Bagley v. Johnston

38 S.C.L. 22
CourtCourt of Appeals of South Carolina
DecidedNovember 15, 1850
StatusPublished

This text of 38 S.C.L. 22 (Bagley v. Johnston) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of South Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Bagley v. Johnston, 38 S.C.L. 22 (S.C. Ct. App. 1850).

Opinion

Curia, per

O’Neall, J.

We concur in opinion with the Judge below.

To set out a libel “in substance as follows,” is admitted by all the authorities to be bad.

Starkie, in his Treatise on Slander, (p. 362,) says, “it has long been settled that the declaration, or indictment, must profess to set out the very words published, and that it is not sufficient to describe them by their sense, substance, and effect.”

The Court disclaims the power to alter any well settled principle of the common law. It is only when uncertain, or of doubtful application, that the Court may sometimes be considered as establishing a principle different from what may have been considered the law by others. But when the rule is clear, our duty is performed in declaring and enforcing it.

On a general demurrer, the Court has no power to grant a motion to amend. The judgment is final.

The motion to reverse the Circuit decision is dismissed.

Evans, Wardlaw, Füost and Withebs, JJ., concurred.

Motion refused.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
38 S.C.L. 22, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bagley-v-johnston-scctapp-1850.