Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1866-03-26
LOCAL NEWS.
The Pardon Brokerage Case-TriaI OF Sen.



CRIMINAL COURT, JUDGE FIsHER-This
morning, the trial of Lafayette c. Baker. on
The charge of robbing, preferred by Mrs. Lucy
Il. Coo6, was commenced in the Criminal
Court Judge FISHERY
The specific charge made by Mrs Cobb is
that General Baker, while she was under con-
srsint nom him, robbed her Of $500 which She
had received from a man named Hine or How.
ell for procuring him a pardon. This is the
second trial OF the accused, It will be remem-
oered, IN connection with this case, be having
IN January been tried and convicted Of false
imprisonment. There vet remains TO be tried
the charge Of false Imprisonment Of Joseph r.
Cobb. The United States, represented by Dis
trict Attorney Darlington, Joseph II. Bradley
Jr., and Hon. James Hughes, OF Ind, an
nounced their readiness 10 proceed as did also
the defense, represented by Messrs. Stanton
and Riddle.
The accused was arraigned by the clerk
and submitted a special plea in writing, which
was read by Mr.. Stanton, as follows:
land the said l.. c. Baker in his own proper
person cometh into Court and having heard
tire said indictment read, saith that the United
States ought not further 10 prosecute the said
Indictment against the said Baker, because he
satin that heretofore, towit Al the J une term OF
this Court. in the year 1865, il was presented
that the said Lafayette c. Baker (then and
there described as Lafayette g. Baker, late OF
of November, A. ID. 1865, with force and arms
a. the county aforesaid, in and upon Lucy L.
Cobb, in the peace OF God and the said u. s.,
then and there being, did make an assault on
her, the said Lucy l.. Cobb, then and
there. inIuriously and unlawfuily, and
against the said Lucy l.. Cobb, and with.
and also against the laws of the said United
States without any legal warrant authority
or UNSUITABLE cause whatev yer, did imprison
anu detain tor long time, to wit, for the space
OF five hours, then next following, and until
she, the said Lucy l.. Cobb, had paid 10 him
the said Lafayette y. Baker, four United States
Treasury notes, each of the denomination Of
fifty dollars, and of the value Of fifty dollars of
the goods, chattels, monies and United States
Treasury notes Of Joseph r. Cobb for her en-
largemep, &c, &c.
term, 1866, the said L. Baker being arraigned
upon the said indictment, pleads thereunto moi
guilty, and put himself upon the country, and
the District Attorney did the like, and there
upon came a jury of good and lawful men of
the District of Columbia, who, being duly
sworn TO try the issue joined. did say that the
defendant was guilty Of the false imprison-
ment OF which he stood charged, and was not
guilty of the extortion, as charged
"And afterwards, to wit: The said January
term of the Court, as by the record thereof
more Iuliy and at large appears, which said
judgment still remains in full force and effect,
and not in the least reversed or made void
and the said Lafayette T.. Baker In fact saith
that be. the said Lafayette T.. Baker, and the
SAID Lafayette &. Baker as indicted and con-
Victed as last aforesaid. are one and the same
person, and not other and different persons;
and that the assault and false Imprisonment Of
which he was indicted ana convicted as afore-
said, and the felony and robbery of which he
is now indicted, are one and the same offeRse,
and not other and different oifenses; and this
lie, the sand Lafayette q. Baker, is ready to
verify; wherefore he prays Judgment and that
by the court here he may be dismissed and dis
charged from the said premises in the present
indictment specified
"(Siened) LAFAYETTE G. BAKyR.-
To this plea the prosecution demurred and
the defendant entered a rejoinder to the demur-
Ter.
District Attorney Darlington common ced The
argument on the plea and demurrer contend
ing that when party has been tried on one in .
dictment for msdemeanor he NAV afteryya ards
be tried under an indictment for n felony, or
rice rerSG, and quoted from Arehbold's Plead.
ing, page 81, Sd Greenieaf, section IS, and 9th.
ers. T
Mr.. Stanton followed the District Attorney
s,aung maj II ue case was looked ut in its
proper light, no plea was necessary. He read
from lasts crown law, vol 20, page 6S9, and
said that no jury having respect for the mselves
could coayiei under the Indictment. Tue de-