Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1893-01-04

The District Attorney Declines tn RECON-
mend Executive Cleruency.

The District Attorney Declines tn RECON-
mend Executive Clem-ncy.
In the case of VIM. Douglass Cross, the coll
ored wife murderer, sentenced to be hanged
Friday next, the Attorney General yesterday
requested an opinion from District Attorney
Cole las TO the expediency and justice of grant,
ing the communication Of the sentence"
The district attorney has forwarded hrs
opinion to the Attorney General deliberately
detailing the facts in the case as brought out
during the two trials of the accused. Attention
Is called to the fact that eros. was heard to
threaten the life of his wife on the night
OF the killing. and the testimony OF the colored
man Shreeves, who testified on the second triAl
that he saw the man shoot the woman. although
he could not identify Cross as the man, is also
referred to iii the district attorneys report The
defense offered BY the condemned man. that
his wife shot herself in "a fit of jealousy aroused
by he: suspected infidelity OF her husband is
related, as also the facts that Cross was in 1881
convicted of manslaughter In killing a man,
and that In 1856 he pleaded guilty To cruelty
torturing boy. After calling attention to the
fact that Cross was twice convicted of the crime
charged against him, and that the Court In
General Term refused to grant tho third trial,
the district attorney SAWS.
In view OF the foregoing facts and circum-
stances there would seem TO be no room for
doubling that the petitioner is guilty Of the
murder of his wife. In this District we have no
degrees of murder. All unlawful homicide is
either murder punishable by DEATH man.
slaughter punishable by fine or imprisonment
not to- exceed ten years in the penitentiary, or
both). The evidence excludes the possibility
Of manslaughter. Had there been u statute in
force here making degrees OF murder.
might there have been verdict of
murder in the second degree, which
all the statutes punish by imprisonment,
for life? is question that may arise. SUCH
statutes, wherever they have been enacted,
generally define murder in the first degree to
be where the malice is expressed. or by proof
of threats, lying in wait, poison and the
like, while murder in the second degree
is defined to be where malice is in
ferred from the use OF deadly
weapon or other circumstance from which
malice may be inferred, but does not necessarily
exist. 1t seems to me that under such statute
as above supposed the evidence would have
supported verdict Of murder in the first de-
gree, but, Of course, it would have been within
the fair discretion OF a jury to have returned
verdict of murder in the second degree Had
we had such a statute l cannot say that would
have asked for or expected such verdict IN
der the evidence, but such a one would not
have surprised me.
Il hesitate to express any opinion as to the
expediency and justice of granting the commu-
tation OF the sentence. and should
the attorney in charge Of pardons
did not expressly require me to do SO. feel
constrained to say that there is nothing in the
evidence or the circumstances attending the
commission Of the crime that seems to require
executive clemency."
Although Cross IL under sentence to be
hanged Friday OF this week il Us generally
thought that, should the President decline to
interfere, he will grant tho condemned man
a short lease of life by ordering
the execution postponed for perhaps thirty
days. This afternoon the counsel Of Cross ap-
peared before the Attorney General in support
of the petition for Communication of the sem
tence Of death to one Of life imprisonment