the defendants to recover, it was Held:That the responsability of the defendants was governed by the law of Ontario :-Tait, J., 1888, Glasgow and London Ins. Co. vs Canadian Pacific Ry Co., 34 L. C. J., 1; 20 R. L., 157.

5. Contracts disposing of real estate or immovables are governed, as to their validity, by the law of the country in which real estate is situated and by the law of the place where the contract is made:-Stuart, J., 1885, Bélanger vs Mann, 11 Q. L. R., 71; 8 L. N., 188; 14 R. L., 42.

6. Le vendeur non payé de marchandises vendues en Angleterre peut exercer le stoppage in transitu reconnu par les lois anglaises bien que nos lois ne l'admettent pas :-Andrews, J., 1888, Rogers vs The Mississipi and Dominion SS. Co., 14 Q. L. R., 99; 11 L. N., 317.

7. Les règles suivantes adoptées en Angleterre sont des principes de droit public et doivent être suivies en Canada: 10 Le contrat de vente qui a reçu sa perfection dans un pays étranger doit être exécuté, et l'exécution peut en être poursuivie devant les tribunaux anglais, lors même que l'une des parties au contrat avait, à la connaissance de l'autre, l'intention, en achetant, de violer la loi anglaise.

8. 20 Pour qu'un étranger, qui a vendu des marchandises que l'acheteur voulait introduire frauduleusement en Angleterre, ne puisse recouvrer le prix des marchandises vendues, il faut non seulement qu'il ait connu la mauvaise intention de l'acheteur, mais qu'il ait participé à la fraude:-C. R., 1898, Lebœuf vs Lavallée, 5 R. de J., 382.

9. A contract made by a physician and surgeon duly qualified by the laws of the province of Quebec, where he has his domicile, to render professional services in the State of Vermont, by the laws of which State he is prohibited from practising, is illegal, and he cannot recover his charges for such services before the courts of this province-White, J., 1900, Rugg vs Lewis, R. J. Q., 17 C. S., 206.

II. Mariage.-10. Dans le cas d'un mariage contracté dans un pays sauvage, d'après les usages du lieu, sans l'intervention d'aucun prêtre ou magistrat, dans une contrée où il n'existe pas de corps de droit, lequel mariage a été suivi de cohabitation prolongée, il y a communauté de biens entre les époux, quant aux biens situés dans le Bas-Canada-Monk, J., 1867, Connolly & Woodrich, 11 L.C.J., 197; 3 L. C. L. J., 14; 1 R. L., 253; 14 R. L., 37; 17 R. J. R. Q., 75, 266, 517, 519, 531, 534, 541, 544, 550, 552 et s., 559 et s., 562, 571, 573.

11. In the absence of proof of the laws of the place where parties had their domicile when they were married out of Lower Canada, the Court cannot take notice of or be governed by any other laws than those in force in Lower Canada in deciding upon the matrimonial rights of the parties:-C. R., 1852, Brodie & Cowan, 7 L.C.J., 96; 12 R. J. R. Q., 64. 12. The parties in the suit were married in the city of New York, where they then had

their domicile. Later, they both established their domicile in the province of Quebec, but the respondent since then has obtained a divorce before the Supreme Court of the state of New York, and instituted the present action against her husband in the province of Quebec, Held: without any previous authorization. That the divorce which the respondent has obtained in the State of New York does not affect the appellant, who then had his domicile in the province of Quebec :-C. B. R., 1883, Fisk & Stevens, 27 L.C.J., 228; 5 L.N., 79; 6 L.N., 329; 8 L.N., 42, 53; 14 R.L., 38; 16 R.L., 561; 3 D. C. A., 293.

