Daily national Republican. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1862-1866, 1866-02-01

| OF The heritage decended to Us from our mother
Sls.org Ia. ever exercised he mos. yissas and
The unlawful restraint Of tina. personal liberty
has. In our system Of lurisprudsnee for genera
| but has been regarded a criminal offence. and
a. such indictable nt common law. II Is In this
criminal view ofitthat you are now called upon
to act IN ,hi. case before you.
The defendant, Lafayette @. Baker. indicted for
the offence Of having uniawfully restrained the
| personal liberty Of Mrs. Lucy L. Cobb, the pros.
sonting witness, In this District, on or about
the sh S'y o. sOys%ssr is md 80 TO hHSs
extorted from her the sum Of $500 This is the
charge contained In the fret count Of the indict.
ment; and the second and last count 10 but a
repetition Of the hrst with the extortion omitted
II is the ordinary common law form Of indict.
| ment for false imprisonment
This offence Of false imprison mont may prop
erly be defined 10 be any Intentional and unlaw
tho arrest and restraint o. a person, under color
Of law, by means Of an Illegal or iusuficieni
warrant or process, as when = person appear
before smother pretending to be an oehcer, aud
rant, when be has really no such warrant or su
thority or IL may be by means Of legal pro-
cess at an Illegal time, rs upon Sunday when .
civil writ cannot DO lawfully executed or, as in
the case Of the arrest Of member Of Congress on
such writ whilst attending upon, going to, or
| returning from, his congregational duties; or u
may be altogether without color Of law-that IL
70 say, without auy pre,enee on the part o. ,hs
or that he Is acting In obedissee TO legal war
rant. ."...... .T.. ra
Again, this offence may be effected with phys.
ieal force or violence. or II may be done without
touching the imprisoned party person, simply
| by menaeing words or gestures, producing In
| the mind Of that party . reasonable and we'll
grounded fear that n the impriscp ment or con :
straint be not submitted to without physical
I III. H.. lf.Al L. h. har
| suit, and compelling the imprisoned party by
means Of this we'll grounded fear 10 20 where he
does not wish TO go or IL under no legal obliga-
ton to so, OF to refrain him from going where
Extortios, in It's more extended sense, signifies
any Kind Of oppression under pretence or color
| Of right when such right really does not exist.
Bat In the more restricted and teehn cal sense In
which you have to deal with It in this case, II
| IMPLY means the unlawful taking By an ofheer,
| by color Of his Office, or uudera pretended right
| as such officer, Of any msney or thing OF value
that is not really due 10 him, more than is due
differs from that Of robbery and Of trespass In
this that the former-extortiou-is comm ted
by an ofneer under pretence that he has lawful
authority as such ohieer for the doing OF the act
when he really does not possess such lawful au.
thority, whilst treapass aud robbery grow out
Of acts done by individuals not acting In an OH
eial capacity, though they may pretend to be ON
GERS Of the law.
You will infer from these obseryat atoms that the
defendant In this ease, In order ~ have rendered
himself obnoxious to tho charge Of false impris
onment, must have been proved 10 your satisfae-
ton by the evidence in the cause, to have re.
