid
upon the Jew, it immediately transpired
that the Jew had already employed the best
law firm in Atlanta!
In other words, the Jew had, virtually
accused himself before the Gentiles accused
him.
When did a thing like that ever happen
before ?
And the very time that Frank was accus
ing Newt Lee, and J. M. Gantt, of the
crime, he had thrown an anchor to wind
ward, by employing Luther Rosser’s .firm
to defend him, Frank.
Slaton rushed to Frank's defense on this
vulnerable point, by telling mankind that
Frank’s friends employed this big law firm
for him.
Let ns see if that explanation is beneficial
to Frank. ,
Who were his officious friends, that had
the ducats to retain such a high-priced ar
ticle as Rosser’s firm?
They were Jews—the Montags, Seligs, &c.
Then, the Jews employed lawyers for
Frank, before Frank was accused, by the
Atlanta police and detectives.
In other words, the rich Jews suspected
that Frank would need the best legal talent,
before the Gentiles suspected it!
This shows what they thought, as to who
assaulted and murdered the little girl.
If you believed that your friend was in
nocent ,and that there was “not a scintilla
of evidence against him,” would you take
it upon yourself to employ lawyers for
him?
No other man in Atlanta was blessed
with that particular variety of “friends.”
It was a breed peculiar to Leo Frank.
No friend of J. M. Gantt rushed secretly
to a lawyer’s office, before Gantt was ac
cused. Newt Lee had no such extraordinary
friends.
So far as I know, Leo Frank is the only
man in Georgia whose friends were ever
so- certain of his guilt, that they secretly
hired the best lawyers, before anybody had
accused him of the crime.
Therefore, the literal fact is, as our
official court records prove, THAT THE
RICH JEWS OF ATLANTA WERE
THE FIRST TO SUSPECT LEO
FRANK- OF THE CRIME.
And there is one other terrible detail
which Frank never mentions, which Burns
never mentions, which Hearst never men
tions, and which Slaton dared not mention;
and it is this:
For three weeks, Leo Frank's wife's ab
horrence of her guilty husband was so un
conquerable, that she resisted all efforts to
persuade her to go to see him at the jail.
Thus we have the appalling truth of the
case: the Jews, on the inside, knew of
Frank's guilt, and acted upon that knowl
edge—the Seligs, and Montags, by secretly
employing lawyers; and the wife, by refus
ing to associate with him.
To the end of time, they will never get
away from those two facts.
John M. Slaton, the gubernatorial part
ner of the law firm employed by the rich
Jews who knew Frank to be guilty, in
tended all the time—as a last resort—to save
the client of his law firm; to stultify his
own record in the Milburn and Cantrell
cases, and to give Frank what the Supreme
Court Justices unanimously refused, towit,
a re-hearing.
The elaborate arguments of the attor
neys, and the pretended weighing of the
voluminous evidence, was mere stage play
and sham: Slaton never intended that HIS
CIA ENT should hang.
Do the out-of-Georgia papers catch thd
point ?
It is time they did!
Instead of hailing Slaton as a hero, they
should see him as he is: they should be
willing to see the prosaic fact, that the rich
Jews hired a law firm which enjoyed the
immense advantage of having one of its
members in the office of Governor; and
that after the other members of the firm
had failed, all along the line, the guberna
torial partner rescued his guilty client.
The Bible tells us that no man can serve
two masters: it tells us that he will be cer
tain to betray one of the two.
Which one did Slaton deceive? He
shamelessly continued to be a law-partner
of Luther Rosser and Ben Phillips while
they had charge of Frank's case; he refused
to respite his client, and leave him to the -
incoming Governor Harris. jf
Therefore, Slaton placed himself where, f
