
    Robertson, by Smith, her next friend, vs. Robertson.
    Although there was an appeal to the Chancellor, from an order allowing the sufficiency of a next friend, still it did not stay the Vice-Chancellor from granting temporary alimony.
    June 11, 1832.
    Tuis~ was a ijiII filed for a di'~orce a m~ns~ et thoro. Tl~e husband had applied to the court to stay proceedings in the suit, until a more responsible next friend was appointed or the complainant should give security for costs. This application ■was opposed; and the court decided that the present next friend was a person of sufficient responsibility. From this i , , . determination the dctendant appealed.
    An application was now made for temporary alimony.
    Mr. Dudley Selden, for the applicant.
    Mr. John B. Scoles, for the defendant, opposed; on the ground of the appeal.
   The Více-Chanceelor.

If the order appealed from should be reversed by the Chancellor, still the suit is not at an end. Some responsible person can very likely be procured, or even the present party may be enabled to give security. The pendency of the appeal is therefore not fatal to the hearing of the present motion.

Alimony granted.  