The New York herald., 1877-09-02
THE COURTS.
Waving the Formalities of Extra
dition Under Guarantees.
MUNICIPAL CIVIL SERVICE.
Joe COburn'S Figh. for Liberty ard Refusal
To Throw Up the Sponge.
A TEUTONIc JURORS VERDICT.

Notice has been given OF a motion to be made to-
morrow in Supreme Court Chambers, the result oil
which is likely to determine important legal prvi-
leges connected with the exradltion OF persons ac-
cused OF high crimes and particularly where such ex
tradition as alleged in the present case, was accom-
plshed upon guarantees which, it is claimed. have
since been most grossly violated. The motion Is to
secure tho discharge OF Thomas r. Lewis from Ludlow
Street Jail. As Is well known Lewis formerly
bookkeeper of B. I. Babbitt After Lewis left Mr.
Babbilts employ he went to England. Not long alter
ward It discovered that Edward q. Beckwith
the cashier, had embezzled large sums
and upon this charge he arrested.
indicted, tried, convicted and sentenced to
State Prison, where he is undergoing penal serv-
tudc. 1t was claimed that Lewis party 70 these
embczzements, and indictments having been OBJ
taned against him Detective Golden was sent to Lon
don, where Lewis was sojournng. with view to MS
extradton to this country to be tried upon these in-
dictments. How Lewis found In the English capi-
tai, how he came to this country with Detective
Golden how no put in prison. and in short, all the
Incarceration had been fully given 10 the HERALD, ana
II Is unnecessary to repeat tho details 1t appears
now, however, tnat after several months lmprison
ment ho has arrived conclusion that he has been
most unJustly dealt with. supplementary story
the iacts presented in this additional narrative he
seeks through his counsel Messrs. Cody stanton ana
William f. Kinizng, his restoration to liberty: AS
the basis OF discharge he make: very lengthy adav
In this affidavit he states he for several years In
Rabbits employ as oookkeeper; that ne Lett such
employ yment in 1873, after which he went TO London
to visit certain relations; that a civil action was
brought against HIM in March, 1876, Ia London by
Babbltt under which the Sheriff OF London LEVIED
upon f6 900 Of hts, Thea In the London and Wcsmin.
stcr Bank; that this suit Is now pending, and
tnat the money Is now IN the Court OF
ments being found against him In this city by
Babbltt extradtion papers were prepared, that the
requistIon the case gwen to Detective Golden,
who, with an English detective named Littlcchild,
told him that the sole object of getting out extradton
papers was to secure his attendance as witness IN
this city in suit brought by Babbitt against Edwin
Ii. Crampton formerly bookkeeper OF BabDitt that
q written promise and guarantee signed by them was
given that II hc would surrender himself ana como with
Golden to this city, waving formaities incident to ex
tradition under the treaty, and testify against Cramp
ton indictments against him would be quashed that
he arrived this CITY the 18th of May last the
custody OF Golden, and ON his arrival was asked 10
sign II paper renqu,shing his claim to tho moneys
attached IN the English suit and his refusal to do
this that he was placed IN the Tombs; that he was
taken the District Attorneys ohice, where he was
finally induced TO sign paper transferring " Babbitt
his claim tho moneys attached IN London, he beng
promised that making this transfer he would be
arrested as and taken to Ludlow Stree, Jail where
he has since been confined, and that such
took place alter acceptance OF bail in $4,000
in criminal proceedings against him. he concludes
his affidavit by stating that none OF these representa-
tons TO his release were made In good faith; that
there IS now demanded from him a sum, in addition
TO the moneys III the England, sufficient 10
bring tho total up TO sos 900 as The basis OF settle
ment Of Mr. BabOitts claims against him. and that he
Is told he will have to make up that sum before he Is
released Messrs. Stanton kintzng raise the point
that he is entitled to his discharge through his having
been brought within the jurisdiction o! the courts
counsel, and will doubtless s,rcnuousy resist the ap
plicaton.
JOE COBURN'S FORLORN HOPE.
Tho friends Of Joe Coburn In addition to the array
Of cou, sci already employed have retained Mr. Henry
c. Denison prepare the argument the part Of Co.
burn, the Court OF Appeals, which takes place
the 18th Of this month One OF the points raised by
Mr. Denison is that taking all the evidence ON the
part of the prosecution to be true it insufficient
convict the prisoner for the that at
law in order to convict person charged with assault
and battery with intent 10 KILL the prosecution
bound 10 prove that had death ensued from
the alteration 1t would have amounted to mur-
der IN the iirst degree, in other words, that
the prosecution bound 70 prove all the clements
that constituted murder in the first degree at common
law, that is to say malice aforehought In order TO
convict OF assault and battery with intent TO kill.
governed that offence at common law, to our present
statute, and claims that before tho prosecution mado
out their they were bound 10 prove, had tho
police officers shot by Coburn died from the effect of
thu pistol shots, tho prisoner could have been con-
victcd, under our statutes. Of murder in the nrst
degree and that the does not snow deliberate
premcditatod design on the part OF Coburn To
take the lie OF the officers, and, therefore,
in question:, and that had the jury convicted tho
prisoner under tho second count in the Indictment
''assault with intent to 60 bodily harm"-it would
have been In accordance with the evidence. 1t IS
iurther insisted that Coburn hastily tried and
convicted that the proper defence to have been inter-
posed would have been that Of nsanity and justica
tioD," which was the defence sought 10 be urged
by ex-Judge Curtis Coburn will be represented IN
the Court OF Appeals by Ira shater William f. Howe,
Henry c. Denison and John j Reilly.