
    Brookfield v. Jones.
    bail can. in any case be required on a penal statute, where not expressly allowed by the statute, the plaintiff to be entitled to bail must have an order of the court or a judge, unless the statute otherwise expressly provide.
    ■ A eapias acl respondendum, was issued in this case for penalties under the first section of the act entitled “ an act to prevent the unlawful waste and destruction of timber in this State,” Pev. Laws 700, and marked for bail in a large-sum, upon the filing of an affidavit setting forth the cause-of action, but without an order for bail by the court or a judge.
    
      
      Seudder for plaintiff.
    
      Scott for defendant.
   The Court quashed the writ, because if bail can ever be required on a penal statute where not expressly allowed by the statute, on which point the court did not intimate an opinion, the plaintiff to be entitled to bail must have an order of the court or a judge unless the statute otherwise expressly provide; and by the 18th see. of the practice act, Rev. Laws 415, the first process in personal actions when the plaintiff is not entitled to bail shall be a summons.  