
    Sturtevant v. Fairman.
    Where ati order requires a party to amend or tlie like, and directs him to pay costs, the payment of the costs is not a condition precedent to the amendment. . In order to have that effect, it must be expressed to be on payment, cite., or in other equivalent express terms.
    November 13, 1851.
   This point was decided by

Sandford, J.,

at chambers, with the concurrence of all the justices. ' On the plaintiffs motion an order was made requiring the defendant' to make his answer more definite in certain particulars, and directing him to pay tbe plaintiff ten dollars costs of the motion. The defendant then tendered a definite answer, but did not pay or offer the costs of the motion, for which reason the plaintiff refused to receive the answer, and proceeded as if no such answer had been offered. On a subsequent motion, the practice was settled as above stated.

L. B. Marsh, for the plaintiff.

G. L. Isham, for the defendant.  