
    Commonwealth vs. Elizabeth Ford.
    A magistrate’s copies of a complaint, warrant, officer’s return, and record of proceedings, ail on one paper, are sufficiently attested by the words “ a true copy,” signed by the magistrate, at the end of the record.
    Complaint on St. 1855, c. 215, § 17, for an unlawful sale of intoxicating liquors. The defendant, being found guilty by the justice to whom the complaint was made, and again on a trial in the superior court in Norfolk at September term 1859, moved in arrest of judgment, “ because the papers used at the trial of the same do not appear to be certified as true copies of the proceedings before the justice from whose judgment the defendant appealed to this court.” The copies of the complaint and warrant, officer’s return, justice’s record and bill of costs, were all on one paper, the only attestation upon which was at the end of the record, in these words, “ A true copy — Attest,” signed by the justice. Rockwell, J. overruled the motion, and the defendant alleged exceptions, which were overruled
    
      E. Worthington, for the defendant.
    
      S. H. Phillips, (Attorney General,) for the Commonwealth.
   By the Court,

on the ground that, the copies of the proceed ings being all on the same paper, the attestation at the end of the record was a sufficient attestation of all the proceedings, within the Rev. Sts. c. 138, § 2.  