
    Rogers vs. The State.
    Where a defendant has been fined in a State cause, and is ordered into custody until the fine and costs are paid, he is not entitled to take the oath of an insolvent debtor without giving ten days notice to the attorney general. The judgment operates as a capias ad satisfaciendum.
    
    This is an indictment for unlawful gaming. The plaintiff in error pleaded guilty to the indictment, was fined ten dollars by the court, and ordered in custody of the sheriff until the fine and the costs were secured. The plaintiff in error then offered to take the benefit of the law of insolvent debtors, without giving notice; this was refused by the court.
    
      Wm. JB. Campbell,
    
    Attorney General, for the State. A party when convicted and fined, and ordered into custody, &c. cannot take the insolvent oath, unless ten days notice be given, or it is waived. Praying a party in custody, operates as if. taken in custody by the sheriff on a ca. sa., and he must give security to appear at the next court and render a schedule and take the insolvent oath. 2 Yerger’s Reports, 247.
   Catron, Ch. J.

delivered the opinion of the court.

In this cause ten days notice to contest the application to be discharged under the insolvent acts, was necessary to be given to the solicitor. Act of 1812. ch. 25, sec. 4.

Judgment affirmed.  