BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £5, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
 |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
Scottish Court of Session Decisions |
||
|
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Scottish Court of Session Decisions >> Menzies v Goodlet [1835] CA 13_1136b (20 July 1835) URL: http://www.bailii.org/scot/cases/ScotCS/1835/013SS1136b.html Cite as: [1835] CA 13_1136b |
||
[New search] [Help]
Page: 1136↓
Subject_Reparation—Slander.—
In an action of damages for written defamation, by posting the pursuer as a coward and scoundrel, verdict for the pursuer, with £700 damages.
This was an action for written defamation. The defender admitted the authorship of the writings libelled on, and made a judicial tender of £30 in reparation of damages, besides expenses, which was refused. The following issues went to trial:—
“1. Whether, at Leith, on or about the 6th day of December, 1834, the defender did write and publish, or cause to be written and published, by placing the same in the Exchange Coffee-House, Leith, a writing, containing the following words, or words to the following effect, viz.—‘I hereby post Robert Dryborough Menzies as a coward and scoundrel. Geo. Goodlet. Leith, 6th December, 1834.’ And, Whether the whole, or any part of the said words, are of and concerning the pursuer, and falsely and calumniously hold up the pursuer to the contempt of the public, to the loss, injury, and damage of the pursuer?
“2. Whether, on or about the 10th day of December, 1834, the defender did compose or write, or prepare and print, publish, and circulate, or caused to be composed or written, or prepared, or printed and published, or circulated, at Leith, Edinburgh, and the vicinity, a certain paper, entitled, ‘Statement,’ * and subscribed George Goodlet, of which No. 13 of process is a copy: And, Whether the whole, or any part of the said statement, is of and concerning the pursuer, and falsely and calumniously holds up the pursuer as the author of certain anonymous letters, and thereby guilty of treacherous and dishonourable conduct, and warranting the defender in posting him as a coward and a scoundrel, to the loss, injury, and damage of the pursuer?
“Damages laid at £7000.”
The pursuer led evidence to show that the statement in question had been extensively circulated, and that certain engravers, whom the defender consulted, had given it as their opinion, comparatione literarum, that the pursuer was not the writer of the anonymous letters mentioned in the second issue.
The defender led no evidence.
The Jury found for the pursuer on both the issues, and assessed damages at £700.
Solicitors: Hugh Bremner, W.S.— Wm. Alexander, W.S.—Agents.
_________________ Footnote _________________
* The Statement here referred to contained a narrative of the grounds on which the defender considered himself justified in posting the pursuer in the manner described in the first issue.
