KIDDEE V, FEATTEAC. 617 �It is admitted that the copy of the record, in this case was not filed within the time specified in these provisions of the statute, and in the bond executed in pursuance thereof. It seems, however, to be well settled that the only necessary consequence of this delay is a liability of the obligors on the bond. If there is such unnecessary delay in filing the tran- Bcript as amounts to unexcused laches, whereby the other party is prejudiced, the federal court may, for this reason, remand the case. The defendant, in this case, cannot demand, as, a matter of right, that the case be remanded. It is for the court to say whether, under ail the circumstances, there bas been inexcusable laches. Dillon on Eemoval of Causes, 74, note 125. �In this case it appear that the petition for removal and the bond wer§ filed in the state court on the eighteenth day of December, 1879, and that the transcript was filed here on the thirty-first of January, 1880. The intervening time was, therefore, 43 days. �It does not appear, hoWever, that the defendant bas been prejudiced by the delay. The suit is brought to enforce the collection of certain promissory notes of the defendant, and to foreclose a mortgage given by him to secure the same. In the absence of any showing to the contrary, I must presume that the defendant in such a case is not damaged by a post- ponement of the day of trial, and while a long neglect to bring the record into this court, if unexplained, would not be ex- cused, I do not see in the facts of this case any sufficient reason to remand the cause, and this motion is accordinglj overruled. ����
