Thursday, 30th April 1914: Tale Of $200 Bribe Is Branded As A Lie By Detective Burns, The Atlanta Journal

Search for:

Reading Time: 18 minutes [2979 words]

Sleuth Leaves Train Going West and Returns to Atlanta to Refute Rev. C. B. Ragsdale's Story

Frank Trial Motion to Be Heard Friday

A resolution to revoke the license of Burns' Detective Agency in Atlanta will be presented to the Police Board. The hearing of Leo M. Frank's extraordinary motion for a new trial will be resumed Friday morning at 10 o'clock before Judge Ben H. Hill. While the defense will offer additional amendments, interest centers in the "counter showing" of Solicitor Hugh M. Dorsey, who has thrown a veil of secrecy about his evidence.

A development in the case Thursday was the denunciation of Rev. Calton B. Ragsdale by the three men who he claimed were present when he accepted a $200 bribe to make his affidavit, saying he had heard a Negro, later identified as Jim Conley, confess to the murder.

Another development is that members of the board of Police Commissioners are planning to introduce at the next meeting a resolution to revoke the license to do business in Atlanta of the William J. Burns National Detective Agency on the ground that several conditions on which the license was granted have not been complied with.

Attorneys for the defense of Frank had no comment to make on the new developments in the Ragsdale matter Thursday.

Rosser's Statement

Mr. Rosser, however, did tell how Ragsdale and Barber were brought to his office. "When they came in with the Burns' agent," he said, "I was absent and my partner, Mr. Brandon, who is not especially familiar with the case, commenced an interview."

"I was summoned from the court and relieved him of the task. I put both men through a very vigorous cross-examination and was particular to ask the names of his associates, and he named several of the most prominent men in the city."

"The affidavits were dictated almost in the language of the two men. Then I had a notary public, a young man named Callahan, who is with another law firm in the city, summoned to the office to take the affidavits."

"I was in an adjoining office dictating the amendment when the two men swore to the affidavits, but Mr. Callahan, I understand, read every word to them before the affidavits were signed."

"Mr. Ragsdale told how reluctant he had been to enter the case and how he hoped to avoid publicity. I had never seen him or Barber before they walked into the office. I had heard, however, various vague rumors to the effect that some person could give the sort of testimony that Ragsdale in the affidavit. Long before the men came into the office, I had given up hope of securing the evidence."

Solicitor Dorsey had no comment to make on the Ragsdale developments. Unless more time is necessitated by new amendments, he says he will be ready to proceed with the case Friday morning. The Solicitor still intimates in a general way that various perjury and bribery charges are likely to follow the completion of the hearing.

Burns Denies Charge

Detective Burns, now in Chattanooga, denounces as an unmitigated lie the statement of the Rev. Ragsdale to members of his church that he was offered a $200 bribe in the presence of the detective and others to make his affidavit in the Frank case. Mr. Burns was en route to Oklahoma when he heard on the train of Ragsdale's story and he got off at Chattanooga, from which point he telephoned The Journal.

"Ragsdale is an unmitigated liar," said Mr. Burns, "and I never saw the man in my life. Just as soon as I heard of his outrageous story I decided to come back to Atlanta and I will be there on the first train."

"All I know about his affidavit is that he came to our office and Mr. Lehon conducted him to the office of Attorney Rosser. I have never seen the man."

Thurman Says "Liar"

Arthur T. Thurman, the lawyer who was charged by Ragsdale with being present when the $200 bribe offer was made and accepted, characterizes the preacher as a liar and perjurer. It was charged by Ragsdale that Thurman threatened him with criminal action on a business deal if he didn't make the affidavit, and this the attorney denies, characterizing the preacher again as a liar.

Mr. Thurman made this statement: "Several months ago, Ragsdale, who has been coming to my office frequently, told me this story, which was embodied in his affidavit. He said then that he did not want it made public until he could find R. L. Barber, who had left town, in order that the story might be corroborated by him."

"While I didn't take much stock in the story, I communicated with Dr. B. Wildauer. About three weeks ago, the Burns people started working on it."

"Last Thursday, C. W. Tedder, who is a Burns employee, dropped into my office, about that time Ragsdale and Barber, with whom I had an engagement, came in. Then Ragsdale told the story to Tedder. Later I took him and Barber to the Burns office, where we met Mr. Lehon, and he took the two men over to the offices of attorneys."

"The story that he was offered a bribe is ridiculous."

"Both Stories False"

"As to the story that I threatened him because of a business transaction, I can only say that it, too, is utterly false."

"In April 1913, Ragsdale sold to the Rev. J. W. Foster (who was in the limelight when arrested recently with his affinity, a Mrs. Ruth Dean) a saw mill, a grist mill, and a cotton gin and land at Holly Springs, Cherokee County. More than two months later Foster sold the property to me, and I assumed a $500 machinery mortgage on it. The transaction was perfectly regular, and there was nothing criminal in it, for Foster knew that it was encumbered when he bought it from Ragsdale and I knew that it was encumbered when I bought it from Foster."

