After this particularly happy attempt to reduce kissing to a system, our jurist maintains the view that all depends on the person who kisses and the person who is kissed. If, for instance, a peasant or a vulgar citizen takes such a liberty as to kiss a noble and high-born lady against her will, her claim against the aggressor ought to be far greater than it would be in the case of one of less ignoble descent; but, on the other hand, if Hans steals from his Greta “an informal, hearty, rustic kiss,” and she complains to the authorities about it, there will scarcely be any grounds for litigation. On the whole, says he, a kiss between individuals of the same position in society is not to be regarded as a tort, and he more closely defines how he arrives at this conception. It can only be actionable in the case of a party having some consciously unchaste intention when he kissed, or in the case of an _osculum luxuriosum_ or _libidinosum_--in such cases only can a verdict be brought in of what, according to Roman law, is termed _crimen osculationis_, and in no other case can the wrong-doer be punished by fine or imprisonment, _propter voluntatem perniciosæ libidinis_. The punishment, however, should be proportioned in severity according to the rank of the injured party. In the case of a nun or a married woman it ought to be most severe; less severe if the lady be unmarried but betrothed, and mildest when she is neither married nor betrothed. But if the unchaste intention cannot be distinctly proved, the woman has no grounds for complaining of any sort, and, in accordance with the procedure of the German courts, the kiss is to be considered innocent till the contrary is proved. Our jurist thus takes a really liberal view in the case of a “kiss taken by force”; he may almost be said to regard it as _eine grosse Kleinigkeit_ (an unimportant trifle). With regard to the question of a woman’s right to defend herself in such cases, he is of opinion that she is justified in repulsing the insulter by a box on the ears, but only if the offence amounts to _crimen osculationis_, and this box on the ears may not be inflicted with “the fist of an Amazon,” as, by such requital, she easily loses her right to take legal action in the matter. She must, above all, be careful that the box on the ears be not excessive (_die Ohrfeige proportionirlich einzukleiden_), as otherwise the man can bring an action against her; consequently the woman ought to use her right of self-defence with great caution. Our jurist concludes with considerations of cases when the woman who has been kissed forfeits all claims, viz., when, for instance, by look or gestures she says, “I should like to see the man who would dare to kiss me,” and, by such conduct, obviously exposes herself to the danger. Holberg has also occupied himself with this question, and tells the following story in one of his epistles (No. 199):--