marriage c. Vpon not guilty it was found for the Plaintiff and damages given and a Writ of error brought and a Iudgement given for the Plaintiff and so the first Iudgement was affirmed and agréed that the words were spoken affirmatively and not by way of Interrogation and that the Action was given for the stain of his blood and his special damage And that a man may perhaps have this Action albeit he have no Land at all Croo. 2. 422. Case 77. Trin. 15. Jac. B. R. Sr. John Tasburge versus Day This Action was brought for this that whereas hee was a Iustice of Peace c. and that hee upon the seventh of March and long before seized in Fée of the Advowson Slander of a Title Of an Officer of Sandcroft in the County of S. and intended to sell it towards the paiment of his debts and the Defendant knowing of it and intending to Slander him in his Religion c. and to Slander his Title to the Advowson and hinder the sale thereof the same day having spéech with divers persons about his Title to the Advowson and about his Religion spake these words True it is that Sir John Tasburge was the true and undoubted Patron of Sandcroft but now hee hath lost that Patronage and presentation by being a Simonist and a Recusant both which I will prove him to bee By reason whereof hee was hindred in the sale of his Advowson And upon not guilty pleaded and a verdict for the Plaintiff it was adjudged for the Defendant because it doth not appear hee was about the sale of it and so had any special damage by it and for the rest of the words they were held not Actionable Croo. 2. 484. Case 78. Pasche 13. Car. B. R. Humfreys and Studfields Case In this Action for Hindrance of preferment words the Plaintiff declared that hee was heir apparent to his Father and also to his younger Brother who had purchased lands but had no Issue either male or female and that the Defendant with an intent to bring him in disgrace with his Father and also with his younger Brother and thereby to make the Father and younger Brother to give away their Lands from the Plaintiff did maliciously speak these words of him Thou art a Bastard which were spoken before the Father and the Brother Hee is a Bastard by reason of the speaking of which words the Father and younger Brother did intend and afterwards did give their Lands from the Plaintiff and by the opinion of the whole Court it was adjudged that the words were Actionable and Iudgement entred accordingly Godb. Rep. 451. Case 89. Pasche 15. Jac. B R. Cooper versus Smith This Action was brought for this viz. waterman and thou Innuendo the Plaintiff hast killed Charge of Murder thy Masters Cook Innuendo c. and I will bring thee in question for thy life And after Verdict for the Plaintiff and motion to arrest the Iudgment for the Incertainty of the words for that it did not appear who was his Master or that his Master had a Cook it was adjudged for the Plaintiff Incertainty Innuendo and said that albeit the Innuendo cannot make a thing incertain certain but shall serve only as a predict yet the words import that hee had a Master and that his Master had a Cook c. And another Action was brought for these words viz. thou hast sacrificed thy Childe to the Devil and adjudged that the words were Actionable Charge of Murder Pophams Rep. 128. Bridgmans Rep. 60. Case 80. Mich. 44. 45. Eliz. B. R. An Action was brought for this Thy Father By Report Averment said thou hast murdred thy husband Innuendo such a man by name jam defunct and averred ubi re vera her Father spake no such words And Verdict for the Plaintiff upon not guilty pleaded and it was moved in arrest of Iudgement because it was not averred that the husband was dead at the time of the words spoken and divers Cases cyted to the purpose Yelvertons Rep. 20 21. Case 81. Mich. 23. Car. B. R. Person and Dawson An Action was brought for Charge of Theft this your Son Innuendo your Son William stole a Horse and sold him for ten pound and a verdict for the Plaintiff upon a not guilty and after many motions to arrest the Iudgement it was given for the Plaintiff Stiles Rep. 46. Case 82. Pasche 33 Eliz. B. R. Buckley versus Wood. The Plaintiff in this Action Slander in a course of Justice declared that whereas the Defendant did exhibit a Bill against him in the Star-Chamber 30. Eliz. containing inter alia that hee was a nozeler of Théeves Murderers and Pirates c. and recited a great part of the Bill that afterwards the Defendant at P. in the County of Salop. 7 Maij. 31. Eliz. Said hee would justifie his Bill to bee true in every part c. The Defendant pleads that the seventh of May at Wellminster in the County of Middlesex he was demanded of the Lord Chancelour if his Bill were true and he said it was true in all points Absque hoc quod dixit predicta Pleading verba before or after the said day Aliter vel alio modo And upon this the Plaintiff did demur in this Case albeit it was objected For the first thing that it was in a course of Iustice and that his words after were justifiable and that the declaration containing this that he had exhibited his Bill inter alia was not good but that he ought to recite the whole Bill yet it was adjudged for the Plaintiff for that they were matters not examinable in that Court and especially because hée had spoken of them after in the Country Croo. 1. part last publisht 230. 247. Case 83. Action for these words Coles hath strained a Mare Innuendo carnaliter Strained a Mare cognovit equam the Iury found that the Defendant spoke the words C. hath strained a Mare meaning that carnaliter cognovit c. And upon these words the Plaintiff had Iudgement although it was alledged that the words in themselves had no sense And the Innuendo will not help the Innuendo matter but only denote the person but because the verdict was found prerisely that this was his meaning and it is a phrase of the Country it was adjudged for the Plaintiff Croo. 1. part last publisht fol. 250. Case 84. Mich. 33. 34. Eliz. B. R. Cole vers Havilland This Action was A. hath strained a Mare brought for these words Coles hath strained a Mare Innuendo Carnaliter cognovit equam and upon issue joyned c. the Iury found the words and the meaning thereof to be as was declared and Iudgement was given for the Plaintiff Croo. 1. part last publisht 250. Case 85. The Bishop of Norwich against Pricket Action de scandalis magnatum Scandalum Magnatum brought for these words viz.
