KIDNAPPING. The forcible abduction or stealing away of a man, woman, or child from their own country and sending them into another. 4 Bla. Com. 219. At common law it is a misdemeanor ; Comb. 10.
There is no wide difference in meaning between kidnapping, false imprisonment, and abduction. The better view seems to be that kidnapping is a false imprisonment, which it always includes, aggravated by the carrying of the person to some other place ; Archb. Cr. P. by Porn. 984,;. 2 Bish. Cr. L. § 750. See Ex parte Keil, 85 Cal. 309, 24 'Pac. 742. It has been held that transporta tion to a foreign country is not necessary, though this conflicts with Blackstone's defi nition, supra; State v. Rollins, 8 N. H. 550. See 1 East, P. C. 429. The consent of a ma ture person of sound mind prevents any act from being kidnapping; otherwise as to a young child ; a child of nine years has been held too young to render his consent avail able as a defence ; Cl. Cr. L. 221; State v. Farrar, 41 N. H. 53; Com. v. Nickerson, 5 Allen (Mass.) 518; Gravett v. State, 74 Ga. 191; U. S. v. Ancarola, 17 Blatchf. 423, 1 Fed. 676 ; but a female fourteen years of age is not kidnapped, if taken away with her consent for the purpose of marriage, and she actually marries ; Cochran v. State, 91 Ga. 763, 18 S. E. 16; so, going away by previous arrangement with an unmarried wo man who, becoming intoxicated, remained for some days, in illicit intercourse, and was then brought back at her request, was not kidnapping; Eberling v. State, 136 Ind. 117, 35 N. E. 1023. Physical force need not be applied, threats will suffice; Payson v. Ma comber, 3 Allen (Mass.) 69; or fraudulently acquiring consent ; People v. De Leon, 109 N. Y. 226, 16 N. E. 46, 4 Am. St. Rep. 444. The crime may be effected by means of men aces; Moody v. People, 20 Ill. 315 ; or by get ting a man drunk ; Hadden v. People, 25 N. Y. 373. Where the custody of a child is as signed to one of two divorced parents, and the other, or a third person employed for the purpose, carries it off, it is kidnapping; State v. Farrar, 41 N. H. 53 ; Com. v. Nicker son, 5 Allen (Mass.) 518. It was held that within the meaning of the statute against kidnapping, any place where a child has a right to be is its residence ; Wallace v. State, 147 Ind. 621, 47 N. E. 13. In this case two children who were acrobats had been sent away from home for the purpose of giving exhibitions to raise money with which to relieve the necessities of the family. While
absent from their parents they were decoyed away by defendant, who was indicted for kidnapping under the Indiana ,statute. The court held that they had not acquired a per manent residence, but they were at a place they had a right to be—to which they had been sent by tl4ir parents, engaged in the business for which they had been sent. "The purpose of the statute here under con sideration certainly was not that a child might be kidnapped at its father's house, but not if it were on a visit at a friend's in a near or distant city. The evident purpose was rather to proVide against the kidnapping of a person from any place where he has a right to be, whether that be the place of his leniporary sojourn or permanent domicile.' A child may be kidnapped, not only from its domicile or the home of its parents, but like wise from a neighbor's house, from church or school, or hotel, from a ball of public entertainment, or, in fact, from any place where it has a right to be ; and it is in that sense that the word 'residence' is here used." 17 N. Y. L. J. 842.
One who takes his child of tender years out of the state, with its consent and with the consent of the mother to whom its cus tody has been awarded in divorce proceed ings, to prevent its presence at a criminal trial in which it had been subpoenaed as a witness, is not guilty of kidnapping; John v. State, 6 Wyo. 203, 44 Pac. 51. New York, Illinois, and other states have passed stat utes on kidnapping. See ABDUCTION ; 1 Russ. Cr. 962 ; Click v. State, 3 Tex. 282; Com. v. Blodgett, 12 Mete. (Mass.) 56; People v. De Leon, 47 Hun (N. Y.) 308 ; Cora. v. Myers, 146 Pa. 24, 23 Atl. 164. Where defendant pro cured an adjudication that the person alleg ed to have been kidnapped was insane, and, without using force, publicly conveyed her to a lunatic asylum, though she was not in sane at the time, he was not guilty of the offence of kidnapping; People v. Camp, 139 N. Y. 87, 34 N. E. 755.
The indictment must be found in the coun ty in which the person was seized and not in one through which was carried ; State v. Whaley, 2 Harring. (Del.) 538.
It has been held, however, that the carry ing away is not essential ; State v. Rollins, 8 N. H. 550. The crime includes a false im prisonment; 2 Bish. Cr. Law § 671. See