, 1870-08-13

Judge Gillespie Decides tllnt tisczc IN
no E.aW in Force III Illinois 10
Punish Adultery, In Gases Where
ssoth the Parties Charged nre
White.
From. the B.H<ealr tliI> Dr.~or.at, dug. II.
In tho case of Colonel John Thomas. in
dicted for adultery several terms ago, there
was motion made in the Circuit Court. on
Tuesday last, to quash tho Indictment This
motion wAs argued on that slay. The ground
taken by the defendanta counsel Was, that
there il no Law III force in this State punish
Ing white persons for living together in a1ul.
tory and fotnicasion.
11e law Ct 1873 provides that, il any man
and woman live together in adultery. they
shall be punished By tino Of $500, or six
months imprisonment.
4 law vent into force in 1874, furnishing q
adultery, By fine of i've hundred dollars and
one year, imprisonment Thero was u pro-
viso TO this last Law, that it should not apply
to caaes where 10th parties were white. Both
these laws appear in the revised statutes
Of ls45, but the rrosiso in the act Of 1911 il
omitted.
In 1855, the Legislature repealed tho law
IN the revised statutes IN relation to negroes
and whites living together in adultery. Gross,
however, in b edition Of the statutes pub
!irhed iu 1863, gives 10th tho lawH of 1888 aud
ISL; and the Legislature IN 1859, passed an
should bs primo fi1eie tho Law, until an error
was shown.
The States attorney argued, first, that tho
p1oyieo in tue act Of 1874, even il in force,
only prevented the increased punishment pro-
sided against blacks and whites from extend
ing to cases where both persons we1e white.
and that it was not Intended to license adul-
ters between white persons; that the two laws
were not inconsistent or repugnant, and had
been enforced together for more than twenty
years, during which time this question bad
never be On Iaised, and that tho law ought not
now to receive construction which would
authorize open lewdness, and even adultery.
Second, that the part Of the revised statutes
Of 1845-the chapter relating to negroes and
mulattoes-where this law Of l844 ap-
Of 1al4 is not nov in force. The Court held
that the question was doubtful: that the de-
fendant Vas entitled to the benefit Of the
donbt; and that the Court would. therefore,
decide that the law against adultery does not
apply to white pertous
The following il tho eection Of tho Iav OF
illinois concerning which our most learned
Judge Is in doubt. It may be found in all Of
the Revised Statutcs Of tho State. but for
more particular reference zee Gross Statutes,
isS9; Page 191, paragraph 4, under head Of
:. ANY man and woman who shall live to-
gethcr in an open state Of adultery or forDica-
ton, CT adultery and fornication, every auch
man and woman shall bo indicted, and On con-
viction shall be fined in any sum not exceeding
200 each, or imprisoned not exceeding six
months. This oGeuce shall he sufficiently
proved br circumstances which raise the
presumption Of cohabitation and unlawful in
tinacy; and for i second offence. such man
or woman shalt be rcyerally punished twice
AZ mush As tho former punishment, and for
the third offence. thrice, aud thus Increasing
the pu1lie hrnent for each succeeding offence:
Prorldesl. however, that ii shall be in the
power Of the party or PARTIES offending. to
prevent or suspend the prosecution bv their
intermNrHiage, il euch marriage can be legally
solemnized, and upon the payment Of the
costs Of such prosecution
As the peop1e can have no writ Of error. OF
appeal to the Supreme Court, this decision
will, We presume, be the law in the Judicial
Court until the Legislature takc soma steps in
this matter, or . new Judge is elected.