in Law, the carnal knowledge of a woman forcibly and against her will. This, by the Jewish law, was punished with death, in case the damsel was betrothed to another man; and, in case she was not betrothed, then a heavy fine of fifty shekels was to be paid to the damsel's father, and she was to be the wife of the ravisher all the days of his life; without that power of divorce, which was in general permitted by the Mosaic law.

The civil law punishes the crime of ravishment with death and confiscation of goods: under which it includes both the offence of forcible abduction, or taking away a woman from her friends; and also the present offence of forcibly dishonouring her; either of which, without the other, is in that law sufficient to constitute a capital crime. Also the stealing away a woman from her parents or guardians, and debauching her, is equally penal by the emperor's edict, whether the consent or is forced. And this, in order to take away from women every opportunity of offending in this way; whom the Roman laws suppose never to go astray without the seduction and arts of the other sex; and therefore, by refraining and making so highly penal the solicitations of the men, they meant to secure effectually the honour of the women. But our English law does not enter-

---

**Rape.**

Rape was punished by the Saxon laws, particularly those of King Athelstan, with death; which was also agreeable to the old Gothic or Scandinavian constitution. But this was afterwards thought too hard; and in its stead another severe, but not capital, punishment was inflicted by William the Conqueror, viz. castration and loss of eyes; which continued till after Bracton wrote, in the reign of Henry III. But in order to prevent malicious accusations, it was then the law, (and, it seems, still continues to be so in appeals of rape), that the woman should, immediately after, go to the next town, and there make discovery to some credible persons of the injury she has suffered; and afterwards should acquaint the high constable of the hundred, the coroners, and the sheriff, with the outrage. This seems to correspond in some degree with the laws of Scotland and Arragon, which require that complaint must be made within 24 hours: though afterwards by statute Westm. i. c. 13. the time of limitation in England was extended to 40 days. At present there is no time of limitation fixed: for, as it is usually now punished by indictment at the suit of the king, the maxim of law takes place, that "nullum tempus occurrat regi:" but the jury will rarely give credit to a stale complaint. During the former period also it was held for law, that the woman (by consent of the judge and her parents) might redeem the offender from the execution of his sentence, by accepting him for her husband; if he also was willing to agree to the exchange, but not otherwise.

In the 3 Edw. I. by the statute Westm. i. c. 13. the punishment of rape was much mitigated: the offence itself, of ravishing a damsel within age, (that is, twelve years old) either with her consent or without, or of any other woman against her will, being reduced to a trespass, if not prosecuted by appeal within 40 days, and subjecting the offender only to two years imprisonment. ment, and a fine at the king's will. But this lenity being productive of the most terrible consequences, it was, in ten years afterwards, 13 Edw. I. found necessary to make the offence of forcible rape felony by statute Welfm. 2. c. 34. And by statute 18 Eliz. c. 7. it is made felony without benefit of clergy: as is also the abominable wickedness of carnally knowing or abusing any woman-child under the age of ten years; in which case the consent or non-consent is immaterial, as by reason of her tender years she is incapable of judgment and discretion. Sir Matthew Hale is indeed of opinion, that such profligate actions committed on an infant under the age of twelve years, the age of female discretion by the common law, either with or without consent, amount to rape and felony; as well since as before the statute of Queen Elizabeth: but that law has in general been held only to extend to infants under ten; though it should seem that damsel between ten and twelve are still under the protection of the statute Welfm. 1. the law with respect to their seduction not having been altered by either of the subsequent statutes.

A male infant, under the age of fourteen years, is presumed by law incapable to commit a rape, and therefore it seems cannot be found guilty of it. For though in other felonies "malitia supplet actum," yet, as to this particular species of felony, the law supposes an imbecility of body as well as mind.

The civil law seems to suppose a prostitute or common harlot incapable of any injuries of this kind: not allowing any punishment for violating the chastity of her, who hath indeed no chastity at all, or at least hath no regard to it. But the law of England does not judge so hardly of offenders, as to cut off all opportunity of retreat even from common strumpets, and to treat them as never capable of amendment. It therefore holds it to be felony to force even a concubine or harlot; because the woman may have forsaken that unlawful course of life: for, as Bracton well observes, "licet meretrici fuerit antea, certe tunc temporis non fuit, cum reclamando nequitie ejus confertire noluit."

As to the material facts requisite to be given in evidence and proved upon an indictment of rape, they are of such a nature, that, though necessary to be known and settled, for the conviction of the guilty and preservation of the innocent, and therefore are to be found in such criminal treatises as discourse of these matters in detail, yet they are highly improper to be publicly discussed, except only in a court of justice. We shall therefore merely add upon this head a few remarks from Sir Matthew Hale, with regard to the competency and credibility of witnesses; which may, salvo pudore, be considered.

