
    *Commonwealth versus Jedidiah J. Calef.
    An indictment for unlawful cohabitation under the statute of 1784, c. 40, § 6, is not maintained by evidence of one act of criminal intercourse between a married man and a single woman.
    The indictment in this case charged, that the defendant, being a married man, with force and arms, did unlawfully and lasciviously associate and cohabit with one Emily Kimball, a single woman, against the peace, in violation of his marriage-covenant, in evil example to others, &c., and against the form of the statute, &c.
    It was admitted by the defendant that one act of criminal intercourse, between him and the woman named in the indictment, could be proved; and it was agreed between him and the attorney-general, that, if such evidence was, in the opinion of the Court, sufficient to maintain the indictment, the defendant would, on his arraignment, plead guilty to the indictment, and submit himself to the mercy of the Court.
   Curia.

The indictment is grounded on the statute of 1784, c. 40, <§> 6, by which it is provided, that, if any man and woman, either or both of them being then married, shall lewdly and lasciviously associate and cohabit together, they shall be punished by, &c. By cohabiting must be understood a dwelling or living together, not a transient and single unlawful interview. The design of the statute, in this particular provision, was to prevent evil and indecent examples, tending to corrupt the public morals. Perhaps an indictment for the crime of adultery might have been maintained by the evidence stated; but, on the present indictment, the defendant could not be convicted. He must therefore be discharged thereof.

ADDITIONAL NOTE.

[See Grisham, vs. The State, 2 Yerg. 589. — F. H.]  