
    Giles Andrews vs. Wyllis Bartholomew.
    In an action of slander, the defendant cannot give evidence, in mitigation of damages, that the plaintiff has been hostile to him for a long time, and has proclaimed that he did not wish to live in peace and on good terms with him.
    At the trial of this action, which was for slander, the defendant offered to prove, in mitigation of damages, that the plaintiff had, for several years, been hostile to the defendant, and had proclaimed that he did not wish to live in peace and on good terms with him. The evidence was rejected, and a verdict returned for the plaintiff. The defendant alleged exceptions.
    
      Porter 8f Sumner, for the defendant.
    
      Byington, for the plaintiff.
   By the Court.

The fact offered to be shown had no tendency to disprove malice in the defendant, nor for any reason to mitigate the damage. It was immaterial and rightly rejected. (See Craig v. Catlet, 5 Dana, 323. Goodbread v. Ledbetter, 1 Dev, & Bat. 12.)

Judgment on the verdict.  