The Memphis appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1886-1890, 1889-04-19
TO JAIL WITHOUT BAIL.
THE DISPOSITION OF THE HEpRIcK
CASE BY JUDGE DUBosE.
Every Ingredient.of Murder in the First
Degree Present In Force to His
Honor's Satisfaction, and He Doesn't
Hesitate to So Pronounce.

w. o. Hedrick, the slayer of Thomas
Cochran, is in Jail, with no prospect of
getting out in time to see the races, which
begin tomorrow.
His preliminary hearing before Judge
DuBose, sitting as committing magis-
trate, was concluded yesterday morning,
the result being that he was remanded to
Jail without bail.
In committing Mr.. Hednck, His Honor
manifested u greatdeal OF feeling, so much,
in fact, as to cause widespread comment
OF somewhat caustic character. After
Gen. Wright, for the defense, had sub
mitted a brief argument setting forth why
his client should be admitted to bail, and
reasonable bail at that, His Honor began
his opinion. He referred first TO the con-
stitutional provision that all offenses we're
bailable except those OF capital grade,
to determine which the proof pos
tive and the presumption clear.
There were four ingredients in
the crime OF murder in the first degree,
viz: II must be willful, deliberate, mali
cious and premeditated. Continuing, he
said: "Did defendant lIedrick kill de-
ceased Cochran willfully, that is of pur-
pose, with the intent that the act OF shoot
ing him should have that effect? Was it
deliberately done. that is, OF cool purpose2
Was it maliciously done, that is, with the
intent to do injury TO the deceasedP Was
il done with reconciliation, that is, was
the design to kill deceased Cochran by de-
PENDANT formed before the act OF shooting
him was performed, by which his death
was produced?" The Judge then read
from a regulation charge TO Jury in a
murder case, in which the law in the case
was set down as defined by the Supreme
Court. That portion defining murder in
the first degree was rs follows:
"rhe distinctive feature OF murder in
the first degree is generalization, and in
wolves previously formed design or actual
intention TO kill. II is not necessary that
such design should have been conceived
or pre-existed in the mind for any definite
period OF time, anterior to its execution.
Ii is sufficient II it precede the actual as
sault, hcw short soever the interval OF
time may be; for the length OF time is not
Of the essence of this element OF this
oilense. And the purpose TO kill is no
less premeditated in the legal sense OF the
term, ii il was deliberately formed but a
moment preceding the act by which death
is produced, than II il had been formed
one hour before. The mental state OF the
assailant at the time, and other than the
length OF time the act may have been pre-
mediiated, is the material point TO be con.
sidered. The question OF vital importance
Isl Was the mind OF the assaiant at the
moment Of killing so far free from excite.
ment or passion as 10 be capable OF pre-
meditating as before explained, and was
the death OF the party slain the object
sought to be accomplished, the end de-
termined upon?"
Taking up the four ingredients, Ills
Honor found in the testimony OF witnesses
on the stand sufficient merit TO establish
every one OF them, and 80 held. Referring
| TO defendant counsePs statement that nc
| Jury in the world would hold their client
| guilty OF murder In the first degree, the
Judge replied that he had nothing 10 dc
with the verdict Of any jury in his court
| except in q restricted sense; but us Judge
on the bench IL was his duty to maintain
the law at It's proper standard, and this h'
proposed TO do.
| An APPEAL reporter, during n visit &
the Judges Office yesterday afternoon
inquired when Hudrick would probably b,
tried.
81 do not know, - said he; two hay
four other murderers In Jail to be tried
aud Iledrick will have to take his chance
| on the calendar"