#### Robert King’s case.

Mich. 2 Car.

HE brought an action on the case against Merick, for saying of him: I charge you, King, with felony, and you, Constable, (innuendo one Noscot,) to take him, and the words were said to have been spoken in London, and on non culp. pleaded, there was a verdict for the plaintiff. The defendant moved in arrest of judgment, because,

1. Here the words are not directly affirmative, that the plaintiff was a felon, and are unaccompanied with any act. *To which

Doderidge, J. and Jones, J. assented.

Doderidge, J. He may say ut supra, I charge you, &c. and it is not actionable. This differs from Hext’s case in 4 Rep. I doubt not, but within two days to arrest Hext, of suspicion of felony.

2. Felony may be intended mayhem.

Doderidge, J. and Jones, J. assented. For the count in mayhem is ut Jelo domini regis. Therefore the action does not lie. It is not like when a man says to another; thou art a felon.

Jones, J.

The words admit of a twofold construction, the one actionable, the other not. There is nothing either before or after, which may render an interpretation more probable than another, then, verba sunt accipienda in mitiori sensu. As if one says: Thou hast stolen my corn. No action lies, for it may be understood to be out of the field. But if he had said: Thou art a thief, and hast stolen my corn, it would be otherwise, on account of the preceeding words; and the judgment was arrested. Bendl. 202. Poph. 210. 3 Cr. 277. 1 Roll. 43.