Another F-Word Case

[Baker, John]

        As I have previously posted, the first printed book of any kind in the United States to use the word "fuck" appears to be volume 9 of the Missouri Reports, where the Supreme Court of Missouri ruled against the defendant's motion "that the word used to convey the slander, was unknown to the English language, and was not understood by those to whom it was spoken." Edgar v. McCutchen, 9 Mo. 768 (1846).  An annotation to an earlier case cites Edgar v. McCutchen for the proposition "But the meaning of the word "fuck" need not be averred."  Dyer v. Morris, 4 Mo. 214 (1835).  The annotation to the 1835 case obviously must have been added after 1846, but I cannot tell when.  However, it could not have been any earlier than 1866, since there is also an 1866 case cited in the annotations.  Other than these two cases, no uses of "fuck" were known in any American printed books before the later cases from the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, found by Fred Shapiro and me.

        Now Kevin McDowell, writing in http://www.lawhaha.com/strange.asp#A3, has identified another legal opinion, this one from 1865 or 1866.  The Supreme Court of Indiana, in a case printed in volume 25 of the Indiana Reports and reprinted in volume 87 of American Decisions, wrote as follows:

        >>Rebecca Kelley sued the appellant in the court below for slander. The words charged are, "I have ??f--ked Rebecca Kelley one hundred times." "I have screwed Beck Kelley one hundred times."

        . . . It is claimed that the words charged do not import whoredom, and are not actionable per se. We think otherwise. The word "f--ked," although not to be found in any vocabulary of the English language, is as well understood as any other English word. Edgar v. McCutcheon, 9 Mo. 768. A number of common English words are not to be found in the standard lexicons of the language on account of their vulgarity. It may be that the word "screwed" is not actionable in the absence of other averments, but if one set of the words charged are actionable per se, the motion in arrest was rightly overruled.<<

Linck v. Kelley, 25 Ind. 278, 1865 WL 1799, 87 Am.Dec. 362 (Ind. Nov Term 1865).  I don't know whether the question marks before the first "f--ked" are in the printed versions.  It's interesting that the court didn't seem as sure about the meaning of "screw."  I don't know how old the sexual meaning of screw is, but it does go back at least to 1845, as shown by this Illinois case:

        >>This was an action of slander, brought by the appellees against the appellant, in the circuit court of McHenry county.

        The declaration contains two counts, charging that the appellant, on the 21st day of July, and on divers other days, between that day and the commencement of the suit, spoke and published concerning the wife of Potter, the appellee, these words: "She slept with me one night before she was married, and I screwed her;" thereby imputing a charge of fornication.<<

Hatch v. Potter, 2 Gilman 725, 7 Ill. 725, 1845 WL 3993, 43 Am.Dec. 88 (Ill. Dec Term 1845).


John Baker