The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1867-05-24

person is an ofIense against the public, because
IL may stir up the passions OF the living and pro-
duce acts OF revenge This language fits the
case before usprecisely; for what is more likely
to produce resentment than an insulting pro
position 10 virtuOus vile?
EavesdToppers who listen under walls, win
doWs, and caves oil houses 10 catch and detail
conversations to the prejudice of others, are
inGctable at common law. SO Is a common
scold as this Court has recently determined;
and yet these cases bear no proportion to the
one before us. Exhibiting an obscene picture
is indctable as contra bonos Dlores, though not
charged TO be done publicly as a common nul-
sance: Common wealth vs.. Sharpess, 2 s. & r.,
81. Joseph Barker was charged with collecting
crowds in the streets of Pitteburg, to whom be
spoke scandalous and infamous words repre-
senting men and women in indecent postures.
This Court held that count to be good, though
IL did not charge o public nuisance, Lewis G.
j., 1emarking that IT would be reproach on
the common law II such acts we're permitted,
expressions very applicable to the case now
hSi0re us! Haines, 4l2. IN the Commonwealth
We. Trundell, 2 Grant, $40, Thompson, j., held
that running the street cars on Sunday, to the
disturbance of the "peace of the Sabbath, !" as
he well expresses 1t, Is a breach of the peace.
In principle il is step downward from this
case TO that Now II in Pennsylvania all these
have been held 10 be indictable offenses, it is
certainly public wrong of greater magnitude
and worse tendency to solicit the prostitution
of virtuous married woman, TO inCte her to
commit adultery, an offense which has been
dIed and sixty years. To be soicitous on
account of the debauch of public morals, is to
be overnice. The modesty which does not
shrink from the disgusting details of a case OF
Grim con. or of iornication and bastardy, can
not be greatly shocked at the proposal only.
1t is SAID there will be difficulty OF proof, and
Courts will be called upon to punish for wink
or a nod, or some other obscene invitation to
criminal Intercourse. The argument furnishes
dispensation TO all crimes of a secret or uncer-
tain character. In Furnishing for, a libel, no
difficulty is set up because the illusions are
purposely velled. Who and what is meant are
often questions for jury. Nor do think such
an argument Just to those who are the custo-
dans of public morals, which invites them
deliberately to close their eyes to plain and
palpable proposals to lust, because I'm some in
stances their visions cannot detect an invitation
in disguise. Besides, there is full protection
against silly and pretended prosecutions, in the
power 10 visit the unwise ana the malicious
with penalty of all the costs.
The English case, which Is so Zealously
attacked in the opinion of the majority, and
seems to bear against all the fine powers of the
intellect which prepared the opinion to over
turn its force, was q surprise upon me, for had
not expected such aid from country which
ignores the ohense of adultery itself in her civil
Courts. 1t only discovers the fact that even
their judges are compelled by the inherent in-
dignity OF the proposal to advance towards its
punishment. But the Connecticut case, of the
State We. Avery, Z Conn.,, is an American au-
thority and precedent which, it seems to me,
should be adopted.
1t is asserted that mere words are not indicta-
BILE, and nothing short OF an attempt is indicta-
BILE. This conceive is a mistake. To approach
married woman and 10 propose adultery, is an
act quite as much as to exhibit an obscene pic
ture, or to listen under the caves of house, or
to spout out vulgar and indecent language to a
gaping crowd. Indeed, it is as gross an act as
can be well imagined. To say that it requires
the touch of the would-be seducer to require
legal visitation is to stick in the mud Of pollu.
tion, and to expose virtuous woman to their
abuse is as abhorrent and wouuding to her
pure spirit as the mere touch of her pursuer
/ would affirm the Judgment.