The attorney showed a reporter the two deeds to the property, and in both of them the debt was mentioned.

C. W. Tedder admits meeting Ragsdale and Barber in Thurman's office but emphatically denies that he heard the preacher offered a bribe, and he also declares that so far as he knows Detective Burns has never seen the preacher. Tedder emphatically denies that, acting in the interest of Smith or anyone else, he "planted" the Ragsdale-Barber matter in an effort to trap Burns or other agents of the defense.

Story of Tedder

This is the story Tedder tells: "I had heard four months ago that a Baptist minister, a client of Arthur Thurman's, had a weird story to tell in connection with the Frank case. I had been searching unsuccessfully for the preacher until last Thursday, when I was in Thurman's office and this fellow Ragsdale came in. I asked Thurman if he was the Baptist preacher, and on receiving an affirmative reply, I tried to pump him. He got wise and walked out of the office."

"Half an hour later I heard he had made an affidavit to the defense in the offices of Attorney Rosser. He came back to Thurman's office, where he then talked to me. He told me about the affidavit. He said he had had the matter on his conscience for a long time, but hesitated to speak because he didn't want to get mixed up in the case. He told me, however, that he had read a newspaper story about Frank in the tower, gripping the bars of his cell and proclaiming his innocence, and that he decided then to tell the story."

Tedder says further that after his first conversation with the preacher, Thurman carried Ragsdale and Barber down to the Burns office, where they met Dan S. Lehon, of the Burns' forces, and he took them to the office of Attorney Rosser, where the affidavits were made.

Burns' Statement

This is borne out by a statement made by Detective Burns before he left the city. Mr. Burns then told reporters that he did not see Ragsdale. He was informed, he said, by Lehon that Ragsdale would make an affidavit, and he instructed Lehon to take the preacher to the offices of the attorney.

The committee which received Ragsdale's resignation last Monday night reported Wednesday to the church conference, and the pastor's resignation was accepted and it was ordered that he be paid one month's salary of $35 in advance. This action was taken after a lengthy discussion.

J. E. Dobbs, one of the prominent members of the church committee, says the pastor did not tell who offered him a $200 bribe, but asserted that the offer was made in Thurman's office in the presence of the men named. He was in financial stress at the time and yielded to temptation, Mr. Dobbs says the pastor informed the committee.

Ragsdale was not at the meeting of the church when the resignation was accepted. A Journal reporter called at the Ragsdale home in Kirkwood Thursday morning but was unable to see the minister. The members of Mr. Ragsdale's family were also reluctant to discuss the affair.

A committee of two, W. B. Blair and J. R. Faver, representing the Melford Baptist church, near Smyrna, in Cobb County, called at the home during the morning. They stated that Mr. Ragsdale had been preaching for their church and they had been appointed by the church to make any investigation of Mr. Ragsdale's connection with the Frank case and report back to the congregation.

Pinkerton Agency Sues National Pencil Factory

A development of Wednesday afternoon of interest in the Frank case was the filing of a suit by the Pinkerton National Detective Agency against the National Pencil Company. The suit alleges simply that the Pencil Company has never paid the Detective Agency's bill for its investigation of the Mary Phagan murder mystery. The sum which the Pinkertons ask is slightly in excess of $1,200.

The suit sets out that the officials of the Pencil Company have repeatedly been requested to pay the bill, but have refused. The Pinkertons figured extensively in the first investigation of the case, and Harry Scott, who had charge of the case for the Agency, was one of the principal witnesses for the state at the trial.

Will Move to Revoke Burns' Atlanta License

It was learned Thursday that Police Commissioner A. R. King will introduce a resolution at the next meeting of the Police board, which occurs on the second Tuesday in May, revoking the license of the Atlanta branch of the W. J. Burns Detective Agency on the ground that the Agency has failed to comply with conditions agreed upon at the time the license was granted.

The revocation of the license will be requested, it is understood, first, because it was the impression of members of the board that the Agency was to act in Atlanta only in bank cases; second, that it was agreed at the time the license was granted that the chief of Police and the Police board should have a list of all agents at work in the city and should know the detectives who operated in Atlanta; third, it is stated that Detective Burns not only failed to comply with this agreement in regard to detectives brought to Atlanta from New Orleans, New York, and other cities to investigate the murder of Mary Phagan, but that he also allowed local men with no license to work with his own men on the case.

In addition, it is charged that he has not hesitated to make discrediting remarks about the Atlanta Police department. Chief of Police Beavers, when questioned by a Journal reporter, stated he was making an investigation to see whether the Burns Agency had complied with the regulations for private detectives working in Atlanta. Should he find the Agency is violating the conditions of its license, he said he would bring the matter to the attention of the board, otherwise not.