Assize Yelvertons Rep. 143. Case 119. Blanchflower and Atwood The Action was for this I will hang him Charge of Treason for hee hath spoken words which be high Treason and they were adjudged actionable Yelverton Rep. 107. Case 120. Brinsby and Balgy M. 5. Jac. B. R. The Action was brought by a Charge indirect of a Robbery Maid in a Treaty of Marriage for this It is no marvel shee comes not to Church for it is thought she is with childe and I fear it is too true And it séems not actionable And yet that such words used about a Robbery would be actionable Yelvertons Rep. 113. Case 121. Tomson and Knot M. 6. Jac. B. R. The Action was brought for these Charge indirect of a Theft words You might have known your own sheep and not have stoln mine In this Case by two Iudges the words were not actionable for they are no direct affirmation of any stealing but by way of Implication and a slander may not be drawn in by a strained construction And two Iudges that they were actionable Yelvertons Rep. 145. Case 122. James Wilshire hath forged the late Queens Writ It was affirmed in Forgery a Writ of Errour that the words are actionable Wilshire Case Mich. 5. Jac. B. R. Yelvertons Rep. 146. Case 123. Staverton and Relfe M. 7. Jac. B. R. The Action was this I will prove Charge indirect of Perjury thee a perjured Knave And it was adjudged actionable for these words I will prove import a vehement affirmative of the thing and the Plaintiffs guilt therein Yelvertons Rep. 160. Case 124. Dromant and Westofer M. 6. Jac. B. R. The Action was for these Charge of Theft Pickpocket words The wife of D. Innuendo the wife of the Plaintiff pickt five shillings six pence out of H. Davis wives pocket and her Husband Innuendo the Plaintiff was consenting to the same and in this Case the Iudgement given in the Common-Pleas upon a Writ of Errour was affirmed in the Kings-Bench for the Plaintiff for the first words to pick a pocket c. are slanderous and in the common phrase is in the worst sense a stealing Yelvertons Rep. 136. Case 125. Tuerleote and Morrison Hill 8. Iac. B. R. The Action was brought for these words by an Alien Merchant Hee is a Bankerupt and fled beyond the Seas for much mony And the Defendant pleaded that the Alien Plaintiff was an Alien but it was adjudged for the Plaintiff Yelvertons Rep. 199. Case 126. 1 In an Action upon the Case for words the Plaintiff did declare That Case hée was Heir apparent to his Father and also to his younger Brother who had purchased Lands but had no issue either Male or Female and that the Loss of Preferment Defendant with an intent to bring him in disgrace with his Father and also with his younger Brother and thereby to make the Father and younger Brother to give away their Lands from the Plaintiff did maliciously speak Thou art a Bastard these words to the Plaintiff Thou art a Bastard which words were spoken in the presence of the Father and younger Brother by reason of speaking which words the Father and younger Brother did intend and afterwards did give their Lands from the Plaintiff And by the opinion of the whole Court it was adjudged that the words were actionable and Iudgement entred accordingly Godbolt Rep. Case 519. Humfreys Case 13. Car. B. R. Case 127. Mich. 20. Jac. B. R. Elborrow versus Allen. Action upon the Case Whereas hee was the Son and Heir of John Elborrow and Anne his Slander of a Title to Land Wife Daughter and Heir of John Travel and had divers Lands by discent from them of the value of two hundred pound per annum that the Defendant envying his estate speaking of the Plaintiff and Katherine his wife said these words Shall Elborrow his wife sit above my wife hee is but a Bastard That by this hée was much scandalized in his Estate and forced to great expence to defend his Title upon Nihil dicit writ of Injury and fifty pound damages and after motion to arrest the Iudgement it was given for the Plaintiff And it was agréed that the words in themselves were scandalous and dangerous that may cause his Inheritance to be questioned Croo. 2. 642. Case 128. Banister sued Banister for saying to him being Son and Heir to his Father Slander of a Title to Land That hee was a Bastard And it was resolved that the Action would lye for the words tended to his dis-inherison But if the Defendant himself had pretended to be the next Heir then the words had not béen actionable Trin. 25. Eliz. B. R. Mich. 3. Jac. B. R. Case 129. Two men having speech together of John Syms and William Syms Slander incertain in the person slandered and in the matter one of them said The Symses make Half-crown peeces and John Syms did carry a cloak-bag full of clippings And whether the Action would lye was the question because it was incertain in the person for hee did not say these Symses but the Symses Like unto the Case where one Farrer being slain and certain persons being Defendants in the Starre-Chamber one having spéech of them said These Defendants did murder Farrer and it was adjudged that the Action would not lye for two causes First Because the words these was incertain in the person And secondly it was incertain in the thing for it might be that they had authority to do it as in Mills Case 13. Jac. in the Kings-Bench Thou Charge of coyning of money hast coyned Gold and art a Coyner of Gold Thirdly a Cloak-bag of Clippings that is also uncertain for it might be Clippings of Wooll or other things or it might be Clippings of Silver from the Goldsmith for the Goldsmith that maketh Plate maketh Clippings and fourthly it is not shewed any certain time when the words were spoken And for these causes it was adjudged that the Action would not lye Godbolt Rep. Case 477. Syms Case Pasche 3. Car. B. R. Case 130. Note it was cited by Chamberlain Justice 15. Jacobi to be adjudged Hinderance of Preferment Bastard Slander of a Title For saying one is a Bastard That where a man brought an Action upon the Case against another man for calling of him Bastard that the Action was maintainable the Defendant brought a Writ of Errour and shewed for Errour that the Plaintiff did not claim any Inheritance or to be Heir to any person certain But notwithstanding that Errour assigned the Iudgement was affirmed And hee said that if one saith of J. S. that his Father is an Alien that an Action upon the Case will lye because it is a disability to the Son Quere Godbolt Rep. Case 421. Case 131. Mich. 6. Jac. B. R. Vaughan versus Ellis Errour of a Iudgement in Slander of a Title the Exchequer in an Action of the Case for
