and do not seem well founded upon the principles of international law. The discussion at the time,-1826,-led to no other result than to present the subject to the more deliberate consideration of the two nations. The question, however, was satisfactorily arranged by the commercial treaty of the 5th of June, 1854, between the two countries, the fourth article of which provides, that the citizens and inhabitants of the United States shall have the right to navigate the river St. Lawrence and the canals of Canada, used as the means of communicating between the great lakes and the Atlantic ocean, with their vessels, boats, and crafts, as fully and freely as the subjects of her Britanic Majesty, subject only to the same tolls and other assessments as now are, or may hereafter, be exacted of her Majesty's said subjects; it being understood, however, that the British government retains the right of suspending this privilege, on giving due notice thereof to the government of the United States. (De Cussy, Droit Maritime, liv. 2, ch. 28; Wheaton, Elem. Int. Law, pt. 2, ch. 4, § 19; Wheaton, Hist. Law of Nations, pp. 511, et seq.; Phillimore, On International Law, vol, 1, § 170; Congress. Docs., 1827-1828, No. 43; Hansard, Parl. Deb., vol. 127, No. 6, pp, 1073-4; U. S. Statutes at Large, vol. 10, p. 1091.)

CHAPTER VII.

RIGHTS OF LEGISLATION AND JURISDICTION.

CONTENTS.

-

1. Exclusive power of civil and criminal legislation-2. Law of real property - 3. Law of personal property — § 4. Law of contracts 25. Exceptions to rule of comity in contracts-26. Rule of judicial proceeding 7. Law of personal capacity and duty-28. Droit d'aubaine and droit de retraction-29. Law of escheat-? 10. Foreign marriages-2 11. Foreign divorces-2 12. Laws of trade and navigation - 13. Laws of bankruptcy-14. Law of treason and other crimes-15. Judicial power of a state-16. Jurisdiction with respect to actions-17. Jurisdiction of a state over its own citizens- 18. Over alien residents- 19. Over real property 20. Over personal property- 21. Rule of decision in case of personal property-22. Distinction between contracts inter vivos and causa mortis 23. Between assignments in bankruptcy and voluntary assignments-24. Jurisdiction over public and private vessels on the high seas- 25. Public armed vessels and their prises in foreign ports26. Private vessels in foreign ports-2 27. Summary of the judicial powers of a state-2 28. Extradition of criminals- 29. Extra territorial operation of a criminal sentence-230. Conclusiveness of foreign judgments in personal actions-31. Conclusivenes of foreign judgments in rem32. Foreign courts, how far exclusive judges of their own jurisdiction — 33. Proof of foreign laws-234. Proof of foreign contracts and instruments-235. Of foreign judgments and documentary evidence.

§ 1. We have already remarked, that the exclusive power of civil and criminal legislation, is one of the essential rights of every independent and sovereign state. An infringement upon this right is a limitation of the natural sovereignty of the state, and if extended to a general denial of this power,

it is justly considered as depriving the state of one of its most essential attributes, and as reducing it to the position of dependence upon the will of another. In such a case, it can no longer claim to be numbered among independent and sovereign states, for it no longer possesses the attributes necessary to entitle it to rank as such among the nations of the world, viz.: the right to exercise its volition, and the capacity to contract obligations. (Vide Ante, chapter iii., § 1, and chapter iv., §14; Vattel, Droit des Gens, liv. 1, ch. 1, § 4; Wheaton, Elm. Int. Law, pt. 2, ch. 2, §1; Riquelme, Derecho, Pub. Int., lib. 2, tit. 1, cap. 1; Polson, Law of Nations, sec. 5; Garden, De Diplomatie, tome 1, pt. 3, §7; Merlin, Repertoire, verb. Souveraineté; Dalloz, Repertoire verb. Souveraineté.)

§ 2. This sovereign right of legislation extends, (with the exceptions hereafter to be mentioned,) to the regulation of all real or immoveable property within the territorial limits of the state, no matter by what title such property may be held, or whether it belongs to aliens or to citizens of the state. The law of the place, where real or immovable property is situate, or the lex loci rei sitae, governs in everything relating to the tenure, title, and transfer of such property. Hence it is, that the descent, device, or conveyance of real property, in a foreign country, must be governed by, and executed according to, the local laws of the state where such property is situate. And where these local laws prescribe, as to instruments for the transfer of real property, particular forms which can only be observed in the place where it is situated, such as the registry of a deed, or the probate of a will, the transfer cannot be executed in a foreign country. But, by the rules of international jurisprudence, recognized among the different nations of the European continent, if the property is allowed, by the lex loci rei sitae, to be alienated by deed or will, and the local laws do not require forms which must necessarily be observed in the place where it is situated, the deed or will may be executed according to the law of the place where it is made. But the application of the rule is less liberal in the United States and Great Britain; the formalities required by the laws of the state where the land lies being essential to the validity of the transfer. (Wheaton, Elem. Int. Law, pt. 2, ch. 2, § 3; Huberus, Praelect.,