Frank Makes Appeal to Public, Asking Justice

Stating that the people of Atlanta and of Georgia have too great a love of justice to want to see him hanged on the evidence of a Negro, Leo M. Frank Thursday gave out the following signed statement.

"To the People of Atlanta:"

"I have been advised not to make further appeal for justice to the people, but I cannot bring myself to believe that the people would deny me the small privilege of pleading my case before them."

"I am told there are many people who do not hesitate to say that I ought to be hanged whether I had a fair trial or not, or whether I am guilty or not; but I cannot bring myself to believe they represent a majority."

"I have had no trial in the courthouse, only the pretense of one. The question put up to the jury in my case was not 'Is Leo M. Frank guilty?' but it was 'Whose life shall it be, Frank's or yours?' and they decided accordingly. I do not so much blame the courts and jurors for denying me justice and a fair trial. It is the people themselves who are responsible. It is they who have compelled the judges and the jurors to decide as they have. I feel that I have a right to appeal to the people, because they are the last court of this state, higher and more powerful than all the other courts."

Whom He Contradicted

"Was there ever a case in a Georgia courthouse when the jury rejected the testimony of eight good white women in favor of the word of a degraded Negro? Conley not only contradicted me, but also Miss Corinthia Hall, Mrs. Emma Clarke Freeman, Mrs. J. A. White, Miss Rebecca Carson, Miss Helen Kerns, Miss May Pirk, Miss Dora Small, and Miss Julia Fuss."

"It was a part of Conley's monstrous lie that after he had carried the dead body to the basement, he and I were talking in my office and were interrupted by the appearance of Miss Corinthia Hall and Mrs. Emma Clarke Freeman at about twenty minutes past one. Now these ladies were on the stand and swore unequivocally that they left the factory for the last time that day at 11:45 a.m., or in other words, an hour and thirty-five minutes before the hour given by Conley, and they furthermore swore that when they left there remained in the factory Arthur White, Mrs. White, Mrs. May Barrett, Mrs. Barrett's daughter, Henry Denham, the stenographer, and myself. Now why should the jury take the Negro's word in preference to that of these white women on a simple question of fact? There was no chance for a mistake on their part. It was a square issue between them and the Negro, their oath against his oath. And, if Conley was lying on this point, how can any part of his story be believed for a moment?"

Miss Kern's Testimony

"Then take Miss Helen Kern's testimony. She testified that at 1:10 p.m. she saw me at the corner of Whitehall and Alabama streets, the very moment when Conley swore he was helping me dispose of the body."

"Miss Rebecca Carson testified: 'On Monday morning I said to Jim Conley, "Where were you on Saturday? Were you in the factory?" He said, "I drunk, I don't know where I was or what I did." I also overheard a conversation that he had with my mother when he said "Mr. Frank is just as innocent as an angel."'

"Conley testified, 'I didn't tell Miss Carson on Monday that I was drunk all day Saturday. I didn't see her at all on Monday. I don't remember telling Miss Carson on May 1, that Mr. Frank was innocent.'"

"Miss Mary Pirk testified: 'I talked with Jim Conley Monday morning after the murder. I accused him of the murder. He took his broom and walked right out of the office and I have never seen him since.'"

"Conley testified: 'I didn't have any conversation with Miss Mary Pirk on April 28 and she didn't say that I committed the crime, and I didn't shoot out of the metal room after she said that.'"

"Miss Dora Small testified: 'I saw Jim Conley Tuesday. He was worrying me to get money from me to buy a newspaper, and he often would come and ask me for copies of the paper before I got through reading them. They were extras. He would even get two of the same edition. He would take it and run over there and sit on a box by the elevator and read it. He told me, 'Mr. Frank is just as innocent as you are.'"

"Conley testified: 'I didn't ask Miss Small on Monday what the extra had in it, and I didn't say Mr. Frank is just as innocent as you are.'"

"Miss Julia Fuss testified: 'I talked with Jim Conley Wednesday morning after the murder. He was sweeping around there and asked me to see the newspaper. He told me he believed Mr. Frank was just as innocent as the angels from heaven.'"

"Conley testified: 'I didn't ask Miss Fuss on Wednesday for an extra. I didn't tell her that I thought Mr. Frank was as innocent as the angels in heaven.'"

"I say to the people of Atlanta that if the jury had not been intimidated by the fear of death and been left free to express its convictions, it would never have rejected the testimony of these eight white women in favor of that of a Negro. Let it be admitted that most of these ladies were in the employ of the National Pencil Factory, would that circumstance make the word of a Negro more reliable than theirs and more worthy to be believed by twelve white men, a Negro who was trying to save his own neck? No wonder Judge Roan declared he was not convinced of my guilt."

"LEO M. FRANK."