Adams v. Hannon

• Decision Date: 30 September 1833
• Citation: 3 Mo. 222
• Parties: ADAMS v. HANNON.
• Court: Missouri Supreme Court

3 Mo. 222

ADAMS

v.HANNON.

Supreme Court of Missouri.

September Term, 1833.

ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF BOONE COUNTY.

TOMPKINS, J.

Rachel Hannon, by Esam Hannan, her next friend (she being an infant under the age of twenty-one years), brought her action in the Circuit Court of Boone county, against Robert Adams, for words spoken, and had judgment. To reverse this judgment, Adams by writ of error brings the cause into this court. The declaration commences with an averment of the the plaintiff's good character and innocence, and then the plaintiff avers that the defendant to cause it to be suspected and believed that she was guilty of adultery, and to subject her to the pains and penalties of adultery spoke the words in the declaration charged; on account of which speaking she avers she has been suspected, and believed to be guilty of the crime of adultery. There are three counts to the declaration: the words charged to be spoken in each are the same, but spoken in different manners; they are, I (meaning Robert Adams) stroked her (meaning Rachel Hannon). There is no averment that the word used to convey the idea of carnal knowledge, was by the hearers or by those of the neighborhood where it was used, understood to convey that idea. After the jury was impanneled, and before the pleadings were opened, the defendant moved the court to strike out three counts of the declaration: the court refused to take up the motion before the pleadings were read to the jury; after they were read, the defendant renewed his motion and it was overruled. After the plaintiff's testimony was closed, the defendant introduced a witness to prove the general character of the plaintiff for chastity, amongst a majority of her neighbors with whom he had conversed. This witness stated that he had never resided in the neighborhood, but that he was frequently at the house of an uncle who resided as a near neighbor to the plaintiff before the commencement of this action, and had frequently remained there several days at a time, and heard several of the neighbors who were there express their opinion about the plaintiff's character, some of a favorable and others of an unfavorable kind: these being all the facts the witness had stated, the defendant asked the witness what was the character of the plaintiff for chastity among a majority of her neighbors, with whom he had conversed on that subject. The court, on motion of the plaintiff, refused to suffer the witness to answer the question. After verdict found for the plaintiff, the defendant moved the court to set aside the verdict, and for a new trial. First. Because the verdict was against law and evidence. Second. The damages were excessive. Third. Because the court refused to admit the defendant's testimony. This motion being overruled, the defendant moved in arrest of judgment, First. Because the declaration is wholly defective. Second. The words alleged gave no cause of action: this motion, too, was overruled.

It is assigned for error, First. That the court erred in refusing to hear the motion to strike out when it was first made. Second. The court erred in refusing to strike out the counts when the motion was heard. Third. The court erred in rejecting the evidence of general character offered by the defendant. Fourth. It erred in refusing a new trial. Fifth It erred in refusing to arrest the judgment.

The points to be decided are, First. Was the declaration good? Second. Was the evidence rejected of such a...