The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1896-09-22

life in moment 81 weakness had given up her body through
motive OF love, under the influence Of excite
who has given up her body FOR gam Therefore
previous unchasty of the proecurx If proved would not
of itself be defense in this
IF woman reforms having had sexual intercourse, she
protection of the statute though
she had fallen from virtue Therefore should ind
complaining had had sexual intercourse prior
the alleged seduction you then consider whether not
hereformed before the time when such seduction IS alleged to
occurred whether sufficient had elapsed for You
presume that she had reformed The matter OF reformation
is your hands, well other questions OF tact III this case
Therefore if the believe the testimony OF the defense t
in former years the prosecutrx nchase person. but has
and has under promise of marriage committed
fornicaton with the defendant, YOU convict
the Supreme Courts of the United States that held
very highest respect, treating OF this naer has lald
down the principle that who has been seduced but VINO
has reformed again the subject of educon and where
reasonable eapse between the different acts, the pre-
sumption in favor of reformation may By this you
that it is not necessary all prove reformation, but
after reasonable time reformation may be presumed
what is reasonable time leave to you to lind and
of the determine to what Is
reasonable time for reformation cannot give you any RUE
upon this question: leave your good Judgment
We think instruction 1t authorized the
jury find that the prosecuting witness had committed repeated
acts intercourse with several within year or
two alleged seduction and then further find from the
lapse of that two OF m regardless OF oer CIT
cnance and absence of evidence of her mode OF
life meanwhile that she had reformed
We do not hold that under circumstances
NAV reformation be presumed from lapse OF time ii but
one act unchasy Shown and that fifteen on twenty
years previously may be that the jury would IN the absence
evidence the other as to the mode OF HE
meanwhile justified in nferring reformation But we think
that the instruction applied the facts OF tins
The cases cited in 81 Eng 4 Am Encyc of Law, p 1913
may be referred to.
Tn the People clark, 33 Mich III the Court say
clad reasonable elapsed before the different acts
sumption in reformation might arise but we think no
uch presumption this and that the burden
of proving would be on the prosecution
In case People Sqni'es 40 Mlch 49, the trla
Judge had deducted People Clark that return to virtue
between acts might be presumed If the interval
was long enough Supreme Court held appeal that
this was misapprehension their ruling in the former
and that it was not that lapse of time which was
possible case that mere abstenatlon from
intercourse for few months, which might be fully accounted
for bv want opportunity would ground legal presumption
of reformation beyond all reasonable doubt
Upon review of the whole think the instruction
oiven was material did the defendant injury and was
erroneous and new should be ordered which IS done
accordingly.
Messrs Hartwel Thurson Stanley and A. Rosa for prose-
cution A. s. Humphreys for defendant
In Selte 16 1906.