
    James A. Keown vs. Julia E. Trudo & others.
    Middlesex.
    March 22, 1619. —
    April 17, 1919.
    Present: Rugg, C. J., Loring, Braley, Crosby, & Carroll, JJ.
    
      Practice, Civil, Indorser of writ.
    The decision in Keown v. Hughes, ante, 1, affirmed.
    Tort for alleged alienation of the affections of the plaintiff’s wife by the defendants. Writ dated June 30,1917. •
    There was a motion for an indorser of the plaintiff’s writ as security for costs, the plaintiff being an inhabitant of the State of California. The plaintiff was ordered to furnish an indorser for costs without specifying the amount for which the indorser should be responsible. The plaintiff having failed to comply with the order within ten days as required by its terms, upon motion of the defendants the plaintiff was nonsuited with costs. The plaintiff alleged exceptions similar to those alleged in the case of Keown v. Hughes, ante, 1.
    The case was submitted on briefs.
    
      J. A. Keown, pro se.
    
    
      F. Hunt, for the defendants.
   By the Court.

All questions raised on this record are disposed of adversely to the contentions' of the plaintiff by the decision just rendered in Keown v. Hughes, ante, 1.

Appeals dismissed.

Exceptions overruled.  