
    Slocum vs. Watkins.
    The court will award a precept against a defendant for the costs imposed by referees as a condition to granting an adjournment, where, instead of payment at the time, his attorney stipulated in writing that he should pay them.
    The defendant’s counsel appeared before the sole referee to whom this cause ivas referred, and before whom it was noticed for trial, and moved for an adjournment for cause shewn, which the referee granted upon the condition of payment of costs, whereupon the defendant’s attorney stipulated that the defendant should pay the costs within thirty days after they should be taxed, and the hearing was accordingly postponed. The costs were taxed at $18,84 on notice a few days afterwards, and demanded of the defendant, who refused to pay them. The thirty days having elapsed,
    
      W. McCall, for the plaintiff,
    moved for a precept against the defendant for these costs.
   By the Court, Beardsley, J.

The referee had power to impose the payment of costs as a condition to granting the adjournment, which power he exercised by making it a condition that they should be paid. The defendant not being prepared to make payment as required by the order, his attorney stipulated that they should be paid when taxed. The referee had a right to require payment or such a stipulation. (Butler v. Bates, 5 Hill, 375.) The defendant having refused to pay after taxation and a demand, the motion should be granted with costs.

Motion granted.  