The Sun.
London, England, 1826-04-06 00:00:00

LAW OF ABDUCTION•

'The Case of Mr. WAXEPIELD and Miss Tim-
bEit has excited a very general interest, and
the public are naturally anxious to learn
the exact state of the Law of Abduction. The
forcible abduction of children from their parents
Or guardians, for the purpose of marrying them,
is a misdemeanor at common law, where vio-
lence or deceit are practised, in order the more
easily to perpetrate the crime. The common
law only protected children ; and the crime con-
sisted not so much in the forcible abduction,
83 the violent and unlawful means put in prac-
tice in order to carry them off. Women ap-

pear to have been left entirely without protec-
tion, except indeed that a sort of civil remedy
Was given to the husband for the taking away of
his, wife, nearly similar to the writ of ravishment
in case of children, or an action of trespass vi et
anvil de filio eel filia rcrpto et abduct°. The diffi-
culty thus thrown in the way of prosecutions for
ceimes of this atrocious nature, and the slight
punishment which tl►e. law could inflict on per-
settrguillY of them (the action only amounting
talk misdemeanour), seems to have been early felt,
. And Accordingly' the statute of Henry VII. c.
was passed, which made the forcible abduction of
women a felony; but the benefit of clergy not being
expressly taken waYsoffenders were still liable to
escape punishment by praying the allowance of it.
As the crime increased, this inconvenience was
more and more felt, till at last the statute 39
c. 9, took the benefit of clergy from the
principal and necessaries before the fact ; and
thus it continued until the Ist Geo. IV., c. 115,
again restored clergy, and subjected the offender
to the punishment authorised by that statute, viz.
transportation for a term in the discretion of the
. Judge, not being less than seven years, or im-
prisonment with hard labour. A law thus highly
penal in its consequences must of necessity meet
with strict construction, and accordingly it is now
. held, that to make offenders subject to its provi-
sions, four things are necessary, viz.—lst, That
the indictment allege that the taking was for lucre,
for such are the words of the statute ; 2d, In or-
der to chew this, it must appear that the woman
has substance real or personal, or, is heir app..
rent ; 3d, It must appear that she was taken away
against her will ; 4th, That she was married,
or defiled. But it is to be remarked,
that although the marriage or defilement
might be by her subsequent consent, being won
iliireVtito by flatteries after the taking, yet this
is felony, if the first taking were against her will.
And so, vice versa, if the woman be originally
taken away by her own consent ; yet if she af.
terwards refuse to continue with the offender,
and bo forced against her will, she may from that
time as properly be said to be t►ken against her
ns if she never had given asiy consent at all,

for, till the force was put upon her, she was in
her own power. The woman, it is said, is good

evidence against her ravisher, notwithstanding
the marriage. We shall not stop to examine how
far the facts of Mr. WAKEFIELD'S ease will sup.
Port O. prosecution for the' felony under the sta.
"tute °film VII., but certainly from what has
transpired (and this comes from the injured party
-wily), it appears to us, that no felony can be sus-
stained ; and GOIMON'S case, reported in RUSSEL on
Crimes, 821, confirms our view of the point. The
common law prosecution too would also seem to
Mr,WAH.tri ELD, however, must not hug him.
'sot with this idea, or flatter himself that the law
Cannot renal him. It so happens that there
e4ilits a statute, which assuming the facts to have
`,been correctly stated—would precisely meet the
Present case. This is the 4 and 5 P. and M.
wh'eh enacts, that if any person above the
agd 'of 14 shall unlawfully convey, or take away,
.any woman child, unmarried, within the age of
16 pars, from the possession, and against the
will of itlie father, mother, guardians, or gover-
nors, he tikall be imprisoned two years, or fined,
at the discretion of the Justices ; and if he
deflowers such maid or woman child, or without
.the consent of the parents, contracts matritnony
with her, he shall be imprisoned five years, or
'fined, at the discretion of the Justices, and she
4hall forfeit all her lands to her next of kin,
'during the life of her husband, which latter pro.
'vision 'is enforced by the 4 G. IV. c. 76, s. 23,
/4, 25. The application of this latter Act in
(he case of Miss TueSER may, however, be
questionable, as the marriage, if any, took place
in Scotland, and the operation of 4 G. I V. c. 76.
is confined to England.

CURIOUS CASE OF BLINDNESS,--A celebrated
physician has recorded the case of a Jewess, who
in her first three pregnancies began at the com-
mencement of each to grow blind, and was com-
pletely ainaurotic by the third or fourth month :
during the two first she remained blind, till after
the delivery, when she recovered her sight but
the third time it remained permanent.

A :BILL .•
To REGULATE the IMPORTATION of SILK GOODS

ibr a Time to be limited.
(As amended by the Committee.)
SESS. 7. OEO. IV.

This Bill, when passed into law, completes
the measure against which so much outcry has
been raised, and allows the free importation of
silk goods from and after the sth July, now next
ensuing. As, therefore, it obviously affects a
very large portion of our manufacturing and
trading interests, we purpose giving an abstract
.of its provision: now. before it shall become law,
because it will afford opportunity to those inte-
rested to become acquainted with the new regu-
lations beforehand, and also to point out any al-
teration they may think the Bill requires.
The first clause recites the repeal of the old
laws, by which the importation of silk is prold-
hited, by the Act 6 George IV., c. 105,—the
granting of new duties, by the 6 George 1 V., c. •
11,—and that it was expedient to reduce the
rated duties, and to impose on manufactured silks
a rated duty per pound, instead of the ad valorem
duty by the 6 George IV., c. 111,—and then
enacts, that -frogs and after the sth July, 1826,
the new duties given in the schedule should be
raised, in lieu of the duties in the said recited
Act set forth.