
    Levi E. Ward v. Henry W. Baker.
    Courts op Other States ; Powers and Jurisdiction; Presumption. It will be presumed, in tbe absence of evidence to the contrary, in favor of courts of general jurisdiction of sister states, that they have the authority they assume to exercise, and that the modes of procedure pursued by them, though different from those established by the laws of this state, are authorized by the laws of the states in which they act.
    
      Error from Coffey District Court.
    
    Action by Baker on a judgment rendered on the 17th of August 1868 by the supreme court of Chautauqua county, state of New York, in an action then pending in said court in favor of Baker as plaintiff, and against Ward as defendant. The petition set forth a copy of said New York judgment, which shows that the same was entered by the clerk in vacation, pursuant to the following statement, which was signed and verified by Ward, to-wit:
    
      (Title.) “I, Levi E. Ward, authorize judgment by confession, without action, to be entered against me in favor of Henry W. Baker for $434.22, for the following cause: On the 6th of March 1865, at Sinclairville, the plaintiff indorsed for my accommodation a promissory note made by me, and dated on said 6th of March 1865, payable to the order of Henry W. Baker at the Jamestown Bank, for the sum of $350, and use, and delivered the same to me. Said note having become due and owing, and not paid by me, the same was paid by the said Henry W. Baker, plaintiff, to the owner and holder thereof; and there remains unpaid from me to the said Baker on account of the payment by him of said note, and interest on said note, the sum of $434.22 aforesaid.”
    The transcript of said judgment is authenticated by the certificate of J. R. R., clerk, and by the further certificate of “Joseph Miller, presiding justice of the Fourth Judicial Department of the State of New York, composed of Allegany, Chautauqua, Cattaraugus, Erie, Genesee, Niagara, Orleans, and Wyoming,” that J. R. R. “is the clerk of the supreme court of the county of Chautauqua, that the seal by him affixed to the foregoing certificate is the seal of said court, and that this attestation of the said record is in due form.” These certificates are dated June 25th 1873. Trial at the May Term 1874 of the Coffey district court. The defendant objected to the introduction in evidence of the transcript of said New York judgment, “for that the same is irrelevant, incompetent and immaterial.” Objection overruled, and transcript admitted, and defendant excepted. Judgment in favor of Baker for $593.30 and costs, and Ward brings the case here on error.
    
      A. M. F. Randolph, Silas Fearl, and Ruggles & Sterry, for plaintiff in error.
    ' Stephen II. Allen, for defendant in error.
   The opinion of the court was delivered by

Brewer, J.:

The questions in this case have already been decided by this court in the recent cases of Dodge v. Coffin, and Haynes v. Cowen, 15 Kas. 277, 637, and no further opinion is necessary. For reasons given in the opinions in those cases, this judgment will be affirmed.

All the Justices concurring.  