6. 5. But where the sense is double and indifferent that it may be taken the one or the other way But one of the senses is worse and the other is better there the words shall bée taken in the better and not in the worser sense But of this sée before 6. That where the sense of the words is general and may be taken divers waies there it shall bée understood with reference to the person of whom they are spoken For in this the Rule is Sermo relatus ad personam intelligi debet de Conditione personae And thus the same words spoken to one man may be and spoken to another man may not be actionable to say to a Iudge or such like Officer You are a corrupt man is actionable But such words to another man are not actionable Coo. 4. 16. And yet if in this case there be other words spoken together with these words that do manifest them not to bée intended with reference to his office but to some other thing the words will not be actionable Coo. 4. 16. Hetleys Rep. 123. 139. Wée have toucht it before That Slander is and may bée by word or by déed And by word it may be either of the title a man hath to his Land or of his Person Wée shall first of all lay down something of the first of the slander of titles and then wée shall enter upon the slander of perâ—ons As to which it may bee easily discovered by that which is laid down in the general foregoing Rules That in this subject wée are upon these things are principally to bée considered 1. The Person of the Slanderer 2. The Person of the Slandered 3. The way and manner of divulging of the Slander 4. The frame of the words whereby the Slander is raised and made 5. The matter and quality of the slander it self Wée shall therefore after wée have dispatcht the first and after wée have spoken a little to the Slander of great men called Scandalum Magnatum in the next place say something to every one of these particulars CHAP. III. Of the Slander of a Title to Land THere are some words spoken that are in scandal and disparagement of Words that tend to the slander of a mans title to his Land or to a mans disinheritance Sect. 1. a mans Title to his Land or tend to a mans disheritance for which an Action of the Case may lye And for the opening of this point these things are to be known That in all cases where an Action will lye for a Slander of this nature there must be these things in the Case 1. The words must be spoken about such Land as wherein I that am to bring the Action have some Title of Estate or at least a possibility or probability of Estate or Title in Possession Remainder or Reversion For if they bée spoken about Land that doth not concern mée and wherewith I have not to do they cannot as they refer to the Land be actionable 2. The words spoken must be false For if what is said bée true bée it what it will the speaker may justifie the speaking of it where an Action is brought against him for it 3. They must be spoken by one that neither hath nor pretendeth title to the Land himself and that is not of Counsel with him that hath or pretendeth title to it For if a man lay claim to Land that another hath in possession or to which hée doth pretend title as next heir or otherwise And hée shall say any such words as these That the Land is his Land that claimeth it and not the others or that hee hath a good title to it and the other hath no title to it or that hee hath such an Estate in it or such a conveyance of it if in truth hee have such a conveyance of it and if it bée true as hée saith no Action will lye for it So if they both claim as heir and the one of them say of the other That hee is a Bastard or that hee is not the rightful heir or that his Father was an Alien or the like and that hée himself is the heir And so if the Counsel of such a man shall use any such words as these in the agitation of his Case about the Lands these words will not be actionable And yet if a man shall pretend title to the Land another hath in possession and hath no colour of title for it And say hée hath such a déed or conveyance of it where in truth hée hath no such déed or conveyance at all or if hée hath any such it is a counterfeit and a forged one and hée knoweth it to be so in these Cases the words may be actionable But if there be any colour for what is said the words will not be actionable Coo. 4. 17 18 Yelvertons Rep 80. 88. New Book of Entries 20. 28. Trin. 25. Eliz. B. R. Banisters Case Mich. 3. Jac. B. R. Croo. 2. 339. 4. The party that brings the Action must have or be likely to have some special damage by the speaking of the words as that hée is hindred in the sale of his Land was forced to fall his price or in his preferment in marriage or the like by it And therefore where a man is not about the sale of his Land or about a match with a Wife or Husband and another shall speak words to the disparagement of the title of his Land this will not bear an Action But if by the speaking of the words hée hath lost his Chapman or otherwise suffered any special prejudice the which he must not faile to set forth in his Declaration there without question the Action will lye Croo. 1. 99. 100. Croo. 2. 213. 397. 422. 484. Croo. 2. 642. 337. Owens Rep. 32. Popham Rep. 187 Yelvertons Rep. 88. Bulstr 2. part 9â— 5 That where the words are spoken to the prejudice of his Inheritance as where he is denied to be rightful Heir or the like there the Averment Action may be maintainable without Averment of any present damage and therefore it is held that this Action will lye for saying of a lawful Heir to Land before or after the Ancestors death He is a Bastard and so albeit the words be spoken before or after he hath Land in possession and though he be not about to sell the Land and although he have no special losse by the speaking of the words for by this the King or other Lord may be moved to search after the Title and the Title of his Land if he have any may be called in question and so it may in time turne to his prejudice Coo. 4. 17. Croo. 2. 642. M. 20. Jac. B. R. Elborrows case 6 That this Action will not lye for words that are too general and incertain nor for words that are not malicious sufficiently positive and the like within the Rules of words spoken in other cases for if they be incertaine of a
double intendment doubtful meaning or the like no Action will lye upon them It is therefore agreed That if I have Land and am about the sale of Sect. 2. it in treaty with another or about to settle it on a Marriage and one that hath nothing to doe with it or makes no title to it shall say That I have no title to the Land or I have no right to it or I can make no good estate of the Land or that it is anothers Land or that another hath such an estate in it and set forth such a one as will disable the estate that I am now about to make this is Actionable As if I bee a Copy-holder for life of Land in a Mannour and the Lord is making a Lease of it after my life and is bid five hundred pound for it and I shall say I have a Lease for years of it after my life made by a former Lord this will be Actionable Coo. 4. 18. Croo. 2. 397. 337. Owens Rep. 32. Pophams Rep. 187. Croo. 2. 163. Yelvertons Rep. 88. Croo. 1. 99. But if it be so that I have only a purpose to sell it or to settle it upon Children and any man speaks such words about it this will not bear Action Croo. 2. 397. 337. 444. Pophams Rep. 187. Owens Rep. 32. Croo. 1. 99. And if one that claimes this Land as his owne shall say It is my Land or I have a Lease of it or the other hath no estate in it or hath no right to it or the like this is not Actionable Coo. 4. 18. so if I pretend Title to Land as Heir and another claims it as Heir and I say He is a Bastard and I am next Heir this is not Actionable Coo. 4. 17. Yelverton Rep. 80 88. And if a Counsellor shall say That his Clyent hath the better right to the Land or shall use other words in the course of his pleading pertinent and necessary to be said in order to the advance of the cause no Action will lye for this Coo. 4. 