
    Alfred White vs. Edward I. Judd.
    Under the Rev. Sts. c. 121, § 36, actual travel of a party to a suit, who resides wlteitat the State, can be taxed only from the line of the State, in the usual route from his residence to the place where the court is held.
    The defendant, having obtained a verdict, taxed in his bill of costs 200 miles travel, that being the distance which he had actually travelled to and from his residence in Ithaca, in the State of New York, for the special purpose of attending the court in this cause. To this taxation the plaintiff objected.
    
      Bishop, for the plaintiff.
    
      D. N. Dewey, for the defendant.
   Wilde, J.

We have decided that actual travel of a witness from another State can be taxed only from the line of this State, in the usual route from his residence to the place of holding the court; Melvin v. Whiting, 13 Pick. 190 ; and there seems to be no good reason for giving a more liberal construction to the Rev. Sts. c. 121, § 36, in regard to the actual travel of a party. As the defendant has not actually travelled more than forty miles within the State, he can be allowed for travel only as if he had not attended the court in person ; viz. eighty miles out and home.  