Statute ⅠⅠ.
Chap. XI.—An Act to prescribe the mode in which the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings in each State, shall be authenticated so as to take effect in every other State.
Act of March 27, 1804, ch. 56.
Legislative acts, records and judicial proceedings of the several states how to be authenticated; and
the effect thereof.Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the acts of the legislatures of the several states shall be authenticated by having the seal of their respective states affixed thereto: That the records and judicial proceedings of the courts of any state, shall be proved or admitted in any other court within the United States, by the attestation of the clerk, and the seal of the court annexed, if there be a seal, together with a certificate of the judge, chief justice, or presiding magistrate, as the case may be, that the said attestation is in due form. And the said records and judicial proceedings authenticated as aforesaid, shall have such faith and credit given to them in every court within the United States, as they have by law or usage in the courts of the state from whence the said records are or shall be taken.[1]
Approved, April 30, 1790.
Statute ⅠⅠ.April 30, 1790.
[Expired.]
Chap. XII.—An Act to provide for mitigating or remitting the forfeitures and penalties accruing under the revenue laws, in certain cases therein mentioned.
- ↑ Art. 4, sec. 1, Constitution of the United States.—The decisions of the courts of the United States upon this statute, and on the introduction in evidence of the “acts, records, and judicial proceedings of the States,” have been:
Under the fourth article and 1st section of the constitution of the United States, and the act of 26th May, 1790, if a judgment has the effect of record evidence in the courts of the State from which it is taken, it has the same effect in the courts of every other State; and the plea of nil debet is not a good plea to an action brought upon such judgment in a court of another State. Mills v. Duryee, 7 Cranch, 483; 2 Cond. Rep. 578. See Leland v. Wilkinson, 6 Peters, 317. United States v. Johns, 4 Dall. 412. Ferguson v. Harwood, 7 Cranch, 408; 2 Cond. Rep. 548. Drummond’s adm’rs v. Magruder’s trustees, 9 Cranch, 122; 3 Cond. Rep. 303.
Under the act of May 26, 1790, prescribing the mode in which the public records in each State shall be authenticated, so as to take effect in every other State, copies of the legislative acts of the several States, authenticated by having the seal of the State affixed thereto, are conclusive evidence of such acts in every other State. No other formality is required, than the annexation of the seal, and in the absence of all contrary proof, it must be presumed to have been done by an officer having the custody thereof, and competent authority to do the act. United States v. Amedy, 11 Wheat. 392; 6 Cond. Rep. 362.
The record of a judgment in one State is conclusive in another, although it appears that the suit in which it was rendered was commenced by an attachment of property, the defendant having afterwards appeared and taken defence. Mayhew v. Thatcher, 6 Wheat. 129; 5 Cond. Rep. 34.
In an action upon a judgment, in another State, the defendant cannot plead any fact in bar which contradicts the record on which the suit is brought. Field v. Gibbs, Peters’ C. C. R. 155. See Green v. Sarmiento, Peters’ C. C. R. 74. Blount v. Darrah, 4 Wash. C. C. R. 657. Turner v. Waddington, 3 Wash. C. C. R. 126.