17. Trin. 25. Eliz. B. R. Banisters case If I have a Copy-hold of Inheritance within the jurisdiction of the Court of another and he saith That I have not any Title to those Lands if by this I have no special prejudice no Action will lye for it Croo. 1. 99. and yet if such a one that hath no Title to nor estate in it himself shall say that another hath an estate in it or title to it who hath no good but hath a colourable estate or title in it this will be Actionable so it is to say in such a case I know one that hath a Lease of the Land and hée will not part from it at any rate Mich. 37. 38. Eliz. B. R. Pennimans Case Mich. 20. Jac. Elborrows Case Croo. 1. 99 100. Croo. 2. 397 422 642. Croo. 4. 17. Coo. 1. 175. And if two have Leases of the same Land and hée that hath the last Lease which is not good shall say That the Land is his and the others estate is not good this is actionable Coo. 1. 175. Coo. 4. 18. And if I be about to sell my Land and J. S. shall pretend to and shew a Lease of it and it is counterfeit and hée know it to be so this is actionable Coo. 4. 18. So if a woman shall publish a Lease of the Land of another as made by her Husband and shall know it to be forged if by it the party have any special loss hée may have this action Coo. 4. 18. So if I bée about to sell my Land and another man shall say the Land is conveyed to J. S. and is his Land or that hée hath a Lease of it for years or the like this is actionable And so it is albeit there be a conveyance or Lease made to J. S. in truth if it bée not a good Conveyance or Lease in Law Coo. 1. 175. Coo. 4. 18. But for these words I had rather to buy the title of the younger Brother than of the elder Brother and the Plaintiff and that hee had seen an Indenture to lead the uses of a Fine whereby it did appear that the Plaintiff had no authority to sell the Land no Action will lye Crush vers Crush M. 3. Jac. B. R. And so it hath béen agréed That an Action will lye in the Cases following To say a man is a Bastard and not a rightful Heir to Land As I have Land as Son and Heir of J. S. and another shall say of mée I am a Bastard if by this I suffer any special prejudice there is no doubt I may have this Action against him Croo. 2. 642. And if I bée Heir apparent to my Ancestor who intends to settle his Land upon mée and by occasion of these words hée doth give it away from mée I may have this Action against him that speaketh the words Croo. 2 Bastardy 642. Croo. 2. 213. Godb. Rep. 421 451. pl. 519. Bulstr 2. part 90. Nay it séems the Law is That if one shall say of mée that I am a Bastard albeit I do not claim any Inheritance or to be Heir to any one person in certain and albeit I have not any present or special damage by it yet that these words are actionable Croo. 2. 642. Croo. 2. 213. Godb. Rep. 421 451. pl. 519. Bulstr 2. part 90. And if I have but a remote possibility of Land as where an entail is of Land on my Father and the Heirs of his body whereof I am the youngest of many and hée is about the sale of this Land and I am bid mony for this possibility and then one shall say of mée I am a Bastard and after that the Purchaser refuse to give mée any thing for my possibility in this case I may have this Action against him for it Croo. 2. 213. Godb. Rep. 421 451. pl. 519. CHAP. IV. Of the Scandalum Magnatum SCandalum Magnatum is a wrong done to some eminent person of the Scandalum Magnatum What. Land as Duke Earl Baron Chancellour Treasurer Privy-Seal Justice of the one Bench or of the other by false news or false messages whereby debates and discords betwéen them or any scandal to their persons Sect. 1. may arise Stat. 2. R. 2. chap. 5. Westm 1. chap. 34. In this Case the party defamed may have his Action in the name of the The punishment of it King and his own Name upon the Stat. of 2. R. 2. And hereby shall recover damages for the wrong and the party may also be otherwise punished And if the slander be divulged in the nature of a Libel it is punishable by Indictment and great Fines are imposed for this offence for that the reproach of such persons is the reproach of the King and State it self Coo. 5. 125. Old Book of Entries 593. Crompton Jur. 35. 19. 13. For the knowledge of this wherein this Action is given to a great
Burrows Case Albeit this Averment be added that none do lye there but such as have the French-Pox M. 44. 45. Eliz. Boddin and Jones Case Nor for this Hee hath been in Fullers Tubb meaning a Chirurgions Tubb wherein none were but such as had the Pox I will not say of the Pox but hee lay in the Tubb that time that Langhams wife was laid of the Pox and his hair falls from his head and hee is a pilled and a Rascal-knave and a Villain no Christian and thinks there is neither Heaven nor Hell Goldsb 135. pl. 34. Croo. 2. 144. Nor for this Thou art Matcombes Hackney thou art a theeving and a pocky Whore Innuendo that shée had the French-Pox and I will prove thee a pocky Whore Croo. 2. 514. Godb. 278. Nor for this Thou art a scurvy pocky Whore and a Pickpocket Nor will it lye for saying of a man Hee hath the Falling-sickness Hill Falling-sickness 4. Jac. B. R. unlesse it may disable him in his Profession as a Lawyer or the like Hill 4. Jac. B. R. It is adjudged as it is said not to lye for this to advise a mans friend not to kéep company with J. S. because hée is full of the French-pox because there is no malice in this James and Rudleys Case 40. 41. Eliz. Co. B. Nor will an Innuendo enforce any of these words beyond their native Innuendo sense to make them actionable that in themselves are not so Coo. 4 17. And yet in some of these Cases if any special damage come to the party by the words spoken there haply they may be actionable albeit they be not so in themselves And in other Cases albeit there be damage yet may not the words be actionable Croo. 2. 499. CHAP. XVIII Of words that hinder ones Preferment THere are other words that do or may hinder a Preferment that a Sect. 1. man or woman may be in a possibility and likelihood to have And this falls out especially in one of these Cases where a man is in likelihood to have a wife or a woman a husband or one that is or may be an heir to an Ancestour and in that Right to have Land from him or a Minister is in possibility and likelihood to have a Parsonage by presentation or one is in a likelihood to be chosen to an office or one is in likelihood to be preferred to a special service and by some scandalous words spoken by another against him to his disparagement hée is prevented of and put besides it in such a Case and for this Injury the Law gives him this remedy And therefore it is held that this Action will lye for the words in the Cases hereafter following That is to say where a woman is like to have a husband or a man is like to have a wife and one say of him or her hée or shée had a Bastard or lay with J. S. or J. S. had the use of her body or the like and hée or shée lose the Match thereby this Action will lye for him or her that is so disappointed Hill 4. Jac. B. R. Dame Morrisons Case Hobb Rep. 106. 236. 350. Croo. 1. 110. 111. 195. 134. Croo. 2. 