¶1 The defendant pleaded that the matter was res judicata.
¶2 The former judgment was as follows: “This cause came on for trial; after hearing the evidence, it is adjudged that this warrant be dismissed as to Jonathan Davis;” and there was further judgment, that the plaintiffs recover of the other defendant, in that action, the amount of the bond sued on, with interest and costs. The plaintiffs insisted that this was, as to Jonathan Davis, merely a judgment of nonsuit, and excepted to the admission of evidence as to the proceedings had before the Justice. “Evidence of what a Justice meant by the judgment in the former action is improper, for the entry must speak for itself. But it is otherwise as to the fact whether the merits were inquired into upon rendering it.” Ferrell v. Underwood, 13 N. C. (2 Dev.), 111. This was cited and approved in Justice v. Justice, 25 N. C. (3 Ired.), 58; Massey v. Lemon, 27 N. C. (5 Ired.), 557; Carr v. Woodleff, 51 N. C. (6 Jones), 400, and in other cases.
¶3*503 By consent, the Court found the facts. It found “that there had been a trial on the merits upon the issues involved in this action, and a judgment heretofore had and rendered between the parties hereto, to-wit, before a Justice of the Peace, in this county, on 9th June, 1S90; that said Justice rendered his said judgment solely and entirely upon the ground that it was pi oven to his satisfaction that there was no obligee named in the bond at the time the defendant executed the same, and that said Justice did not hear or consider any equitable claim that the plaintiffs had against the defendant on account of his having executed said bond.” This is conclusive, nor is the latter part contradictory. Unless the former proceeding was terminated by a nonsuit the judgment therein is conclusive, and it is not a nonsuit necessarily because in form a judgment against the plaintiffs. It is found that the plaintiff failed on the merits, and though he may have had other merits or an equitable ground of maintaining the action, it was his own fault he did not present it on the trial, nor appeal from the judgment.
¶4 The judgment not being a nonsuit, it concludes the parties not only as to all matters pleaded, but as to all which could or should have been.
¶5 No error.