Poppenheim v. Wilkes

O’Neall J.,

dissenting. In this case, I dissent from the opinion delivered by my brother Withers, on the grounds,

1st. That the testimony rejected by the Judge below, was admissible as a ground of suspicion.

2d. The words proved, as they ought to have been under, stood from the whole conversation, meant no more than that the plaintiff had been indicted for calf stealing, and were not actionable; I am therefore in favor of a new trial.