case brian nelson son and heir of Thomas Nelson against staff a action recite  that a be seize in fee marry b and have issue c between who and one d there be  a communication concern marriage and that the defendant say have that bastard  c arrest you per quod c lose his marriage be maintainable although the word be  interrogative and it be not aver that c be the son of a or that a be not seize  in fee when the slander be speak ante post   error in action upon the case  bring in the common plea for word whereas Thomas Nelson be and yet be seize in  fee of land to the value of one hundred pound per annum and be espouse to  Elizabeth and have issue betwixt they the plaintiff and whereas communication  be betwixt the plaintiff and one mary Syvedale concern a marriage between he  and the say mary and he be offer in marriage with the say mary six hundred  pound that the defendant on purpose to scandalize he and to hinder he of his  say marriage have communication with I S of the plaintiff say these word of  the plaintiff videlicet have that bastard Brian Nelson cause you to be arrest  be that all the spite that bastard can do you by reason of which word he lose  his marriage c the defendant plead not guilty and find against he to his  damage one hundred pound and judgement give for the plaintiff that these word  notwithstanding they be speak in this manly by interrogation be actionable a  writ of error be bring the error assign be first because the word be not  actionable second because it be not show that he be son and heir of Thomas  Nelson at the time of speak the word but only name he son and heir by way of  addition in the beginning three he do not say that Thomas Nelson be seize of  those land at the time of the word speak but say only quod to be et thus far  seisitus be croak James er p say non allocatur for this action be not for  slander his title which peradventure will not be without these circumstance  precise show as it be in Bannesters case   a but it be for hinder he of his  marriage which he have lose by reason of these word and whereof a man may be  hinder by reason of the stain in his blood and which action peradventure he  may have although he have not any land at all and it be but a inducement and  needs not such precise certainty and for the word themselves they all resolve  that they be speak affirmative and not only by interrogation and they be such  a slander by these circumstance show that he lose his marriage by reason  thereof and therefore the action well lie and the judgement be affirm