Crozier v. People
New York Supreme Court
This was a writ of error to the court of sessions of Washington county. The plaintiff in error was indicted under the act passed March 22, 1848, entitled “ an act to punish seduction as a crime.” The indictment contained two counts.
Read the full summary
This was a writ of error to the court of sessions of Washington county. The plaintiff in error was indicted under the act passed March 22, 1848, entitled “ an act to punish seduction as a crime.” The indictment contained two counts. The first count charged “ that John K. Crosier, late of the town of Salem in the county of Washington, on the 8th day of June, 1849, at the said town of Salem in the county of Washington aforesaid, did unlawfully, and feloniously, under a promise of marriage, seduce and have illicit connection with Emeline J. Oderkirk, an unmarried female of previous chaste…
1Opinion of the CourtPakkee, P. J.
I shall examine the points made by the plaintiff in error in the order in which they were presented on the argument.
1. The first is that the indictment was defective in not alleg-a mutual promise of marriage.
The counsel for Crozier concludes that the promise contemplated by the act must be a valid promise —one that is legally binding, and depending for its consideration on a corresponding promise made by the party seduced; and argues that a lunatic or an idiot might be made liable for seduction under this statute, unless a valid and binding promise is intended. The answer to that argument is…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Hartfield v. RoperNew York Supreme Court · 1839
- United States v. MillsSupreme Court of the United States · 1833
3Cited by3 opinions
- People v. BrewerMichigan Supreme Court · 1873
- State v. JonesWashington Supreme Court · 1914
- Ford v. JonesNew York Supreme Court · 1871