163. So if one say of a man Thou art a Whoremaster for thou hast lyen For a hindrance in Marriage Sect. 2. with Browns wife and hadst to do with her against a Chair If by this he lose a preferment by a wife Bulstr 2. part 90. So to say of a Widdower being about a wife that hee had lien with such a woman and others carnaliter cognovit and that by this hée lost such a match Croo. 1. 293. So for this Hath that Bastard A. B. caused you to be arrested is this all the spight the Bastard can do you if by reason hereof hée lose a match hée was about Croo. 2. 422. It will lye for these words A. hath had a childe for shee was conveyed to B. and there shee laid her great belly it is as true that she hath had a childe as that you sit there For shee was sent away with childe and if shee had not a childe shee hath made it away Croo. 1. part 639. For an Heir to hinder him of Land If one be Heir to his Father or Vncle that hath an Estate of Land or Goods which in likelihood hée may bestow upon him or if Land be given to his Grandfather and the Heirs of his body and hée hath children the Father and others that may be Heirs to the Entail though in the second or third degrée and the Land being at sale hée is offered somewhat for his possibility and after one shall say of him Hee is a Bastard and by this means hee loseth it hée may have this Action and not aver any special loss Croo. 1. 337. Coo. 4. 13. 14. Coo. 10. 130. Owens Rep. 32. Yet see Popham 187. If a Divine be to be presented to a Benefice and one say of him Hee For a Divine to hinder him of a Parsonage is a Heretick or a Bastard or Excommunicate if thereby the Patron refuse to present him and hée lose his Preferment this is actionoble Coo. 4. 16. 17. If one be Heir to his Father Brother or other Ancestour who intendeth For an heir to hinder him of Land to settle his Land upon him And another shall say of him Hee is a Bastard and thereupon the Father Brother or Ancestour give away the Land from him this is actionable Hughes Rep. 451. Bulstr 2. part 276. 277. Croo. 2. 213. And this Action some say it hath béen adjudged will lye albeit the party have no special losse by the words N. B. Entries 28. Trin. 25. Eliz. B. R. Godb. Rep. 519. Croo. 1. 337. Coo. 10. 130. Owens Rep. 32. If some say of a Lawyer that stands for a Town-Clerks place or any other For an Officer to hinder him of an office place of preferment Hee is an ignorant man and unfit for the place and thereby hée loseth this place this Action will lye March Rep. pl. 217. Sandersons Case 17. Car. B. R. And so by the like reason if any common servant be like to have a service and For a Servant to hinder him of a service by some slanderous spéeches hée loseth it Agreed M. 15. Car. B. R. So it lyeth for this Hee is not worthy to bear office in such a place for he keeps a Baudy-house in London if by this hée lose the place he stands for Bulstr 1. part 138. It is said that this Action will not lye for saying of another hee is base born And yet that perhaps it may lye for saying of another Hee is an Alien if he have any special damage by it Godb. Rep 327. 328. This Action will lye for saying of a Maid or a Widdow that hath a Hindrance of Marriage Suitor I know her well enough shee did dwell in Cheapside a Grocer did get her with childe
Innuendo will not help for that actionable words must import in themselves precise slander without ambiguousnesse so that every one that hears them may intend of whom they be spoken For it was said that hée spake the words of the Plaintiff and the Iury found him guilty And this difference was taken where the words in themselves import apparent incertainty and when they may be ascertained by Intendment In the first Case no Averment will aid it But in the last Case by Averment an Averment and a Verdict it may be aided And therefore where the words be One of my Brothers is perjured this is so incertain that neither of them can bring an Action and if he be found guilty by Verdict it will not help But here it did not appear that hée had more Brothers than one and then it may be certain enough and here it is expressy averred to be spoken of him and the Iury hath found him guilty and therefore it is here certain enough And this Case was cited by the Court to be adjudged for the Plaintiff That murdrous Knave Stroughton lay in wait to murder mee And upon this one Thomas Stroughton brought the Action and said they were spoken of him And upon not guilty pleaded and a Verdict for the Plaintiff it was adjudged after divers motions to arrest the Iudgement for the Plaintiff Croo. 2. 108. Case 225. Sir Thomas Gresham versus Grindsley Thy Brother was a fool and was never born to do himself any good for that he could not hold his hand from ratifying and subscribing to his Fathers Will notwithstanding I have that to shew in my house that if his heir Elizabeth Gresham do not any such Act as hee hath done it shall bring her to inherit Titsley Sir Tho. upon this sues the Defendant And shews how his Father was seized Slander of a Title to Land of the Mannor of Titsley and of other Lands and by his will devised to A. his wife for life the Remainder in Tail to the Plaintiff and how the Father had issue William the eldest which had issue Elizabeth his Daughter and Heir and this Plaintiff the youngest Son and that A. is dead and the Plaintiff entred and the Defendant to slander his Title spake these words before and shewed further how hée had an intention to make a Ioynture to his Wife and to passe divers parcels of the Land devised to him to his younger children for their advancements and that hée was hindred in his intent by these words ad damnum a hundred pound and upon not guilty pleaded it was found for the Plaintiff and twenty pound damages But Iudgement was given for the Defendant 1 For that it doth not appear by any thing in the Declaration that the Plaintiff is damnified viz. that hée was about to sell it or has entred into any Bond to make a Ioynture to his wife which by reason of these words would not be accepted and there ought to be some special matter shewed in which damage may be apparent Coo. 4. 18. For upon such general words no special slander may be imposed As if a Lease for life be with a condition to re-enter and J. S. shall say That hee can shew that which will bring him in Reversion to the possession this is no slander of the Title for the very Lease it self by the Indenture by which the Land was devised will bring him to it either by the condition or by the determination of the estate 2 For that it doth appear by the Plaintiffs own shewing that Elizabeth is Heir at Common Law and that the Plaintiff himself had but an estate tail and upon the determination of it Elizabeth will have Titsley as general Heir and the Defendant doth not shew any time certain when Elizabeth shall have it but indefinitely and this shall be taken in meliori sensu Yelverton Rep. 88. Coo. lib. Entries 35. Case 226. Mich. 4. Jac. B. R. Earl of Northumberland versus Birches In an Slander of a Title to Land Action for the slander of a Title The Plaintiff declared that Henry Earl of Arundel was seized in Fée of the Mannor of D. and gave it to the plaintiff in tail and that the Defendant was a Customary Tenant