
    Walsh and others against Sackrider.
    Where an attor, "sey c“"¡¿ love™™1 sum exceeding 25 dollars, bui. less than 50 doltiffisentitiedTe ful1 00sts‘
    THE defendant is an attorney of this court, and the suit was brought against him on a note for a sum above 25 dollars, but less than 50 dollars, and a judgment was given for the plaintiff, on a cognovit, for less than 50 dol1/07 lars.
    The question was, whether the defendant was liable to pay supreme costs; and if not, whether the plaintiff was liable to pay costs to the defendant.
   Per Curiam.

Full costs are recoverable against the defendant. The case of Bailey (1 Johns. Cas. 32.) is in point. The reason is, that the plaintiff could not safety sue the defendant elsewhere, for he would have been entitled to his privilege of this court, and could have abated the suit,  