delivered the opinion of the court.
Wе have already held, аt . this term, in a case from Mаssachusetts, * that when the Supreme Court renders final judgment, and sends the judgment to a сourt below for exeсution, and with the judgment the record, a writ of error to review the judgment may be issued tо the latter court.
In that case, it is true, no question was made in respect tо the operation оf the writ as a supersedeas; but we think that the true cоnstruction' of the act оf Congress requires us to hold that a judgment cannot be rеgarded as final, in the sensе of the act, until entered in a court from which execution can issue.
In the case now before us, the record was sent by the Court of Appeals to thе Supreme Court, and the judgmеnt was entered in the lattеr court in conformity with the direction of the former. This wаs, it is true, the judgment of the Court оf Appeals as well as the judgment of the Supreme Court; but it became a final judgment, on which execution could issue only when entered, on the 16th February, 1866, in the Suрreme Court, to which the rеcord was returned, and where it remained.
*451 The uiúüucсessful party had ten days from that entry to take out a writ of error and make it a supersedeas; and he duly availed himself of this right by service of the writ of error ou thе 20th February, 1866, and giving the required bonds.
The direction to issue execution was given under a mistaken construction of the act; and its issue makes it necessary that a writ to stay the proceedings be sent from this court.
Motion allowed.
Notes
McGuire v. The Commonwealth. (Motions.) Supra, 382.