
    DEN, LESSEE OF D. H. CAMPBELL, v. DANIEL HUFF.
    (S. C., Thomp. Cas., 24.)
    Knoxville,
    September Term, 1847.
    
    1. EJECTMENT. Landlord may intervene.
    Where the landlord’s tenant is made a defendant in an action of ejectment, the landlord may intervene and become a defendant with, or in the place of, the tenant.
    2. SAME. Severance in action of, when.
    Where different questions are involved between different parties upon different titles, it is proper in ejectment to sever the causes.
    3. SAME. Same. Taxation of costs.
    Where there is a severance in ejectment, all the costs in each case should be eharg'ed and taxed separately to its own case. [See Sloan v. Parks, 2 Swan, 63; Boothe v. Cowan, 5 Sneed, 357; Code, secs. 4938 and 4942.]
    Tbis was an action of ejectment. At the return term, Huff, whose tenants were jointly sued with one Gibson, was admitted to plead separately in tbe room and stead of bis tenants. Gibson also pleaded for bimself. Tbe clerk entered them as separate causes, and Campbell, tbe plaintiff, took out- separate subpoenas in each case. After-wards Huff compromised, and confessed judgment for t-be costs of bis case. ITei was charged with all tbe costs of witnesses summoned in bis case. Upon motion to retax tbe costs, tbe court below held that tbe defendant was properly charged.
    1. Landlord may become defendant after judgment against tenant, when.
    When the ejectment suit is against a tenant, the landlord may appear and be made a defendant with, or in the place of, the tenant (Code, sec. 4973); and where judgment by default ”is taken in an action of ejectment against the landlord’s tenant, upon which a final judgment is taken, and a writ of possession is awarded, the landlord may, at the next term, upon showing by affidavit that he had no notice of the suit, have such judgments set aside, the case reinstated, and be permitted to enter his appearance and defend. Conn v. Whiteside, 6 Hum., 47; Hillman v. Chester, 12 Heis., 35, 36; Collins v. Legg, 1 Lea, 122.
    2. Cause of action divided by contract; costs in each case.
    A debtor and creditor may divide a debt beyond the jurisdiction of a justice into a number of small debts, each of which is within his jurisdiction, and the creditor may sue upon them separately, and recover judgments with costs. Upon an appeal to the circuit court, the separate causes may be consolidated without imposing upon the plaintiff terms that he shall pay all the costs-which had previously accrued. Dews v. Eastham, 5 Yer., 298.
    3. Costs where judgment is in favor of one defendant and against another.
    Where the plaintiff recovers judgment against one defendant and another defendant is acquitted and discharged, the latter may recover of the plaintiff such costs only as accrued separately and properly, on account of his being a defendant in the suit, and the plaintiff is entitled to recover of the other defendant the costs of the suit incurred in the joint defense, or otherwise, except such as may be separated therefrom as having exclusive reference to the defendant who- is discharged. Sloan v. Parks, 2 Swan, 63; Boothe v. Cowan, 5 Sneed, 356, 357.
   Keese, J.:'

Tbe fact of several pleas does not make several causes in any case but ejectment, and does not in that action necessarily. But -where different questions are involved between different parties upon different titles, it is proper in ejectment to sever the causes. Tbe parties having’ recognized in this case a severance, and acquiesced in it, are bound by their acquiescence, and tbe taxation was hence proper. Each party will pay full costs.

Judgment affirmed.

4. Costs where several causes of action are joined by means of several counts.

Where a plaintiff joins several separate and distinct causes of action by means of several counts in his declaration (not several counts containing the same cause of action, only varying- in the statement so as to avoid a variance in the proof and the like), and recovers as to some of the counts, but fails as to others, he can recover only such costs as are incident to that count of the declaration upon which he succeeds; while the defendant is entitled to recover such costs as have accrued in consequence of the counts upon which the plaintiff has failed. Allison v. Thompson, 2 Swan, 202; Boothe v. Cowan, 5 Sneed, 357.

5. Costs of advertisement when several executions in favor of, and against, the same parties.

Where there is more than one execution in favor of, and against, the same parties, levied on the same -land, one condensed advertisement of the property for sale is sufficient to authorize a sale at the same time under all of the executions so levied, or under the orders of sale, for this is all that is required by our statutes (Code, sec. 3842), and if there is more than one advertisement, the printer’s fee for all in excess of one, and over and above the propel amount for such advertisement on motion to retax costs, will be struck out and disallowed the sheriff. Arnold v. Dinsmore, 3 Cold., 236, 238, 239.  