Case Name: THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. EDGAR HUSTIS, Appellant
Court: New York Supreme Court, General Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1884-02
Citations: 39 N.Y. Sup. Ct. 58
Docket Number: 
Parties: THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. EDGAR HUSTIS, Appellant.
Judges: DyKmaN, J., concurred.
Reporter: Supreme Court Reports (Hun)
Volume: 39
Pages: 58–60

Head Matter:
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, Respondent, v. EDGAR HUSTIS, Appellant.
■ Seduction under a promise to ma/rry — when a promise, upon condition that the female becomes pregnant, is sufficient —1848, chap. 111.
■ One who seduces and lias illicit connection with an unmarried female of previous chaste character, under a promise to marry her in case she becomes pregnant, is guilty of a misdemeanor, under chapter 111 of 1848, providing for the punishment of seduction.
Appeal from a judgment of tbe Court of Sessions of Putnam county, convicting the defendant of tbe offense of seducing complainant under a promise of marriage.
W I Thorn, for tbe appellant.
William Wood, district attorney, for tbe respondent.

Opinion:
Barnard, P. J.:
Tbe Court of Appeals have settled tbe question presented by tbis : appeal adverse to tbe appellant. Assuming that there was proof ' that the seduction was acconaplished under a promise of marriage, conditioned upon pregnancy resulting therefrom, such a promise is sufficient under chapter 111, Laws of 184-8. It is not necessary that the promise should be a valid and binding one between the parties. The offense consists in seducing and having illicit connection with . an unmarried female under promise of marriage. It is enough that a promise is made, which is a. consideration for or inducement to the intercourse. (Kenyon v. The People, 26 N. Y., 203.) This case is approved in Boyce v. The People (55 N. Y., 644). In that case the promise was one conditioned upon a consent to illicit con- - nection. That consent, based upon such a promise, was within the law. It was held, in Armstrong v. The People (70 N. Y., 38), that -the question was not presented by the case. The court cited with approval the cases cited, Boyce v. The People and Kenyon v. The People.
The conviction should, therefore, be affirmed.
DyKmaN, J., concurred.