
    Tharpe v. Pearce.
    Since the adoption of the code, in order to render any judgment of a tribunal in a sister State admissible in evidence in this State, it must be authenticated in the mode provided by the act of Congress, if that act applies to it; and if not, its authentication must be under the great seal of. the State, as required by section 3825 of the code in respect to foreign judgments, that section declaring that “Foreign laws and judgments must be authenticated under the great seal of their respective States.” Parol evidence alone, or in connection with docket entries whether original or a copy, is not admissible to establish here the rendition of a judgment by a justice of the peace in Alabama, or to prove the contents of such judgment.
    April 4, 1892.
    Argued at the last term.
    Foreign judgment. Evidence. Before Judge Martin. Muscogee superior court. May term, 1891.
    Pearce sued out attachment against Tharpe, returnable to a magistrate’s court of Muscogee county, upon the ground of the non-residence of Tharpe. He obtained a judgment in that court. Tharpe’s certiorari was overruled, and be excepted. The errors alleged in the petition for certiorari (which was not substantially controverted by the answer of the magistrate) were ; Upon the trial plaintiff introduced as a witness one Gibson and'offered to prove by him, orally, that in 1886 he was a justice of the peace at Crawford, Russell county, Alabama. Tlie defendant objected to the testimony as being.illegal and not competent to prove such fact in the magistrate’s court in Georgia. The objection was overruled. Plaintiff then handed Gibson a small book and pointed to the following entries therein : “1886, Aug. 24, summons issued; 1886, Aug. 28, returned executed; continued by court until next 4 Saturday in September; Sept. 28, case called for trial, both parties present. This day came the plaintiff and defendant in open court, after hearing allegations and proof of the case, a judgment was rendered against the defendant for sixty-eight dollars. (Signed) P. J. Gibson, J. P.”—and asked the witness if that was the judgment he rendered in Alabama. To this question and the affirmative answer the defendant objected as illegal and incompetent to prove the action of the justice, or to prove the judgment. This objection was overruled. Plaintiff' then offered in evidence the original judgment, to which defendant objected as not being legally or properly proved. This objection was overruled. The plaintiff testified that defendant owed the debt and it was due, and that he had sent the account to Alabama to be sued, and now he brought the judgment obtained. This was not denied, and the magistrate rendered judgment for the plaintiff, which also was assigned as error.
   Judgment reversed.

A. A. Dozier, by brief, for plaintiff in error.-

J. L. Willis, by brief, contra.  