for life of a messuage parcel of the said Mannor And the Plaintiff was in Communication with J. S. to make a Lease for years to him to make a Lease for years of the Land to him to begin after the estate of the Defendant for life was determined for which J. S. agréed to give him five hundred pound that the Defendant intending to hinder that bargain and slander his Title spake these words The late Earl of Arundel Lord of the Mannor of D. did make a Lease of my Tenement to one J. D. for sixty years to begin after my customary estate ended and the same is a good Lease Whereas the said Earl did not make such a Lease by reason whereof neither J. S. nor any other person would give him ten pound for the Lease The Defendant justified that Henry Earl of Arundel before the Gift made to the Plaintiff made such a Lease to J. S. for sixty years and that J. S. conveyed the Lease to him It was objected that the words import not any slander nor is it alledged when the Earl made the Lease But the opinion of the Court was that the words shall be taken in the worse sense according to his intent which hée spake when hée said it to be a good Lease And the words themselves imply that hée spake them to countenance the Title of a stranger which is not lawful and now hée cannot excuse himself by intituling of himself when at the first the words did not import as much and now hée cometh too late to justifie Croo. 2. 163. Case 227. M. 3. Car. B. R. Law and Harwoods Case In this Action for a slander of a Title The Plaintiff declared that hée was seized in Fée as a Coppy-holder Slander of a Title to Land of Land in D. within the Iurisdiction of the Defendants Court and that the Defendant said Hee had not any title to those Lands It was found for the Plaintiff And upon a Writ of Errour brought the Iudgement was reversed because the plaintiff did not shew that by occasion of the words hée had any prejudice as by any bargain of Inheritance or Lease of the Land And this Action is not maintainable without shewing a special prejudice Croo. 1. part last publisht 99. Case 228. M. 6. Jac. B. R. Vaughan versus Ellis M. 6. Jac. B. R. Errour of a Iudgement in the Exchequer-Chamber in an Action of the Case for words for saying Hee is a Bastard The Errour assigned was that the Action lyes not for these words without special cause shewn that hee was damnified by them as to alledge that hée was inheritable to some Lands and that by reason of those words hée is to have losse And here it
whereas it should have been prefat I. S. Innuendo and this was amended by the Court Croo. 2. 157. As to this Question these things are to be known Where the plea in Bar or Verdict of the Jury will help to maintaine the Declaration and Action or not 1 That the Writ and Declaration must set forth that the words were spoken in auditu or in presentia quamplurimorum subditorum c. otherwise it is not good and the Defendant may take advantage of it but if hee doe not except against it but plead to it and it bee put to a Iury that doth finde for the Plaintiff this may haply supply that defect Croo. 1. 65. 144. 2 That where the words supposed by the Declaration are That Eyres Innuendo the Plaintiff is a Theef And hereupon the Iury doth finde it for the Plaintiff this is good and doth make the incertain words certain and actionable Eyres Case M. 7. Jac. B. R. So if one say to another of a woman passing by shee is a Witch and Sect. 6. hath bewitched my childe Innuendo the Plaintiff and verdict is given for the Plaintiff now it is out of question Pasâ—he 18. Jac. B. R. Roberts Case 3 That where the words that are found by the Iury do not agrée with the words in the Declaration in the substantial and essential form in this Case they will not warrant and maintain the Declaration But if they do agrée in the substantial and essential form though they agrée not in every word yet they may warrant the Declaration and maintain the Action Hobb Rep. pl. 213. M. 4. Jac. B. R. Hill 3. Jac. B. R. Dyer 21. 75. And although all the words in the Declaration be not found yet if the essential and substantial form of the words be found it will be good enough Dyer 21. 75. 4 In this Action for words upon not guilty pleaded the Iury found the words laid in the Declaration to be spoken by the Defendant of the Plaintiff The words were these Thou art a Theef and I will prove thee so And the Iury finde that hée spake the words de Querenti not in his presence but in his absence and so finde it specially And it séems it might be good Bulstr 1. part 56. 5 In this Action against a Husband and Wife if the Iury finde the Husband guilty and the Wife not guilty and a verdict be found in the Case And albeit that the Declaration be naught it now is holpen by the verdict and the Plaintiff may have Iudgement Stiles Rep. 350. 6 If the Action be brought by the Plaintiff against the Husband and Wife for words spoken by the Wife and the Iury finde the Wife guilty this is good and the Iudgement shall be against them both Stiles Rep. 460. Brownl and Goldsb 7. 7 The Count was that the words were spoken falso malitiose and Sect. 7. the Iury found it falso injuriose And it was agréed to be naught and that they were not actionable Trin. 7. Car. B. R. Norman and Simons Case 8 The Count was that the words were That hee is a maintainer of Theeves and a strong Theef And the Iury found all the words but the word strong And it was adjudged for the Plaintiff Burgis Case Dyer 75. 21. 9 The Count was That John Barker and his children be false Theeves men cannot have their Cattel going upon the Common but they will kill them and eat them c. And the Iury found the last but not the first words viz. B. and his children be false Theeves which are the only actionable words and it was adjudged for the Defendant Barbars Case If the Action be for words only and the Plaintiff recover hée is to have Costs recoverable no more costs than the Iury have given damages But if the Action be for words and déeds together as for slandering and causing imprisonment or the like there hée is to have full costs Croo. 1. part 223. If the Plaintiff be non-suit the Defendant shall have costs Hobb pl. 286. CHAP. XXIV Of a Libel A Libel called Famosus Libellus seu infamatoria scriptura is taken Libel What Sect. 1. for a scandalous writing or Act done tending to the defamation of another And this may be and sometimes is against a publick and sometimes against a private person sometimes against the living sometimes against the dead This may be by writing or by other Act done By writing when any Epigram Rhyme or other writing is composed or published to the note or contumely of another by which his fame or dignity may be prejudiced And this may be either verbis or cantilenis as where it is malitiously repeated The kinds of it or sung in the presence of others 2. Traditione when the Libel or any Copy of it is delivered over to another to the intent to scandalize the party Or it may be done by other waies An infamous Libel without writing may be either by pictures when the party is painted in any ignominious or reproachful manner 2. Or by signs when one doth make or fix a Gallows or any other reproachful or ignominious sign at the door of the party or elsewhere Coo. 5. 126. Or the like Thus Jeffes exhibited an infamous writing directed to the King against Sir Edward Cook Chief Justice of the Kings Bench and against the Court for a Iudgement given in the Court affirming the Iudgement to be Treason calling him therein Traitor and perjured Judge and scandalizing all the Professors of the Law containing much scandalous matter in it And fixed the Libel upon the great Gate at the entrance into Westminster-Hall and in divers other publick places and was indicted for it in the Kings Bench and fined a thousand pound committed to the Marshal ordered to stand on the Pillory at Westminster and Cheapside with a Paper of his offence on his back to be detained in prison till hée made an open submission in all the Courts at Westminster and to be bound with sureties for his good Behaviour during life Croo. 1. 125. And so an infamous Libel was composed and published in verse against John the Archbishop of Canterbury and his successour by Circumlocutions and descriptions and not in expresse terms by which they were traduced and scandalized which was punished in the Starre-Chamber Coo. 5. 225. And so William Peacock did exhibit his Bill in the Starre-Chamber against Sir George Reynel for this that the Defendant perceiving that the Plaintiffs Father was inclined to settle his Land upon him that hée to take off his affection and that hee might settle it upon himself writes a Letter to his Father that the Plaintiff was not the Son of a Peacock and was a haunter of Taverns and that divers women did follow him from London and that hee longed for his death and that his Land would not be sufficient to pay his debts c. And the Defendant was there fined two hundred pound and
words for calling of him Bastard And the cause of the Errour was laid to be that the Action lies not for these words without special cause shewn that hée was damnified by them as that hée was inheritable to some Lands and by reason thereof he Hindrance of preferment is to have losse And here it is shewn that such Land was given in tail to his Grandfather and that his Father had divers Sons whereof the Plaintiff is youngest Son and his Elder Brothers are living and that such a one was to buy the Land and offered him so much for his Title And by reason of those words refused to give him any thing In this case it was For saying of one Hee is a Bastard agréed that albeit hée had no present Title but a possibility and being offered mony for it and having lost this gain by the words and in futuro might receive prejudice in case hee were to claim any Land by descent And for these causes they held the words actionable and did affirm the Iudgement Croo. 2. 213. Case 132. An Action of the Case was brought for speaking of these words viz. J. S. For saying Thou hast had Bastards 34. years since had two Bastards and hath paid for the nursing of them and the Plaintiff shewed that by reason of these words contention grew betwirt him and his wife almost to a divorce and it was adjudged that an Action would not lye for the words and the Chief Iustice said that an Action upon the Case doth not lye for every ill word but for words by speaking of which the Plaintiff is damnified and that cannot be in this Case the time being so long past And the causes wherefore a man shall be punished for saying that a man hath a Bastard are two the one because by the Statute of 14. Elz. The offender is to be punished for the same And secondly because the party by such means is discredited or hindered in his preferment Godbolt Rep. Case 385. Pasche 16. Jac. B. R. Case 133. Sir Gilbert Gerrard brought an Action against Mary Dickinson and Slander of a Title declared that hée was seized of the Land in Fée and was in treaty to make a Lease of it for two and twenty years at a hundred pound a year Rent to R. Egerton and that the Defendant knowing of it said I have a Lease of the Mannor and Castle of H. which was the same Land for ninety years and published it c. by reason whereof R. Egerton did not procéed In this Case it was agréed that no Action would lye for the words although they were false because the Defendant did pretend an interest in the Land So if the Defendant had said that the Plaintiff had no right to the Land but that shee her self had right to it no Action would lye for this Coo. 4. 18. Case 134. An Action upon the Case was brought for these words viz. Thou art a For saying Thou art a Couzener and Bankerupt Couzener and Bankerupt and hast an occupation to deceive men by the words were spoken of a Gentleman who had a hundred pound Land per annum to live upon and therefore although hée used to buy and sell Iron yet because hée was not a Merchant nor did live by his Trade the better opinion of the Court was that the words were not actionable and so adjudged Godb. Rep. Case 45. Hill 28. Eliz. B. R. Case 135. Pasche 15. Car. 1. Smiths Case One said Thou art forsworn and hast Charge of Perjury taken a false Oath at Hereford Assizes against J. S. And the opinion of the Court was against the Action But it was said it would have lyen for this Thou art forsworn and hast taken a false Oath at the Assizes against J. S. with an Averment that hée was sworn in the cause March Rep. pl. 17. Smiths Case Pasche 15. Car. 1. Case 136. Easter 15. Car. 1. Molton versus Clapham The Defendant upon reading Perjury Affidavids in Court openly in the presence and hearing of the Iustices and Lawyers said There is not a word true in the Affidavids which I will prove by forty witnesses March Rep. pl. 45. Molton versus Clapham Easter 15. Car. 1. Case 137. Mich. 15. Car. 1. Johnson versus Dyer The Case was this The Defendant Incertain charge of Felony having spéech with the Father of the Plaintiff said to him I will take my Oath that your Son stole my Hens But did not averr that hée was his Son or that hee had but one Son and it was held not good March Rep. pl. 96. Mich. 15. Car. 1. Case 138. Mich. 15. Car. 1. Just Crooks Case It was agreed That if one had preferred Manner of divulging of a Slander a Bill in the Starr-Chamber against a Iudge for Corruption in his office and then shall go unto a Tavern or other place and tell the effect of it that this is actionable March Rep. pl. 119. Case 139. Pasche 17. Car. 1. B. R. Sir Richard Greenfields Case The Action agreed Charge of couzening to be maintainable for this Thou hast received mony of the King to buy new Saddles and hast couzened the King and bought old Saddles for the Troopers for hee may thereby lose his office or imployment So if hee had said these words of the Kings Sadler March Rep. pl. 135. Case 140. Trin. 17. Car. 1. Co. B. Action was brought for this Thou hast killed my Charge of Murder Lack of Averment Brother Innuendo C. c. fratrem nuper mortuum and it was held by the whole Court not actionable without averment that hee was dead and that the Innuendo will not do it March Rep. pl. 187. See Hobb Rep. pl. 11. Case 141. Trin. 17. Car. 1. Hawes Case The Action was brought for these words Charge of speaking against the book of Common-Prayer Averment Necessary My couzen Hawes hath spoken against the Book of Common-Prayer and said it is not fit to be read in the Church with an averment of a special losse by it that hée was called into the Spiritual Court and the Plaintiff had Iudgement in it March Rep. pl. 191. Case 142. Mich. 17. Car. 1. Co. B. Baine sued for these words That hee kept a Charge of cheating and couzening Averment false Bushel whereby hee did cheat and couzen the poor But hée set forth that hée was a Farmer did use to sow Land and sell the Corn and thereby maintained himself and his Family and that the words were spoken to one that did use to buy of him and that by reason of the words hée lost his custome And it was adjudged actionable March Rep. pl. 192. Case 143. Mich. 17. Car. 1. Co. B. A. sued for these words That hee kept false Couzening weights and hée set forth that hée got his living by buying and selling but did not shew of what Trade or Profession he was and agréed that the Action
