Whether the district court erred in denying Appellant George Tolbert's motion to proceed in forma pauperis

QUESTION(S) PRESENTED BH actording Yo 2€ US.0. See¥ion 19 186g) Plan Vf. Appellanl George folberl Could nol Proceed in Vo Pauperrs On Case No. IO-UYB ave, bes yi orma. Ys Proceed So Yorma Pampers in We ery, caved Yor Ube SouVYhern Districl oF By 0 _ cack Corr # NOR. This Appeal was whe, ve No. 3:79-@v0131 “Kule 3d), and Chere idas no (2 “Ul pasuaet Yo Csrexi (be Seekson 1415 (g). ur ther (: iqalron prrsua nf , femised on Whe above 3 an Ancarcerated Person ofthe nae SecLion MUS (4) Dislrtele Could (s), ele Liber ale Gal ress Yo Vhe U.S. Const Vationa| . > Callous and vetkK less abused “, rights and Abuse af rs a Vhesr Jarlors because Uhe Drasone, & ; ee i have “Sleruck Ox” FBlhol evhaudlenf 7 / a and/or Save remeckie< Us no avas/< ak , edo all oF Asc Clasms Case No. /£ 00 dene “od Cinoks Cord 2, Drejuelice. 2s Poss ro, Dismissed ‘the (edera Cours) olees nok ener Vasn or oleny’s Tolbeck Vo proceed in Voema Danperss ancl Cou Vimel deadline to pay Court Yees Up proceed The Csay Vx ic . Vhe Vees anya Willer Asmssin Comp faint (a) and s¥sl/ olses no¥ en Ve, Comp/asak, ay Can sIberk get remedy (Lov ConVYut sonal Fig hc Woh tsone 2 Folbe¥ never Ssan VrusY Vad OV Seer (he Je. Money leave Tolbects accoun ¥,