
    Terry and others vs. Stukely & Gillintine.
    The securities in an appeal from the chancery to the supreme COurt, are liable for the costs of the appeal, and not for the costs that may have accrued in the chancery court.
    The bill was filed in the chancery court; on the hearing it was dismissed at complainant’s costs, and he appealed to the supreme court, where the decree was affirmed with costs. Stukely and Gillintine were the securities for the prosecution of the appeal. They paid the costs of the appeal, and upon their refusing to pay the costs of the cause in the chancery court, this scire facias issued, to subject them to the payment 7of such costs as accrued in the chancery court before the appeal was allowed. The appeal bond was for the performance of the decree of the supreme court. To this scire facias the defendants demurred,
   Catron, Ch. J.

delivered the opinion of the court.

The only question in this case is, to what extent the clerk was authorized to take the bond.

The chancery rule adopted in 1825, prescribes his duty. In cases where money is not decreed to be paid by the appellant, he is bound to give bond and security, as in cases at law on appeals in error. 1811, ch. 72, sec. 11. In such cases, the surety is only liable for the costs occasioned by the appeal, but no previous costs. So this court, it is believed, has universally hol-den. The costs and damages sustained for wrongfully prosecuting the appeal, can only be lawfully covered by the form of the bond. We order the demurrer to be sustained.

Judgment affirmed.  