lar, neither party is entitled to costs.11 On the other hand in case of an appeal which substantially prevails, as where the decree is reversed as to the most important point, the appellant is entitled to costs.12 Where the decree of the lower court is broader than the findings the appellate court may correct the same of its own motion and no costs will be allowed either party since it is the duty of the complainants attorney to draw out a proper decree.13 [b] Costs as to matter in record. Where the printed record on appeal is useless14 or unnecessarily long the cost of the unnecessary matter will be taxed against the party at fault, whether he be successful or not.15 Where it does not appear who is responsible the facts on that point may be presented to the appellate court by affidavit or other proof so that the unnecessary costs may be taxed to the proper party.16 So where costs are enhanced by the actions of a party, without adequate cause such party should be taxed for the excess.17 Likewise costs will not be allowed for irrelevant matter introduced into the record.18 Thus, where a motion for a new trial made in the lower court is set forth in the record on appeal the costs of printing such mation, and the order denying it, will not be allowed, since an order denying such a motion is not reviewable on appeal and hence is immaterial to the case.19 § 1852. Costs on appeal to be inserted in mandate. When costs are allowed in this court it shall be the duty of the clerk to insert the amount thereof in the body of the mandate, or other proper process, sent to the court below, and annex to the same the bill of items taxed in detail. Clause 6 of 24th Supreme court rule? and clause 5 of rule 31 of circuit courts of appeals in force in all circuits. 11 New England, etc. R. Co. v. Car negie, etc. Co. 75 Fed. 59, 21 C. C. A. 219; Packard v. Lacing-Stud Co. 70 Fed. 68, 16 C. C. A. 639. 12 Northern Trust Co. v. Snyder, 77 Fed. 820, 23 C. C. A. 489. 13 Shute v. Morley, etc. Machine Co. 64 Fed. 368, 12 C. C. A. 356; Blair, etc. Co. v. Eastman, etc. Co. 64 Fed. 491, 12 C. C. A. 603. Providence, etc. Co. 62 Fed. 375, 10 16 United States Sugar Refinery v. Providence, etc. Co. 62 Fed. 375, 10 C. C. A. 422. 17 American, etc. Co. v. Farmers 14 DeGroot V. United States, 5 Loan, etc. Co. 91 Fed. 565, 34 C. C. Wall. 427, 18 L. ed. 700. 15 Ball & Socket, etc. Co. v. Kraetzer, 150 U. S. 118, 37 L. ed. 1019, 14 Sup. Ct. Rep. 48; Railroad Co. v. Stewart, 95 U. S. 279, 24 L. ed. 431; United States Sugar Refinery v. A. 7. 18 Eastman Co. v. Getz, 84 Fed. 462, 28 C. C. A. 459. 19 Nederland, etc. Ins. Co. v. Huel, 86 Fed. 741, 30 C. C. A. 363. 221 How. XVI. 90 Fed. § 1853. rule in circuit court of appeals. The rule in the various circuits is in substance much the same and based upon the Supreme Court rule given in the preceding section.3 In the first circuit the rule is precisely the same and in the others differs but slightly.[a] Author's section. [a] Second, third and eighth circuits. "In case of reversal, affirmance, or dismissal with costs the amount paid for printing the record shall be taxed against the party against whom costs are given."5 [b] Fourth circuit. "In case of reversal, affirmance or dismissal, with costs, the amount paid for the printing of the record and the clerk's fees for supervising the same shall be taxed against the party against whom costs are given."6 [c] Fifth and seventh circuits. "In case of reversal, affirmance, or dismissal with costs, the amount of the costs of the printing of the record and of the clerks fees for supervising the same shall be taxed against the party against whom costs are given, and shall be inserted in the body of the mandate or other proper process." דיי. [d] Sixth circuit. "In case of reversal, affirmance, or dismissal, with costs, the amount paid. for printing and supervision shall be taxed against the party against whom the costs are given, and shall be inserted in the mandate or other proper process."8 [e] Ninth circuit. "In case of reversal, affirmance or dismissal, with costs, the amount paid for printing the record, and of the clerk's fee, shall be taxed against the party against whom costs are given."9 3 Ante, § 1852. 4 Par. 9, C. C. A. rule 23, first circuit. 5C. C. A. rule 23. 2d and 3rd circuits. Par. 5, C. C. A. rule 23, 8th circuit. cuit, as amended May 19, 1898. 7 Par. 6. C. C. A. rule 23, 5th and 7th circuit. 