is shewn that such Land was given to his Grandfather and that his Father had divers Sons Slander of a Title whereof the plaintiff is the youngest and his elder Brothers are living And that such a one was to buy the Land and offered him such a summe of money for his title and by reason of those words refused to give him any thing So it appears by his own shewing that he hath not any present title and therefore no cause of Action at all But the two chief Iustices conceived that although he hath not any present Title it appears hee is by a possibility inheritable to those Lands and being offered a summe of mony for that possibility to joyn in the assurance although he hath not any present title to the Land yet by reason of those words hee had a present damage and in future might receive prejudice thereby in case hee were to claime any Land by discent And for these causes they held that the words were actionable and the judgement was affirmed Croo. 2. 213. Case 229. 2 Car. B. R. Reynor vers Hallet The Action was brought for these words viz. Reynor is a base Gentleman and hath four Children by his servant Agnes and he hath killed them all or caused them to bee killed And after a verdict for the Plaintiff and amotion for to arrest the judgement judgement was given for the Plaintiff and there it was said to be adjudged not to lye for these words Agnes Knight is a Witch and Witch by Dodridge these words Hee hath four Children by his servant Agnes alone are not actionable but Whitlock contra And by Iustice Jones it Incontinency For saying one is a Bastard lyeth not for saying One is a Bastard and by him it lyeth not for saying Thou hast killed I. S. where in truth there never was any such man But to say Thou hast killed the King Contra. Case 230. Mich. 40 Eliz. In an Action of the Case for calling one Bastard Dyer and Walsh Iustices said an Action would lye but Brown on the contrary For calling one Bastard because it must be tried in the Spiritual Court And Dyer said that at Barwick Assizes a Formedon in Dicender was brought and one said That his Father by whom he claimed was a Bastard and thereupon he brought an Action against him for those words and recovered Case 231. The Clerk said That he had a Son in Nottinghamshire and that he Charge of Theft Incertainty Averment had his Chest picked and a hundred pound taken out of it in one Lock-smiths house and I thank God I have found the Chief who it is it is one that dwelleth in the next house called Robert Kingston whereupon Kingston brought this Action without averment that he did live in the next house and had a verdict for him and it was held not good for lack of this averment Pasche 7. Jac. B. R. Case 232. Action for these words There was never a Robbery committed within Charge of Robbery forty miles of Wellingborough but thou hadst thy part in it after verdict it was moved in arrest of judgement that the Action did not lye because it was not averred there was any Robbery committed within forty Averment miles c. for otherwise it is no slander sicopinio cur and judgement for the Defendant Mich. 36 37 Eliz. B. R. placito 12. Croo. 1. last published 308. 11. Case 233. Action for these words You have sought to murder me and I can Charge of an endeavour to Murder prove it adjudged that it lay Croo. 308. 1. last published 12. Case 234. Action for words That he being a Counsellor at Law and Steward to Slander of a Lawyer I. S. of his Mannours the Defendant said of him Hee is a paultry Lawyer and hath as much Law as a Jack-a-napes upon not guilty pleaded it was found against him and damages twenty pound And it was moved and the Action lyeth not for it is not said hee had no more Law than a Iack-a-napes but it was adjudged for the Plaintiff for the words are scandalous and touch him in his profession Croo. 1. last publisht 342. 9. Case 235. Action for these words Thou art a forsworn Jack in the Court-Baron Charge of Perjury of D. thou hast sworn me out of twenty shillings rent and hast me on thy side adjudged that the Action lay and the Plaintiff recovered Croo. 1. last publisht 342. 10. Case 236. Action for these words There was never a Purse cut within twenty Charge of Theft Cut purse miles of VVellingborough but thou hadst thy part in it and avers that such a Purse was cut c. and he had no part in it And it was moved that an Action lyeth not for it is not said he had a part of it as a partaker in the Felony for he may have a part in it in the losse and so it is no slander but it was adjudged for the Plaintiff for the words shall be taken to be spoken in the worst sense in disgrace and reproach of the Plaintiff Nota Serjeant Yelverton cited a Case Pasche 32 Eliz. Sir Edward Hastings Endeavour brought an Action for these words You have procured a perjured man to seek my bloud and ruled that an Action did not lye But Fenner said the Case was not adjudged but ended by his Arbitrement Vide Mich. 35. 36. Eliz. Antea B. R. placite 11. Croo. 1. last publisht 342. 11. Case 237. Action for words for that the Defendant said to I. B. Son of the Plaintiff in the presence of divers Thou praefat J. B. Innuendo and thy Charge of Perjury Father Innuendo the Plaintiff were both Perjured and I Innuendo the Defendant will prove you both perjured Vpon not guilty it was found for the Plaintiff damages twenty pound And it was moved in arrest of judgement that it was not averred that I. B. was the Son of the Plaintiff but it was held well enough for that it was alledged that the Averment words were spoken to I. B. his Son and it was adjudged for the Plaintiff Croo. 1. last publisht 143. 11. Case 238. Action for these words Many an honester man hath been hanged and Charge of Felony Indirectly a Robbery hath béen committed and I think he was at it and I think he is a Horse-stealer it was moved after verdict that an Action lyeth not without an expresse averment he was so Curia contra they are great Averment slander if the Defendant sheweth not a good cause of his thinking and it was adjudged for the Plaintiff Croo. 1. last publisht 148. 20. Case 239 Action upon the Case was brought for these words Thou art forsworn and I will make thee flowre the Pillory or else it shall cost me a hundred Charge of Perjury pound Et per totam curiam an Action lyes not for Anderson said There is a great difference betwirt the words