lib. 1, tit. 3, § 15; Foelix, Droit Int. Privé, § 52; Story, Conflict of Laws, §§ 364–373, 428-483; Robinson v. Campbell, 3 Wheaton Rep., p. 217; United States v. Crosby, 7 Cranch Rep., p. 115; Massé, Droit Commercial, tome 2, §§ 65, et seq.; Bowyer, Universal Public Law, ch. 16; Westlake, Private Int. Law, ch. 4; Coppin v. Coppin, 2 P. W. Rep., p. 291; Brodie v. Barry, 2 Ves. and Be. Rep., p. 127; Dundas v. Dundas, 2 Dow. and Cl. Rep., p. 349; Johnson v. Tilford, 1 Russ. and My. Rep., p. 244.)

§3. With respect to personal or movable property, the same rule generally prevails, except that the law of the place where the person to whom it belonged was domiciled at the time of his decease, governs the succession, ab intestato, to his personal effects. So, also, the law of the place where any instrument relating to personal property is executed, by a person domiciled in that place, governs, as to the form, execution and interpretation of the instrument. Thus, the validity, effect and interpretation of a testament of personal property, must be determined by the law of the place where it is made, and where the party making it is domiciled. Lex loci domicilii regit actum. The rule is applicable to every transfer, alienation, or disposition made by the owner, whether it be inter vivos, or causa mortis, and is founded on the maxim that personal property has no locality, but adheres to the person of its owner. Mobilia sequuntur personam. There are exceptions to this rule; first, in cases where the local or customary law of the place gives to the particular property a necessarily implied locality; and second, in special cases provided for by local statutes. Thus, by the laws of some countries, certain movables are considered as annexed to immovables, either by incorporation, or as incidents, and therefore partake of the character of the latter, such as fixtures of personal property in houses, under the English common law. Heritable bonds, ground rents, and other rents on land, are ranked, by the Scottish law, among the class of immovables. Contracts respecting public funds, or stocks, may be required to be carried into execution, according to the local law; and the same rule may properly apply to the transfer of shares in bank, insurance, canal, railroad, and other companies. which owe their existence to, and are regulated by, peculiar local laws. Subject to these, and perhaps some other excep

tions, the general rule is, that a transfer of personal property, good by the law of the owner's domicil, is valid wherever it may be situate. (Wheaton, Elem. Int. Law, pt. 2, ch. 2, § 5; Story, Conflict of Laws, §§ 374-423; Huberus, Praelect., lib. 1, tit. 3, §§ 14, 15; Foelix, Droit Int. Privé, § 37; Bynkershoek, Quaest. Jur. Pub., lib. 1, cap. 16; Henry, Foreign Law. App. p. 196; Merlin, Repertoire, verb. Loi., § 6, No. 3; Massé, Droit Commercial, tome 2, §§ 66, et seq.; Bowyer, Universal Public Law, ch. 16; U. S. v. Bank of U. S., 8 Rob. Rep., p. 262; Black v. Zacharie, 3 Howard Rep., p. 483; Westlake, Private Int. Law, ch. 8; Sill v. Worswick, 1 H. Bl. Rep., p. 690; Riquelme, Derecho Pub. Int., lib. 2, tit. 1, caps. 1-5; Gardner, Institutes, p. 122, et seq.)

§ 4. The general law of contracts is, that the validity of every contract is to be decided by the law of the place where it is made, or, in legal phraseology, the lex loci contractus is to govern in everything respecting the form, interpretation, obligation, and effect of the contract. "The rule," says Story, "is founded, not merely in the convenience, but in the necessities of nations; for, otherwise, it would be impracticable for them to carry on an extensive intercourse with each other. The whole system of agencies, purchases and sales, credits, and negotiable instrumens, rests on this foundation; and the nation, which should refuse to acknowledge the common principles, would soon find its whole commercial intercourse reduced to a state like that in which it now exists with savage tribes." "In this, as a general principle, there seems a universal consent of courts and jurists, foreign and domestic. The same rule applies, vice versâ, to the invalidity of contracts; if void or illegal by the law of the place of the contract, they are generally held void and illegal everywhere."

We have already mentioned exceptions to this rule, in the transfer of real property, which is governed by the lex loci rei sitae, and in the transfer of immovable property, which, though generally governed by the lex domicili, is, in some cases, subject to the same rule as real property. The lex loci contractus cannot apply to the personal status and capacity of the citizens of a state, or to cases where it would conflict with the laws of another state in respect to its police, its