de la Società est qu'aucun crime ne reste pas impuni, son plus grand intcret, en cette occasion est de se montrer indulgente, et de ne pas sacrifier et une vengeance tardive l'honneur d'ime famille entière'. It is surely carrying indulgence beyond its fair limits, when the prohibition of nefarious attempts and the protection of the interests of persons so exposed to them are sacrificed to the considerations of a spurious delicacy”. But in defence of a similar exemption in the Italian Code of 1889 the Ministerial Report stated as follows: “E' giusto ed equo non tener separate, per effetto del procedimento penale, due persone fra le quali si frapponeva dapprima il delitto, ma che poi si sono congiunte con uno dei vincoli piu' sacri; ed e' d'altronde prudente agevolare, con la concessione dell'impunità, la piu' grande riparazione che l'uomo possa dure alla donna da lui disonorata”. On the other hand, as Maino observes, the subsequent consent to the marriage may veil, in regard to the victim, be considered as a form of implied condonation351. Our law, as we have seen, in case of marriage between the offender and the girl abducted by him, makes the taking of proceedings contingent on the complaint of the party whose consent would, according to civil law, be required for the marriage.
6. Defilement of Minors “Whosoever by lewd acts defiles a minor of either sex, shall, on conviction, be liable to hard labour for a term not exceeding two years, with or without solitary confinement”352. The substantive part of this provision is identical with the first part of art. 335 of the Italian Code of 1889, from which it was obviously derived. It deals with those lustful acts not consisting in carnal knowledge or attempted carnal knowledge with violence, whether actual or constructive, committed on the person or in the presence of an individual, whether male or female, and capable of defiling such individual. 351
Op. cit. art. 352, para. 1530
352
Section 217(l)
Page 250 of 350