Onslow v Horne
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 01 January 1779 |
| Date | 01 January 1779 |
| Court | Court of the King's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 96 E.R. 439
COURTS OF WESTMINSTER-HALL
Qualified, Lumbey v. Allday, 1831, 1 C. & J. 305. Considered, Miller v. David, 1874, L. R. 9 C. P. 125. Followed, Alexander v. Jenkins 1892, 1 Q. B. 797.
easter tkrm,-11 geo. III. 1771.-C, P. onslow v. horne. Charging a member of Parliament with want of sincerity, no ground for an action for words. [Qualified, Lumhey v. Allday, 1831, 1 C. & J. 305. Considered, Miller v. David, 1874, L. R. 9 C. P. 125. Followed, Alexander v. Jenkins [1892], 1 Q. B. 797.] S. C. 3 Wils. 177. Case, for a libel, and also for malicious and scandalous words spoken of the plaintiff. The libel was set sorth in htec verba, in four several counts. The fifth count (a) set forth, that the plaintiff, being knight of the shire for Surry, the defendant, on the 26th of June, 1769, at Epsom, in the presence of many freeholders assembled to consider of measures to be taken in support of the right of election, when it was proposed to instruct their members to take measures on that behalf, falsely and maliciously spoke the words following:-" I expected to have met George Onslow, but find he is not here; for which I am rather sorry, as I [751] came here with an intention to have told him my opinion of him. And if he would have waived his privilege, I would have waived my gown. I know him very well. I have carried letters from Mr. Onslow to Mr. Wiikes, full of professions of friendship and service, which were never-kept. Nor indeed is it to be wondered at; since it is notorious, he never kept his word, unless where his own interest was concerned. As to the instructing our members to obtain- redress, I am totally against the plan: for, as to instructing Mr. Onslow, we might as well instruct the winds; and should he even promise his assistance, I should not expect him to give it us." The sixth count charged only the words in italics^ without the introductory ones. On not guilty pleaded and issue joined, the jury,, at Kingston Summer Assizes, 1770, found their verdict for the defendant on the four first counts, and for the plaintiff on the two last, with 4001. damages. In Mich, term, 1770, Glyn moved in arrest of judgment, that the words were not actionable, especially those in the sixth count; and the verdict being taken generally on the fifth and sixth, if one fails, the action is gone, and was supported by Jephson. Whitaker and Leigh shewed cause, and the Court took time to consider till Hilary term, 1771...
To continue reading
Request your trial
- Goh Chok Tong; JB Jeyaretnam
-
Dinnegan v Ryan
... ... Defendants Citations: M'MULLAN V MULHALL & FARRELL 1929 1 IR 470 GATLEY LIBEL AND SLANDER 9ED 1998 119 ONSLOW V HORNE 3 WILS 177 MICHAEL V SPIERS & PONDE LTD 1909 101 LT 352 JARVIS V SWANS TOURS LTD 1973 1 AER 71 JOHNSON V LONGLEAT ... ...
-
Jeyaretnam v Goh Chok Tong
...Merivale v Carson (1888) 20 QBD 275 (folld) Muthusamy v Ang Nam Cheow [1979-1980] SLR (R) 188; [1978-1979] SLR 25 (refd) Onslow v Horne (1746) 2 Bl W 750; 96 ER 439 (refd) Robinson v Ward (1958) 108 LJ 491 (folld) Silkin v Beaverbrook Newspapers Ltd [1958] 1 WLR 743; [1958] 2 All ER 516 (fo......
-
McMullan v Mulhall and Farrell
... ... The declaration was held bad on demurrer. The Court dissented from a rule supposed to have been laid down by De Grey C.J. in Onslow v.Horne (3) , that words are actionable if they be of probable ill-consequence to a person in a trade or profession or office, and approved the ... ...