
    Ellick Morris, plaintiff in error, vs. The State of Georgia, defendant in error.
    1. It was not error in the court to refuse to charge the jury as requested by defendant’s counsel, nor was the charge erroneous in view of the facts set forth in the record.
    2. The exception to the charge as to the age of the female, was abandoned at the hearing, as not properly certified to by the judge.
    Criminal law. Rape. Before Judge Clark.- Lee Superior Court. November Term, 1874.
    The court, in this case, was requested to charge the jury that before the defendant could be convicted of the crime of rape, they ought to be satisfied from the evidence that the vagina was entered; that the mere entering the vulva would not be a sufficient penetration if the vagina was intact and not penetrated in the least. The court refused thus to charge, but instructed the jury that slight penetration was sufficient to complete the crime.
    Exception was taken to the charge and refusal to charge.
    The defendant was convicted of the offense of rape. He assigns error upon the above exceptions.
    George Kimbrough; W. A. Hawkins, by Allen Fort, lor plaintiff in error.
    C. F. Crisp, solicitor general, by brief, for the state.
   McCay, Judge.

"Whatever may have been the ancient rule upon this subject, based as it was upon untrue philosophical notions as to certain necessities of- true sexual intercourse, that rule has entirely given way to what is now known to be the truth, that very slight penetration is necessary even for the begetting of a child: R. vs. Hughs, 2 M. C. C., 190; R. vs. Champlin, C. & K., 746. See, also, Rapen’s case, 1 East, P. C., 498.

Judgment affirmed.  