13. Il n'y a pas de communauté de biens, entre époux mariés sans contrat de mariage, en Angleterre, où ils étaient alors domiciliés et qui sont venus résider en permanence dins notre pays:-Q. B., 1848, Rogers et al. & Rogers, 3 R. de L., 255; 14 R.L., 37; 16 R.L., 653; 2 R. J. R. Q., 290; 21 R. J. R. Q., 65; 3 L.C. J., 64.-C. R., 1877, Astill & Hallé, 4 Q. L. R., 120.-Mackay, J., 1879, Dalton & King, 9 R. L., 548.-Mackay, J., 1879, Wiggins & Morgan, 9 R. L., 546.

14. The claim to customary dower is a real right and is governed by the law of the place where the real property of the husband is situated--C. B. R., 1880, Ericksen & Cuvillier, 25 L. C. J., 80; 3 L. N., 285, 290.

15. C'est la loi de la situation des immeubles, et non celle du lieu du mariage ou de la résidence et domicile des parties, qui doit prévaloir quant à l'existence du douaire coutumier sur les immeubles du mari situés dans cette province; et l'acte par lequel la femme a renoncé à son douaire et qui a été fait selon les formalités requises par les lois du Massachusetts où il avait été passé, est valide:-Gill, J., 1896, Prunier vs Ménard et vir et al., 3 R. de J., 153.

16. Deux Canadiens qui se marient à l'étranger, et qui s'y établissent, sont censés renoncer à leur domicile d'origine et sont gouvernés par la loi étrangère quant aux effets civils de leur mariage :-C. R., 1899, renv., Marchildon Vs Chandonnet, R. J. Q., 17 C. S., 226.

17. The defendant had seized against the plaintiff's husband, property which she claimed as being her own in an opposition. She was described in this opposition as being separated as to property from her said husband. The opposition was not contested, except as to the costs thereof, inasmuch as the defendant had acted in good faith when seizing the property as belonging to her husband. Her opposition having been maintained, she now claimed damages for the alleged illegal seizure.

18. The matrimonial rights of the consorts are governed by the domicile, not by the mere residence of the husband at the date of the marriage. The original domicile of the husband therefore is not lost by mere residence abroad.

19. In this case, the plaintiff's husband merely resided in New Hampshire when they

married, and consequently they now were in community of property. She, therefore, could not bring this action in her own name :-C. R., 1898, Brien vs Marchildon, R. J. Q., 15 C. R., 318.

20. Des époux domiciliés et mariés dans le Bas-Canada sont régis dans leurs relations comme tels par la loi du Bas-Canada, lors même qu'ils vont s'établir à l'étranger.

21. La vente par la femme ainsi mariée, conjointement avec son mari, mais sans mention d'autorisation de ce dernier, faite dans l'Etat de New York, où cette autorisation n'est pas requise, d'immeubles situés dans le Bas-Canada, est absolument nulle, tant sous le rapport du statut personnel, qui régit la personne de la femme, que sous le rapport du statut réel, quant à l'aliénation des immeubles.

22. La ratification subséquente, avec l'autorisation du mari, ne peut valider une semblable vente, et n'a l'effet d'aliéner la propriété que du jour de telle ratification:-Q. B., Laviolette & Martin, 11 L. C. R., 254; 2 L. C. J., 61; 5 L. C. J., 211.

A receiver, appointed

III-Personnes.-23. under the statutes of New York to an insolvent Insurance Company, (whose powers and func tions are the same as those of a foreign assignee in bankruptcy), cannot intervene in a case in the S. C., here, wherein monies belonging to the company have been attached before judgment on the ground of Insolvency and secretion of estate, and claim to be paid the monies so attached [less plaintiff's costs] for distribution in New York, the legal domicile of the company :-Q.B., 1871, Osgoode & Steele, 16 L. C. J., 141; 22 R. J. R. Q., 330, 519. C. B. R., 1893, Penis & The Quebec Bank, R. J. Q., 2 B. R., 566; R. J. Q., 3 C. S., 122.

