1913 October 20 Atlanta Georgian 32 Pages Georgia : Atlanta Georgian : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming : Internet Archive (2024)

WAY CLEAR

FOR FRANK

Fight for New Trial to Open Be-

For Judge Roan Next Wed-

The way was cleared Saturday for theactual beginning of the fight over the motion to give Leo M. Frank, convictedof the murder of Mary Phagan, a new trial. The battle will open before JudgeRoan Wednesday with both sides primed for a vigorous contest in which chargesagainst jurors accused of bias will play a large part.

The defense, headed by Luther Z.Rosser, relies in large part on the evidence showing that Juror A. H. Hensleeexpressed violent animus to Frank before the trial opened, winning a new trialfor the prisoner Scores of affidavits will be introduced to uphold thecharacter of the witnesses who swear that Henslee said he was sure Frank wasguilty and would like to see him hanged.

On the other hand the State will beprepared to assail a number of these witnesses and will try to show throughHenslee himself that the sentiments against Frank were expressed after thetrial.

Will Exchange All Papers.

Wednesday, as had been announced in TheGeorgian, was formally fixed for the opening of the arguments by Judge RoanSaturday. At the same time the defense and State agreed to exchange all newpapers in the case. A number of important documents, it is said have not yetbeen made public.

In the discussion of the case Mr.Rosser made the offer to exchange all new affidavits for the new papers inpossession of the State, and Solicitor Dorsey agreed.

While declaring that delay undoubtedlywould benefit their client, Luther Rosser, for the defense, urged that themotion be brought to a speedy hearing.

He pointed out that he had beenneglecting his evil business for the Frank case, and said that if the fightover the new motion were not disposed of by Monday a week he would have to ask that it be put overso that he could take up some of his other work.

Roan Urges Hosts.

If that was impossible, he wanted thecase to be put over until December.

Judge Ross interrupted with the remarkthat he was anxious to pass on the case as quickly as possible, and would beagainst any delay until December, and the same sentiments were expressed toSolicitor Dorsey.

The Solicitor pointed out that he hadgiven every moment of his time to preparing his answer to the lengthy plea,filed by the defense, and that he would continue to do everything towardhastening the hearing.

Dorsey and Leonard Haas, of counsel forthe defense, began Friday a review of the record of the case to check up on allthe evidence briefed by Frank’s lawyers. Due to pressure of other business, Mr.Haas was unable to continue the work Saturday, but arranged to resume theconference Monday morning at 9 o’clock.

Sixty pages of the 400 were gone overthe first afternoon, minor alterations and additions being made at thesuggestion of the Solicitor. Practically all of the remaining time before thehearing will be occupied in this work, and it is problematical if it will beconcluded satisfactorily by Wednesday.

ARREST OFFISHER IS

EXPECTED AS MOVE TO

I. W. Fisher, the mysterious new figure in the Phagan murdercase, who created one of the greatest sensations of the entire investigation byhis declaration that he knew the murderer of the little factory girl and thather slayer was not Leo Frank, may be arrested and placed in a cell on a formalwarrant before nightfall on an old warrant charging him with cruelty to hiswife, who is suing for divorce. He disappeared some months ago when the warrantwas sworn out, the police say.

The strange person, whose startlingstory was first told to Chief of Police Bodeker in Birmingham, was virtually a prisonerSunday and Monday in the tightly locked offices of Luther Z. Rosser, chief ofcounsel for Frank, in the Grant Building. No one was permitted to see him. Hisfood was brought to him and the groups of persons who gathered outside theoffice in the hope of getting a glimpse of the accuser of a prominent Atlantaman were disappointed.

Meanwhile detectives in relayspatrolled the first and second floors of the Grant Building. There was no wayfor Fisher to get by them without observation. Newspaper photographers, withtheir cameras set up for instant action, dozed on the hard steps, hoping tohave an opportunity to get a flash of the mysterious personage.

Reporters, who had trailed Fisher fromBirmingham from where he was brought to Atlanta by C. W. Burke, an agent forAttorney Rosser, were on constant duty ready to resume the chase in the eventthat any new move was made by Frank’s lawyers or there appeared an endeavor tohide him away.

The vigilance of an entire day and anight resulted in only the sensational statement of the quasi-prisoner whichwas forecast very closely by the Sunday American. This statement was given outlate in the afternoon by Attorney Rosser. Rosser would not reveal the name ofthe prominent man charged. He said that his identity must remain a mystery fora time at least. The only clew he furnished was that the man was fairlyprominent.

Man’s Name Withheld.

“I do not want to use the name of the man,” said Rosser, “andthus possibly to do him an injustice. I will tell everything in the worldexcept the name of the man.”

“The man who has just told his story to us is I. W. Fisher.He once lived here and left e about the time of the murder of Mary Phagan, andsince then has lived in North Georgia, Tennessee and Birmingham. He now livesin Birmingham.”

“Without our knowledge or instigation, he went to the Chiefof Police in Birmingham, George H. Bodeker, and asserted that Frank wasinnocent, and that he had known of his innocence all the time, but that hedidn’t think Frank would be convicted, and therefore had kept his silence aboutthe real murderer.”

“He said that he met the man whocommitted the crime on Saturday, April 26, and that this man told him he wasgoing to meet Mary Phagan in the pencil factory at noon. Fisher said that whenthe man came factory he said: ‘I raised h—l in there and you have got to getout of town.’”

“Since that time Fisher says that thisman, who is well to do and established in business here, has been paying hisexpenses wherever he went.”

“Whether Fisher’s story is true orfalse we do not know. We are not giving it out as fact, but merely as one ofthe numerous stories which have come to our ears during the investigation ofthe crime. We would

DETECTIVESAND FRANK

COUNSEL IN FIGHT FOR

MYSTERIOUS WITNESS

have saidnothing about it if the newspapers had not come out yesterday telling ofFisher’s walking into the office of the Chief of Police in Birmingham. We donot take any stock in it one way or another as yet. But we are going tooinvestigate it thoroughly and find whether or not if it is true.

Police Told Name.

“We have told the detectives somethingwhen we have not told the public. We have told them the name of the man Fisheraccuses, and have incited them to work with us on our investigation. There issuch a man as the one Fisher names, and he is well known. Fisher is a marriedman, and has several children. They are in Atlanta.

Solicitor Dorsey, Frank A. Hooper, whoassisted the Solicitor in the Frank trial, and members of the detectivedepartment appeared not at all impressed by Fisher’s story Monday. “I thinkhe’s telling a lie, pure and simple,” said Mr. Hooper when he was asked hisopinion.

Chief Lanford laughed at the story andsaid it was his belief that Fisher was out in town at the time of the Phaganmurder. Fisher is the same man, he thinks, that testified some ago againstGriff Freeman, who was arrested on a blind tiger charge, and then disappearedfrom town after Freeman was bound over Fisher was not on hand to testify in theState trial.

Mrs. Fischer acted as a sleuth andobtained much of the evidence that resulted in the prosecution of Freeman. Shetestified at the trial that Fisher pawned her shoes and sold their chickens toget liquor from Freeman. Fisher admitted that he had bought liquor many timesfrom the defendant.

In an effort to make the identificationof the man secreted in the office of Attorney Rosser as the same man whotestified in the trial of Griff Freeman and then disappeared from the city,Lanford Monday ordered Detective Cowan to go the Fisher home on Marietta streetand get Mrs. Fisher. She will be taken to Rosser’s office and the attorney willbe asked for permission to let her see the man. Chief Lanford believes it willprove the same man.

May Balk Detectives.

It is conjectural if the detectiveswill be allowed this privilege in view of the strict seclusion in which Fisherhas been kept so far. Chief Lanford Monday that if the lawyers have evidencethat the crime was committed by another person than Frank, he thought theyshould turn it over to the police so that the man might be arrested and justicedone.

“Although Frank has been convicted ofthe crime,” said Lanford, “our eyes and ears never have been closed to evidencethat would point to any other person as the guilty on. I do not place muchreliance on Fisher’s story, but I want my department to investigate itthoroughly. This Fisher, I believe once was with the Southern Railway, and wasdischarged because of his drinking Burke, who now is acting for Rosser, oncewas special agent for the Southern.”

Attorney Rosser Monday explained theunpassable guard that had been thrown around Fisher by saying that he wanted toget every detail of Fisher’s story before he let him go.

MYSTERIOUSWITNESS

ONCE HELD FOR MURDER

Charged by his wife with being a ravingdrunkard, wanted by the police who give him a long court record, believed byProbation Officer Coogler to be demented as a result of accusations of murdermade against himself, I. W. Fisher, the accuser of a prominent Atlanta man inthe Phagan case, was confronted Monday by a general disposition to ridicule hisstory and the threatened collapse of a sensation.

Kept a prisoner in the office of LutherZ. Rosser, while the police waited to arrest him, Fisher continued to beinaccessible to newspapermen, but various investigations of his record baredfacts that thew a dark cloud on his reliability.

Detectives continued their vigil on theground floor of the Grant Building ready to arrest Fisher as soon as he madehis appearance. In the meanwhile the Frank lawyers kept on investigating hisstory and seemed determined to hold their man a strict prisoner until they wereentirely through with him.

Mr. Coogler’s opinion was contingent onthe identity of an I. W. Fisher Coogler has had before him many times and thatof the Fisher as been virtually a prisoner in the Grant Building being thesame.

Coogler said Monday that Fisher wastried several ago for the murder of his wife’s brother. He was acquitted, butit is known that a suspicion that he was guilty still rested in the mind of hiswife and that she frequently had charged him with the crime. These accusationsare believed by Coogler to have unsettled Fisher’s Mind, a condition whichperhaps has been augmented.

The “Fisher” Coogler has had before himlived at 797 Marietta street. An investigation of his record has disclosed thatthe man was placed on probation November 24 of last year charged with beingdrunk and disorderly and abusing his wife. He obtained employment andcontributed to the support of his wife and children through the probationofficer.

