Imputations of crime are of such importance in this connection as to require special discussion.

Any charge which falsely and maliciously accuses a person of the commission of a crime involving moral turpitude, is actionable per se whether the charge takes the form of slander or libel.

The crime charged may be either a crime at common law or one created by statute.34 It may be either a felony,35 or one of certain misdemeanors.36 A misdemeanor is ordinarily not punishable by an infamous punishment, and therefore, in order that a suit had been brought against a married man. D And red vs. New York Press Co., 61 N. Y. App. Div., 605. charge of such offense may be actionable per se it is necessary that it be indictable and involve moral turpitude.37 Moral turpitude generally is said to imply ' 'inherate baseness or vileness of principles in the human heart; extreme depravity."38 Moral turpitude as the term is used in the present connection has been defined to be an act of baseness, vileness or depravity, in the private and social duties which a man owes to his fellow-man or to society in general, contrary to the accepted and customary rule of right and duty between man and man."39

27 Hawkins vs Globe Printing Co., 10 Mo. App., 174; Smith vs. Smith, 73 Mich., 445; 41 N. W., 499; Gates vs. New York Recorder Co., 155 N. Y., 228; 49 N. E., 769. 28 Witcher vs. Jones, 17 N. Y. Supp., 491; Stowers vs. Converse, 3 Conn., 325..

29 Cousins vs. Merrill, 16 W. C. C. P., 114.

30 Mix vs. North America Co., 12

Pa. Dist., 446.

31 Price vs. Whitley, 50 Mo., 439. 32 Commonwealth vs. Batchelder, Thack Cv. Cas. (Mass. 191). 33 Eckart vs. Van Pelt, 69 Kan., 357; 76 Pac., 909. 34 Burton vs. Burton, 3 Greene, 316;

Shepherd vs. Piper, 98 Me., 316

Atl. 84; Herzog vs. Campbell,

47 Nebt., 370; 61 N. W., 424. 35 Childers vs. San Jose Mercury

Printing, etc., Co., 105 Cal.,

284; 38 Pac., 903. 36 Lenious vs. Wells, 78 Ky., 117;

Earle vs. Johnson, 81 Minn.,

472; 84 N. W., 332; Smith vs.

Smith, 2 Sneed, 473.

An infamous punishment is generally one corporal in its character. This would include death, mutilation, whipping, the pillory and imprisonment.40 It is sometimes held that imprisonment to come under this heading must be in the penitentiary, and that imprisonment in a common jail is not an infamous punishment.41 Punishment by fine is generally not considered an infamous punishment,42 but there is some authority to the contrary.43

It may be actionable to charge a person with the commission of a crime, the corpus of which never existed;44 or to charge the commission of a crime incapable of commission by the party deformed,45 unless such impossibility was known to the hearers.46

37 Crawford vs. Wilson, 4 Barb. (N. Y.), 504; Stitzell vs. Reynolds, 67 Pa. St., 54; Am. Rep., 396.

38 Webster's Dictionary.

39 Newell on Defamation (2 ed.), Sec. 12, quoted in Baxter vs. Mohi, 37 Misc. (N. Y.), 833; 76 N. Y. Suppl., 982.

40 Ludlum vs. McCuen, 17 N. J. L., 12; Gudgen vs. Oenland, 108 N. C, 593: 13 S. E., 168.

41 Brooker vs. Coffin, 5 Johns., 188; 4 Am. Dec, 337; McKee vs. Wilson, 87 N. C, 300.

42 Buck vs. Hersey, 31 Me., 558;

Rammel vs. Otis, 60 Mo., 365;

Damerest vs. Haring, 6 Cow.

(N. Y.), 76. 43 Brown vs Nickerson, 5 Gray

(Mass.), 1; Perdue vs. Burnett, Mina (Ala.), 138. 44 Durrah vs. Stillwell, 59 Ind., 139;

Stone vs. Clark, 21 Pick

(Mass.), 51. 45 Chambers vs. White, 47 N. C,

383; Stewart vs. Howe, 17 111.,

71. 46 Beckett vs. Sterrett, 4 Blackf.

(Ind.), 499.