Long v. Brougher
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
ERROR to the common pleas of Somerset county. Peter Brougher against Nathan Long. This was an action of slander in which the declaration laid the charge by the defendant to have been that the plaintiff had committed a crime against nature; Plea, Not guilty.
Read the full summary
ERROR to the common pleas of Somerset county. Peter Brougher against Nathan Long. This was an action of slander in which the declaration laid the charge by the defendant to have been that the plaintiff had committed a crime against nature; Plea, Not guilty. Upon the trial, the defendant offered to prove by a witness-, that four or five years ago, he heard thé plaintiff admit, that he had been guilty of a crime against nature, similar to the-one laid in the plaintifí ’s declaration, but upon the body of a different animal. The evidence was objected to and overruled; and the defendant excepted.…
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the Court was delivered by
Gibson, C. J.
The evidence contained in the first bill of exceptions, was clearly incompetent. It is perhaps still unsettled how far a defendant may show, on the general issue, circumstances tending to a conclusion of guilt, though short of an actual justification; but it has never been supposed that he may prove the perpetration of a distinct crime belonging to the same class, in mitigation of damages. It seems to be affirmatively settled that he cannot, by Smithies v. Harrison, 1 Ld. Raym. 727; Helsden v. Mercer, Cro. Jac. 677; Andrews v. Vanduser, 11…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Andrews v. VanduzerNew York Supreme Court · 1814
3Cited by7 opinions
- Thibault v. SessionsMichigan Supreme Court · 1894
- Conroe v. ConroeSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1864
- Lukehart v. ByerlySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1867
- Pease v. ShippenSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1877
- Moyer v. MoyerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1865
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.