Fisher was before Coogler again onChristmas, and this time he was given employment with the Christian Helpers’League. He could not stay good, and February 21 he was arrested again, chargedwith striking and otherwise mistreating his wife. He was bound over to theState Court underbond of $200. He obtained his release only to offend in thesame respect again. A peace warrant was issued, and he stayed in jail two dayslast May, and soon afterward he disappeared from the city.

Coogler received a letter from him lastMay, postmarked in Parksville, Tenn. He asked that his trunk be sent him. Thatwas the last Coogler heard of him until Fisher’s sensational story appeared inthe Sunday papers.

Mind Broken by Drink.

Grave discredit was cast on Fisher’sstory by Mrs. Annie Fisher, his wife, of No. 734 Marietta street, who assertedfirmly that she believed the tale of a “business man’s confession” of the crimewas the fabrication of a mind broken down by drink, perhaps by drugs.

“My husband is a confirmed drunkard,”Mrs. Fisher regretfully admitted. “He is at times without any responsibilityfor his words or actions. He was once tried on a lunacy writ taken out by hisbrother, a business man of Rome, Ga. They declared him sane at the time, butput him on probation. I have an idea he uses morphine. He left me August 12.”

Both Stallings and his wife declareFisher is utterly irresponsible. His sister said she would not believe anystatement he might make, while her husband recounted some strange stories hesaid Fisher had told him at different times.

“He told them with no straight a facethat I almost believed him,” Stallings said, “but afterward I always found themto be untrue.”

Believed Frank Innocent.

As to Fisher’s knowledge of the Phagancase, Mrs. Fisher said that only once did her husband say anything that mighthave been taken as evidence that he knew something. One night while reading thenewspaper accounts of the arrest Fisher said:

“They haven’t got the guilty man. Frankdidn’t murder Mary Phagan.”

Mrs. Fisher also denied that herhusband had left Atlanta immediately after the murder of the little girl, as hesaid.

“He lived with here until August 12,”she stated, “and then he went away because I had filed a petition askingdivorce and alimony. He went away to keep the papers from being served.”

Mrs. Fisher was very candid andunreserved in talking the affairs of her husband and herself.

They were married, she said, in Dalton,Ga., thirteen years ago, and lived there until they moved to Atlanta threeyears ago.

Maniac When Drinking.

“My husband has long been a drinkingman,” Mrs. Fisher said. “When sober I believe he was perfectly rational, butwhen drinking—I don’t know just how to express it. He was nearly a maniac. Morethan once he threatened to shoot me. I had to have him arrested less than ayear ago because he was threatening my life.”

“I was going to sue him for divorcethen, but Officer Clarke, a friend of his, took his part and begged me not to.I consented, and he was put on probation. Officer Coogler, I believe it was,kept him on the probation list four months. But it was no use at all.”

Since Fisher went away to avoid theservice of the divorce papers, his wife has been taking boarders and sewing tosupport herself and their two children. Fisher wrote to her from Parkville,Tenn., she said, and again from a suburb of Birmingham. He wanted to return andlive with her, Mrs. Fisher said, but she did not answer the letters.

Then Mrs. Fisher told of a happeningthe morning after the murder was committed.

“It was Sunday,” she said, “and justafter breakfast we went to a drug store about a block away. On our way back wemet a man I didn’t know. He stopped my husband and said: ‘Fisher, I’ve gotsomething to tell you.’”

Went to Factory.

“Mr. Fisher stopped and talked with himand I went on home. Later, he came home and told me the man told him a girl hadbeen killed at the pencil factory. He seemed to be quite curious about thecrime. He and I went and we took our little girl, Eve-“

WIFEDECLARES FISHER

A RAVING DRUNKARD AND

RIDICULES ENTIRE STORY

lyn, andMiss Lille Embree, a young woman who was boarding with us.”

“We couldn’t go all over the factory,but I didn’t think my husband seemed at all nervous or acted unusual. He didread a lot about the case. I noticed that. And some time after that I missed mydiary that I kept to set down almost everything I did. I don’t know that hetook it, however.”

Reporters, who had trailed Fisher fromBirmingham, from where he was brought to Atlanta by C. W. Burke, an agent forAttorney Rosser, were on constant duty ready to resume the chase in the eventthat any new move was made by Frank’s lawyers or there appeared an endeavor tohide him away. The vigilance of an entire day and a night resulted in only thesensational statement of the quasi-prisoner which was forecast very closely byThe Sunday American. This statement was given out late in the afternoon byAttorney Rosser. Rosser would not reveal the name of the prominent man charged.He said that his identity must remain a mystery for a time at least. The onlyclew he furnished was that the man was fairly prominent.

Man’s Name Withheld.

“I do not want to see the name of the man,” said Rosser, “andthus possibly do him an injustice. I will tell everything in the world exceptthe name of the man.

“The man who has just told his story tous is I. W. Fisher. He once lived here and left here about the time of themurder of Mary Phagan, and since then has lived in North Georgia, Tennessee andBirmingham. He now lives in Birmingham.”

“Without our knowledge or instigation,he went to the Chief of Police in Birmingham, George H. Bodeker, and assertedthat Frank was innocent, and that he had known of his innocence all the time,but that he didn’t think Frank would be convicted, and therefore had kept hissilence about the real murderer.”

“He that he met the man who committedthe crime on Saturday, April 26, and that this man told him he was going tomeet Mary Phagan in the pencil factory at noon. Fisher said that when the mancame from the factory he said: ‘I raised h—l in there and you have got to getout of town.’”

“Since that time Fisher says that thisman, who is well to do and established in business here, has been paying hisexpenses wherever he went.”

“Whether Fisher’s story is true orfalse we do not know. We are not giving it out as fact, but merely as one ofthe numerous stories which have come to our ears during the investigation ofthe crime. We would have said nothing about it if the newspapers had not comeout yesterday telling of Fisher’s walking into the office of the Chief ofPolice in Birmingham. We do not take any stock in it one way or another as yet.But we are going to investigate it thoroughly and find whether or not if it istrue.”

Police Told Name.

“We have told the detectives somethingwhen we have not told the public. We have told them the name of the man Fisheraccuses, and have incited them to work with us on our investigation. There issuch a man as the one Fisher names, and he is well known. Fisher is a marriedman, and has several children. They are in Atlanta.

Solicitor Dorsey, Frank A. Hooper, whoassisted the Solicitor in the Frank trial, and members of the detectivedepartment appeared not at all impressed by Fisher’s story Monday. “I thinkhe’s telling a lie, pure and simple,” said Mr. Hooper when he was asked hisopinion.

Chief Lanford laughed at the story andsaid it was his belief that Fisher was out in town at the time of the Phaganmurder. Fisher is the same man, he thinks, that testified some ago againstGriff Freeman, who was arrested on a blind tiger charge, and then disappearedfrom town after Freeman was bound over Fisher was not on hand to testify in theState trial.

Mrs. Fischer acted as a sleuth andobtained much of the evidence that resulted in the prosecution of Freeman. Shetestified at the trial that Fisher pawned her shoes and sold their chickens toget liquor from Freeman. Fisher admitted that he had bought liquor many timesfrom the defendant.

In an effort to make the identificationof the man secreted in the office of Attorney Rosser as the same man whotestified in the trial of Griff Freeman and then disappeared from the city,Lanford Monday ordered Detective Cowan to go the Fisher home on Marietta streetand get Mrs. Fisher. She will be taken to Rosser’s office and the attorney willbe asked for permission to let her see the man. Chief Lanford believes it willprove the same man.

May Balk Detectives.

It is conjectural if the detectiveswill be allowed this privilege in view of the strict seclusion in which Fisherhas been kept so far. Chief Lanford Monday that if the lawyers have evidencethat the crime was committed by another person than Frank, he thought theyshould turn it over to the police so that the man might be arrested and justicedone.

“Although Frank has been convicted ofthe crime,” said Lanford, “our eyes and ears never have been closed to evidencethat would point to any other person as the guilty on. I do not place muchreliance on Fisher’s story, but I want my department to investigate itthoroughly. This Fisher, I believe once was with the Southern Railway, and wasdischarged because of his drinking Burke, who now is acting for Rosser, oncewas special agent for the Southern.”

Attorney Rosser Monday explained theunpassable guard that had been thrown around Fisher by saying that he wanted toget every detail of Fisher’s story before he let him go.

“As soon as I get all I want to know, Idon’t care what becomes of him,” the lawyer said. “We are making a most carefulinvestigation of every statement he has made, and we want to keep him at handuntil we are through. After that the detectives and the newspaper men canquestion him to their hearts’ content.”

Fisher Not Prepossessing.

Fisher is not a particularly prepossessing witness. When hestepped from the train Sunday morning in company with Agent Burke he had aseveral days’ growth of beard. He wore an old slouch hat, a shirt of stripedpattern and no collar. He was unkempt, and his dark suit appeared as if it hadbeen used to sleep in.

He kept his mouth tightly closed whenthe reporters tried to talk to him. Had he been inclined to be loquacious, hiswords would have been quickly checked by the watchful Burke, who used the“strong arm” on one inquisitive young newspaper man who tried to enter into aconversation with Fisher.

The train, due from Birmingham at 6:30o’clock Sunday morning, did not get into Atlanta until two hours later. Burkeand Fisher jumped into a waiting carriage and were taken to the office ofAttorney Rosser on the seventh floor of the Grant Building where they stayeduntil Rosser’s arrival at 10 o’clock.

The photographers flocked around Rosserto get his permission to get a picture of Fisher.

“Not on your life!” shouted the lawyer,smiling at the discomfited snapshotters. And all their efforts throughout theremainder of the day were fruitless.”