strained the prosecuting witness, Mrs. Cobb, OF
her liberty by presenting himself to her In the
character Of sn officer charged with the duty OF
making arrests, and under the pretence that he
had legal and Sufficient warrant for her sppre-
hension, when In truth aud In fact he had no
such oficial character or authority, thereby In
due,ng her to 20 with him under q we'll grounded
belief that she was Obliged By Law TO- so, or
that without any ofieial pretension he, by phys
ieal force, or by words, or gestures, or both, so
aroused her just and reasonable fear for her per-
sopal safety rs 10 compel her compliance with his
orders TO 20 where she did not desire to go, or to
refrain from going where shs wanted to 90, and
This eompuision to go where she was not
obliged by law to go, or the hindering and pre-
venting her from going where she had rlgh. 70
iscted either by actual force applied 70 the per
son Of the witness, or by words or actions sun :
eisnt to put her. or any other person o. ordinary
II you shall be satisfied beyoud a reasonable
doubt from all the evidence before you, that the
defendant in this case, under preteuee that he
had. ss an ohaser. . lawful warrant from the
President OF the Tnited States, or from some one
Of the Cabinet MaNters, or from any ofieer OF
| the Government clothed with the proper Author-
ity to graut such warrant, did go 10 the room OF
Mrs. Lucy L. Cobb, and there gave her good
Government authorized to make arrests, and that
he had In bis hands good and So ficent authority
| In law to take her 20 his headquarters, and to
believe in accompanying him hhitheE she was
| acting In obedience to the mandates OF toe law,
| when really he had no such authority, then he
has been guilty Of false imprisonment.
| lin addition to this you further believe that
under such pretsuded Authority he compelled
| her by force or through fear to pay him money
which he was not entitled TO take from her or d
not rightfully belong to him, then he was guilty
| both Of the false imprisonment aud extortion,
and you will nnd him guilty rs indicted
| although she Of her own free volition, without
eompulsion by physical force or fear OF personal
injury accompanied the defendant to his head :
| quarters, and that he there prevented her from
leaving those headquarters by means Of pre-
tended authority In his hands as an onieer Of the
| Government, and that he contlnued that I'm.
prisoument under such pretended authority until
| he succeeded In obtaining from her sum o.
money which was not due him, then he would
also be guilty OF false imprisonment and extor.
ton Ms charged 10 the nrst count OF the indict +
ment, and you will md him guilty as Indicted.
| II however, you are not satisfied beyond a
| reasonable doubt that he arrested and restrained
| her Of her liberty under pretence that be was =
public officer armed with authority, but that be
did arrest aud restrain her Of her liberty merely =
as an individual, without having made any such
| pretenoe Of lawful warrant therefor, then he IL
guilty Of false imprisou ment but not Of extor'
| ton. Although he may have obtained the
|
taking Of the money In that ease would amount
not TO oxtOrtion bat 10 tresI ass or robbery, nc
cording to the circumstances OF claim Of right
| aud falonious inter tion, aud In that event you
| would mud him guilty, under the second count
| OF false imprisonment only.
| But, gentlemen, before you can properly con
yict him at all in either form charged In the In
dietment, you must be assured beyond reason
able doubt from the evidence In the cause either
that he presented himself to the prosecuting wit.
ness In ths character Of sn ollcer whose duty Il
was TO arrest and imprison In proper apd laWfll
cases. and that IN that character he set up 10 her
10 this particular case the prstenes that he was
acting under lawful authority emanatipg from
some public oniesr having the right to confer 1t,
grounded belief that In placing herself under his
| custody she was acting in obedienee to the law
or u you do not thus believe, then you must be
| satisfied beyond Q reasonable doubt that, with =
out any preteEt Of lSgai authority he used phys
| ical force to arrest AVID impTisan her, or by
words or gestures, or both, PLACED hsr lp 50 b
fear Of personal injury ~ 10 coHstrain her 70 Va
| going where she had . right to 20.
But you are not 10 taxa for granted, gentlemen,
that the defendant was such IN officer, pretend
| ing to be armed with such authority as that
have mentioned, without evidence OF the fact,
that Ars, Cobb, taking him for such oficer with
! out any pretspee on his part was ready to con
slider herself BndsF arrest aud Imprisoned the
| Baker. Of the War Department, aud that there
fore, inasmuch as she supposed he bad come 10
arrest and imprison her, she must necessarily
| commit herself 10 his custody aud TO his biddin
whether he pTofsssed to hold laval authority
| for that purpose or not.
| You must have satisfactory evidence before
you that Gen. Bakers aGtioDs and conduct were
l. ~ a0NA alU L. IL.