“After, the discharge of the two former rules, ante 317, Phillips entered a rule upon the plain tiff to show cause, why proceedings should not be staid on the bail bond, on payment of costs, and confession of judgment by the principal. He contended that, after assignment of the bail bond, the court will stay proceedings against the appearance bail on payment of costs, confessing judgment, and putting in and perfecting bail, as the court decided on one of the former rules. But he insisted that surrendering the principal was equivalent to putting in sufficient bail; and that the court will, in this case, dispense even with that form, since the defendant would be immediately entitled to his discharge, having been already discharged under the insolvent law of this state.”