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
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
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
man For and against whom and where this Action will lye or not for such a wrong these things are to bée known 1. That the King is within the Statute of Westm cap. 34. but not within the Statute of 2. R. 2. cap. 5. and 12. R. 2. cap. 12. Dyer 155. 2. That the persons that are to have this Writ are declared to be Prelates Dukes Earls Barons and other Nobles and Grandées of the Realm and also the Chancelour Treasurer Clerk of the Privy-Seal Lord Guardian of the Cinque Ports and of the Kings Privy-Council Steward of the Kings Houshold Justice of the one and of the other Bench and other the great Officers of the Realm 2. R. 2. cap. 5. Westm 1. 34. Dyer 155. in Hetleys Rep. 55. 3. That for this it matters not for the manner of contrivance or publication How this slander may be contrived and published of it which way the words or reports be published either by spéech or writing either spoken or written from a mans own knowledge and from himself or by the report of another And by writing either delivered to the party himself or to another or hanged up in any open place or by Libels or by any other extrajudicial way whatsoever See in Hetley Rep. 55. But this lyeth not against any man for any thing done by him in a judicial way as for bringing a Writ or for having a Suit for forging of déeds or other Cause in a legal way or for preferring and prosecuting of a Legal Indictment or an Appeal of Murder Robbery or the like offence albeit the Charge be false And whiles the Starr-Chamber-Court was in being a Bill might have béen brought against any such great man for any thing whereof the Court had Conusance as against another but for preferring any Charge in that Court for any thing whereof the Court had not Conusance a man might have had this Action Or for a Conspiracy to indict such a man the Defendant or party indicted may have the same remedy against the Plaintiff and Conspirators as another man may have Crompt Jur. 13. Coo. 2. part Iust 228. Coo. 4. 14. Fitz. Disceit 35. Dyer 285. Kelw. 27. in Hetley Rep. 55. For what this Action may bee laid Or not Sect. 2. 4. For the Matter and Quality of this Slander take this That the words or rumours uttered against great men for which this Action is given 1. Must be false and horrible 2. Such as by which discord or slander may arise betwéen the King and his people or the Grandées of the Realm Westm 2. cap. 24. Or between the Lords and Commons 2. R. 3. cap. 53. by which great peril and mischief may come to all the Realm 3. Such as tend to the destruction of the Realm Coo. 12. 134. And if any do hear or shall hear any such words by the report of another it will not be safe for him to report them again Coo. 12. 136. It hath béen adjudged and resolved for the words uttered as in the Cases following viz. For saying Thy Lord is a Traitor and I will prove him a Traitor Vicount Sayes Case In Leyes Rep. 82. Croo. 1. 96. And for this My Lord of Winchester sent for mee and imprisoned mee till I entred into bond of twenty pound to the Kings use The Bishop of Twenty pound Winchesters Case Croo. 1. last publisht See it in Leonard Rep. 336. 2. H. 8. So for saying My Lord is a base Earl and a paultry Lord and keepeth none but Rogues and Rascals like himself Earl of Lincolns Case Trin. 5. Jac. B. R. Yet see Croo. Rep. 2. 196. So for saying You bring in Jesuits and Papists into the Realm c. Earl of Northamptons Case Coo. 12. 136. So for saying You maintain sedition against the Kings proceedings Or you uphold and countenance them that do so Coo. 4. 13. So for this You are a Traitor to your Prince or Rebel against him Lord Monteagles Case M. 9. Jac. B. R. So for this It is your grief that you are a subject County of Salops Case M. 40. 41. Eliz. B. R. So for this You charged them that transport or import Merchandizes to or from such a place that they should not pay custome for it nor suffer the customers to search them Old Book of Entries 593. So for this You have no more conscience than a Dog so you have goods you care not how you come by them Duke of Buckinghams Case M. 4. H. 8. Rot. 659. Or to a Chief Justice You are a Corrupt Judge Cromp. Jur. 35. So for this You said you would wind my guts about your neck Lord Abergavenie's Case Cromp. Jur. 13. So also it is thought of these words You are used to do things against Law to impound the Subjects beasts and keep them in a Castle that they cannot be replevied but to say that hée did so once will not bear an Action Duke of Buckinghams Case So for this You have sent Commissioners to spoil the Country where hée sent Commissioners to make Leases of his Land and improve his Rents Duke of Buckinghams Case So for this My Lord of Abergavenie sent for us and put some of us in the stocks sent some of us into the Gaol and put some of us into the house called Little Ease Hill 19. Eliz. the Lord Abergavenies Case See it in Croo. 1. last publisht 192. and Leonards Rep. 336. And so generally of any words of an ordinary mans spoken will give him an Action being spoken to such an eminent person will much more give him this Action Coo. 12. 132 134. Leys Rep. 32. But it is said It will not lye in these Cases and for these words following viz. The Earl of Lincolns men by his commandment did take the goods of one Hoskins by a forged warrant because it was not said hée knew the Warrant to be forged Goldsb 115. See more of this Subject Leys Rep. 82. In the Case of the Earl of Northampton Mich. 10. Jac. B. R. It was as it is said amongst other things resolved in the Starre-chamber 1. That the publishing of false Rumours either concerning the King or of the high Grandées of the Realm may in some Cases be punished by the Common Law So as 1. The words and rumours be false and horrible by which discord or slander may arise betwixt the King and his People or the Grandées of the Realm West 2. cap. 24. or betwéen the Lords and Commons 2 R. 2. cap. 53. by which great peril and mischief may come to all the Realm 2. The persons against whom the words be spoken must be Prelates Dukes Earls Barons and other Grandées and Nobles of the Realm and also the Chancelour Treasurer Clerk of the Privy-Seal Steward of the Kings houshold Iustice of the one and of the other Bench. 2. R. 2. cap. 5. Westm 1. 34. Dyer 5. 2. It was resolved that if one hear such false and horrible rumours either of the
Plaintiff declared Slander of a title to Land That his Brother dyed seized of Land in Fée and dyed seized thereof without issue and the Land descended to him as Heir and that he had a purpose to settle part of it upon his Son and to make Leases of part of it and that the Defendant to frustrate his intent used these words The Plaintiff hath no more right to the Land than a stranger It was adjudged against the Plaintiff because he did not shew any cause of losse that he was about to make a Lease or assurance of it to his Son but that he had an intent only Croo. 2. 397. 337. Owens Rep. 32. Pophams Rep. 187. Case 167. Trin. 18 Jac. B. R. Action for these words the Plaintiff alledged That 1. April 17 Jac. hée was a Merchant and the said 1. April 17 Jac. the Defendant spake these words of the Plaintiff Hee is a Bankrupt Bankrupt slave the Defendant justifies because 1 April 17 Jac. the Plaintiff became bankrupt but adjudged the words actionable and the Defendants Bar insufficient because he doth not alledge he continueth still a bankrupt for it may be he afterwards recovered himself and became a good Merchant judgement for the Plaintiff Usher and Bretts Case Croo. 2. 578. Case 168. Trin. 22 Jac. in C. B. Action for these words Thou art as arrant a Indirect words Theft thief as is any in England for thou hast broken up I. S. his chest and taken away forty pound After verdict and motion to arrest the Iudgement it was adjudged the first words without any Averment will not maintaine an Action and the last words doe not prove any Felony committed and the money may be taken away and the Chest broken open upon pretence of Tithe and in mid-day in the presence of divers and then it is no felony Iudgement was for the Defendant and there this Case was put by Hobbard Thou art a thief for thou hast stoln away my corn not actionable but if he say For thou hast stoln my corn contra Foster and Brownings Case Croo. 2. 