VValkenden and Haycock.
Mich. 1654. Banc. sup.
VPon a Verdict given for the Plaintif in an Action upon the case for these words spoken of a Millener in London,* 1.1 viz. Thou art in a break∣ing and decayed condition, and I will prove it, and if you question me, I will prove it to your disgrace. Twisden moved for judgement for the Plaintif, because he held the words are actionable; for by the speaking of them the Plaintif is disgraced in his profession; for in common understanding the words amount to as much as if he had said that the party is a Bankrupt, and it is so averred in the Record, and found by the Iury, and he cited Mich. 1651 Tayler and Keisers case, and Smith and Rookes case 24 Car. Wild on the other side said, that the words are not actionable,* 1.2 for they are adje∣ctive words, and of an incertain signification, for the words may as well mean that he is broke or burst in his body, as that he is a Bankrupt or broken in his estate; and there is no averment that the words were spoken in the hearing of tradesmen, and though they were, yet they may not tend to his disgrace, for a Tradesman may be in a decaying condition, in respect of what he hath formerly been, and yet have stock enough left to trade withall. The Court then enclined that the words were actionable, but for that time gave no judgement;* 1.3 but the case being moved again the same Term, judgement was given for the Plaintif.