(after argument.) In this action for a* -*• assault and battery, the plaintiff purposes to give in evidence, threats which the defendant made in the presence oí the *403plaintiff; to be executed at a future day» The counsel for the defendant opposes the evidence, on the ground of a former decision made in this court, hi the case of Eary and Ingles, which «excluded testimony of a provocation given to the defendant some months before the assault by the plaintiff, by newspaper publications : that decision proceeded on the principle, that the passions of men should cool and subside in some reasonable time, and would not allow the continuance of them without a recent provocation, to be taken as a mitigation of an assault made at a distant tune :■ but that principle is not opposed to the evidence, now offered ;■ for the object oí it is to enhance the damages, be-sause the defendant still kept alive his resentment after a sufficient time for it 1.0 cool. It an old provocation will not excuse a recent assault, a threat formerly made and recently executed, as k evinces an unreasonable continuance of heat, will induce an increase of damages on that account».
Sledge v. Pope, 3 N.C. 402, 2 Hayw. 402 (1806)
April 1806
·
North Carolina Superior Court
3 N.C. 402, 2 Hayw. 402