sued in one action, costs can only be recovered as in one. if judgment be given for the party pursuing the same, such party shall not thereon recover the costs of more than one action or process, unless special cause for several actions of processes shall be satisfactorily shown on motion in open court.
Costs to be recovered only in one libel when that is sufficient.Sec. 2. Be it further enacted, That whenever proceedings shall be had on several libels against any vessel and cargo which might legally be joined in one libel before a court of the United States or of the territo-
the capture, though made in good faith, is in law adjudged tortious, the claimant is entitled by the general practice of the court to such costs as have necessarily arisen in the prosecution of his claim, unless he has been guilty of such misconduct as amounts to a forfeiture of such costs. The Ulpiano, 1 Mason, 91.
21. When a cause is removed from a state court to the circuit court, under the act of Congress, the plaintiff is entitled to recover his costs; although he obtains a verdict for less than five hundred dollars. Ellis v. Jarvis, 3 Mason, 457.
22. If a witness, recognised for the defendant, is marked on the indictment, and sent to the grand jury by the district attorney, the United States, on the acquittal of the prisoner, must pay the witness his costs. United States v. Coulter, C. C. U. S. of Pennsylvania, April, 1803.
23. It is within the discretion of the court to permit the defendant to file a new plea; but where the effect of it would be to put the plaintiff out of court, and the cause was instituted in consequence of the act of the defendant himself, and had been long at issue before the application was made, the court would not permit it to be done, unless the defendant would pay not only the costs incurred since the filing of his first plea, but the whole costs of the action. Anonymous, 2 Wash. C. C. R. 270.
24. Where the plaintiff prevails in the action, the court will not, in the exercise of their discretion, tax the costs against him, where he might naturally and fairly suppose he was entitled to recover more than five hundred dollars. Cottle v. Payne, 3 Day, 289.
25. Costs and expenses are not matters positively limited by law, but are allowed in the exercise of a sound discretion of the court; and no appeal lies from a mere decree respecting costs and expenses. Canter v. The American and Ocean Insurance Company, 3 Peters, 319.
26. In Virginia, if the first ca. sa. be returned non est, the second may include the costs of issuing both. Peyton v. Brooke, 3 Crunch, 92; 1 Cond. Rep. 464.
27. Costs will be allowed on the dismission of a writ of error for want of jurisdiction, if the original defendant be defendant in error. Winchester v. Jackson et al. 3 Cranch, 515; 1 Cond. Rep. 612.
28. A party who obtains a continuance of a cause, must pay the costs of the term. Lessee of Patton v. Blackwell, 2 Overt. Rep. 114.
29. The Supreme Court has no jurisdiction in a case in which the judges of the circuit court have divided in opinion, upon a motion for a rule to show cause why the taxation of the costs of the marshal on an execution should not be reversed. Bank of the United States v. Green and others, 6 Peters, 26.
30. The transcript of the record had been lodged by the plaintiffs in error with the clerk of the court on the 24th of October, 1835; who refused to file it or docket the cause, until the plaintiffs had given the fee bond in pursuance of the thirty-seventh rule of the court. The counsel for the plaintiffs in error moved to have the transcript filed and docketed; alleging they had done all the law required to be done in order to bring the case before the Supreme Court. On the part of the defendant in error, his counsel filed and read in open court certified copies of the writ of error, citation and appeal bond, and of the judgment of the circuit court; and having stated that the plaintiffs in error had failed to have the case docketed according to the thirtieth rule of the court, they moved to have the case docketed and dismissed. The court overruled the motion to docket and dismiss the cause; and also the motion to have the transcript filed, and the cause docketed without the fee bond being first given. These motions were overruled on the 18th of January, 1836; and the court allowed the plaintiff in error until the 1st day of March following to give to the clerk the fee bond: on the failure so to give the same, the writ of error to be dismissed. Owings v. Tiernan, 10 Peters, 447.
31. If the court had jurisdiction of the cause, when the action was commenced, the repeal of the law which gave the Jurisdiction, will not take away the plaintiff’s right to costs. Walker v. Smith, 1 Wash. C. C. R. 202.
32. Where three members of the bar enter their appearance for the defendant, to suits instituted against him, and are all equally called upon, and act as the attorneys of the defendant, no warrant of attorney having been given by the defendant to either; the attorneys’ fee in the bill of costs is to be equally divided among all who have acted in the case, and who have appeared to the suits. Hurst v. Durne l, l Wash. C. C. R. 438.
33. Query. If in an action for the violation of a patent, the plaintiff recover five hundred dollars damages, or the damages when trebled amount to that sum, the plaintiff is entitled to costs. Kneas v. The Schuylkill Bank, 4 Wash. C. C. R. 106.
34. The common law gave costs in no case; and the statute of Gloucester gave them only where damages were recoverable at common law. Ibid.
35. If the defendant do not demand security for costs within a reasonable time, it shall not be a ground for a continuance, that such security has not been given when the cause is called for trial. Hawkins v. Wiltbank, 4 Wash. C. C. R. 285.
36. The clerk of the circuit court for the district of Pennsylvania cannot charge in the bill of costs any compensation for the travel and attendance of the successful party, none such being allowed in the supreme court of the state. But he ought to tax one dollar and twenty-five cents a day for the attendance of each witness, and five cents a mile for their travelling to and from the court. Sebring’s Lessee v. Ward, 4 Wash. C. C. R. 546.
37. Costs are imposed on a party asking for an amendment of the pleadings. But in a case where, from the irregularity of the practice in the courts of Pennsylvania, the error requiring amendment arose, costs were not allowed. Lessee of Laning v. Dolph, 4 Woah. C. C. R. 630.