ALLSPONSORSHIP FOR

FISHER AND HIS STORY

Here is the latest trend of eventsconnected with the newest sensation in the Phagan case—the statement by Ira W.Fisher that Frank is not guilty of the murder of Mary Phagan, and that aprominent Atlanta business man, known to Fisher, is the murderer.

1. Fisher is de virtually a prisoner inthe office of LZ. Rosser, chief counsel for Frank, all of Sunday night anduntil afternoon Monday, while police wait to arrest him.

2. The police bare his record, showing anumber of arrests for disorderly conduct while drinking, abuse and mistreatmentof his wife.

3. Fisher’s wife states plainly that heis an incorrigible drunkard; that he did not leave Atlanta immediately afterthe murder (as he said), and that she would put no confidence in the wild storyhe tells.

4. S. J. Coogler, probation officer,gives it as his opinion that Fisher’s mind has suffered from long brooding overa murder charge on which he himself was once tried and acquitted, and that thecontinued use of liquor and possibly drugs has produced a hallucination whichwould account for the story he tells. Coogler had charge of Fisher for aboutthree months while he was on probation.

5. Luther Rosser disclaims for himselfand his associates all sponsorship for the story Fisher tells, but announcesthat it is being probed to the limit.

6. The growing impression is that thislatest sensation in the Frank case is not a substantial texture and will verysoon be exploded.

Charged by his wife with being a raving drunkard; wanted bythe police, who give him a long court record, believed by Probation OfficerCoogler to be demented as a result of accusations of murder made againsthimself, I. W. Fisher, the accuser of a prominent Atlanta man in the Phagancase, was confronted Monday by a general disposition to ridicule his story andthe threatened collapse of a sensation.

Kept a prisoner in the office of Luther Z. Rosser, while thepolice waited to arrest him, Fisher continued to be inaccessible to newspapermen, but various investigations of his record bared facts that threw a darkcloud on his reliability.

Detectives continued their vigil on theground floor of the Grant Building ready to arrest Fisher as soon as he madehis appearance. In the meanwhile, the Frank lawyers kept on investigating hisstory and seemed determined to hold their man a strict prisoner until they wereentirely through with him.

Police Haven’t Seen Fisher

“I am not acting sooner for Fisher orfor Fisher’s story,” declared Mr. Rosser, at his office Monday. “We want tokeep the man for a few hours longer, and then if the police would like to havehim they are welcome to him.”

“Do you believe Fisher’s story?” questioned a Georgianreporter.

“I have said my say,” exclaimed the attorney.

“Can I talk to Fisher?” the reporter asked.

“You can—when I get through with him,”said Rosser, and he strode away in the direction of his office door.”

A police officer stated positively Monday noon that the Frankattorney “prisoner” would be arrested and taken to headquarters as soon as hewas taken from Rosser’s office.

None of the officers has had a look atFisher, and it is doubt whether or not they will get him if he should try towalk out of the Grant building. Since he was taken to the office of Rosseryesterday morning, he has been given a shave and an overcoat. A pint of whiskywas also seen to have been taken into Fisher’s “cell.”

The arrival of Chief of Police Beaversin Rosser’s office Monday noon created quite a bit of excitement. ChiefBeavers, however, went into the private office of Rosser, where the argumentsin the Whitehall street injunction were being heard.

Mr. Coogler’s opinion was contingent onthe identity of an I. W. Fisher Coogler has had before him many times and thatof the Fisher who has been virtually a prisoner in the Grant Building being thesame.

Coogler said Monday that Fisher wastried several years ago for the murder of his wife’s brother. He was acquitted,but it is known that a suspicion that he was guilty still rested in the mind ofhis wife, and that she frequently had charged him with the crime. Theseaccusations are believed by Coogler to have unsettled Fisher’s mind, a conditionwhich perhaps has been augmented by the use of drugs.

The “Fisher” Coogler has had before himlived at No. 797 Marietta street. An investigation of his record has disclosedthat the man was placed on probation November 24 of last year charged withbeing drunk and disorderly and abusing his wife. He obtained employment andcontributed to the support of his wife and children through the probationofficer.

Fisher was before Coogler again onChristmas, and this time he was given employment with the Christian Helpers’League. He could not say good and February 21 he was arrested again, chargedwith striking and otherwise mistreating his wife. He was bound over to theState Court under bond of $200. He obtained his release only to offend in thesame respect again. A peace warrant was issued, and he stayed in jail two dayslast May, and soon afterward he disappeared from the city.

Coogler received a letter from him lastMay, postmarked in Parksville, Tenn. He asked that his trunk be sent him. Thatwas the last Coogler heard of him until Fisher’s sensational story appeared inthe Sunday papers.

Here is Fisher’s probation record:

He was arrested and put on proba-

FISHER IS DERANGED BY

AN OLD MURDER CHARGE,

THINKS OFFICERCOOGLER

tionNovember 24, 1912. The charge was abusing and mistreating his wife whiledrinking, December 24, he violated his parole, drinking and again beingarrested. He promised better behavior, and was continued on probation, stayingat the Christian Helpers’ League on Decatur street.

February 22, 1913, Fisher yielded oncemore. Intoxicated, he went to his wife’s home and beat her. He was arrested andbound over in police court under a $200 bond, which he furnished.

May 15 his wife applied for a peacewarrant, under which Fisher was arrested and detained two days, finally givingbond. Then he disappeared May 28 Coogler received a letter from Fisherpostmarked Parkville, Tenn., requesting his truck, which he had left in theChristian Helpers’ League.

That closedthat part of the official record of Fisher in Atlanta.

MindBroken by Drink.

Grave discredit was cast on Fisher’sstory by Mrs. Annie Fisher, his wife, of No. 734 Marietta street, who asserted firmlythat she believed the tale of a “business man’s confession” of the crime wasthe fabrication of a mind broken down by drink, perhaps by drugs.

“My husband is a confirmed drunkard,”Mrs. Fisher regretfully admitted. “He is at times without any responsibilityfor his words or actions. He was once tried on a lunacy writ taken out by hisbrother, a business man of Rome, Ga. They declared him sane at the time, butput him on probation. I have an idea he uses morphine. He left me August 12.”

Both Stallings and his wife declareFisher is utterly irresponsible. His sister said she would not believe anystatement he might make, while her husband recounted some strange stories hesaid Fisher had told him at different times.

“He told them with no straight a facethat I almost believed him,” Stallings said, “but afterward I always found themto be untrue.”

Believed Frank Innocent.

As to Fisher’s knowledge of the Phagancase, Mrs. Fisher said that only once did her husband say anything that mighthave been taken as evidence that he knew something. One night while reading thenewspaper accounts of the arrest Fisher said:

“They haven’t got the guilty man. Frankdidn’t murder Mary Phagan.”

Mrs. Fisher also denied that herhusband had left Atlanta immediately after the murder of the little girl, as hesaid.

“He lived with here until August 12,”she stated, “and then he went away because I had filed a petition askingdivorce and alimony. He went away to keep the papers from being served.”

Mrs. Fisher was very candid andunreserved in talking the affairs of her husband and herself.

They were married, she said, in Dalton,Ga., thirteen years ago, and lived there until they moved to Atlanta threeyears ago.

Maniac When Drinking.

“My husband has long been a drinking man,”Mrs. Fisher said. “When sober I believe he was perfectly rational, but whendrinking—I don’t know just how to express it. He was nearly a maniac. More thanonce he threatened to shoot me. I had to have him arrested less than a year agobecause he was threatening my life.”

“I was going to sue him for divorcethen, but Officer Clarke, a friend of his, took his part and begged me not to.I consented, and he was put on probation. Officer Coogler, I believe it was,kept him on the probation list four months. But it was no use at all.”

Since Fisher went away to avoid theservice of the divorce papers, his wife has been taking boarders and sewing tosupport herself and their two children. Fisher wrote to her from Parkville,Tenn., she said, and again from a suburb of Birmingham. He wanted to return andlive with her, Mrs. Fisher said, but she did not answer the letters.

Then Mrs. Fisher told of a happeningthe morning after the murder was committed.

“It was Sunday,” she said, “and justafter breakfast we went to a drug store about a block away. On our way back wemet a man I didn’t know. He stopped my husband and said: ‘Fisher, I’ve gotsomething to tell you.’”

Went to Factory.

“Mr. Fisher stopped and talked with himand I went on home. Later, he came home and told me the man told him a girl hadbeen killed at the pencil factory. He seemed to be quite curious about thecrime. He and I went and we took our little girl, Evelyn, and Miss LilleEmbree, a young woman who was boarding with us.”

“We couldn’t go all over the factory,but I didn’t think my husband seemed at all nervous or acted unusual. He didread a lot about the case. I noticed that. And some time after that I missed mydiary that I kept to set down almost everything I did. I don’t know that he tookit, however.”

Reporters, who had trailed Fisher fromBirmingham, from where he was brought to Atlanta by C. W. Burke, an agent forAttorney Rosser, were on constant duty ready to resume the chase in the eventthat any new move was made by Frank’s lawyers or there appeared an endeavor tohide him away. The vigilance of an entire day and a night resulted in only thesensational statement of the quasi-prisoner which was forecast very closely byThe Sunday American. This statement was given out late in the afternoon byAttorney Rosser. Rosser would not reveal the name of the prominent man charged.He said that his identity must remain a mystery for a time at least. The onlyclew he furnished was that the man was fairly prominent.

“I do not want to use the name of the man,” said Rosser, “andthus possibly to do him an injustice. I will tell everything in the worldexcept the name of the man.”

“The man who has just told his story to us is I. W. Fisher.He once lived here and left e about the time of the murder of Mary Phagan, andsince then has lived in North Georgia, Tennessee and Birmingham. He now livesin Birmingham.”

“Without our knowledge or instigation, he went to the Chiefof Police in Birmingham, George H. Bodeker, and asserted that Frank wasinnocent, and that he had known of his innocence all the time, but that hedidn’t think Frank would be convicted, and therefore had kept his silence aboutthe real murderer.”

“He said that he met the man whocommitted the crime on Saturday, April 26, and that this man told him he wasgoing to meet Mary Phagan in the pencil factory at noon. Fisher said that whenthe man came factory he said: ‘I raised h—l in there and you have got to getout of town.’”

“Since that time Fisher says that thisman, who is well to do and established in business here, has been paying hisexpenses wherever he went.”

“Whether Fisher’s story is true or false we do not know. Weare not giving it out as fact, but merely as one of the numerous stories whichhave come to our ears during the investigation of the crime. We would have saidnothing about it if the newspapers had not come out yesterday telling ofFisher’s walking into the office of the Chief of Police in Birmingham. We donot take any stock in it one way or another as yet. But we are going toinvestigate it thoroughly and find whether or not if it is true.”

Police Told Name.

“We have told the detectives somethingwhen we have not told the public. We have told them the name of the man Fisheraccuses, and have incited them to work with us on our investigation. There issuch a man as the one Fisher names, and he is well known. Fisher is a marriedman, and has several children. They are in Atlanta.”

Solicitor Dorsey, Frank A. Hooper, whoassisted the Solicitor in the Frank trial, and members of the detectivedepartment appeared not at all impressed by Fisher’s story Monday. “I thinkhe’s telling a lie, pure and simple,” said Mr. Hooper when he was asked hisopinion.

Chief Lanford laughed at the story andsaid it was his belief that Fisher was out in town at the time of the Phaganmurder. Fisher is the same man, he thinks, that testified some ago againstGriff Freeman, who was arrested on a blind tiger charge, and then disappearedfrom town after Freeman was bound over Fisher was not on hand to testify in theState trial.

Mrs. Fischer acted as a sleuth andobtained much of the evidence that resulted in the prosecution of Freeman. Shetestified at the trial that Fisher pawned her shoes and sold their chickens toget liquor from Freeman. Fisher admitted that he had bought liquor many timesfrom the defendant.

In an effort to make the identificationof the man secreted in the office of Attorney Rosser as the same man whotestified in the trial of Griff Freeman and then disappeared from the city,Lanford Monday ordered Detective Cowan to go the Fisher home on Marietta streetand get Mrs. Fisher. She will be taken to Rosser’s office and the attorney willbe asked for permission to let her see the man. Chief Lanford believes it willprove the same man.

May Balk Detectives.

It is conjectural if the detectiveswill be allowed this privilege in view of the strict seclusion in which Fisherhas been kept so far. Chief Lanford Monday that if the lawyers have evidencethat the crime was committed by another person than Frank, he thought theyshould turn it over to the police so that the man might be arrested and justicedone.

“Although Frank has been convicted ofthe crime,” said Lanford, “our eyes and ears never have been closed to evidencethat would point to any other person as the guilty on. I do not place muchreliance on Fisher’s story, but I want my department to investigate itthoroughly. This Fisher, I believe once was with the Southern Railway, and wasdischarged because of his drinking Burke, who now is acting for Rosser, oncewas special agent for the Southern.”

Attorney Rosser Monday explained theunpassable guard that had been thrown around Fisher by saying that he wanted toget every detail of Fisher’s story before he let him go.

“As soon as I get all I want to know, Idon’t care what becomes of him,” the lawyer said. “We are making a most carefulinvestigation of every statement he has made, and we want to keep him at handuntil we are through. After that the detectives and the newspaper men canquestion him to their hearts’ content.”

MARIETTA STREET

MERCHANT LAUGHS

Characterizing the accusation of Ira W.Fisher, author of the latest Phagan case sensation, as a huge farce, J.Shirley, a highly respected furniture dealer at No. 809 Marietta street, ahighly respected furniture dealer at No. 809 Marietta street, named by Fisheras the little girl’s slayer, declared the man a “fit subject for an insaneasylum.”

Identification of the accused man wasmade public Monday afternoon. It came from Birmingham, where Fisher first madehis sensational statements. The man is well known in business circles ofAtlanta. He declared that he was not aware that he was the one referred tountil he was approached Monday.

He said that he was acquainted with hisaccuser. He stated that he operated a business establishment on Mariettastreet, near the Fisher residence. He declared that he had once had businessdealings with the “Witness” and had been forced to transfer his negotiations toMrs. Fisher when her husband failed ts obligations.

Mr. Shirley could not ascribe anyreason for Fisher having brought the charge of murder against him unless he wasdemented.

‘‘Why, I don’t recall having talked with Fisher since he leftMarietta street home,’’ said Mr. Shirley. ‘‘The only time I saw much of him waswhen he loafed around the store. I don’t recall having ever discussed thePhagan case with him.’’

Mr. Shirley denied having everdelivered furniture at the home of J. W. Coleman, stepfather of Mary Phagan,with Fisher.

Charged by his wife with being a raving drunkard; wanted bythe police, who give him a long court record, believed by Probation OfficerCoogler to be demented as a result of accusations of murder made againsthimself, I. W. Fisher, the accuser of a prominent Atlanta man in the Phagancase, was confronted Monday by a general disposition to ridicule his story andthe threatened collapse of a sensation.

Kept a prisoner in the office of Luther Z. Rosser, while thepolice waited to arrest him, Fisher continued to be inaccessible to newspapermen, but various investigations of his record bared facts that threw a darkcloud on his reliability.

Detectives continued their vigil on the ground floor of theGrant Building ready to arrest Fisher as soon as he made his appearance. In themeanwhile, the Frank lawyers kept on investigating his story, and seemeddetermined to hold their man a strict prisoner until they were entirely throughwith him.

Police Haven’t Seen Fisher.

“I am not acting sooner for Fisher or for Fisher’s story,”declared Mr. Rosser, at his office Monday. “We want to keep the man for a fewhours longer, and then if the police would like to have him, they are welcometo him.”

“Do you believe Fisher’s story?” questioned a Georgian reporter.

“I have said my say,” exclaimed the attorney.

“Can I talk to Fisher?” the reporter asked.

“You can—when I get through with him,” said Rosser, and hestrode away in the direction of his office door.”

A police officer stated positivelyMonday noon that the Frank attorney “prisoner” would be arrested and taken toheadquarters as soon as he was taken from Rosser’s office.

None of the officers has had a look atFisher, and it is doubt whether or not they will get him if he should try towalk out of the Grant building. Since he was taken to the office of Rosseryesterday morning, he has been given a shave and an overcoat. A pint of whiskywas also seen to have been taken into Fisher’s “cell.”

The arrival of Chief of Police Beaversin Rosser’s office Monday noon created quite a bit of excitement. ChiefBeavers, however, went into the private office of Rosser, where the argumentsin the Whitehall street injunction were being heard.

Mr. Coogler’s opinion was contingent onthe identity of an I. W. Fisher Coogler has had before him many times and thatof the Fisher who has been virtually a prisoner in the Grant Building being thesame.

Coogler said Monday that Fisher wastried several years ago for the murder of his wife’s brother. He was acquitted,but it is known that a suspicion that he was guilty still rested in the mind ofhis wife, and that she frequently had charged him with the crime. Theseaccusations are believed by Coogler to have unsettled Fisher’s mind, acondition which perhaps has been augmented by the use of drugs.

The “Fisher” Coogler has had before himlived at No. 797 Marietta street. An investigation of his record has disclosedthat the man was placed on probation November 24 of last year charged withbeing drunk and disorderly and abusing his wife. He obtained employment andcontributed to the support of his wife and children through the probationofficer.

Fisher was before Coogler again onChristmas, and this time he was given employment with the Christian Helpers’League. He could not say good and February 21 he was arrested again, chargedwith striking and otherwise mistreating his wife. He was bound over to theState Court under bond of $200. He obtained his release only to offend in thesame respect again. A peace warrant was issued, and he stayed in jail two dayslast May, and soon afterward he disappeared from the city.

Coogler received a letter from him lastMay, postmarked in Parksville, Tenn. He asked that his trunk be sent him. Thatwas the last Coogler heard of him until Fisher’s sensational story appeared inthe Sunday papers.

Here is Fisher’s probation record:

He was arrested and put on proba-

FISHER IS DERANGED BY

AN OLD MURDER CHARGE,

THINKS OFFICERCOOGLER

tionNovember 24, 1912. The charge was abusing and mistreating his wife whiledrinking, December 24, he violated his parole, drinking and again beingarrested. He promised better behavior, and was continued on probation, stayingat the Christian Helpers’ League on Decatur street.

February 22, 1913, Fisher yielded oncemore. Intoxicated, he went to his wife’s home and beat her. He was arrested andbound over in police court under a $200 bond, which he furnished.

May 15 his wife applied for a peacewarrant, under which Fisher was arrested and detained two days, finally givingbond. Then he disappeared May 28 Coogler received a letter from Fisherpostmarked Parkville, Tenn., requesting his truck, which he had left in theChristian Helpers’ League.

That closedthat part of the official record of Fisher in Atlanta.

MindBroken by Drink.

Grave discredit was cast on Fisher’sstory by Mrs. Annie Fisher, his wife, of No. 734 Marietta street, who assertedfirmly that she believed the tale of a “business man’s confession” of the crimewas the fabrication of a mind broken down by drink, perhaps by drugs.

“My husband is a confirmed drunkard,”Mrs. Fisher regretfully admitted. “He is at times without any responsibilityfor his words or actions. He was once tried on a lunacy writ taken out by hisbrother, a business man of Rome, Ga. They declared him sane at the time, butput him on probation. I have an idea he uses morphine. He left me August 12.”

Both Stallings and his wife declareFisher is utterly irresponsible. His sister said she would not believe anystatement he might make, while her husband recounted some strange stories hesaid Fisher had told him at different times.

“He told them with no straight a facethat I almost believed him,” Stallings said, “but afterward I always found themto be untrue.”

Believed Frank Innocent.

