Brownlow's Knoxville Whig. [volume] (Knoxville, Tenn.) 1866-1869, 1866-09-26
supreme Court opinion.
KsoxvIBEE, TkSSEssEE SEPTEMBER TEnx, 1855.
THOMAS II. CALDWELL, Attor7sey Genera


This action trespass brought the Circuit C,
the county Of Hancock by the defendant error azsn.
done property and person Of the defendant In
The declaration contains but aud che plain
of threats forced him to leave his home and fee the se
Whereby his dwelling house aud other prOpertv WA, 4.
stroyed The plea Of not guilty hled the declaration
1t appears from the proof in se the defendant with fifteen
excited, and some in the crowd said 10 Inc -
error if he did get on his Knees tbsv I 20
his head they come to drive the 0ue eqt On
town The defendant did not get down a. eors,s5 tn
much abusive language used by the crow, ~ b;b a.
plaintiff in formed part There vS M ~ sn sne
injury inflicted On the defendant in error or t,
the defendant left the and returned home @
he went to the State Of Kentucky, Joined the federal y
and out-houses destroyed; there is no
IN error mad any agencies in the destruction
on ths trial OF the cause the counsel for the planta s
objected to the proof going to the jury Of eepdant
70 q; anu ne o. ms property, unless
pantn IN error was connected with it, The objection
overruled and the evidence permitted 20 to the iurv Tn
court among other things not accepted charged the iuv
the plalntln IN error or the mob, or any Of them
while so assembled by their acts threats
the defendant in to leave his home fumy and
absent MS property was Destroyed the plaintiff in
will be liable for the destruction, provided Won are satisfied
from the testimony that the defendant in have
saseu ms properly II ne could have remained at home
verdict and Judgment rendered in favor the de-
endant IN error Tor 100; new trial moved for aud
refused the plaintiff in appealed to this court m.
charge Of the court this being
such special damage strictly the consequences Of th,
trespas committed. The done part
the commencement. 9Th Hump. l The per
hitting the proof to the jury that the defendant had
left for the State of Kentucky and the subsequent
ton Of his property unless appeared part Of the
original respass and transaction aud the panin error
present aiding and abetting in the destruction of the
property From examination Of the record there is no
proof to sustain the verdict of the jury. The plaintiff in
in crowd of when violent abusive lapruas
used to the defendant in by crowd
he not otherwise molesed disturbed
terry committed his person, other injury
few days thereafter he left his home for Kentucky during
his absence his home and buildings destroyed 1hs
proof the plaintiff in had agencies
in the destruction of the property is there any proof
he mosted used violent language the defendant in
he with the crowd what used the offensive epthe
party with which the plaintiff in associated they
having assembled for unlawful purpose the plaintiff
would have been responsible for the consequences
1t settled principle of this if there any evidence
to sustain the verdict 1t will not be disturbed In this
there is total want of evidence it ought have
aside and new trial granted, large discretion vested
the Circuit Judge in such and where the is not
sustained by the proofs ought to be set aside The
and quiet of the country greatly depends the proper
ercse of this discretion and before the history
country has il been important for the Circuit Judges
Of the State eduousy guard the trial by jury
that il does not become oppression rather than
justice unless the verdict sustained by the proof ought
in any stand
The Judgment is reversed and a trial awarded.
SHACKELFORD Judge
\ true copy, Test NJ. l.. Patterson, Clerk.