8 Par. 5, C. C. A. rule 23, 6th circuit. 9 Par. 6, C. C. A. rule 23, 9th cir Par. 5, C. C. A. rule 23, 4th cir- cuit. § 1854. - printing briefs and opinions as taxable costs. The rules in some of the circuits expressly provide that the cost of printing briefs or of printing the court's opinion shall be taxable costs.10 Author's section. The fifteenth admiralty rule in second circuit makes "the reasonable expense of printing briefs" an "item of taxable costs." 10 Eng. Adm. rule XV., 2nd circuit; clause 4, C. C. A. rule 28, 6th circuit, clause 1, rule 28, C. C. A. 4th circuit, as amended Oct. 22, 1894. See post, as amended May 29, 1896. Compare § 2108.[c]-[d] CHAPTER 56. JUDGMENT AND EXECUTION. 1858. Amount of judgment for sum due in equity on bonds, etc. § 1859. -on judgments against United States in Court of Claims. liens for same period as State judgments. unaffected by creation of new district in California. Executions run in all districts of State. Interest on judgments. $ 1860. § 1861. § 1862. § 1863. -as to record in Louisiana county. § 1864. 1865. § 1866. § 1867. $ 1868. Execution against revenue officers when withheld. § 1873. Stay for purpose of moving new trial and grant thereof. State laws as to appraisal before sale apply to Federal courtsprocedure. § 1874. Execution from State courts against national banks restricted. § 1858. Amount of judgment for sum due in equity on bonds, etc. In all suits brought to recover the forfeiture annexed to any articles of agreement, covenant, bond, or other specialty, where the forfeiture, breach or nonperformance appears by the default or confession of the defendant, or upon demurrer, the court shall render judgment for the plaintiff to recover so much as is due according to equity.[a] And when the sum for which judgment should be rendered is uncertain, it shall, if either of the parties request it, be assessed by the jury.[b] R. S. § 961, U. S. Comp. Stat. 1901, p. 699. [a] Application of section. The section was carried into the Revised Statutes from the judiciary act of 1789.1 The rule set forth therein is to be applied generally in proper 1 Act Sept. 24, 1879, c. 20, § 26, 1 Stat. 87. cases in the courts of the United States, 2 it being the duty of such courts to give effect to the plainly expressed will of the contracting parties. But the section does not apply in cases heard on agreed facts or tried upon pleadings and proofs, nor in cases of judgment on a verdict,5 nor was it. intended to enlarge the liability of a surety on official bonds.6 [b] Ascertaining amount due. Where the sum is certain, as where the suit is on a promissory note, the computation may be made by the court,s or by the clerk.9 The court also may compute the amount where the sum is uncertain and neither party requests a jury.10 But in such cases where a jury is requested, the courtmay either direct a writ of inquiry or swear a jury immediately to ascertain the sum justly due the plaintiff.11 § 1859. Interest on judgments. Interest shall be allowed on all judgments[a]-[b] in civil causes(c) recovered in a circuit or district court, [4] and may be levied by the marshal under process of execution issued thereon, in all cases where, by the law of the State in which such court is held, interest may be levied under process of execution on judgments recovered in the courts of such State; and it shall be calculated from the date of the judgment, at such rate as is allowed by law on judgments recovered in the courts of such State.[e] Rules of the Supreme court and of the circuit court of appeals as to the allowance of interest on judgments are given in a following section.15 The above section was carried into the Revised Statutes from an act of 1842.16 Its purpose was to bring about uniformity between the Federal and State tribunals on the subject of interest.17 The matter of giving interest being regulated purely by statute the courts are bound to give or withhold inter 2The S. Oteri, 67 Fed. 151, 14 C. C. A. 344. 3 Sun Printing, etc. Ass'n v. Moore, 183 U. S. 642, 46 L. ed. 366, 22 Sup. Sup. Ct. Rep. 234. 4 Farrar v. United States, 5 Pet. 385, 8 L. ed. 165; Ives v. Merchants Bank, 12 How. 164, 13 L. ed. 938. 5 Farrar v. United States, 5 Pet. 386, 8 L. ed. 165. United States v. Hills, 4 Cliff. 618, Fed. Cas. No. 15.369. sGurney v. Hoge, 6 Blatchf. 499, Fed. Cas. No. 5,875; Aurora v. West, 7 Wall. 82, 19 L. ed. 42. |