Colloquium

In actions for libel or slander, the averment that the language in question was published or uttered of and concerning the plaintiff. It is, however, frequently used in practice to denote both the inducement (g. v.), and the co Uoquim proper. Towns. Libel & Slander, § 323. It is to be distinguished from "innuendo," which is an explanation by reference to that which has been already sufficiently explained, and cannot extend the meaning of words unless there be something before averred, to which the innuendo may refer. 5 Johns. (N. Y.) 220.

A general averment in an action for slander connecting the whole publication with the previous statement. 1 Stark. SI. 431; Heard, Lib. & SI. 228; or stating that the whole publication applies to the plaintiff, and to the extrinsic matters alleged in his declaration. 1 Greenl. Ev. § 417. An averment that the words were spoken "of or concerning" the plaintiff, where the words are actionable in themselves. 6 Term 162; Ellis v. Kimball, 16 Pick. (Mass.) 132; Cro. Jac. 674; or where the injurious meaning which the plaintiff assigns to the words results from some extrinsic matter, or of and concerning, or with reference to, such matter; Bloss v. Tobey, 2 Pick. (Mass.) 328; Carter v. Andrews, 16 Pick. (Mass.) 1; 11 M. & W. 2S7. An averment that the words in question are spoken of or concerning some usage, report, or fact which gives to words otherwise indifferent the peculiar defamatory meaning assigned to them. Shaw, C. J., Carter v. Andrews, 16 Pick. (Mass.) 6. Whenever words have the slanderous meaning alleged, not by their own intrinsic force, but by reason of the existence of some extraneous fact, this fact must be averred in a traversable form, which averment is called the inducement. There must then be a colloquium averring that the slanderous words were spoken of or concerning this fact. Then the word "meaning," or innuendo, is used to connect ence from the whole declaration, that such was, under the circumstances thus set out, the meaning of the words used. Per Shaw, C. J., Carter v. Andrews, 16 Pick. (Mass.) 6. By the Com. L. Proc. Act (1852) in England the colloquium has been rendered unnecessary. See Innuendo; Odger, Lib. & SI.

2. 2. Conversation; discourse. in slander which avers that the words plaintiff, — in a certain discourse or quio which he had with others, or with the of others.

One of the usual parts of the declaration in an action for slander. It is a general averment that the words complained of were spoken “of and concerning the plaintiff,” or concerning the extrinsie matters alleged in the inducement, and its offiee is to connect the whole publication with the previous statement. An averment that the words in question are spoken of or concerning some usage, report, or fact which gives to words otherwise indifferent the peculiar defamatory meaning ussigned to them. 16 Pick. 6.

A speaking together: a conversation. An averment, in an action for slander, that the defendant spoke the words in a certain conversation {in quodam colloquio) he had with another person, concerning the plaintiff. When the words are actionable in themselves, a colloquium, averring a speaking of and concerning the plaintiff, is sufficient. When the words have a slanderous meaning, not of their own intrinsic force, but by reason of the existence of some extraneous Blatch. 84-91 (1879), cases; The Clara, 102 U. S. 203 (1880), cases; The Benefactor, ib. 214 (1880). 1 Schoonmaker v. Gilmore, 102 U. S. 118 (1880), cases. 2 The City of Norwich, 118 U. S, 469, 489-506 (1866), Bradley, J.: Waite, C. J., Field, Woods, and Blatchfo Td, JJ., concurring; Matthews, Miller, Harlan, and Gray, JJ., dissenting — ib. pp. 526-41. The other cases, The Scotland, ib. 607, and The Great Western, ib. 520, being considered in the same connection. »The Great Western, 118 U. S. 520 (1886). See also Norwich Co. v. Wright, 18 Wall. 104, 116-28 (1871), cases; The Benefactor, 103 U. S. 246 (1880). • The North Star, 106 U. S. 20, 17-22 (1882), cases, Bradley, J. See, as to dividing the loss, 2 Law Q. Rev. 357-63 (1886). fact, this fact must first be averred as inducement, and then there must he a colloquhtm^ averring a spealcing of or concerning the plaintiff. Lastly, the word " meaning," or innuendo, is used to connect the matters thus introduced with the particular words laid, showing their identity, and drawing what is the legal inference from the whole declaration that such, was, under the circumstances thus set out, the meaning of the words." See Innuendo; Slander.

Lat. [from colloqui, to speak together, to converse.] In pleading. Conversation, discourse. A term applied to that part of the declaration in actions of slander, where it is alleged that the defendant spoke the words in a certain discourse or conversation (in quodam colloquio,) which he had with others, or with the plaintiff in the presence of others, concerning the plaintiff; and which is followed by an averment that the words were spoken of and concerning the plaintiff. 2 Chitt. Pl. 633. Bronson, J., 2 Hill's N. Y. Rep. 282, 284. The term colloquium is also sometimes applied to the whole of this averment. 1 Chitt. Pl. 403. 1 Starkie on Slander, 383. Cooke on Defamation, 92.

pleading, a discourse, a conversation or conference. In actions of slander it is generally true that an action does not hie for words, on account of their being merely disgraceful to a person in his office, profession or trade; unless it be averred, that at the time of publishing the words, there was a colloquium concerning the office, profession or trade of the plaintiff.

In its technical sense, the term colloquium signifies an averment in a declaration that there was a conversation or discourse on the part of the defendant, which connects the slander with the office, profession or trade of the plaintiff, and this colloquium ought to extend to the whole of the prefatory matter necessary to render the words actionable. 3 Bulst. 83; Vide Bac. Ab. Slander, S, n. 3; Dane’s Ab. Index, h. t; Com. Dig. Action upon the case for Defamation, G 7, 8, &c.; Stark. on Sland. 290, et seq. q