
    ORILLON vs. ROMAN.
    Whether an appeal, without a bond, is to be sustained?
    Appeal. No bond having been filed:
    Hopkins, for the appellee.
    The appeal ought to be dismissed, In the case of Wall vs. Pousset's executors, Judge Mathews held that there could be no appeal, unless a bond was filed. The actof the legislature has made no provision for any appeal, from the Parish Court, without bond.
    Baldwin, for the appellant.
    No law requires that the appellant should give bond. Every citizen has a right to theopinion of the Superior Court: but, as a strong presumption arises, from the judgment of the Parish Court, that the party castis liable, eecurity is required of him, in order to suspend the execution, that, while the cause is depending in the Superior Court, he will not waste his property-that the time necessarily em-ploved in ascertaining his rights, will not be improved in rendering those of the successful party inefficacious.
    The act of 1807, ch. 1, provides that no appeal shall stay execution, unless the appellant shall, before execution, give bond, ~Vith one sufficient security, for prosecuting the appeal with effect This impliedly admits that other appeals, that is, such in which no bond as given, shall not stay execution. Exceptio prolat regulain. It would have been vain to have thus made this implied exception, if it had not been understood that such appeals, which did not stay executions, could exist.
    In the next paragraph, the legislature directs that "whensoever such petition, for an appeal, "shall be filed, and such bond executed and given, all proceedings in such suit, in the Parish " Court, shall cease"_clearly implying that whensoever such a petition shall be filed, and NO such bond executed, the proceedings in such suits, in the Parish Court, s/La11 ~o T cease, notwithstanding the appeal; but the successful party shall proceed to execution.
   By the court.

The impI~cation is suffici~t1y strong, to warrant the conclusion drawn by the appcllaht's counsel. The appeal will be sustain~ ed, and the cause continued, as one~of the j~dges has entertained a different opinion, an~ the Court is now composed of one ~udge only, in order that the opinion of the third judge may be had.

APPEAL SUSTAINETh  