24. Where an action was brought in the province of Quebec, by the plaintiff as receiv er to a corporation in liquidation domiciled in Ontario, and it was proved by the production of Ontario Statute that the plaintiff, as receiver, was duly authorized to represent the corporation in judicial proceedings, he may also appear in his quality of receiver in judicial proceedings before the court of the province of Quebec :-Q. B., 1887, Giles & Jacques, M. L. R., 1 C. S., 166; M. L. R., 7 Q. B., 456; 31 L. C. J., 266; 8 L. N., 100; 29 L. C. J., 138; Torrance, J., 1885, Giles & Phaneuf, M. L. R., 1 S. C., 322; 8 L. N., 245.-Loranger, J., 1898, Barker & Central Vermont Ry Co., 4 R. de J., 449, 454.

25. A receiver duly appointed to a foreign corporation, who is authorized, under the law of the place of his appointment, to appear in judicial proceedings, has the like right in the province of Quebec, for the recovery of a debt due to the corporation therein, without being specially authorized by the provincial court 80 to do:-Davidson, J., 1896, Young vs Consumers' Cordage Co., R. J. Q., 9 C. S., '471; R. J. Q., 7. B. R., 67.

26. Celui qui a été nommé par un tribunal français administrateur provisoire, pendant

une instance en nullité de testament, d'une succession ouverte en France, ne peut réclamer, à l'encontre d'un séquestre nommé par un tribunal de la province de Québec, la possession des biens dépendant de cette succession qui se trouvent en cette province.

27. Les tribunaux de la province de Québec ont pleine autorité pour décider de la possession provisoire des meubles et immeubles, sis en cette province, d'une personne décédée à l'étranger, et leurs décisions sont souveraines en ce pays.

28. L'article 80 du Code de procédure civile ne s'applique pas à l'administrateur provisoire ou séquestre des biens d'une succession, pendant un procès en nullité de testament, lequel ne représente nullement le défunt :-Pagnuelo, J., 1900, Lavoignat vs Mackay, R. J. Q., 17 C. S., 378.

The

29. A railway company, incorporated under the laws of Vermont, having become insolvent, was placed in the hands of receivers by judg ment of the circuit Court of Vermont, which vested them to operate it. The receivers took possession of the assets under this judgment, and by the laws of Vermont, the creditors of the company could not after that date execute any judgment against the railway. Some of the cars and locomotives of the company, of which the receivers had previously taken possession, and which were on the tracks of the Grand Trunk Railway in Montreal, in the course of the operation of the railway by the receivers, were seized by a creditor in execution of a judgment obtained in this province. judgment creditor was a mere prête-nom for an American creditor, and the promissory note upon which the judgment was obtained, was signed and made payable in Vermont, where the maker (the Railway Company) and the The payee were both domiciled. receivers opposed the execution of the judgment here on the ground that the seizing plaintiff in the cause was bound by the law of Vermont, which prevented him from executing the judgment against property of which the receivers had taken possession under the Judgment of the circuit Court of Vermont, and which vested them with the assets of the company against the creditors.

30. Held: As the contract was made in Vermont between persons domiciled in that State, the consequences attached to the contract by the laws of Vermont must be applied by our courts.

31. Inasmuch as one of the conditions and consequences of the contract with the railway company, made applicable to it by the laws of Vermont, was that the right of execution and sale of the property of the railway should cease on the appointment of receivers, this judgment creditor could not be allowed to proceed to execute his judgment against such property merely because it had passed from the territorial jurisdiction of the court of Vermont into that of the courts of this province :— Archibald, J., 1898, Barker vs The Central Ver

mont Ry Co., R. J. Q., 13 C. S., 2.-Loranger, J., 1898, same parties, R. J. Q., C. S., 467; 4 1. de J., 449; 1 R. J. Q., 51.

32. Action by the widow and children of one D., an employee of defendants, claiming $30,000 damages for his death, caused by the fall of a derrick on board the steamer "Muriel", a British ship, registered in England. The company defendant was incorporated by Statute of Canada, with its head office in the city of Quebec, where the contract of hiring D., a British subject, was originally entered into. The Superior court dismissed the action, holding that the law of Trinidad, which denies such an action, governed, because the action such was in tort, and by international law actions must be decided by the law of the country in which the tort was committed, and even if the action were deemed to be based on the contract of hiring, the case would be governed by the law of the place where such contract was made, because it was not to be executed there, but in the West India Islands.

33. Held. That the ship was then a part of the territory of England, and those, then and there, on board of her were not subject to the laws of the Island of Trinidad in respect to their mutual rights and liabilities connected with her loading and navigation, and therefore the doctrine of "common employment", or the maxim actio personalis moritur cum persona, if in force on said island, could not be set up in order to defeat plaintiff's action.

34. Even if, by reason of the assent of D. to certain changes in some of the terms of his engagement with defendants having been given by him in New York, it could be held that his contract of hiring was made in the latter city, this would be unimportant in the present case, there being no allegation or proof of any difference between the law of New York and that of this province, and such difference cannot be presumed.

35. The rules of international law are based on reason and justice, on a sort of moral necessity to do justice in order that justice may be done to us in return; its rules are flexible, and the circumstances of each particular case and taken have to be carefully considered

into account; and under the circumstances of the present case, only the most positive, clear and undisputed rule of international law would warrant the court in applying the law of Trinidad to enable defendants to defeat the claim of deceased's widow and children, pronounced by the law of this province to be a just one. No such rule existed, and, semble, even if the law of Quebec could not justly be applied, there was more authority for choosing the law of England than that of Trinidad.

36. The law to be applied in the case of responsibilities for an accident which happened on board a British ship, registered in England, belonging to a Canadian company, with its head office in Quebec, where the engagement of the deceased was made, the accident having taken place in the Island of Trinidad, Spain,

It could was that of the Province of Quebec. not be presumed to have been the intention of either D. or the defendants that the terms of his engagement with them or their mutual rights and liabilities connected with such enthe services to gagement, or be performed under them, should be interpreted or affected by any law other than that of this province, and it would be unreasonable and unjust to apply any foreign law to the decision of this cause so as to read into the contract of hiring the doctrine of "common employment", viz. : an implied consent by the party hired to take the risk of accident caused by the acts and defaults of his fellow employees, a consent which plainly defendants never intended exact or said D. to give :-C. R., 1896, Dupont vs Quebec Steamship Co., R. J. Q., 11 C. S., 188.

το

37. La qualité de père et d'enfant légitime est irrévocablement régie par les statuts personnels du temps où elle a été acquise, et ces statuts régissent aussi le mode par lequel cette qualité peut être prouvée :-Tellier, J., 1894, Lefebvre vs Digman, 3 R. de J., 194.

38. In the present case, the pretended right of the wife, to the ownership of $3,000, involves a question of her status and capacity to contract, and is therefore governed by our Law under article 6, C. c. :-White, J., 1897, McNamara vs Constantineau, 3 R. de J., 483.

39. Les mots "droits de gage" dans le deuxième alinéa de l'art. 6 du Code civil, s'entendent du nantissement dont il est question aux articles 1968 et suivants, et non du gage que l'article 1981 accorde au créancier sur les biens de son débiteur-Loranger, J., 1898, Barker vs The Central Vermont Ry Co., R. J. Q., C. S.,

467.

40. The rights and liabilities of alleged heirs domiciled in a foreign country in relation to immovables situate in this province are gov erned by the law of Quebec :-Davidson, J., 1898, Page vs McLennan, R. J. Q., 14 C. S., 392; R. J. Q., 7 C. S., 368; R. J. Q., 9 C. S., 193.

41. La capacité d'un mineur, même commerçant, doit s'apprécier d'après les lois de son domicile Jetté, J., 1895, Jones vs Dickinson, R. J. Q., 7 C. S., 313.

42. A no daughter-in-law has claim for maintenance against a father-in-law, where it appears that the latter was only temporarily within the province of Quebec when served with the writ of summons, and that by the law of his domicile, which was also the place of plaintiff's marriage to his son, no obligation is imposed on a father-in-law, to maintain or contribute to the support of children-in-law: - Doherty, J., 1894, Barnes vs Brown, R. J. Q., 7 C. S., 287.

IV. Procédure.-43. Les formalités de justice sont réglées par la loi du pays où la demande est formée :-Loranger, J., 1885, Giles vs Giroux, 13 R. L., 652.

44. The action upon a promissory note is a matter of procedure, and it is governed by the

law of the place where the remedy is sought to be enforced :—Buchanan, J., 1886, Cross vs Snow, 9 L. N., 196.

DOCTRINE FRANÇAISE.

Reg.-Mobilia sequuntur personam.

1.

Statut réel.-Le statut réel se compose des lois qui ont pour objet les blens mobiliers ou immobiliers:-1 Aubry et Rau, § 31, 85.

2. L'ordre de succession et les Incapacités de posséder, font partie du statut réel :-1 Demolombe, n. 80 et s.-1 Aubry et Rau, § 31, 101.-1 Massé, Dr. com., n. 554.-1 Zachariæ, § 2.

3. Les lois prohibitives, comme celles contre les donations de biens à venir, les degrés de substitutions, les renonciations aux successions futures, appartiennent au statut réel :1 Aubry et Rau, § 31, 85.-Merlin, Rép., vo Lois. -1 Toullier, n. 119 et s.-1 Delvincourt, 187.1 Duranton, n. 84 et s.-1 Demolombe, n. 80, 89, 105.

4. C'est sous le statut réel que se règlent les divers modes de constitution, de conservation, de transmission des biens à titre particulier:1 Lyon-Caen-Renault, n. 1313.-1 Baudry-Lacantinerie, n. 214-30.-1 Huc, n. 132-30.

Statut personnel.—5. Il se rapporte à l'état et à la capacité des personnes. Telles sont les lois qui règlent l'état des mineurs, la fillation, la puissance paternelle et le mariage:1 Laurent, n. 88 et s., 96; t. 5, n. 244.-1 Demolombe, n. 76, 88.-Demangeat, Rev. prat., t. 1, n. 58 et s.-Pardessus, Dr. com., n. 1482..

7. Les actes faits ou passés hors du Bas-Canada sont valables, si on y a suivi les formalités requises par les lois du lieu où ils sont faits ou passés.

Cod.-Domat, Liv. Prél., tit. 1, § 2, n. 20.Pothier, Introd, aux Cout., c. 1, n. 6, 7.-Dard, et les auteurs cités par lui, 2.-Lahale, 2.C. N. 3.-C. Louis, 9.

Conc.-C. c., 135, 776.

Doct. can.-Baudoin, 3 R. L. N. S., 320.Lafleur, 3 R. L. N. S., 423.-Roy, C. c., 15.Beaudry, C. c., 15.-I. Mignault, C. c. 96.

8. Les actes s'interprètent et s'apprécient suivant la loi du lieu où ils sont passés, à moins qu'il n'y ait quelque loi à ce contraire, que les parties ne s'en soient exprimées autrement, ou que, de la nature de l'acte, ou des autres circonstances, il n'apparaisse que l'intention a été de s'en rapporter à la loi d'un autre lieu; auxquels cas il est donné ef

1 Freminville, Min., n. 4.-Felix, Dr. Intr., n. 88.-1 Aubry et Rau, § 31, 81 et s.-Roiland de Villargues, vo Loi, § 6, n. 6.-Fœlix, Rev. étrang., t. 7, 611.-1 Baudry-Lacantinerie, n. 197.-1 Huc, n. 140 et s., 147.-1 Broher, n. 315.

6. Un contrat fait avec un mineur étranger qui a dissimulé son état et qui a profité de la convention, par une personne de bonne foi agissant prudemment, est valide quelle que soit l'incapacité de ce mineur dans son pays :-1 Laurent, n. 97.-1 Demolombe, n. 102.-5 Aubry et Rau, § 172, 142 et s.-5 Colmet de Santerre, n. 347 bis II.

7. Les auteurs enseignent que la succession mobilière d'un étranger doit être régie par la loi du domicile du défunt :-Demangeat, Cond. des étrang., 337; do 1 Rev. prat., 613.-Heffter, Dr. Int., n. 38; Wheaton, do, 106 et s.-1 Demolombe, n. 94, 268.-1 Laurent, n. 117 et s.1 Huc, n. 102.-1 Baudry-Lacantinerie, n. 78.

8. Les lois concernant l'état et la capacité des personnes régissent les Canadiens même résidant en pays étrangers; d'un autre coté. les étrangers restent soumis à la loi de leur .pays:-Merlin, vo Loi, § 4, n. 6.-Boullenois, t. 1, c. 2, 51.-1 Aubry et Rau, § 28, 295, § 31, 91.-1 Laurent, n. 77, 84 et s.-4 Toullier, n. 102.-1 Duranton, n. 79.-Pardessus, n. 1482.— 1 Zachariæ, § 29.-Marcadé, art. 3.-1 Demolombe, n. 88, 98.

V. A.-1 Aubry et Rau, § 31, 83, 295.-Pothier, Int. aux Cout., n. 6 et s.-1 Proudhon, 24 et s.-1 Chabot, 24 et s.-1 Delvincourt, 187.

7. Acts and deeds made and passed out of Lower Canada are valid, if made according to the forms required by the laws of the country where they were passed or made.

Lafleur, Conflict of Laws, 59, 116, 134, 145.

JURISPRUDENCE CANADIENNE.

V. les décisions sous l'art. 8, C. c.

DOCTRINE FRANÇAISE.

Rég.-Forma res est individua.

V. les auteurs sous les arts. 6 et 8, C. c.

8. Deeds are construed according to the laws of the country where they were passed, unless there is some law to the contrary, or the parties have agreed otherwise, or by the nature of the deed or from other circumstances, it appears that the intention of the parties was to be governed by the law of another place; in any of which cases, effect is

1. In the absence of proof to the contrary, the laws of a foreign country are presumed to be the same as the laws of this province :-1879, Parker vs Cochrane, M. C. R., 65.—Q. B., 1887, Primeau & Giles, M. L. R., 7 Q. B., 467; 31 L. C. J., 271.-C. R., Trew vs Kirkup, R. J. Q., 7 C. S., 308.

2. The law of the country in which a contract is made and its usages in trade, must govern in mercantile cases:-1816, Allen vs Scaife, 2 R. de L., 77; Stuart's Rep., 105; 1 R. J. R. Q., 163, 507; 15 R. J. R. Q., 15; 23 R. J. R. Q., 355.

3. Une séparation de biens entre mari et femme obtenue devant les tribunaux de France, vaut ici-Mathieu, J., 1883, Goudron vs Lemonier, M. L. R., 1 S. C., 160; 8 L. N., 100.

4. Dans une société commerciale en nom collectif formée en France, les droits respectifs des parties sont régis par le droit commercial français en force au temps de la convention-Loranger, J., 1886, Furniss VS Larocque, M. L. R., 2 S. C., 405; 10 L. N., 30. 5. Un connaissement fait en Angleterre, par le maître d'un vaisseau anglais, est un contrat qui doit être gouverné et déterminé par les lois anglaises :-1876, Moore vs Harris, 2 Q. L. R., 147; L. R. app. cases, 318; 18 R. L., 85; 45 L. J. P. C., 55, 34 L. T., 519.-Contra:-Mondelet, J. 1868, Wilson vs Demers, 12 L. C. J., 222

6. A bond in favor of a foreign insurance company, which is signed in this province, is to be interpreted according to our law. By our law, where power is given to cancel a policy of insurance on account of non-payment of premium, that power must be exercised before tender is made of the amount due :Vennor vs Life Ins. Co. of Scotland, 30 L. C. J., 303.

