§ 1300. Independent of the question as to proof, there is another question, as to the effect, which is to be given to foreign judgments, when duly authenticated, in the tribunals of other nations, either as matter to maintain a suit, or to found a defence to a suit. Upon this subject, also, different nations are not entirely agreed in opinion or practice. Most, if not all of them, profess to give some effect to such judgments; but many exceptions are allowed, which either demolish the whole efficiency of the judgment, as such, or leave it open to collateral proofs, which in a great measure impair its validity. To treat suitably of this subject would require a large dissertation, and appropriately belongs to another branch of public law.[1]
§ 1301. The general rule of the common law, recognised both in England and America, is, that foreign judgments are prima facie evidence of the right and matter, which they purport to decide. At least, this may be asserted to be in England the preponderating weight of opinion; and in America it has been held, upon many occasions,[2] though its correctness has been recently questioned, upon principle and authority, with much acuteness.[3]
§ 1302. Before the revolution, the colonies were deemed foreign to each other, as the British colonies- ↑ See authorities in preceding note, and Walker v. Whittier, 1 Doug. R. 1; Phillips v. Hunter, 2 H. Bl. 409; Johnson's Dig. of New-York Rep. Evid. V.; Starkie on Evidence, P. 2, § 67, p. 206; id. § 68, p. 214; Bissell v. Briggs, 9 Mass. R. 462; Bigelow's Dig. Evid. C., Judgment, D. E. F. H. I.; Hitchcock v. Aicken, 1 Caine's R. 460.
- ↑ See authorities in preceding notes; and Starkie on Evid, P. 2, § 67, p. 206 to 216, and Notes of American Ed. ibid.; Plummer v. Woodbourne, 4 Barn. Cresw. 625.
- ↑ Starkie on Evid. P. 2, § 67, p. 206 to 216; Bigelow's Dig. Evid. C.; and cases cited in Kaims's Equity, B. 3, ch. 8, p. 375.
