Mary Anne Quinn v Harriette Wilson

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 23 January 1850
• Date: 23 January 1850
• Court: Queen's Bench Division (Ireland)

Queenƒ€™s Bench

MARY ANNE QUINN

and

HARRIETTE WILSON.

Saunders v. Edwards 1 Siderf. 95, b.

Browne v. Gibbins Salk. 206.

May v. BrownENR 3 B. & C. 113.

Lewis v. WalterENR 3 B. & C. 138, n.

Cox v. Thomason and wifeENR 2 Cr. & J. 361.

Lumby v. Allday 1 Cr. & Jer. 501.

Ayre v. Craven 2 A. & E. 2.

Doyley v. RobertsENR 3 Bing. N. C. 835.

Dyster v. BattyeENR 3 B. & Ald. 448.

Pratt v. SwaineENR 8 B. & C. 285.

Sullivan v. White 6 Ir. Law Rep. 42.

Lumby v. Allday 1 Cr. & Jer. 301.

Ayre v. Craven 4 Nev. & Man. 220.

Brayne v. Cooper 5 Mee. & Wels. 249.

Lefanu v. Malcolmson 8 Ir. Law Rep. 429.

Bryant v. Loxton 11 Moo. 344.

Barrett v. Long 8 Ir. Law Rep. 331.

Smith v. Thomas 2 Scott, 556.

Whittington v. GladwellENR 5 B. & C. 181.

Southey v. DeeringENR 1 Exch. 196.

CASES AT LAW. 381 H. T. 1850. Queen's Bench MARY ANNE QUINN v. HARRIETTE WILSON. Jan 23. To a declaraÂÂtion for slander imputing to the plaintiff, a governess, proÂÂfligate and imÂÂ" said time, and long before, did use and exercise the business or proper con duct in her " employment of a domestic servant, and a servant having the situation as such, the deÂÂ" charge of and attendance on children and young ladies, and there- Pendant plead. ed that " she " by acquired certain gains, and had always conducted herself with was not guilty ofthe said " decorum, chastity, modesty and propriety ; that the plaintiff; before supposed any grievances at "the speaking and publishing of the words hereinafter mentioned by time with- "the in the defendant, had lived in the families of divers persons, to wit in two yearsnext before "the family of W. F. G. and others respectively, as such servant, - the commence of this " and at the time, &c., was and continued to be such servant as suit." Held, that the words "aforesaid in the family of the said W. F. G., and had the charge of being action. able per se " and attendance on young ladies, daughters of the said W. F. G.; were the gist of the action, " and that a short time before, &c., the plaintiff had gone to Scotland and that the "on a visit to her brother." The count then charged that the plea was good. 66 defendant, envying, &c., and contriving to prejudice the plainÂÂtiff in her good name, fame and credit, and in her business and service, and to cause her to be reputed an unchaste, immodest, indecorous and improper person, and unfit to be employed in such service, to wit, at &c., in a certain discourse which the defendant had with and in the presence and hearing of divers persons of and concerning the plaintiff, and of her character and her fitness for her said service and business, and of her behaviour while she lived as aforesaid in the service of the said W. F. G., falsely and maliÂÂciously in the presence and hearing of the said persons spoke and published of and concerning the plaintiff; and her character and fitness, &c., the false, scandalous, &c., words following :-" She went " to Scotland to be confined of a child to her master ; have nothing " to do with that wicked profligate ; she has been living improperly 382 CASES AT LAW. " with Mr. G. ; she must be dismissed and turned out of doors; she " has had a child to him, and is...