
    Anonymous.
    That the «lístate prison for a term of years, is a ground to stay proceedings till security for costs is filed. On an apsucht=ceurityV the deiendant need not swear vo men s.
    Hopkins, for the defendant, moved that all the proceedings on the part of the plaintiff he staid, until security for costs should be given. The plaintiff was a convict in the state . . , , r , r pnson, lor grand larceny, for a term oí years,
    /_ Seelye, J
    
    contra, objected that the defendant did not J swear to merits.
   Curia.

This is not necessary, on an application requiring the plaintiff to give security for costs, x

Seelye, said the rule, requiring security, applies only to cases of absence from the state. (Pfister & M'Comb v. Gillespie, 2 John. Cas. 109.)

Curia.

We consider this application as standing upon the same ground/ The plaintiff is equally out of the reach of execution, as if absent from the state,

Motion granted.  