The passion which the law requires in order to reduce a homicide from murder to manslaughter must be caused by an adequate provocation, for mere passion is not sufficient, nor will provocation alone be sufficient. And the provocation must be such as naturally and instantly produces anger, rage, sudden resentment, or terror, rendering the mind incapable of cool reflection, and thus showing the want of malice.51

On the question of what is sufficient provocation Blackstone says: If a man takes another in the act of adultery with his wife, and kills him directly on the spot, it is but manslaughter. It is, however, the lowest degree of it.52

Mere words, however abusive, opprobrious, indecent, insulting or irritating they may be, afford no excuse for the commission of an offense, and will not so mitigate an unlawful, intentional killing as to reduce the crime to manslaughter.53

51 People vs. Brigg, 93 Cal., 476; Crockett vs Com., 100 Ky., 382.

52 4 Blackstone Com., 191.

Such words alone will not constitute adequate provocation for passion or heat of blood, and are not sufficient to reduce an unlawful killing to manslaughter.54

Merely threatening to kill another unaccompanied by any overt act to carry the threat into execution affords no legal excuse for making an attack. There must be imminent danger.55

What is adequate, reasonable, or considerable provocation which causes an apparently irresistible passion that will reduce a homicide from murder to manslaughter is ordinarily a question of fact for the jury to determine. But whether or not certain admitted or undisputed facts are sufficient to reduce the killing to manslaughter is a question of law for the court to decide.