And, first, the party ravished may give evidence upon oath, and is in law a competent witness; but the credibility of her testimony, and how far forth the is to be believed, must be left to the jury upon the circumstances of fact that concur in that testimony. For instance: if the witness be of good fame; if the presently discovered the offence, and made search for the offender; if the party accused fled for it; these and the like are concurring circumstances, which give greater probability to her evidence. But, on the other side, if she be of evil fame, and stand unsupported by others; if she concealed the injury for any considerable time after she had opportunity to complain; if the place, where the fact was alleged to be committed, was where it was possible she might have been heard, and she made no outcry; these and the like circumstances carry a strong, but not conclusive, presumption that her testimony is false or feigned.

Moreover, if the rape be charged to be committed on an infant under 12 years of age, she may still be a competent witness, if she hath been and understanding to know the nature and obligations of an oath, and, even if she hath not, it is thought by Sir Matthew Hale, that she ought to be heard without oath, to give the court information; though that alone will not be sufficient to convict the offender. And he is of this opinion, first, Because the nature of the offence being secret, there may be no other possible proof of the actual fact; though afterwards there may be concurrent circumstances to corroborate it, proved by other witnesses: and secondly, Because the law allows what the child told her mother, or other relations, to be given in evidence, since the nature of the case admits frequently of no better proof; and there is much more reason for the court to hear the narration of the child herself, than to receive it at second-hand from those who swear they heard her say so. And indeed it seems now to be settled, that in these cases infants of any age are to be heard; and, if they have any idea of an oath, to be also sworn: it being found by experience, that infants of very tender years often give the clearest and truest testimony. But in any of these cases, whether the child be sworn or not, it is to be wished, in order to render her evidence credible, that there should be some concurrent testimony of time, place, and circumstances, in order to make out the fact; and that the conviction should not be grounded singly on the unsupported accusation of an infant under years of discretion. There may be therefore, in many cases of this nature, witnesses who are competent, that is, who may be admitted to be heard; and yet, after being heard, may prove not to be credible, or such as the jury is bound to believe. For one excellence of the trial by jury is, that the jury are triers of the credit of the witnesses, as well as of the truth of the fact.

"It is true (says this learned judge), that rape is a most detestable crime, and therefore ought severely and impartially to be punished with death; but it must be remembered, that it is an accusation easy to be made, hard to be proved, but harder to be defended by the party accused, though innocent." He then relates two very extraordinary cases of malicious prosecution for this crime, that had happened within his own observation; and concludes thus: "I mention these instances, that we may be the more cautious upon trials of offences of this nature, wherein the court and jury may with so much ease be imposed upon, without great care and vigilance; the heinousness of the offence many times transporting the judge and jury with so much indignation, that they are over-hastily carried to the conviction of the persons accused thereof, by the confident testimony of sometimes false and malicious witnesses."

RAPHAEL D'URBINO, the greatest, most sublime, and most excellent painter that has appeared, since the revival of the fine arts, was the son of an indifferent painter named Sanzio, and was born at Urbino on Good Friday. Raphael Friday 1482. The popes Julius II. and Leo X. who employed him, loaded him with wealth and honour; and it is said that Cardinal de St Bibiana had such a value for him, that he offered him his niece in marriage. His genius is admired in all his pictures; his contours are free, his ordonnances magnificent, his designs correct, his figures elegant, his expressions lively, his attitudes natural, his heads graceful; in fine, every thing is beautiful, grand, sublime, just, and adorned with graces. These various perfections he derived not only from his excellent abilities, but from his study of antiquity and anatomy; and from the friendship he contracted with Ariosto, who contributed not a little to the improvement of his taste. His pictures are principally to be found in Italy and Paris. That of the Transfiguration, preserved at Rome in the church of St Peter Monterio, passes for his masterpiece. He had a handsome person, was well proportioned, and had great sweetness of temper; was polite, affable, and modest. He, however, lived in the utmost splendor; most of the eminent masters of his time were ambitious of working under him; and he never went out without a crowd of artists and others, who followed him purely through respect. He was not only the best painter in the world, but perhaps the best architect too; on which account Leo X. charged him with building St Peter's church at Rome; but he was too much addicted to pleasure, which occasioned his death at 37 years of age. He left a great number of disciples; among whom were Julio Romano and John Francis Penni, who were his heirs. Many able engravers, as Raimondi, George Mantuan, and Bloemaert, engraved after Raphael. See Painting.