Page images
PDF
EPUB

.

lex loci regit actum, but establishing at the same time, the indispensable conditions on which alone marriages under foreign jurisdiction are valid in the native State.

More occasion for Conflict of Laws is presented Nuptial Contracts. by the nuptial contract, or rather by the consequences of the contract of marriage with regard to property situated in foreign States. The general rule is that, while the personal capacity for contracting marriage, such as age, consent of parents, etc., is regulated by the laws of the Political Nationality, and while the formalities and validity of the contract are regulated by the lex loci, the effect of the nuptial contract, in the case of personal property, is governed by the lex domicili, but in the case of immovable property (real property) situated in another State, the effect of nuptial contract is governed by the law of that State in which the property is situated, on the principle of lex loci rei sitæ (§ 54).

Foreign divorces are now, in Europe and Foreign Dicorces. America, generally recognized when obtained by the laws of the place in which the parties were bonâ fide permanently domiciled. But when the parties expressly remove to another country, in order to evade the laws of the State to which the parties belong, either for causes not allowed by the laws. of their domicile or in cases where those laws do not permit a divorce â vinculo for any cause whatever, such action is regarded as fraudulent and void. †

* STORY. Conflict of Law. § 124. REDFIELD'S Note. No. 5. WOOLSEY. Introd. Int. Law. §74. HALLECK. Int. Law. Vol. I, p. 157. MERLIN. Repertoire. Tit. Loi. § 6.

† WHEATON. Elem. of Intern. Law. Part II. §§ 92-151. Idem. Dana's Note, No. 46 on § 81. CALVO. Droit Intern. Vol. I. § 247. HALLECK. Intern. Law. Vol. I. Chapt. VII. §§ 10-11. PHILLI Comm. Intern. Law. Vol. IV. Priv. Intern. Law. Edit. 1874. Chapt. XIX-XXIII. FERGUSON. On Marriage and Divorce. Vol. I. § 18. STORY. Conflict of Laws. §§ 108-230.

MORE.

Husband and

Wife.

Husband and Wife. With regard to marriage and divorce in conformity with the law of the United States of America, Timothy Walker makes the following statements. "The general rule is, that the validity of a marriage depends upon the law of the place where it is celebrated. If valid there, it is valid everywhere; and if invalid there, it is invalid everywhere. The reason of this rule is found in the disastrous consequences which would follow from any other doctrine; and so strong is this reason, that the rule prevails even when persons have gone to a foreign country to marry, for the express purpose of evading the domestic law. The exceptions are with respect to incestuous marriages and polygamy; which, though lawful where they take place, are not recognized elsewhere. Some Nations also expressly prohibit their own subjects from marrying anywhere, unless according to their own laws, and, therefore, will not recognize other marriages. And the necessity of the case sometimes requires a resort to the law of the domicile, for want of a local law suited to the condition of the parties. With respect to the property acquired by marriage, the rule, so far as any is settled, seems to be this. When there is no change of domicile, the law of the place of the marriage will determine the rights of the parties as to personality everywhere; but their rights as to realty will depend upon the law of the place, where it is situated. When there is a change of domicile after marriage, the law of the new domicile will govern future acquired personalty everywhere, but realty will still depend upon the law of the place. In either case, however, if there be a special contract on the subject of property, that contract will everywhere govern personalty, and to some extent realty. Finally, when parties marry in one place with the inten

,

tion of immediately settling in another, the law of the latter will govern their rights, because they are presumed to marry with that understanding. As to divorces, the rule is, that a divorce lawfully obtained in the place where the parties were married and had their domicile, will be valid everywhere. It has also been held in this country, that if the parties have changed their domicile after marriage, a divorce granted in their new domicile, for a cause occurring there, is valid everywhere, even in States where that cause would not have authorized a divorce. But when a party goes to another State for the express purpose of procuring a divorce, which he could not procure at home, such divorce, being in fraud of the law of the domicile, will not be recognized there. Whether it would be recognized elsewhere, is an unsettled question. It is also held in this country, that, in determining what cause shall be sufficient for a divorce, the law of the forum and not of the marriage is to govern; and that one State will not grant a divorce for a cause which occurred in another, unless there be express legislation to that effect." *

Parent and Child. The only important Parent and Child. question under this head is that of legitimacy, which is generally determined by the law of the place of the marriage. If by that law the issue be legitimate, they will be held legitimate everywhere else, at least with respect to heirship. But the converse is not always true.

The purely personal relations between parent and lawful children are to be ruled by the lex domicilii of the parties, in the same way as the personal relations of the spouses and under the same limitation.

TIMOTHY WALKER. Introduction to American Law, page 754 et seq.

+ IDEM, l. c.

Guardian and
Ward.

$53.

Guardian and Ward. With regard to foreign guardian-ship, Mr. Gillespie, in his note on § 106 of Prof. Bar's work, gives the following clear and all-comprehending statement. "The general principles of International Law, which regulate the recognition of the appointment and administration of foreign guardians, are identical, whether the incapacity that gives rise to the guardianship is due to incomplete age, mental weakness or disease, or prodigality. These three kinds of incapacity may be considered together, since the incapax from any of the three causes falls into the same legal position, and the rules of law in different countries are the same in all of the three cases."

"The principle that the interest of the incapax is the first thing to be considered has regulated the practice as to the appointment of guardians in America and Continental countries, and has now been adopted in England also, except where real estate is concerned. Thus, in France a foreigner will not be excluded from the family council, nor from the office of tutor, merely because he is a foreigner, if he is otherwise suitable for the office (Dunn v. Dupuis, 1st May, 1879, Trib. Civ. de Versailles); a foreign father may be appointed tutor to his son, who is a French subject, if that is most convenient for the interests of the child (Bourchy v. Antoine, Trib. de Briey, 24th Jan. 1878); and a foreigner resident in Louisiana has been nominated to be the tutor of his children by the Courts of the State (1874, Succession Guillemin, 2 A. 634). The Belgian Courts have refused to appoint a foreigner to the office of tutor (Prince of Rheina-Welbeck v. Comte de Berlaimont, Trib. de Namur, 12th August 1872); but this decision is pronounced by the reporter to be of doubtful

.

soundness. The Scotch Courts have refused, on grounds of expediency, to appoint persons out of their jurisdiction to be tutors or curators; but they will recognise the appointments of foreign Courts to such offices, except where real estate forms the subject which is to be administered."

"It is no doubt the influence of the maxim, that the interest of the incapax must be the leading consideration for the Court, that has induced the Courts of the Continent,-in countries where nationality and not domicile is generally accepted as founding jurisdiction, to exercise a protective jurisdiction, ratione domicilii, in cases of incapacity, and appoint guardians to persons who are of foreign nationality, and have no more than a domicile, or it may be in some cases merely a residence, within the territory of the Court. The French law allows a French citizen to change his domicile without changing his nationality, to the effect of submitting the tutory of his children to a foreign law. So, too, a Frenchwoman who has been married to a foreigner, but has on her widowhood returned to France and recovered her French nationality, may be appointed tutrix to her children who are resident with her in France, although their nationality will be that of their father. The appointment is made by the French Courts, and the rights and duties of the tutrix on the one hand, and the security given to the wards on the other, over her estate, are those which the law of France allows. This decision appears to proceed upon considerations of social order and public morality (Sokolowski, Bourges, 4th August, 1874). So, too, from similar considerations of the interest of the wards, in a case where the father of a family, himself a foreigner, was in jail in a foreign country, and his children, who were with

« PreviousContinue »