‘fhall be given in each of thefe States to the Records, acts, and
‘‘ judicial proceedings of the Courts and Magiftrates of every other
‘‘State.’’ See Art. 4. This then is a Union of which no precedent is to be found in any other part of the globe (for the Swiʃs Cantons do not furnifh a ftrict analogy) and its defign muft certainly have been to form a ftronger cement, than that by which the States themfelves were hitherto connected, or by which they are, at this day, connected with other nations. If, indeed, it was intended by this article, that a Judgment in a Siʃter State fhould have no greater force, or validity, than a judgment in France, or England, would it not have been abfurd to fay that “ ƒull faith and credit fhall be given,” when nothing more was required, than that the record fhould be confidered as prima ƒacie evidence of a fact, which was ftill liable to exception and denial ? On the other hand, if it is admitted that by this article, the authors of the fyftem intended to make a Judgment in New-Jerʃey as binding in Pennʃylvania, as if it had been obtained in any County oƒ this State, no other form of words, or mode of expreffion, could have been felected more clearly to convey that intention. The very term Record muft be conclufive ; for what is a record in one State, by this article, becomes fuch in every State, and it is the nature of a record to preclude every idea of fcrutiny and contradiction.
2d. With refpect to the fecond point ; there can be no difference between a Judgment in a Foreign attachment, and one obtained in any other fpecies of action, fince the Defendant, by entering fpecial bail at any time before payment of the money, may diffolve the attachment, and conteft the Plaintiff's demand in that Court, in which it was originally made. Nor is it a greater hardfhip to compel him to do fo, than it is to require the Plaintiff to bring all his witneffes hither from a diftant State. Befides, in cafes of attachment, Judgment is never given before the fecond term, and the Garniʃhee has always in his power to fend notice to the Defendant.
The Court expreffing a defire to hear the laws of Maʃʃachuʃetts upon the fubject of Attachments, Ingerʃoll, read the following fections from a law of that State paffed ann' 32 G. 2 Sect. 2 “ It fhall
‘‘ and may be lawful for any perfons entitled to any action &c.
‘‘ againft any perfon abʃconding or abʃent out oƒ this Province to caufe
‘‘ the goods and eftate of fuch abfconding or abfent perfon to be at-
‘‘tached in the whofe hands foever the fame are or may be found : and
‘‘ the attaching any part thereof fhall fecure and make the whole
‘‘ that is in fuch perfons hands liable in the law to refpond the Judg-
‘‘ment to be recovered upon fuch procefs, it fo much there be, and
‘‘no farther, and fhall be fubjected to be taken in execution for fa-
‘‘ tisfaction thereof, or fo far as the value thereof will extend, and
‘‘ the perfon in whofe hands they are fhall expofe them accordingly.’’ Sect. 3. prefcribes the notice (i.e. a fummons and copy of the declaration to be given to the agent &c. of the debtor, in cafe no goods appear, which being duly ferved and returned, is made fufficient to being forward a trial, without further fummons, ‘‘ unlefs the princi-
