Homer v Taunton
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 08 May 1860 |
| Date | 08 May 1860 |
| Court | Exchequer |
English Reports Citation: 157 E.R. 1344
IN THE COURTS OF EXCHEQUER AND EXCHEQUER CHAMBER
S. C. 29 L. J. Ex. 319;8 W. R. 499, 2 L. T. 512
hombs, v. taunton May 8, 1860 -In an action for a libel imputing to the plaintiff that he was a " truckmaster," there being no innuendo to explain the meaning of the word . Held, that although tbe word was not to be found in any English dictionary, yet, as it was composed of two well known English worda, the plaintiff was not bound to give evidence of its meaning, nor the Judge to explain it to the jury; but that it was properly left to them to say whether, under all the circumstances, it was used in a defamatory sense. [S. C. 29 L. J. Ex. 319; 8 W. E. 499, 2 L. T. 512 ] Libel. The first count of the declaration stated that the plaintiff, before and at the time of the committing of the grievances, &c. carried on the business of a manufacturer of hosiery and the trade of a grocer in the parish of East Shilton, and near the parish of Hinkley, and before the committing the said grievances the plaintiff, in his said business of a manufacturer of hosiery, employed divers framework knitters and other workmen. And the defendant thereupon falsely and maliciously printed and published of the plaintiff, as such manufacturer and grocer, in a newspaper called, to wit, tbe Midland Express, the false and malicious words following, that is to say, (the declaration then set out the libel, which contained the following passages)-" It is again our painful duty to announce to the public that the conduct of Messrs. Homer" (meaning the plaintiff) " and Everard, of East Shilton, has compelled their workpeople to cease from labour and appeal for support to the working classes of the district, and, in fact, to the workmen of other districts, and to all who have any sympathy with the poor and the oppressed. The district of Hinkley [662] has long been known for the extreme propriety of the framework knitters, and when we state that the wages of the above class of operatives do not average more than three shillings or six shillings per week, and that men with families cannot earn more than six or eight shillings per week, clear from deductions; it will be seen how cruel and 5 E. ft If 663. HOMER V. TAUNTON 1345 heartless those " (meaning the plaintiff and the said Everard) " must be who attempt to reduce their wages still farther, &c. It is^ therefore, the duty of the men to resist the encroachments of Messrs. Homer" (meaning the plaintiff) "and Everard, and to maintain the present rate of wages. Mr. Homer" (meaning the plaintiff) " who is a truckmaster should, from his position, have been one...
To continue reading
Request your trial