As to Fisher’s knowledge of the Phagancase, Mrs. Fisher said that only once did her husband say anything that mighthave been taken as evidence that he knew something. One night while reading thenewspaper accounts of the arrest Fisher said:

“They haven’t got the guilty man. Frankdidn’t murder Mary Phagan.”

Mrs. Fisher also denied that herhusband had left Atlanta immediately after the murder of the little girl, as hesaid.

“He lived with here until August 12,”she stated, “and then he went away because I had filed a petition askingdivorce and alimony. He went away to keep the papers from being served.”

Mrs. Fisher was very candid andunreserved in talking the affairs of her husband and herself.

They were married, she said, in Dalton,Ga., thirteen years ago, and lived there until they moved to Atlanta threeyears ago.

Maniac When Drinking.

“My husband has long been a drinkingman,” Mrs. Fisher said. “When sober I believe he was perfectly rational, butwhen drinking—I don’t know just how to express it. He was nearly a maniac. Morethan once he threatened to shoot me. I had to have him arrested less than ayear ago because he was threatening my life.”

“I was going to sue him for divorcethen, but Officer Clarke, a friend of his, took his part and begged me not to.I consented, and he was put on probation. Officer Coogler, I believe it was,kept him on the probation list four months. But it was no use at all.”

Since Fisher went away to avoid theservice of the divorce papers, his wife has been taking boarders and sewing tosupport herself and their two children. Fisher wrote to her from Parkville,Tenn., she said, and again from a suburb of Birmingham. He wanted to return andlive with her, Mrs. Fisher said, but she did not answer the letters.

Then Mrs. Fisher told of a happeningthe morning after the murder was committed.

“It was Sunday,” she said, “and justafter breakfast we went to a drug store about a block away. On our way back wemet a man I didn’t know. He stopped my husband and said: ‘Fisher, I’ve gotsomething to tell you.’”

Went to Factory.

“Mr. Fisher stopped and talked with himand I went on home. Later, he came home and told me the man told him a girl hadbeen killed at the pencil factory. He seemed to be quite curious about thecrime. He and I went and we took our little girl, Evelyn, and Miss LilleEmbree, a young woman who was boarding with us.”

“We couldn’t go all over the factory,but I didn’t think my husband seemed at all nervous or acted unusual. He didread a lot about the case. I noticed that. And some time after that I missed mydiary that I kept to set down almost everything I did. I don’t know that hetook it, however.”

Reporters, who had trailed Fisher fromBirmingham, from where he was brought to Atlanta by C. W. Burke, an agent forAttorney Rosser, were on constant duty ready to resume the chase in the eventthat any new move was made by Frank’s lawyers or there appeared an endeavor tohide him away. The vigilance of an entire day and a night resulted in only thesensational statement of the quasi-prisoner which was forecast very closely byThe Sunday American. This statement was given out late in the afternoon byAttorney Rosser. Rosser would not reveal the name of the prominent man charged.He said that his identity must remain a mystery for a time at least. The onlyclew he furnished was that the man was fairly prominent.

“I do not want to use the name of the man,” said Rosser, “andthus possibly to do him an injustice. I will tell everything in the worldexcept the name of the man.”

“The man who has just told his story to us is I. W. Fisher.He once lived here and left e about the time of the murder of Mary Phagan, andsince then has lived in North Georgia, Tennessee and Birmingham. He now livesin Birmingham.”

“Without our knowledge or instigation, he went to the Chiefof Police in Birmingham, George H. Bodeker, and asserted that Frank wasinnocent, and that he had known of his innocence all the time, but that hedidn’t think Frank would be convicted, and therefore had kept his silence aboutthe real murderer.”

“He said that he met the man whocommitted the crime on Saturday, April 26, and that this man told him he wasgoing to meet Mary Phagan in the pencil factory at noon. Fisher said that whenthe man came factory he said: ‘I raised h—l in there and you have got to getout of town.’”

“Since that time Fisher says that thisman, who is well to do and established in business here, has been paying his expenseswherever he went.”

“Whether Fisher’s story is true or false we donot know. We are not giving it out as fact, but merely as one of the numerousstories which have come to our ears during the investigation of the crime. Wewould have said nothing about it if the newspapers had not come out yesterdaytelling of Fisher’s walking into the office of the Chief of Police inBirmingham. We do not take any stock in it one way or another as yet. But weare going to investigate it thoroughly and find whether or not if it is true.”

Police Told Name.

“We have told the detectives somethingwhen we have not told the public. We have told them the name of the man Fisheraccuses, and have incited them to work with us on our investigation. There issuch a man as the one Fisher names, and he is well known. Fisher is a marriedman, and has several children. They are in Atlanta.”

Solicitor Dorsey, Frank A. Hooper, whoassisted the Solicitor in the Frank trial, and members of the detectivedepartment appeared not at all impressed by Fisher’s story Monday. “I thinkhe’s telling a lie, pure and simple,” said Mr. Hooper when he was asked hisopinion.

Chief Lanford laughed at the story andsaid it was his belief that Fisher was out in town at the time of the Phaganmurder. Fisher is the same man, he thinks, that testified some ago againstGriff Freeman, who was arrested on a blind tiger charge, and then disappearedfrom town after Freeman was bound over Fisher was not on hand to testify in theState trial.

Mrs. Fischer acted as a sleuth andobtained much of the evidence that resulted in the prosecution of Freeman. Shetestified at the trial that Fisher pawned her shoes and sold their chickens toget liquor from Freeman. Fisher admitted that he had bought liquor many times fromthe defendant.

In an effort to make the identificationof the man secreted in the office of Attorney Rosser as the same man whotestified in the trial of Griff Freeman and then disappeared from the city,Lanford Monday ordered Detective Cowan to go the Fisher home on Marietta streetand get Mrs. Fisher. She will be taken to Rosser’s office and the attorney willbe asked for permission to let her see the man. Chief Lanford believes it willprove the same man.

May Balk Detectives.

It is conjectural if the detectiveswill be allowed this privilege in view of the strict seclusion in which Fisherhas been kept so far. Chief Lanford Monday that if the lawyers have evidencethat the crime was committed by another person than Frank, he thought theyshould turn it over to the police so that the man might be arrested and justicedone.

“Although Frank has been convicted ofthe crime,” said Lanford, “our eyes and ears never have been closed to evidencethat would point to any other person as the guilty on. I do not place muchreliance on Fisher’s story, but I want my department to investigate itthoroughly. This Fisher, I believe once was with the Southern Railway, and wasdischarged because of his drinking Burke, who now is acting for Rosser, once wasspecial agent for the Southern.”

Attorney Rosser Monday explained theunpassable guard that had been thrown around Fisher by saying that he wanted toget every detail of Fisher’s story before he let him go.

“As soon as I get all I want to know, Idon’t care what becomes of him,” the lawyer said. “We are making a most carefulinvestigation of every statement he has made, and we want to keep him at handuntil we are through. After that the detectives and the newspaper men canquestion him to their hearts’ content.”

MERCHANTVOWS TO

PRESECUTE FISHER

Ira W. Fisher, whose story attempted to involve J. C.Shirley, a respected Marietta street merchant, in the Phagan case, was turnedover to the police authorities late Monday afternoon. Attorney Rosser notifiedChief of Detectives Lanford that he was ready to give the ‘‘witness’’ up.Detective Eugen co*ker was dispatched to the attorney’s office immediately.Fisher was taken to the police station and subjected to a rigidcross-examination Monday night.

Fisher reiterated before a crowd ofnewspaper men and detectives his startling story.

DespiteShirley’s denial of every accusation made by Fisher, the man persisted in hisaccusations. He went into detail, going even so far as naming the amounts ofmoney which he said Shirley had sent him at various times and giving the townswhich he visited. However, he had no documents to support him and none whoheard the story believed him.

That he will prosecute Ira W. Fisher,who names him as the principal in his sensational story of the Phagan murder,to the fullest extent the law allows, was the declaration made to a Georgianreporter late Monday afternoon by J. C. Shirley, the well-known and respectedMarietta street merchant. He has retained C. J. Graham, a lawyer who hasalready figured in the Frank case, to represent him.

“The whole story is a joke,” said Mr.Shirley. “But I will investigate the law and determine how I may prosecute thisman for this abominable fairy tale.”

C. F. Shirley, who lives at No. 54 Flatshoals road ­rand is abrother of the man Fisher names, said Fisher was a drunkard and a gambler and amighty sorry man all around. That appeared to be the opinion of all who havehad any connection with Fisher.

J. C. Shirley said he did not even know where the NationalPencil Factory was until he read of the Phagan case in the newspapers. Hedeclared that he knew none of the girls employed there, except that he hadheard that two girls who lived across the street were employed at the plant.

Fisher, in Luther Rosser’s office, stuck to his story, butvery little credence was attached to it by anybody.

Fisher, according to report, declared that Shirley had methim on the street on the afternoon of the murder and had declared that he hadmet Mary Phagan and “played hell.”

When informed of this statement, the furniture man laughed.

“Why the man is crazy,” he said.

Identification of the accused man was made public Mondayafternoon. It came from Birmingham, where Fisher first made his sensationalstatements. The man is well known in business circles of Atlanta. He declaredthat he was not aware that he was the one referred to until he was approachedMonday.

Mr. Shirley could not ascribe any reason for Fisher havingbrought the charge of murder against him unless he was demented.

“Why, I don’t recall having talked with Fisher since he lefthis Marietta street home,” said Mr. Shirley. “The only time I saw much of himwas when he loafed around the store. I don’t recall having ever discussed thePhagan case with him.”

Mr. Shirley denied having everdelivered furniture at the home of J. W. Coleman stepfather of Mary Phagan,with Fisher.

Charged by his wife being a raving drunkard; wanted by thepolice, who give him a long court record, believed by Probation Officer Cooglerto be demented as a result of accusations of murder against himself, I. W.Fisher, the accuser of a prominent Atlanta man in the Phagan case, wasconfronted Monday by a general disposition to ridicule his story and thethreatened collapse of a sensation.

