Scottish Court of Session Decisions

William Marshall, of the firm of Marshall, Hutchinson, and Company, merchants in London, was connected in business with the house of Gamack and Forbes, of Peterhead. In autumn, 1834, when Marshall was at Peterhead, he had occasion to adjust accounts between his firm and that of Gamack and Forbes, who expressed some dissatisfaction towards the London firm, or some of the partners. This was followed up by a note from William James Anderson, merchant in Peterhead, to Marshall, submitting what he termed a statement of facts, on the part of Gamack and Forbes, relative to their grounds of dissatisfaction. He had been requested by Gamack and Forbes to do this. Marshall found it expedient to delay a full explanation on this subject, apparently until he should communicate with his partners in London, and Anderson thereon wrote to him, impeaching him of seeking, in a “cowardly manner,” to evade explanation; and using other injurious and insulting expressions. These expressions were marked with emphasis, by being underscored. Marshall was a respectable man, of older standing than Anderson; and, on receiving the letter, he rose from a card-table, where he was sitting, and went instantly to the shop of Anderson, which was at a very short distance. He held out the letter in his hand, and, on Anderson acknowledging it as his, Marshall, in the heat of the moment, not only called him a damned low mean puppy, and a blackguard, and used similar terms, but gave him a blow on the breast. It did not appear that the blow had occasioned any personal injury.

Anderson raised an action of damages, concluding for £5000, in modum solatii, and in reparation of the injury sustained by him.

The following issue went to trial:-

“ Whether, in the shop of the pursuer at Peterhead, on or about the 6th day of September, 1834, the defender violently assaulted and struck the pursuer, to the loss, injury, and damage of the pursuer?”

In charging the Jury, the