To which decision of the court the counsel for the defendant excepted After the evidence on bothSides was closed, the counsel for the defendant again asked that the defendant be discharged, and that the jury be directed to find a verdict of " not guilty," on theSame grounds asStated on the previous motion The court denied the motion, and the defendant excepted After the counsel on bothSides had addressed the jury, the presiding judge charged as follows : GENTLEMEN OF THE JURY: TheStatute upon which this indictment is based is one rathe* peculiar in its provisions, and (as has beenStated) up to the time of its passage there was noStatute law, whatever, punishingSeduction Nor wasSeduction a crime at common law ; but the legisla- ture has deemed theSubject ofSufficient importance to enact such a Law It is the law of the land, and you are to admin- ister this law as you find it If a clear case of guilt has been established, then your duty is plain There areSeveral leading principles to which we propose to call your attention, without reciting the proofs, for these are as fresh and probably moreSo in your minds than our own We merely intend to call your attention toSuch points, and toSuch proofs underSuch points, as will aid you ia arriv- ing at a just conclusion The first point to beShown on the part of the People is this : Was the prosecutrix an unmarried female ? There was no testimony, except that of Mary Chissom herself, upon that point.

She testifies thatShe was an unmarried female.

The next proposition in order is this : Was there a promise of marriage ? Because, unless there was a promise of marriage on the part of the defendant, then, although the evidence of theSeduction of the prosecutrix be clear, this of itself would not constitute an offense against theStatute.

The promise of marriage is a condition precedent, and must be proved Unless the People, therefore, have made out aSufficient promise of marriage, then there can be no conviction For, although it be conceded that this prosecutrix wasSeduced, as claimed, yet, ifSuchSeduction was not accomplished under a promise of marriage, then it it is not an offense under theStatute.

The first laboring point in the case will be this : Was there a promise of marriage ? Upon the question of the mutuality of this promise, the authorities areSomewhat in conflict.