687. Case 169. The Plaintiff being an Attorney in B. R. for one Ecombridge prosecuted for him a Latitat against Lord which he delivered to the Sheriff Slander of a Lawyer upon which Lord was arrested The Defendant having spéeches with Ecombridge concerning the Plaintiff and his honesty as an Attorney and concerning the said Latitat ex malitia praecogitata said these words of the Plaintiff Go tell your Lawyer Roberts that I say hee is a base Rascal and I will make him lose his ears and I will teach him or any Lawyer of them all to have a Writ served on mee Vpon not guilty it was found for the Plaintiff And upon debate between the Iudges it was resolved that the words were actionable Trin. 3. Car. 1. Rott 1170. in B. R. Roberts and Lords Case Ley. 70. Case 170. Action for words The Plaintiff declared that one named Carolus being Charge of Perjury Incertainty of good fame and name the Defendant said â—e prefato Carolâ— Where is this Baker Innuendo Caroius Baker hee hath taken a false oath and I could make him look through the Pillory It was moved that the Innuendo Innuendo will not make it good there being no Baker spoken of before But the opinion of the Court was The Declaration was good And if one say of a Counsellour Where is this Counsellour Innuendo such a one it is good Adjudged for the Plaintiff Trin. 13. Jac. in B. R. Bakers Case Bulstrod 3. part 72. Case 171. Action brought for these words Sir Herbert Crofts keepeth men to rob mee the truth was that the Defendant was robbed by two of Sir Herbert Hee keepeth men to rob mee Crofts men and upon this the Defendant spake the words But the Defendant doth not say That hée did kéep them so to do It was agréed by Cook Chief Iustice and all the Court that the Action would not lye for those words for that there is done and it is to be intended his kéeping of them to be lawfull and the words to rob mee this is but an intent and Inclination and purpose no Act and an intent without an act is not punishable and Hill 39. Eliz. in C. B. Snag and Gee's Case was vouched by Cook where the words were Thou hast killed my Wife and it appeared the Wife was then living Adjudged the words not actionable in the principal Case it being found for the Plaintiff the Iudgement was arrested because the words were not actionable Pasche 14. Jac. B. R. Sir Herbert Crofts and Browns Case Bulstr 3. part 161. Case 172. In an Action upon the Case for words it was found for the Plaintiff Charge of Theft It was laid in the Declaration cum quidam malifactores ignoti had feloniously shorn the shéep of J. S. upon a Communication had betwéen the Defendant and another touching the shearing of these shéep the Defendant spake these words I do know who did shear the sheep predict J. S. Innuendo General and incertain words the other desired of her who this was shee answered It was the Plaintiff and M. that did shear them Innuendo Felonice it was upon Innuendo motion for stay of Iudgement adjudged that the words were not actionable and that the general words shall not be restrained to particular and the Innuendo will not help it And in the Declaration it is laid there was Communication betwixt the Defendant and another concerning the shearing of the shéep but not concerning the Felony And it is not said that shée did know who did shear the shéep feloniously but who did shear them generally and the scandal grows out of an inference only which ought not to be to make words actionable but the words themselves ought to be directly scandalous Iudgement was arrested Mich. 13. Jac. B. R. Helly and Henders Case Balstr 3. part 83. Case 173. Hill 9. Jac. Rott 832. B. R. Action for these words Thou art a Bankerupt Bankerupt Rogue Knave Theef Rogue and accounted a common Knave and thou art a Theef and hast stoln my Corn. Adjudged the first words were not actionable but the second were but because the Iudgement was intire and the damages intire the Iudgement was reversed upon a Writ of Errour Damages entire brought Lloyd and Pearses Case Croo. 2. part 424. Case 174. In an Action upon the Case for words it was found upon not guilty for the Plaintiff The words spoken by the Defendant to the Plaintiff Charge of Forgery were these viz. Thou hast forged Writings for which thou shouldest lose thy ears It was laid in the Declaration that the Plaintiff was a Practitioner Solicitor and Steward of a Mannor The Court was divided in opinion For Mountague Chief Iustice and Crook were of opinion that the words were actionable for although the first words of Charge indirect themselves are not actionable yet