Page:United States Reports, Volume 2.djvu/337

 Cracurr Coeur, Pmjplvania Dillriét. gg: polllelling a fparlt of his jurifprudential knowledge 5 and yet if his rqgg. difcharge is conclulive, fo liitewife mull: theirs be."" Ailions are laws. often commenced after non-fuits ; and, it is clear, that the fe- cond Court is not bound, in fuch cafes, nor even in cafes where a decilion may have been had on the merits, by the opi- nion of a lirll Court. It is true, that every fpeeies of vexation lhould be difcountenanced; but every miltalte ought pot to be interpreted into an aét of vexation. The plaintiff was ill-ad- vifed in the mode of prefenting his cafe to the Chief juliiee of Pemgl/jplvaniu; and, conlidering hisi norance of our laws, he ought not to lofe the benefit of bail, by the lnrbe: of his agent, in not purfuing the technical form of an appeal. Nor is the difeontinuance of the former aélion, under- thefe circumliances, tobe imputed to him as matter of malice and perfecution. If the plaintifl"s motive was originally juli and commendable, to recover a bona jfdzdebt, the allegation of any fubfequent im- propriety mull: be manifefled by fome fac} :- now, if he was ever fairl entitled to hold the defendant to bail, the difcharge can furnilh no ground to aecufe the plaintiff of vexation for en- deavouring, by variousmeans, to accomplifh that object; and, after the State Court had refufed to interpofe, he mult either’ abandon that object, or difcontinue his fuit, and refort to ano- ther tribunal. A man may commence a fuit as often as he pleafes; and may hold his debtor twenty different times to bail, ` if any reafonable caufe can be alligned for fo withdrawing and renewing the procefs of the law; No argument to the contra- ry can be founded on 2 W ill:. 381 `; for, bail was there refuf- ed on the fecond aétion, becaufe it had not been alked in the Vexation mult flow from a worfe fonrce than ignorance, " or accident : it is generally inftigated by malice ; and always charatfterifed by vigilance. In the prefent cafe, there is no fymptom of malice ; and the want of vigilance has alone pro- duced the plaintiff"s embarrallment. _ ·* ‘ n Du Panama, for the defendant, admitted, that when a dif-. _ eontiuance tool: place, without any vexatious deli n or effec}, ei- ‘ ther in confequence of a miltake in the nature og the aélion, or • of an attorney’s {lip in the form of conduéiing it, bail might be ordered in the lecond- action, for the fame caufe : But he con- tended, that when a queliion has been decided by one tribunal, a- nother tribunal of co-ordinate juriftlilftion will not take cogni- zance of it, except in the regular courfe of a judicial appeal. He urged, likewite, that the circumllances of inllitutiag and difeontinuing an aftion in the-_State Court, were prium jimi: evi- dence of Vexaltwll, that required a better explanation and exéufc T t 2 than P.:nn.gylvuni.z is produced as evidence of vexation, on the part of the plaintiff; and not to bind the judgment of the (Jour:.
 * Parrenson, _7u.tti¢·e:-'l`l1e certificate of the Chief J. {lite of

