
    Jackson, ex dem. Dackstader, against King and Neilson.
    The Court refused to grant an attachment for costs on a judgment of nonsuit against an Oneida In* dian, who was the lessor of the plantiff in an action of eject-grantedUa lule t0 íow..cau6e on the attorney the°suitbnotlet ing the agent or pointed7by tie the*6 SSr"3 of the Indians, why an attachment should not issue against him.
    
      CADY, for the defendants, moved for an attachment t against the lessor of the plaintiff, an Oneida Indian, for 0 . . c ■ costs on a judgment ot nonsuit,
    
      c9i? Contra.
    
      ^ie Court said, that they could not grant an attachment against the Indian; hut as the suit had been brought by an ° ° J a^orney> w^° was n°t an agent or attorney appointed by the state to manage the affairs of the Indians, they granted a rule on the attorney of the plaintiff, to show cause why an attachment should not issue against him.
     