
    Wilcox v. Buckingham.
    In the Court below,
    Samuel Buckingham, Plaintiff; Joseph Wilcox 2¾ Defendant,
    
    The marshal for the District of Connecticut is liable to personal arrest and imprisonment in civil cases.
    
      r~r% X HIS was an action on a promissory note. The defendant was described as of Killingworth, in the county of Mid-dlesex.
    The defendant pleaded in abatement, that the process was by attachment, and was served by arresting and imprisoning his body ; that at the time of service, he was marshal of the United States for the District of Connecticut ; and that by ■virtue of the statute authorizing the use of the gaols in this state for the confinement of prisoners under the authority of the United States, and by virtue of his right as marshal, he was keeper of the gaol in the county of Middlesex for all prisoners confined therein under the authority of the United States, and equal in authority with the keeper of said gaol under the authority of this state.
    To this plea, the plaintiff demurred. The Court adjudged it insufficient, and ordered the defendant to answer over.
    After the decision of the preceding case, this writ of error was read, and handed up, without argument.
    
      Ingersoll was of counsel for the plaintiff in error.
    
      Daggett for the defendant.
   Bt the Court,

unanimously,

The judgment Was affirmed.'  