1786.
the judgments given in another ; but feem chiefly intended to oblige each State to receive the records of another as full evidence of fuch Acts and judicial proceedings.[♦]
Whatever might have been the effect of an order or judgment of the Court of New-Jerʃey, if it had actually difcharged the Defendant from the Plaintiff's demand, the prefent order, as well as the Act of Affembly on which it is founded, is local in its terms, and goes no further than to difcharge him from his imprifonment in the Gaol oƒ Eʃʃex Country in the State oƒ New-Jerʃey; which, if the falleft obedience were paid to it, could not authorize a fubfequent difcharge from imprifonment, in another Gaol, in another State.
The motion is, therefore, not granted.
SUPREME
[♦]See poft.Phelps vs. Holker, and Miller vs. Holt in the Supreme Court.
