Pouchan

This is an appeal from an order of the superior court of the city and county of San Francisco fixing costs.

After this case was once tried in the superior court, resulting in a verdict for appellant, a new 'trial was granted, whereupon issue was again joined before a jury and again resulted in a verdict in appellant’s favor.

After the second trial appellant seasonably and regularly filed and served a statement of his costs and disbursements incurred in both trials, and included therein an item of two hundred dollars on account of attorney fees, claiming such under section 7 of the Libel and Slander Act (Stats. 1871-2, p. 534), that section providing that “In case plaintiff recovers judgment he shall be allowed as costs one hundred ($100) dollars to cover counsel fees in addition to other costs.”

Respondent insists that the appeal must be dismissed for the reason that appellant has failed either to bring up any authenticated bill of exceptions in pursuance of rule 29 of the supreme court' [ 144 Cal. lii , 78 Pac. xii ] or any record such as is contemplated by sections 953a, 953b and 953c of the Code of Civil Procedure.

The record before us contains certain papers designated as…