Kept a prisoner in the office of Luther Z. Rosser, while thepolice waited to arrest him, Fisher continued to be inaccessible to newspapermen, but various investigations of his record bared facts that threw dark cloudon his reliability.

Detectives continued their vigil on the ground floor of theGrant Building ready to arrest Fisher as soon as he made his appearance. In themeanwhile the Frank lawyers kept on investigating his story and seemeddetermined to hold their man a strict prisoner until they were entirely throughwith him.

“I am not acting sponsor for Fisher or for Fisher’s story,”declared Mr. Rosser, at his office Monday. “We want to keep the man for a fewhours longer, and then if the police would like to have him, they are welcometo him.”

“Do you believe Fisher’s story?” questioned a Georgianreporter.

“I have said my say,” exclaimed the attorney.

“Can I talk to Flasher?” the reporter asked.

“You can—when I get through with him,” said Rosser, and hestrode away in the direction of his office door.

A police officer stated positively Monday noon that the Frankattorneys’ “prisoner” would be arrested and taken to headquarters as soon as hewas taken from Rosser’s office.

None of the officers has had a look at Fisher, and it isdoubtful whether or not they will get him if he should try to walk out of theGrant building. Since he was taken to the office of Rosser yesterday morning,he was been given a shave and an overcoat. A pint of whisky was also seen tohave been taken into Fisher’s “cell.”

The arrival of Chief of Police Beavers in Rosser’s officeMonday noon created quite a bit of excitement. Chief Beavers however, went intothe private offices of Rosser, where the arguments in the Whitehall streetinjunction were being heard.

Mr. Coogler’s opinion was contingent on the identity of an I.W. Fisher Coogler has had before him many times and that of the Fisher who hasbeen virtually a prisoner in the Grant Building being the same.

Coogler said Monday that Fisher wastried several years ago for the murder of his wife’s brother. He was acquitted,but it is known that a suspicion that he was guilty still rested in the mind ofhis wife, and that she frequently had charged him with the crime. Theseaccusations are believed by Coogler to have unsettled Fisher’s mind, acondition which perhaps has been augmented by the use of drugs.

The “Fisher” Coogler has had before himlived at No. 797 Marietta street. An investigation of his record has disclosedthat the man was placed on probation November 24 of last year charged withbeing drunk and disorderly and abusing his wife. He obtained employment andcontributed to the support of his wife and children through the probationofficer.

Fisher was before Coogler again onChristmas, and this time he was given employment with the Christian Helpers’League. He could not say good and February 21 he was arrested again, chargedwith striking and otherwise mistreating his wife. He was bound over to theState Court under bond of $200. He obtained his release only to offend in thesame respect again. A peace warrant was issued, and he stayed in jail two dayslast May, and soon afterward he disappeared from the city.

Coogler received a letter from him lastMay, postmarked in Parksville, Tenn. He asked that his trunk be sent him. Thatwas the last Coogler heard of him until Fisher’s sensational story appeared inthe Sunday papers.

Here is Fisher’s probation record:

He was arrested and put on probation November 24, 1912. Thecharge was abusing and mistreating his wife while drinking, December 24, heviolated his parole, drinking and again being arrested. He promised betterbehavior, and was continued on probation, staying at the Christian Helpers’League on Decatur street.

February 22, 1913, Fisher yielded oncemore. Intoxicated, he went to his wife’s home and beat her. He was arrested andbound over in police court under a $200 bond, which he furnished.

May 15 his wife applied for a peacewarrant, under which Fisher was arrested and detained two days, finally givingbond. Then he disappeared May 28 Coogler received a letter from Fisherpostmarked Parkville, Tenn., requesting his truck, which he had left in theChristian Helpers’ League.

That closed that part of the official record of Fisher inAtlanta.

Mind Broken by Drink.

Grave discredit was cast on Fisher’sstory by Mrs. Annie Fisher, his wife, of No. 734 Marietta street, who assertedfirmly that she believed the tale of a “business man’s confession” of the crimewas the fabrication of a mind broken down by drink, perhaps by drugs.

“My husband is a confirmed drunkard,”Mrs. Fisher regretfully admitted. “He is at times without any responsibilityfor his words or actions. He was once tried on a lunacy writ taken out by hisbrother, a business man of Rome, Ga. They declared him sane at the time, butput him on probation. I have an idea he uses morphine. He left me August 12.”

Both Stallings and his wife declareFisher is utterly irresponsible. His sister said she would not believe anystatement he might make, while her husband recounted some strange stories hesaid Fisher had told him at different times.

“He told them with no straight a facethat I almost believed him,” Stallings said, “but afterward I always found themto be untrue.”

Believed Frank Innocent.

As to Fisher’s knowledge of the Phagancase, Mrs. Fisher said that only once did her husband say anything that mighthave been taken as evidence that he knew something. One night while reading thenewspaper accounts of the arrest Fisher said:

“They haven’t got the guilty man. Frankdidn’t murder Mary Phagan.”

Mrs. Fisher also denied that herhusband had left Atlanta immediately after the murder of the little girl, as hesaid.

“He lived with here until August 12,”she stated, “and then he went away because I had filed a petition askingdivorce and alimony. He went away to keep the papers from being served.”

Mrs. Fisher was very candid andunreserved in talking the affairs of her husband and herself.

They were married, she said, in Dalton,Ga., thirteen years ago, and lived there until they moved to Atlanta three yearsago.

Maniac When Drinking.

“My husband has long been a drinkingman,” Mrs. Fisher said. “When sober I believe he was perfectly rational, butwhen drinking—I don’t know just how to express it. He was nearly a maniac. Morethan once he threatened to shoot me. I had to have him arrested less than ayear ago because he was threatening my life.”

“I was going to sue him for divorcethen, but Officer Clarke, a friend of his, took his part and begged me not to.I consented, and he was put on probation. Officer Coogler, I believe it was,kept him on the probation list four months. But it was no use at all.”

Since Fisher went away to avoid theservice of the divorce papers, his wife has been taking boarders and sewing tosupport herself and their two children. Fisher wrote to her from Parkville,Tenn., she said, and again from a suburb of Birmingham. He wanted to return andlive with her, Mrs. Fisher said, but she did not answer the letters.

Then Mrs. Fisher told of a happeningthe morning after the murder was committed.

“It was Sunday,” she said, “and justafter breakfast we went to a drug store about a block away. On our way back wemet a man I didn’t know. He stopped my husband and said: ‘Fisher, I’ve gotsomething to tell you.’”

Went to Factory.

“Mr. Fisher stopped and talked with himand I went on home. Later, he came home and told me the man told him a girl hadbeen killed at the pencil factory. He seemed to be quite curious about thecrime. He and I went and we took our little girl, Evelyn, and Miss LilleEmbree, a young woman who was boarding with us.”

“We couldn’t go all over the factory,but I didn’t think my husband seemed at all nervous or acted unusual. He didread a lot about the case. I noticed that. And some time after that I missed mydiary that I kept to set down almost everything I did. I don’t know that hetook it, however.”

Reporters, who had trailed Fisher fromBirmingham, from where he was brought to Atlanta by C. W. Burke, an agent forAttorney Rosser, were on constant duty ready to resume the chase in the eventthat any new move was made by Frank’s lawyers or there appeared an endeavor tohide him away. The vigilance of an entire day and a night resulted in only thesensational statement of the quasi-prisoner which was forecast very closely byThe Sunday American. This statement was given out late in the afternoon byAttorney Rosser. Rosser would not reveal the name of the prominent man charged.He said that his identity must remain a mystery for a time at least. The onlyclew he furnished was that the man was fairly prominent.

“I do not want to use the name of the man,” said Rosser, “andthus possibly to do him an injustice. I will tell everything in the worldexcept the name of the man.”

“The man who has just told his story to us is I. W. Fisher.He once lived here and left e about the time of the murder of Mary Phagan, andsince then has lived in North Georgia, Tennessee and Birmingham. He now livesin Birmingham.”

“Without our knowledge or instigation, he went to the Chiefof Police in Birmingham, George H. Bodeker, and asserted that Frank wasinnocent, and that he had known of his innocence all the time, but that hedidn’t think Frank would be convicted, and therefore had kept his silence aboutthe real murderer.”

“He said that he met the man whocommitted the crime on Saturday, April 26, and that this man told him he wasgoing to meet Mary Phagan in the pencil factory at noon. Fisher said that whenthe man came factory he said: ‘I raised h—l in there and you have got to getout of town.’”

“Since that time Fisher says that thisman, who is well to do and established in business here, has been paying hisexpenses wherever he went.”

“Whether Fisher’s story is true or false we do not know. Weare not giving it out as fact, but merely as one of the numerous stories whichhave come to our ears during the investigation of the crime. We would have saidnothing about it if the newspapers had not come out yesterday telling ofFisher’s walking into the office of the Chief of Police in Birmingham. We donot take any stock in it one way or another as yet. But we are going toinvestigate it thoroughly and find whether or not if it is true.”

Police Told Name.

“We have told the detectives somethingwhen we have not told the public. We have told them the name of the man Fisheraccuses, and have incited them to work with us on our investigation. There issuch a man as the one Fisher names, and he is well known. Fisher is a marriedman, and has several children. They are in Atlanta.”

Solicitor Dorsey, Frank A. Hooper, whoassisted the Solicitor in the Frank trial, and members of the detectivedepartment appeared not at all impressed by Fisher’s story Monday. “I thinkhe’s telling a lie, pure and simple,” said Mr. Hooper when he was asked hisopinion.

Chief Lanford laughed at the story andsaid it was his belief that Fisher was out in town at the time of the Phaganmurder. Fisher is the same man, he thinks, that testified some ago againstGriff Freeman, who was arrested on a blind tiger charge, and then disappearedfrom town after Freeman was bound over Fisher was not on hand to testify in theState trial.

Mrs. Fischer acted as a sleuth andobtained much of the evidence that resulted in the prosecution of Freeman. Shetestified at the trial that Fisher pawned her shoes and sold their chickens toget liquor from Freeman. Fisher admitted that he had bought liquor many timesfrom the defendant.

PDF PAGE 8, COLUMN 1

Rosser’sOffice in State

Kept a virtual prisoner all day, andhedged about by secrecy that seemed to portend important things, the newentrant into the Phagan case limelight answered the questions of the Franklawyers somewhat hesitantly and not all impressively, according to the littleinformation that could be gathered from the closely guarded offices.

Theheadquarters of the law firm of Rosser, Brandon, Slaton & Phillips waswatched all day and night by a crowd of reporters who for the most part theirpains for their labors. Occasionally during the day a figure would emerge fromthe office—most frequently Herbert Haas. Close questioning brought theenlightening information from Mr. Haas that he did not know the man in thecase; that if he did he had no idea of the story he had told, and that at anyrate he could not talk to newspaper men.

Secret Conferences.

Outward evidences were the copious questions were being askedby Frank’s lawyers and that considerable importance—perhaps vitalimportance—was at first attached by them in the developments of the day. Youngwomen stenographers had been summoned from their homes and appeared to be busy.The conferences were held in the innermost offices, and no a word drifted tothe waiting men outside.

Reuben Arnold arrived about midday andwas immediately closeted with the other principals in the case. He had beenthere about three hours when the word went forth that the mysterious strangerwas to be spirited away in an automobile, and the newspaper men pared for thechase.

As a matter of fact, the word had beengiven to a private chauffeur to be prepared, and Detective Burke was to rushthe much-wanted man of mystery away. But the reporters remained on the alert,refusing to be lured away by various small subterfuges, and the automobile thathad been waiting downstairs kept on waiting for many hours.

Rosser Secretive.

As usual, Luther Z. Rosser was a synonym for secretiveness.He threw up his hands in horror at the suggestion that the man of mystery beposed for the photographers. He had evidently issued ironclad instructions toBurke to keep the mysterious man’s mouth closed, and Burke obeyed orders. Thedetective complained petulantly of the pestiferous attentions of the newspapermen, but he carried out his orders to the letter. Not a word would he allow hischarge to utter. The man might have been deaf and dumb for all that could begotten out of him.

Or he might have been duped. Thatsuggestion was seriously made by many who saw him. His appearance was anythingbut impressive as he was hustled up to the seventh floor of the Grant Building.A four-days’ beard made his drawn features far from attractive. His eyesshifted constantly. He shuffled his feet as he walked, and occasionally hethrew a glance behind him as though afraid of a shadow. He was not an inspiringspectacle.

Detectives on Guard.

On the ground floor objectives awaited with much the samefeelings as the reporters on the floors above. Detective Starnes, who did starwork in gathering evidence against Frank, was on duty for several hours. Hesimply awaited developments showing little impatience and almost the interest.Like most every body concerned, he wasnot inclined to take the latest developments seriously as far as pointing to anew solution of the crime.

The detectives on the case speculatedon the reasons for Chief Bodeker of Birmingham, failing to inform the city orcounty officials of the alleged revelations and turning the man of mystery overto private parties instead of to the police. To them if looked strange but theyare loath to discuss whatever significance it might have.

FisherDivorce Record

The diverse record of I. W. Fisher,whose sensational accusations have brought an upheaval in the Phagan murder case,is revealed in the petition of his wife. Mrs. Annie Fisher, filed in the FultonCounty Superior Court May 16, 1913.

The petition charges cruelty andinhumanity; also intoxication.

Mrs. Fisher’s petition in full is asfollows:

“Georgia—Fulton County.”

“To the Superior Court of Said County:”

“The petition of Mrs. Annie Fisher ofsaid county shows:”

“That on the 24^th day ofDecember 1899, plaintiff and one I. W. Fisher intermarried in due form of law,to wit: in the county of Whitfield, Dalton, Ga., and lived together as husbandand wife until May 13, 1913, on which date plaintiff and defendant separatedand are now living separated apart.”

“2. The Petitioner was then, and hasbeen since, a bona fide resident of the State of Georgia twelve (12) monthsnext before the filling of this petition.”

“3. Petitioner shows that she was veryaffectionate and kind to her husband from the time of said marriage, and thatduring that time she gave her said husband no cause to complain of yourpetitioner. Notwithstanding this, the said defendant has treated yourpetitioner in a cruel and inhuman manner, so as to make it impossible for herto continue her habitation with him. The acts constituting the cruel treatmentof the defendant are specified in part as follows: Defendant has many timescome home from his work, and being of a very jealous disposition, frequentlystruck and abused petitioner, and on numerous occasions has threatened herlife. That these acts of cruelty have rendered petitioner almost a nervous wreck,and that she is afraid to live with him longer.”

“4. Petitioner further shows thatdefendant has been guilty of habitual intoxication almost continuously for thepast four (4) or five (5) years. That he has frequently during this timeabsented himself during the entire night from home, and for about eight monthsduring 1912 he and petitioner were living separate and apart.”

“5. Petitioner further shows that theissue of said marriage now living are one boy named James Albert Lee Fisher,age 11 years, and one named Alice Evelyn Fisher, age 5 years.”

“6. Petitioner further shows thatneither she nor defendant have any property.”

“7. Petitioner shows that she isphysically and financially unable to properly support herself and her saidchildren: That the defendant, I. W. Fisher, is a strong and able-bodied man,and capable of earning $2.50 per day.”

“Wherefore, petitioner prays:”

“1. That a total divorce fromdefendant, that a divorce in vinculo matrimonii upon legal principles betweenthe petitioner and said defendant.”

“2. That the custody of the twochildren above mentioned be awarded to petitioner.”

“3. That defendant be enjoined frommolesting or annoying in any way interfering with petitioner, and from going toher said residence, speaking to her on the streets, calling her over thetelephone or communicating any threats to her by any other means.”

“4. That he be required to pay areasonable sum into this court to defray the expenses of this action, and forthe support and maintenance of the said children mentioned in this petition.”

“POOLE& LEWIS,”

“Petitioner’s Attorneys.”

“Georgia, Fulton County.”

“Personally appeared before theundersigned, an officer of said State and County, duly authorized by law toadminister oaths, Mrs. Annie Fisher, who, on oath, says the allegationscontained in the above and foregoing petition for divorce are true.”

“MRS. ANNIE FISHER.”

“Sworn to and subscribed to before me this 16^thday of May, 1913.”

“Z. R. UPCHURCH,”

“Notary Public, Fulton Co.”

“Read and considered: Ordered

“That the defendant show cause beforeme at Chambers in the City of Atlanta, Fulton County, Georgia, on the 24^thday of May, 1913, at 9:30 o’clock a. m., why the prayer of the foregoingpetition should not be granted. In the meantime, and until the further order ofthe court, defendant is enjoined and restrained as prayed. This 17^thday of May, 1913.”

“J. T. PENDLETON,”

“JudgeSuperior Court, Atlanta Circuit.”

WATSON TO ASK

QUASHING OF

Attorney for Thomson Editor Does

Not Expect Mail Case to

AUGUSTA, Oct. 20—The trial of Thomas E.Watson, charged with sending obscene matter through the mails, began here thismorning. Mr. Watson did not arrive until 10:20, a half hour after court opened,motoring down from his home at Thomson, S. Guyt McLendon, Mr. Watson’sattorney, who has been here two days, intimated that he would ask the court toquash the indictment, and he stated he did not think the case would ever reacha jury.

Judge Foster and other court officialsarrived last night. District Attorney Akerman refused to make a statementregarding the case other than to say he was ready for trial and that it wouldnot last more than two days.

A large crowd was in the courtroom whencourt opened. Numbers of persons from the country, friends of Watson, were onhand. Some time was taken up in organizing the court, calling the roll of thegrand and petit jurors, the charging of the Grand Jury by Judge Foster andother preliminaries.

FisherDivorce Record

The diverse record of I. W. Fisher,whose sensational accusations have brought an upheaval in the Phagan murdercase, is revealed in the petition of his wife. Mrs. Annie Fisher, filed in theFulton County Superior Court May 16, 1913.

The petition charges cruelty andinhumanity; also intoxication.

Mrs. Fisher’s petition in full is asfollows:

“Georgia—Fulton County.”

“To the Superior Court of Said County:”

“The petition of Mrs. Annie Fisher ofsaid county shows:”

“That on the 24^th day ofDecember 1899, plaintiff and one I. W. Fisher intermarried in due form of law,to wit: in the county of Whitfield, Dalton, Ga., and lived together as husbandand wife until May 13, 1913, on which date plaintiff and defendant separatedand are now living separated apart.”

“2. The Petitioner was then, and hasbeen since, a bona fide resident of the State of Georgia twelve (12) monthsnext before the filling of this petition.”

“3. Petitioner shows that she was veryaffectionate and kind to her husband from the time of said marriage, and thatduring that time she gave her said husband no cause to complain of yourpetitioner. Notwithstanding this, the said defendant has treated yourpetitioner in a cruel and inhuman manner, so as to make it impossible for herto continue her habitation with him. The acts constituting the cruel treatmentof the defendant are specified in part as follows: Defendant has many timescome home from his work, and being of a very jealous disposition, frequentlystruck and abused petitioner, and on numerous occasions has threatened herlife. That these acts of cruelty have rendered petitioner almost a nervouswreck, and that she is afraid to live with him longer.”

“4. Petitioner further shows thatdefendant has been guilty of habitual intoxication almost continuously for thepast four (4) or five (5) years. That he has frequently during this timeabsented himself during the entire night from home, and for about eight monthsduring 1912 he and petitioner were living separate and apart.”

