MAYER v. TYSON.—1 BLAND. 525

Under what circumstances, and at what stage of the case the plaintiff may
be required to give security for costs, (a)

This bill was filed on the 10th of December, 1827, by Lewis
Mayer and Isaac Lohman, of the City of Philadelphia, partners
trading under the firm of Mayer & Lohman, against Thomas Tyson,
Richard H. Douglas, Christian Keller, Isaac Tyson, Jun'r, Nathan
Tyson, Benjamin P. Moore, John Glenn, and Joaquim de Mier.

The bill states, that the defendant Thomas Tyson had purchased
of the plaintiffs a large quantity of rum and brandy, for which
there was then due a balance of $1,425.54; that the defendant
Thomas, being in an insolvent condition, had by a deed assigned
all his property to the defendants, Richard, Christian, Isaac,
Nathan, and Benjamin, in trust for the benefit of such of his cred-
itors as should release their respective claims within a certain time;
that these plaintiffs had not so released their claim; that the de-
fendant Thomas had applied for and obtained the benefit of the
insolvent law, under which the defendant John had been appointed
his trustee; that the rum and brandy purchased by the defendant
Thomas of these plaintiffs was in fact bought by him merely as
the agent of the defendant Joaquim, who was in truth the real
debtor to the plaintiffs; that the defendants who were the trustees
of the defendant Thomas had brought suit against the defendant
Joaquim to recover the amount due from him for the rum and
brandy so purchased, with a view to have it applied, according to
their trusts, in satisfaction of the creditors of the defendant Thomas.
Whereupon the plaintiffs prayed, that, as the debt due from the de-
fendant Joaquim, to the amount due to them, was properly owing
to them, they might be first satisfied, &c.

All the defendants answered jointly or separately, except Joa-
quim, who being a non-resident, publication was made, warning
him to appear, &c. To the answer of the defendant Thomas the
plaintiff's filed exceptions; because of its being, as they alleged,
insufficient in several specified particulars. Upon which it was
ordered, that those exceptions stand for hearing on the 15th of
*April, 1828; provided a copy be served, &c. Which hav-
ing been served as required, the matter was submitted. 560

BLAND, C., 21st April, 1828.—Ordered, that the exceptions of
the plaintiffs to the answer of the defendant Thomas Tyson be
and they are hereby ruled good; and that he make a sufficient
answer to all the several matters and allegations of the bill on or
before the second day of June next, or the same may, after that
day, be taken pro confesso.

(a) Approved in Hatton v. Weems, 13 G. & J. 105