4 Ky. 165 | Ky. Ct. App. | 1808
OPINION of the Court, by
-Hume declared against Arrasmith, stating that the plaintiff was of good fame, &c. and had been, and was the keeper of “ a public water grist-mill,” but that the said defendant, not ignorant, &c. had spoken of the plaintiff these words : “ John Hume (the plaintiff meaning) ijtole corn, and I (the defendant meaning) can prove it; he (the said plaintiff meaning) is a rogue and not fit to keep a mill.”—
To this the defendant pleaded not guilty, and also justified, and thereupon issues were joined.
The plaintiff to support his action, “ proved that the defendant had. said of the plaintiff that he had stolen corn, *and he (the defendant) could prove it ; and that he had sent his corn to the plaintiff’s mill, and weighed it before he sent it and weighed it on its return, and that it was lacking.”
To this evidence the defendant objected, and on his motion, the court directed the jury to find as in case of a nonsuit; the propriety of which direction is the question before this court.
We can only conjecture the grounds upon v/nich the defendant’s objection to the testimony was sustained,
Judgment reversed.