coke Report17a james v RUTLECH Michaelmas term Elizabeth in the king bench SC  more SC cite send for roll still r h Bl t r maul and S Selw n p n Chit plead n  Chit c l vin Abr you a pl I b pl m b pl innuendo a pl Com dig action case for  defamation d f Bac Abr slander r contra cro James see the note and reference  infra hang he hang he he be full of the pox I marvel you will eat or drink  with he I will prove that be be full of the pox innuendo the French pox hold  that this innuendo do not do its proper office for it endeavour to extend the  general word the pox to the French pox and by imagine a intent which be not  apparent by any precedent word to which the innuendo shall refer and the word  themselves shall be take in mild sensum in action for slander two thing be  requisite saint that the person scandalize be certain and that the scandal be  apparent from the word themselves the office of a innuendo be to designate a  person who have be name in certain before and in effect it stand in place of  prediction but it can make a person certain who be before uncertain nor can it  alter or extend the meaning of the word themselves the plaintiff declare that  the defendant and one John bonner have conference of the plaintiff the  defendant say of the plaintiff to the say John bonner these word hang he  prediction Johan James innuendo he be full of the pox innuendo the French a  pox I marvel that you pillage Johan bonner innuendo will eat coke Report17b or  drink with he prediction Johan James innuendo I will prove that he be full of  the pox innuendo the French pox the defendant plead not guilty and it be find  for the plaintiff and damage assess and it be move in arrest of judgement that  the word be not actionable and it be resolve that in every action on the case  for slanderous word two thing be requisite that the person who S scandalize be  a certain that the scandal be apparent by the word themselves a and therefore  if one say without any precedent communication that one of the servant of I S  he have many be a notorious felon or traitor c here for the uncertainty of the  person no action lie and a b innuendo g postea a side Cr James more Cr  Elizabeth ld raym vin Abr action d a pl that slander of title under a claim of  right be not actionable Gerrard v Dickenson post   Acc ld raym Hargrave v Le  Breton burr smith v Spooner taunt Pitt v Donovan maul and S wood vin Abr  action d a pl Com dig action case defamation c Bac Abr slander c ante I p b u  n and the book there cite ED king S p vin Abr action d a pl ED a Cr Elizabeth  Cr James palm a more Selw n p n vin Abr action m b pl a S p vin Abr action m b  pl see ante p a n S ED b side march roll Rep Cr car a Bulst roll Rep hut Cr  James Cr Elizabeth coke report b er p can make it certain b so if one say  general I know one near about I S that be a notorious thief or such like but  when the person be once name in certain as if two speak together of I S one  say he be a notorious thief there I S in his declaration many show that there  be speech of he between they two and that one say of he he innuendo predict I  S be a notorious thief for the office of a innuendo be to contain and design  the same person who be name in certain before and in effect stand in lieu of a  predict but a innuendo can make a person certain who be uncertain before c for  it will be inconvenient that hob alein style Yelv hut roll hetl Cas in l e  post a see the book cite in n c infra b Acc Cowp t r Bac Abr slander r see n c  infra ED c S p king v Griepe salk Lord raym Mod cite ante p a will S east maul  and S Selw n p that edit Chit c l vin Abr action I b pl innuendo a pl Bac Abr  slander r so in Johnson v Aylmer cro James though the word appear clear to  have be speak of the plaintiff for he be name by his name Jeremy Johnson yet  because they be not allege to be speak of he but only by innuendo judgement be  reverse so in king v horn Cowp de grey CJ observe that a innuendo mean nothing  more than the word id be or scilicet that such a one mean one particular  person or such a particular thing and as it be only explanatory of matter  already express it can extend the sense of expression beyond their own meaning  unless something be put upon the record for it to explain thus the plaintiff  can charge that the defendant say of another he burn my barn add by way of  innuendo meaning my barn full of corn because this be not a explanation of  what be say before but a addition to it Barhams case post   a but have it be  aver in the introduction that the defendant have a barn full of corn and that  in a conversation respect that barn the word be utter the innuendo will have  be good and by couple the innuendo with the inducement the sense will have be  complete so in a action on the case for say that the plaintiff be forswear he  can by way of innuendo say meaning that he have perjure himself in his answer  to a bill file against he but have the declaration contain a colloquium  respect a answer aver to have be put in on oath by the plaintiff to a bill  file against he in which he be charge to be forswear the innuendo will have be  good hawk v hawkey east holt v Scholefield t r so where a libel prosecute  respect the management of the navy and in the introductory part it be describe  as of and concern the royal navy of this kingdom and the government of the say  navy though the term navy in the libel be only explain by the innuendo as  meaning the royal navy of this kingdom this be hold sufficient hark saint Tr  so in the king v matthews where the word of the libel be from the solemnity of  the chevalier birth and if hereditary right be any recommendation he have that  to plead in his favour the indictment charge they to have be write of and  concern the pretender and of and concern his right to the crown of great  Britain and the innuendo on the term chevalier c refer to this introductory  averment be hold a sufficient explanation to make good the charge Hargr saint  Tr in king v Alderton sayer SC cite Cowp which be a information for a libel on  the justice of Suffolk it be not state that the libel be of and concern the  justice of Suffolk but a innuendo be add aver that certain order mention in  the write mean order of the justice of the peace for the county of Suffolk the  court be of opinion that the information have omit the word c of and concern  the justice in the introductory part such omission be fatal and judgement be  arrest so in a indictment for a libel against W S omit to allege that the  defendant publish it of and concern W S it be hold that such omission be not  supply by its be allege in the introductory part that the defendant intend to  vilify W S be have be mayor of c cum and to cause it to be believe that as  such mayor he have practice corruption and coke report a er p action shall be  maintain by imagination of a intent which do not appear by the word upon which  the action be ground but be altogether uncertain and subject to deceivable  conjecture but if one say to I S thou art a c traitor c there constat de mask  and the action lie so here in the case at bar when the defendant and bonner  have speech of the plaintiff then when the defendant say hang he c there  innuendo will denote the same person name before but if the defendant without  any discourse of the plaintiff have say hang he c there no innuendo will have  make the person certain as to the second as a innuendo can make the person  certain which be uncertain before so a innuendo can alter the matter or sense  of the word themselves and therefore when the defendant in the case at bar say  of the plaintiff that he be full of the pox innuendo the French pox this  innuendo do not do its proper office for it endeavour to extend the general  word the pox to the French pox by imagination of a intent which be not  apparent by any precedent word to which the innuendo shall refer d and the  word themselves shall be take in d mild sensum e