State v. Brinkhaus

• Decision Date: 24 November 1885
• Citation: 34 Minn. 285
• Parties: STATE <I>vs.</I> HENRY BRINKHAUS.
• Court: Minnesota Supreme Court

Page 285

34 Minn. 285

STATE vs. HENRY BRINKHAUS.

Supreme Court of Minnesota.

November 24, 1885.

Appeal by defendant from an order of the district court for Carver county, Macdonald, J., presiding, refusing a new trial.

H. J. Peck, for appellant.

William J. Hahn, Attorney General, and James M. Martin, for the State.

MITCHELL, J.

The defendant was convicted of the crime of seducing, under promise of marriage, an unmarried female of previous chaste character. Gen. St. 1878, c. 100, § 6. The statute provides that no conviction shall be had on the testimony of the female seduced, unsupported by other evidence.

The main contention here is that the evidence is insufficient to sustain the verdict, in that (1) it did not appear that there was any promise of marriage, or that the intercourse was by reason of such promise; (2) that it appears that the female was not of previous chaste character; and (3) that there was no evidence corroborative of that of the prosecutrix.

1. We think that the evidence of the prosecutrix fairly and reasonably tends to prove the promise. It is true that she is unable to state all that was said, or the exact words used by defendant. She does not say that he, in so many words, expressly said, "I promise to marry you;" but this is fairly implied in what he did say. A promise of marriage need not be expressed in any set form, or in any particular words. It is enough if language is used which implies such a promise, and is intended to convey that meaning, and is in fact so understood by the prosecutrix. Her evidence is corroborated by other evidence, showing that he had been waiting on her for some time as a lover, coming to see her several times a week, on which occasions he was frequently alone in her company. She is also corroborated by the testimony of her brother, to the effect that on one occasion, when talking about marrying her sister, defendant said that his parents were opposed, but he didn't care, — he would do as he pleased; that they would not have to live with her when he got married to her. We think this was sufficient.

The statute does not require direct or positive corroborative evidence, much less evidence sufficient to convict independently of that of the prosecutrix, but simply such facts or circumstances as fairly tend to support her evidence, and shall satisfy the jury that she is worthy of credit. And when there is some other evidence fairly tending to support that of the prosecutrix upon all the facts essential to constitute the offence, it is for the jury to say whether she is sufficiently corroborated to warrant a conviction. State v. Timmens, 4 Minn. 241, (325.)

2. The girl testifies that she yielded her virtue to defendant because he gave her to understand that he was going to marry her, and that she had never had sexual intercourse with any man prior to that time. Her evidence is corroborated by other testimony showing that she was an inmate of her father's family and that of her married sister, who were farmers in the neighborhood where she had lived since a child; that she was a country girl, aged 23 years, and seems to have been received in such society as the neighborhood afforded of the social rank of her family. Some of the neighbors, who had known her for years, testified that they never saw anything improper in her conduct. As chastity is the rule and not the exception with the female sex, we think this was sufficiently corroborative of her previous chaste character. State v. Timmens, supra.

It is contended, however, that by her own admissions she had been unchaste in her previous intercourse with defendant on two different occasions, when he slept in or upon the same bed in which she and her sister were. She expressly denies any sexual intercourse on either of these occasions. It must be admitted that such conduct on the part of any woman belonging to a class of society having any correct sense of propriety, would stamp her as unchaste. And it is, perhaps, difficult to...