The Birmingham age-herald., 1912-02-03
HEFLIN INSISTS
 MALICE IS EVIDENT
Says Aspersions Were ''known to the Perpetrators to Be Deliberately
 False"

Solicitor IT. P. Hefin in an inter- view regarding the recent published report of the grand jury touching the solicitors office has this to say;
 ''The public has been regaled with the sensational. though by no means truthful forceful, comprehensive or just report of the late grand jury, at least so far as the same concerns the office of solicitor of Jefferson county; and were any of the strctures there in alleged made through ignorance of facts, carelessness or indifference, the effect upon the public mind would be bad enough. But when, as I here charge, and am able to substa ntiate beyond the shadow of doubt, the Gs- pensions cast upon my administration were known to the perpetrators as be- ing deliberately and designedly false. 1t is high time for the good citizen to observe for himself the character and type of men called to the highest tribunal of our community--the grand jury. l use the word perpetrator ad- visedly for I have not as yet reached the conclusion (and trust I never shall) that IS men can be correlated from the ctizenry of Jefferson county who will subscribe to report such as the one herein referred to with an utter disregard of facts, unless prompted by malice or some motive beyond my con- ception.
 If it were not from such motive. why did the grand jury refuse to ad- init me before them to give them the facts, instead of unjustly arraigning me in their report and requesting that I make such explanation to the pub lie?
 Was Refused Hearing
 "After being informed that the grand jury would make such a report I at tempted to appear before them and explain certain matters which would throw light thereon and were neces- sarily and properly matters for their inquiry but l was denied this priv ilege (though I might have asserted it as my prerogative) by the grand jury, even though their attention was called to certain matters in my report to the attorney general which they willfully and Intentionally overlooked refer to eases where convictions were had for murder in the second degree and manslaughter in the first or sec ond degree, where the defendants were indicted and tried for murder in the first degree and verdicts rendered for the lower offense
 My reports to the attorney general (the source of information from which the grand jury quoted) shows that during the time covered by said re- ports there were had 21 convictions for murder in the second degree ana where the defendants were tried on indictments charging in the first degree. To any per son at all familiar with the facts 1t is well known that fin many cases de- fendants are tried for murder and con victed for an offense as low as man slaughter in the second degree. Along this line l cite such cases as that of Eldridge F. Parker. If the report of the grand jury is to be relied upon the solicitor receives no credit what ever for securing convictions of this character although he prosecutes the cases as vigorously as cases where verdicts were returned for the higher offense: and the reduction in the de- gree of the homicide from murder in the first degree Ca capital offense) as returned by the grand jury to that of manslaughter in the second degree Ca misdemeanor) lies with the trial jury and cannot be charged to the so- lictor.
 Tn the instructions of the attorney general to solicitors for their guidance In making out their reports appears the following printed wording: State degree of crime according to verdict It will therefore be noted that in re- turning reports to the attorney gen eral the solicitor is required to re-
 
 misdemeanors. And following the pro- cedure of this grand jury the so- licitor receives credit for no action whatsoever in cases such as that of E. P. Parker, above cited.
 Judge Greene's Instructions ''In this connection I desire to quote from the charge of Hon. Samuel E. Greene, given to this grand jury at the time it was empaneled; after defining the different degrees of homicide to the grand jury the court concludes: Now I have given you these distinctions and differences in the degrees of unlawful homicide, gentlemen, for purpose. The expense to the county in trying cases of murder in the first degree is very great; and where the evidence before the grand jury shows that 1t is less than murder in the first degree, that is, that it is murder in the sec ond degree or some lower degree, it is better that the grand jury should re- turn an indictment for the lower of- fense. because in that sort of case, the case may be tried by the ordinary venire for the week. For instance, you take capital case. murder case