
    15742.
    Owens v. The State.
    Decided November 12, 1924.
    Indictment for seduction; from Wilcox superior court—Judge Crum. May 31, 1924.
    The two extracts from the charge of the court, referred to in the decision, were as follows: “If there be a virtuous engagement to marry, the mere ‘proposal by the defendant of sexual intercourse accompanied by a repetition of the promise to marry, if the female yield her consent to the intercourse by reason of persuasion accompanied by a promise to marry, then the jury should convict the defendant of seduction.” “If at the time of the alleged seduction the female in question had never had unlawful intercourse with a man, she was a virtuous female within the meaning of the law in this State.”
   Luke, J.

The evidence authorized the verdict finding the defendant guilty of seduction.

The charge of the court Avas full and fair. The two excerpts from the charge of the court complained of in the special grounds of the motion are not erroneous.

Eor no reason pointed out in the record or presented by the argument did the court err in overruling the motion for a new trial.

Judgment affirmed.

Broyles, O. J., and Bloodworth, J., concur.

H. A. Hodges, J. H. Dorsey, for plaintiff in error.

J. B. Wall, solicitor-general, Hal Lawson, contra.  