
    HANDLEY vs. RUSSELL.
    
    
      January 16th.
    
    Minutes of the countycourt are conclusive evidence of wha£ is done in ttiafc court.
    lo per centi damages not given on coftsi
    THIS was án action for a malicious prosecution, brought by Russell against Handley in the Logan quarter session court, and removed to Muhlenburg by change of venue.
    The act for which Russell wás prosecuted having been done by him as a deputy for Ürbin Éwirtg, sheriff of Logan county, the plaintiff on the trial to prove that said Ewing was sworn in as sheriff, produced á copy of the minutes, the only record of the court df Logan county, in the Words following, to wit: “ Logan county, set: July county court, 1798 — -Urbin Ewing, Esq: háving produced á commission from his excellency the governor, appointing him sheriff of Logan eoiinty, sworn to the same, having given bond and security according td láw.” '
    The defendant below offered to prove by parol evidence, that said Ewing had not in fact taken the oath of office required by the constitution. The court refused to admit this evidence, being of opinion that the said co^ py of the minutes of Logan county court was “ conclusive evidence that said Ewing had taken the oaths of office.” An exception was taken to this decision, and it assigned for error.
    
      
      January 18th.
    
    
      
       Abfent, Edwards, Cm J.
    
   Judge Trimble,

delivered the opinion of the court; The judgment must be affirmed; The minutes were clearly conclusive, and not to be contradicted by parol evidence.

Judgment affirmed;

On reading the orders in this cause, the clerk said that the damages below were so small (one penny) that he had not entered a judgment for 10 per cent, thereon, nor had he entered a judgment for 10 per cent, on the costs, as this court had uniformly determined that 10 per cent, damages were not given on costs.

BY tSe Court. — -You are correct.  