The paper, of which a copy is set forth in the opinion, was filed in the District Court of the Sixth District, on the twenty-seventh day of July, 1850.

"Whereupon the Court, then being in session, entered up the following order in the minutes, which were signed by the Judge at the close of that day’s proceedings, viz.

“ Chapin v. Robert Thompson et al. On this day came into Court the defendants, by their attorney, and presented their written confession of judgment in favor of said plaintiffs in the sum of fourteen hundred dollars, with interest at the rate of five per cent, per month from May 21st, 1850.

“ Whereupon it is considered and adjudged by the Court that the said plaintiffs do have and recover of the said defendants the sum of fifteen hundred and fifty-six dollars and eleven cents debt, with interest thereon at five per cent, per month, together with the cost of suit.”

An entry of said order was made in the “ Judgment Book,” which by law was required to be kept for the entry of judgments. The entry in the Judgment Book is not signed by the Judge, any further than that his signature appears on a subsequent page of the book, between which and the page of the entry, several other judgments intervene.

February 12th, 1861, the plaintiffs applied to the District Court, and obtained leave to sue out execution on said judgment. Subsequently, upon proceedings taken on part of the defendants, the execution was set aside, upon the ground that the judgment was ineffectual to support it. Whereupon plaintiff moved the Court to enter judgment nunc pro tunc, it being claimed by the plaintiff that the warrant of attorney and the minutes of the Court furnished a sufficient authorization for the Court to render perfect by its judgment what had been by accident or mistake left defective. This application was refused; and from the rulings of the Court on these two points the plaintiff has appealed.

The other facts are sufficiently stated in the opinion.