Scottish Court of Session Decisions

This was an action of damages in respect of a circular issued by the defender to his customers in the following terms:—

“Steam Mills, Musselburgh, July 1865.

Dear Sir,—William A. Inglis, who recently acted as agent for the sale of my flour in your district, intimates to me that he has got a number of my empty sacks into his possession, for which he demands payment, or as many of his sacks in lieu thereof. Presuming that these sacks must have come into his hands by some irregularity of some of my customers, I now beg you to be careful, when returning my sacks, to put on the full name and

Page: 184↓

address—John Inglis, Steam Mills, Musselburgh Should you not be careful on this point it may lead to trouble in settling up—Yours, &c.

(Signed) John Inglis, p. Robt. Lambert.”

On the adjustment of issues it was maintained by the defender that there was no relevant matter to warrant an issue, the latter not being of a calumnious character, and the pursuer not being entitled to inuendo calumnious intent, which could on no reasonable construction be inferred from the words used. The pursuer, on the other hand, having inuendoed calumnious intent on the record, denied the competency of the Court to judge of the soundness of the inuendo.

The Court repelled the defender's objection, and granted an issue, the Lord Justice-Clerk observing that in a case of written slander, where it is alleged that a writing has been circulated, it is of no consequence whatever to represent that the terms of the letter are apparently perfectly innocent if the pursuer alleges and offers to prove that the writing conveyed, and was intended to convey, to others an injurious charge against him. The following is the issue which was adjusted.

“Whether the defender in or about July 1865 wrote and circulated among the pursuer's customers a letter in the terms set forth in the schedule hereunto annexed: whether the said circular is of and concerning the pursuer; and falsely and calumniously represents that the pursuer having without right or title obtained a number of the defender's empty sacks, dishonestly retained said sacks, and dishonestly refused to give them up to the defender, to the loss, injury, and damage of the pursuer.”