
    Williams against Wilkins and others, executors of Brush.
    
      October 15.
    A plaintiff, suíngín forma pauperis. and recovering alegacy against executors, is entitled only to the actual costs or expenses of the suit, to be paid out of the assets.
    It rests in the discretion of the court, to Drier pauper or dives costs, according to the circumstances of the case.
    THE plaintiff sued informa pauperis, and recovered a legacy of 200 dollars, with interest. The executors had refused to pay the plaintiff, because the will directed the money to be put out at the discretion of the executors, and they apprehended that the plaintiff- who was born a slave, and emancipated by -the will, would waste the money,
    The question was, whether the plaintiff was entitled to costs.
   The

said the cases had been reviewed in Rattray v. George, (16 Vesey, 232.) and there was found to be a great variety of contradictory decisions upon the subjects of pauper costs, and the result was that the court had a discretion in each case. Here was no very unreasonable delay in the executors, and the plaintiffs ought not to recover dives costs, but only the actual expenses .of the suit, to be paid by the executors out of the assets.

Order accordingly,  