“5. Petitioner further shows that theissue of said marriage now living are one boy named James Albert Lee Fisher,age 11 years, and one named Alice Evelyn Fisher, age 5 years.”

“6. Petitioner further shows thatneither she nor defendant have any property.”

“7. Petitioner shows that she isphysically and financially unable to properly support herself and her saidchildren: That the defendant, I. W. Fisher, is a strong and able-bodied man,and capable of earning $2.50 per day.”

“Wherefore, petitioner prays:”

“1. That a total divorce fromdefendant, that a divorce in vinculo matrimonii upon legal principles betweenthe petitioner and said defendant.”

“2. That the custody of the twochildren above mentioned be awarded to petitioner.”

“3. That defendant be enjoined frommolesting or annoying in any way interfering with petitioner, and from going toher said residence, speaking to her on the streets, calling her over thetelephone or communicating any threats to her by any other means.”

“4. That he be required to pay areasonable sum into this court to defray the expenses of this action, and forthe support and maintenance of the said children mentioned in this petition.”

“POOLE& LEWIS,”

“Petitioner’s Attorneys.”

“Georgia,Fulton County.”

“Personally appeared before theundersigned, an officer of said State and County, duly authorized by law toadminister oaths, Mrs. Annie Fisher, who, on oath, says the allegationscontained in the above and foregoing petition for divorce are true.”

“MRS. ANNIE FISHER.”

“Sworn to and subscribed to before me this 16^thday of May, 1913.”

“Z. R. UPCHURCH,”

“Notary Public, Fulton Co.”

“Read and considered: Ordered

“That the defendant show cause beforeme at Chambers in the City of Atlanta, Fulton County, Georgia, on the 24^thday of May, 1913, at 9:30 o’clock a. m., why the prayer of the foregoingpetition should not be granted. In the meantime, and until the further order ofthe court, defendant is enjoined and restrained as prayed. This 17^thday of May, 1913.”

“J. T. PENDLETON,”

“Judge Superior Court, Atlanta Circuit.”

PDF PAGE 10, COLUMN 3

Two more affidavits were obtained thismorning by the lawyers for Frank tending to show that A. H. Henslee, a memberof the trial jury, had expressed strong opinions as to the guilt of Frankbefore the trial.

Leon Harrison, of Atlanta, makes thestatement under oath that some time in May, 1912, he was walking South onPeachtree street, and just north of Five Points he overheard Henslee andanother man engaged in a very animated conversation” regarding the Frank case.

Harrison stopped, he said, andlistened, being interested in anything he might learn of the famous case. Hesays he overheard Henslee’s companion say:

“I don’t believe Frank committed thatmurder.”

To which Henslee’s reply is said tohave been:

“I believe he did kill the girl, and ifby any chance I get on the jury that tries him I’ll do my best to get himconvicted.”

The other sworn statement is the secondaffidavit of Julian A. Lehman whose first statement drew from Henslee a sharpand sweeping denial of the charge that he had expressed a belief in Frank’sguilt.

Lehman reiterates in his secondstatement all the assertions made in his first. He says that between the dateof the murder, April 26, and the beginning of the trial, July 28, he heardHenslee on two occasions express himself as being firmly convinced of Frank’sguilt. He gave the approximate dates of the expressions as June 2 and June 20.

PDF PAGE 10, COLUMN 3

Rosser’sOffice in State

Of Siege Through Night

Kept a virtual prisoner all day, and hedgedabout by secrecy that seemed to portend important things, the new entrant intothe Phagan case limelight answered the questions of the Frank lawyers somewhathesitantly and not all impressively, according to the little information thatcould be gathered from the closely guarded offices.

Theheadquarters of the law firm of Rosser, Brandon, Slaton & Phillips waswatched all day and night by a crowd of reporters who for the most part theirpains for their labors. Occasionally during the day a figure would emerge fromthe office—most frequently Herbert Haas. Close questioning brought theenlightening information from Mr. Haas that he did not know the man in thecase; that if he did he had no idea of the story he had told, and that at anyrate he could not talk to newspaper men.

Secret Conferences.

Outward evidences were the copious questions were being askedby Frank’s lawyers and that considerable importance—perhaps vitalimportance—was at first attached by them in the developments of the day. Youngwomen stenographers had been summoned from their homes and appeared to be busy.The conferences were held in the innermost offices, and no a word drifted tothe waiting men outside.

Reuben Arnold arrived about midday andwas immediately closeted with the other principals in the case. He had beenthere about three hours when the word went forth that the mysterious strangerwas to be spirited away in an automobile, and the newspaper men pared for thechase.

As a matter of fact, the word had beengiven to a private chauffeur to be prepared, and Detective Burke was to rushthe much-wanted man of mystery away. But the reporters remained on the alert,refusing to be lured away by various small subterfuges, and the automobile thathad been waiting downstairs kept on waiting for many hours.

Rosser Secretive.

As usual, Luther Z. Rosser was a synonym for secretiveness.He threw up his hands in horror at the suggestion that the man of mystery beposed for the photographers. He had evidently issued ironclad instructions toBurke to keep the mysterious man’s mouth closed, and Burke obeyed orders. Thedetective complained petulantly of the pestiferous attentions of the newspapermen, but he carried out his orders to the letter. Not a word would he allow hischarge to utter. The man might have been deaf and dumb for all that could begotten out of him.

Or he might have been duped. Thatsuggestion was seriously made by many who saw him. His appearance was anythingbut impressive as he was hustled up to the seventh floor of the Grant Building.A four-days’ beard made his drawn features far from attractive. His eyesshifted constantly. He shuffled his feet as he walked, and occasionally hethrew a glance behind him as though afraid of a shadow. He was not an inspiringspectacle.

Detectives on Guard.

On the ground floor objectives awaited with much the samefeelings as the reporters on the floors above. Detective Starnes, who did starwork in gathering evidence against Frank, was on duty for several hours. Hesimply awaited developments showing little impatience and almost the interest.Like most every body concerned, he wasnot inclined to take the latest developments seriously as far as pointing to anew solution of the crime.

The detectiveson the case speculated on the reasons for Chief Bodeker of Birmingham, failingto inform the city or county officials of the alleged revelations and turningthe man of mystery over to private parties instead of to the police. To them iflooked strange but they are loath to discuss whatever significance it mighthave.

PDF PAGE 10, COLUMN 3

Two more affidavits were obtained thismorning by the lawyers for Frank tending to show that A. H. Henslee, a memberof the trial jury, had expressed strong opinions as to the guilt of Frankbefore the trial.

Leon Harrison, of Atlanta, makes thestatement under oath that some time in May, 1912, he was walking South onPeachtree street, and just north of Five Points he overheard Henslee andanother man engaged in a very animated conversation” regarding the Frank case.

Harrison stopped, he said, andlistened, being interested in anything he might learn of the famous case. Hesays he overheard Henslee’s companion say:

“I don’t believe Frank committed thatmurder.”

To which Henslee’s reply is said tohave been:

“I believe he did kill the girl, and ifby any chance I get on the jury that tries him I’ll do my best to get himconvicted.”

The other sworn statement is the secondaffidavit of Julian A. Lehman whose first statement drew from Henslee a sharpand sweeping denial of the charge that he had expressed a belief in Frank’sguilt.

Lehman reiterates in his secondstatement all the assertions made in his first. He says that between the dateof the murder, April 26, and the beginning of the trial, July 28, he heardHenslee on two occasions express himself as being firmly convinced of Frank’sguilt. He gave the approximate dates of the expressions as June 2 and June 20.

WATSON MOVES TO QUASH HIS

CaseInvolves Constitutional

Guarantee of Freedom to the

AUGUSTA, Oct. 20—With every seal andevery particle of available standing room in the United States courtroomoccupied, the case of the United States Government vs. Thomas E. Watson,charging him with sending obscene matter through the malls, was called at 10:20o’clock this morning.

The case will be based on the questionof whether or not the Constitution guarantees to the editors of the country thefreedom of the press unabridged. The United States Supreme Court has held thatan act of Congress prohibiting the sending of obscene matter through the mailsis constitutional, but S. G. McLendon, defendant’s leading counsel, declaredthat the Supreme Court has not yet decided the exact point at issue in thiscase.

In his argument on a motion to quashthe indictment, Mr. McLendon said that the case of Thomas E. Watson in itselfwas not of very great importance, that it was not material what kind of matterWatson published, but that the case was one which would affect every newspaperand magazine editor in this country.

He stated that in the first amendmentto the Constitution of the United States ample provision had been made ofguaranteeing the freedom of the press and that Congress can not pass a lawwhich takes away any of that freedom.

When court adjourned at 12:35 o’clockJudge Foster had not passed on a motion to quash the indictment.

WATSON MOVES TO QUASH HIS

CaseInvolves Constitutional

Guarantee of Freedom to the

AUGUSTA, Oct. 20—With every seal andevery particle of available standing room in the United States courtroom occupied,the case of the United States Government vs. Thomas E. Watson, charging himwith sending obscene matter through the malls, was called at 10:20 o’clock thismorning.

The case will be based on the questionof whether or not the Constitution guarantees to the editors of the country thefreedom of the press unabridged. The United States Supreme Court has held thatan act of Congress prohibiting the sending of obscene matter through the mailsis constitutional, but S. G. McLendon, defendant’s leading counsel, declaredthat the Supreme Court has not yet decided the exact point at issue in thiscase.

In his argument on a motion to quashthe indictment, Mr. McLendon said that the case of Thomas E. Watson in itselfwas not of very great importance, that it was not material what kind of matterWatson published, but that the case was one which would affect every newspaperand magazine editor in this country.

He stated that in the first amendmentto the Constitution of the United States ample provision had been made ofguaranteeing the freedom of the press and that Congress can not pass a lawwhich takes away any of that freedom.

When court adjourned at 12:35 o’clockJudge Foster had not passed on a motion to quash the indictment.