
    Anderson vs. Johnson.
    ’ Appeal From Saint Mary's County Court. This was art action of assault and battery, brought by the present appellee. The defendánt, (the now appellant,)' pleaded not gúííty, anil son assault demesne, upon which issues were joined. Tlie defendant at the trial offered to give in evidence, ill mitigation of damages, that the plaintiff had grossly abused two persons, friends of his, G P Q and C E, one of whom, G P G, was then present^ and under recognizance to keep the peace, the other absent; and to prove the abuse against them untrue and false, offered to give evidence of the quarrel, and the original cause thereof, between the plái'ntiff and (JPG, which happened sometime anterior to the assault and battery for which the present suit was instituted. This evidence Was objected to by the plaintiff. But the county court, {Key and Clarke, A. J.) overruled the objection in part, and permitted the defendant to give in evidence the whole of the quarrel between' the plaintiff and G P G, and the abusive language of the plaintiff to G P G and C E, but refused to permit him to give evidence of the truth or falsehood of the abusive and reproachful language used by the plaintiff to &P G and CE. The defendant excepted; and the verdict and judgment being against him, he appealed to this court.
    In as’sault ami battery the ' defendant ' pleaded won culxnüsonas'sault demesne-, and ’ su mitigation of damages* offered to give in eviripnee, that the plaintiff had grossly abused two «'arsons, friends of the defendant; and to prove the abuse against them untrue and false, offered to gMe evidence of the quar* tel, and the origi* xva! cause thereof between the plaintiff and the de fendant’á friends, which happened sometime anterior to the assault and lisxttet y — Helih that flie evidence was inadmissible
    The cause was argued before Chase, Ch. J. Polk, Buchanan, and Gantt, J. by
    
      Chapman, for the Appellant;
    and by
    
      IV. Dorsey, for the Appellee.
   Chase, Ch. J.

The court are of opinion, that the county court went too far in permitting the defendant below to .give in evidence the quarrel stated' in the exception, and that they did right in refusing to permit him to give in evidence the residue of what he offered to prove.

JUDGMENT AFFIRMED.  