
    Den against Wilson.
    Ralefoivsemen* may be Ssue^oined.1' 
    
    THERE were two ejectments against the same defend--*-n one> tlie lessor °f the plaintiff resided ont of the state of New-Jersey, and in the other, was an infant. The issues were joined some terms preceding, and the causes were taken down to the circuit, but not tried. After which,
    
      Ewing, for the defendant,
    had moved and obtained a rule, that the lessors give security for costs, or proceedings be stayed.
    
      Saxton,
    
    now moved to discharge the rule, because not applied for before issue joined. Pat. 364. see. 94.
    
      
      
         See Nix. Dig. 731, & 98. Also State Bank vs. Evans, 2 Gr. 298. Mechanics’ Bank vs. Godwin, 2 Gr. 439. Cotheal ads. Morehouse, 1 Zab. 335. Roumage vs. Insurance Co., 7 Hal. 95. Scull vs. Carhart, 3 Gr. 430. Den vs. Inslee, 1 Hal. 475.
      
    
   Kirkpatrick C. J.

This act is cumulative, and does not restrain the power before possessed by the court. The settled law in actions of ejectment,.was, to order costs at any time, but not for delay of oppression. In practice, the issue is always joined when the consent rule is entered into; and it would be unreasonable, in this action, to refuse this rule to a party.

Court.

Let the rule remain. 
      
      
         Den, Bray vs. Drake, 3 Hal. 305.
      
     