
    Bonner vs. Boyd.
    
      • ' 1 Appeal from Baltimore County Court. This was an action pf slander, and the words charged in the declaration tp have been spoken, were, that “he (meaning the plaintiff, now appellant,) had stolen my horse, and brought him home this morning.” “His partner stole my pocket bookj and there is the man, (pointing at and meaning thereby him the plaintiff,) who stole my horse and brought him home this morning.” Also “that he, (meaning the plaintiff,) had stolen my horse, and brought him home this morning.” The general issue was pleaded. On the trial the plaintiff proved that the defendant, (now appellee,) amongst a crowd of people, assembled at a public vendue, said, pointing at the plaintiff, “there is the man who stole my-horse,.and fetch» %d him home yesterday morning.” The defendant then moved the court to direct the jury, that the plaintiff was not entitled to recover. And the Court, f"Nicholson Oh. J. and Jones, A, J.jj gave the direction. The plaintiff ex- ' ceptedj and the verdict and judgment béing against him, he appealed to this court, where the cause was argued before Buchanan, KaSle, and Johnson, J.
    
      In an action of ¿lander the plaintiff proved that she defendant, amongst a‘crowd, ol people assern-. tied, said, point-ingot the nlaintiff8 there ti? the mat}, mho ' stole my /torse, and fetched Aim home yester* day morning— .Meld, that the words were geti. tumble.
    
      Winder, for the Appellant,
    contended, that the words spoken were actionable; and that the Offence alleged against the plaintiff brought him in danger of legal punishment,
    
      Boyd, for the Appellee,
    cited 2 Esp. Dig. 497, 498, Bull. N. P. 5. And contended chat the words spoken imported but a trespass, and oot an act which could make the plaintiff liable to a criminal prosecution.
   ■.reBGMfiST REVERSED, AND PROCEDENDO AWARDED»  