BINQ OEB V. AH JIM. 813 �ancillarj to the action, they are not liable at; all for oosts, and only for euch expeuses as were incurred on aeoount of the attachment. On the contrary, the plaintiff insista that under the statute he is entitled to recover the costs and dis- bursements adjudged to him in the former action, whether on account of the action itself or the attachaient therein. In support of his position, counsel for defendants cites Norton V, Cammach, 10 La. An. 10, in whieh it was held that a surety on a sequestration bond is only liable for such ex- penses as are incident to the sequestration and release ; and White v.Wyley, 17 Ala. 167, cited in Drake on Attachments, § 176, to the same effect. But the statutes under -which these rulings were made are;aiot given. I suppose they are similar to those in many of the states in which the liability of the obligors in a bond or undertaking for an attachment for both costs and damages depends, alike upon the fact that they are the resuit of the attachment; and >where that is merely ancillary, of course it does not include such as are «imply the result of the action. But such is not, the lan- •guage of the statute of this state* SectaonlM^of .the Oregon .€ivil Code provides thai^ the plaintiff in an actions i before procuring a writ oi attachment to issue, shall giye an under- taking, with.one or more- sureties, "to the effect that the plaintiff will pay all costs that may be adjudged to the defendant, and all damages which he may sustain by reason of the attachment, if the same be wrongful and without suffi- «ient cause, not exceeding the sum speciaed in the undertak- ing." "Costs," as used in this section, only includes an allowance for attorney fees; but a party entitled to "costs" is also entitled to disbursements. Or. Civ. Code; §§ 538-43. ■No provision is made in the Code for an allowance of costs upon an attachment as distinguished from the action in which the writ issues, nor can disbursements be allowed or recovered except by a party entitled to costs. Neither is there any provision authorizing the taxation and recovery of disbursements upon an attachment before, or otherwise, than upon the final judgment in the action, and therefore if the attachment should be discharged, upon the application of ��� �
