
    Kellogg against Mauncy.
    In an action of debt, in a justice’s court, on a judgment obtained before another justice, the defendant denied the ex. istence of such judgment, and the plaintiff produced the certificate of the other justice of the judgment recovered, which, not being objected to, the plaintiff obtained judgment in the secondactionThe certificate of the justice was held to be prima facie evidence, and not being questioned, was sufficient to support the judgment in debt.
    ON a return to the certiorari in this cause, it appeared, that the defendant in error brought an action of debt against the plaintiffin error, before the justice, on ajudgmeht recovered before another justice. The defendant below denied the existence of any such judgment. The plaintiff below thereupon produced a certificate, under the hand and seal of the other justice, of the judgment obtained before him. The defendant not objecting to the certificate, nor denying the handwriting of the justice, and as he had, the day before the trial, admitted the former judgment to be for a just debt, the justice gave judgment for the amount recovered before the other justice, with the costs.
    
      Ingalls,for the plaintiffin error.
    Henry, contra.
   Per Curiam.

The only question is, whether the declaration of the plaintiff below was fully proved. The certificate of the former judgment, which was produced, and iiot objected to, tvas prima facie evidence, at least, of the existence of the judgment; and as this evidence was not Contradicted or questioned by the' defendant below, it must be considered as sufficient to support the judgment.-

Judgment affirmed;  