
    United States v. Elijah Chenault.
    Laboring to exact fees from one party after having received them from another is not extortion, and whether it is an indictable offence, qucere. The contents of a warrant cannot he proved without producing it, or accounting satisfactorily for its non-production.
    This was an indictment for laboring to exact fees from the plaintiff, after having received them from tl^e, defend ant, on a warrant before a justice of the peace in the case of Carlin v. Weston.
    
   The CouRT

refused to instruct the jury that the offence charged was not indictable ; but told them it was not extortion.

. The CouRT also refused to suffer parol evidence to be given of the contents of the warrant without producing it, or accounting, satisfactorily for its non-production.  