7. Dans l'espèce, aux termes de la maxime Lex loci contractus, l'appelant doit être débouté de sa demande, vu que le seul recours qu'il peut exercer, d'après la loi où le contrat a été fait, est une demande pour le prix

given to such law, or such intention expressed or presumed.

de la chose vendue:-C. B. R., 1886, Rhode Island Locomotive Works & Eastern Ry. Co., 31 L. C. J., 86; 16 R. L., 541, 543 et s., 548.

8. La prescription d'un billet promissoire fait à l'étranger, et payable là, doit être gouvernée, non par la lex fori, mais par la ler loci contractus:-Berthelot, J., 1886, Wilson & Demers, 2 L. C. J., 251; 1 R. C., 232, 235; 10 L. C. J., 261; 11 L. C. J., 105; 12 L. C. J., 222; 13 L. C. J., 241; 14 L. C. J., 317.-Contra: -Mackay, J., 1870, Hillsbury vs Mayer, 18 L. C. J., 69; 23 R.J.R.Q., 355, 564.—Buchanan J., 1886, Cross vs Snow, 9 L. N. J., 196.— Chagnon, J., 1886, Lafaille vs Lafaille, 14 R. L., 466. 9.

Un testament fait dans la province de Québec, en langue anglaise, quand même il contiendrait des expressions techniques anglaises, doit s'interpréter suivant nos lois :C. P., 1885, McGibbon vs Abbott, 5 L. N., 431; 7 L. N., 179; 8 L. N., 267; 2 L. C. J., 120; Beauchamp, J. P. C., 829; L. R. 10, app. cases, 653; L. J., P. C., 39; 54 L. T., 138.

10. Les lois de l'Etat de New-York en 1865, permettant aux étrangers de disposer par testament, suivant les formes autorisées par les lois de leur domicile, le testament olographe fait à cette époque, dans cet Etat, par une personne domiciliée à Québec, est valable :Q. B., 1893, Ross & Ross, R. J. Q., 2 B. R., 413; 2 R. J. Q., 8 C. S., 115; 16 L. N., 307; 25 R. C. Supr., 307.

11. Le contrat qui a reçu sa perfection dans un pays étranger peut être exécuté et son exécution poursuivie devant les tribunaux de notre pays, lors même que l'une des parties au contrat avait, à la connaissance de l'autre, l'intention en contractant de violer nos lois.

12. La simple connaissance par le vendeur de l'intention frauduleuse de l'acheteur ne peut vicier le contrat, lorsque les marchandises sont vendues et livrées en pays étranger :C. R., 1898, Lebœuf vs Lavallée, R. J. Q., 15 C. S. 520.

DOCTRINE FRANÇAISE.

Reg.-Locus regit actum.

1. La loi du lieu de la convention en règle la forme, les conditions, la preuve et le degré d'authenticité des actes.-Le principe locus regit actum étant admis par notre Code civil, il s'applique à tous les actes juridiques: obligations conventionnelles ou quasi-conventionnelles, et à tous les actes faits pour constater les contrats, considérés dans leur forme et dans leur effet, en dehors de la capacité des parties: 1 Aubry et Rau, § 31, 105 et s., 109.-12 Toullier, n. 91; t. 1, n. 120.-1 Rodière et Pont, Mariage, n. 33.-10 Locré, 478.-6 Fenet, 66.— Merlin, Rép., vo Loi, § 6, n. 7; vo Lettre de ch., § 2, n. 8; vo Protêt, § 9.-1 Duranton, n. 91; t. 8, n. 218; t. 9, n. 15.-Pardessus, n. 1485.-Bonnier, Preuve, n. 761. Delvincourt,