Johnson, Ex'r. v. Hayes

thought that the twenty-eighth section of the act was designed to give a specific and exclusive mode or remedy for the revival and execution of judgments before justices of the peace, whether before the same justice who rendered the judgment, or any other justice o.f the State. The provisions of that section are beneficial both to the creditor and debtor, by facilitating the remedy ■ and saving costs, and by confining the proceedings strictly within the first judgment. All the checks furnished by that section might be avoided in an action of debt commenced de novo, and in which .the first judgment should be used only as evidence; whereas, the act by requiring la transcript to be filed before any other justice by whom proceedings are taken to enforce it, regards it in the nature of a judgment [wherever filed, and requires the proceedings to be in a particular [form by scire facias to show cause why execution shall not be issu-led upon it.

Judgment reversed.