State, with a resident of another state, no place of performance being expressed, is to be performed in New Jersey; and its law was held to govern as to form. Allshouse v. Ramsay, 6 Wharton, (Pennsylvania,) Rep., 334. Several parties. 615. If there are several parties to the contract, the formalities demanded by the law of the place where each one engages are necessary and sufficient in respect to the obligation imposed thereby upon himself. This rule is laid down with some qualification by Westlake, adding that, when a contract to which there are several parties is manifested by a single instrument, the necessary form of that instrument is determined once for all by the law of that place where it begins to have an operation. The illustrations to which he refers are all cases of negotiable paper; in which cases, although it is true, that for the purposes of transfer it may be proper to determine the effect of an indorsement, as fulfilling the condition of the promise to pay to order, by the law of the place where the promise to pay was to be performed, (Everett v. Van Doyes, 19 New York Rep., 436,) the effect of an indorsement as creating an obiigation on the part of the indorser, may properly be governed by the law of the place where it is made. In Lebel v. Tucker, (Law Rep., 3 Queen's Bench, 77,) it was held that the contract of the acceptor of a negotiable bill which was drawn payable and accepted in the same country is to pay to any order if valid by the law of that country although the indorsement may not have been valid by the law of the country where it was made. It was held, however, in Bradlaugh v. De Rin, (Law Rep., 3 Common Pleas, 538,) that as against the acceptor the validity and effect of an indorsement must depend upon the law of the place where the indorsement was made. ARTICLE 616. Prohibited acts. 617. Performance or omission of acts beyond 618. Performance or omission of acts authorized by law. 619. Ownership and possession of property. Prohibited acts. 616. The obligation arising out of an act prohibited by the law of the place where done, is determined by such law, except as otherwise provided in this Chapter. Andrews v. Pond, 13 Peters' U. S. Supr. Ct. Rep., 65. That the law of the place where the wrong is committed determines so far as regards the substance of the matter on which an action of damage is brought, is the rule in America and Scotland, but by the latest English decisions, (The Halley, 18 Law Journ. (N. S.) P. C., 879,) the injury must be actionable by the lex fori. Guthrie's Savigny, p. 205, note. Performance or omission of acts beyond jurisdiction of nation. 617. An obligation may be created in favor of one member of a nation against another, by reason of an act done or omitted beyond its jurisdiction, although no compensation therefor could be recovered by the law of the place, except as provided in the next article. Scott v. Seymour, 1 Hurlstone & Coltman's Rep., 234, 235. Performance or omission of acts authorized by law. 618. No action can be brought for the performance or omission of an act, if such performance or omission were authorized by an express provision of the law of the place, at the time of its occurrence.1 1 Dobree v. Napier, 2 Bingham's New Cases, 781. The present rule extends this provision to an authorization at any time before the action is commenced. Ownership and possession of property. 619. The obligations arising from the ownership or the possession of property are determined by the law of the place where the property is for the time being sitùated. Law governing damages caused by act or omission beyond the jurisdiction of nation. 620. Where an act or omission occurs within the jurisdiction of one nation, which causes damage solely within the jurisdiction of another, the obligation to make compensation therefor is determined by the law of the latter. Thus the obligations arising out of an injury to an immovable wherever committed, (Thayer v. Brooks, 17 Ohio Rep., 489 ;) are governed by the law of the place where the property is situated, PART VI. ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE. TITLE XXVII. JUDICIAL POWER. XXVIII. PROCEDURE. XXIX. EVIDENCE. XXX. EFFECT OF JUDGMENTS. XXXI. RULES APPLICABLE TO PARTICULAR ARTICLE 621, 622. Remedial justice. 623. When exercise of jurisdiction may be de- 624, 625. Extra-judicial power. 626. Pursuit of inmate of foreign ship upon the 627. Limit of judicial power as to absent persons. 629. Limit of judicial power as to property abroad. 630. Voluntary appearance. 631. Effect of judgment by jurisdiction acquired over property. 632. Effect of judgment by jurisdiction acquired over person. 633, 634. Guardianship. 635. Forfeitures. 636. Actions concerning immovable property. tives. 638. Public property of one nation within the 639. Power of consul to appear for member of 640. Judicial power of consuls. Remedial justice. 621. Foreigners are entitled to free access to the tribunals of the nation, within whose territorial limits they may be, for the prosecution and defense of their rights, in all cases within the jurisdiction of the nation as defined in articles 308 and 309, and are at liberty to employ advocates and agents of whatever description recognized by the local law, whom they may think proper, and in their judicial recourse may enjoy the same privileges and on the same terms,' and no others,' as members of the nation. But this right is subject to the conditions respecting security for costs imposed upon transient persons by the laws affecting local tribunals." This Article, which is broader than the existing rule of international law, is founded upon the provisions contained in the following treaties : Treaty between the United States and Argentine Confederation, July 27, 1853, 10 Id., 1008. Treaty of friendship, commerce and navigation between France and By the treaty of friendship, commerce and navigation between France and Honduras, Feb. 22, 1856, Art. IV., (7 De Clercq, 10,) it is declared, that, foreigners of either nation are entitled to be present in the other nation, at all judicial and official investigations, examinations of witnesses and decisions in which they are interested; in all cases in which the laws of the nation allow the publicity of such proceedings. By the convention between the United States and France, 1831, Art. IV., (8 U. S. Stat. at L., 432,) foreigners may prosecute claims against the government of a nation before the competent judicial or administrative authorities, on complying with its laws and regulations, the dispositions and benefits of which shall be applied to them in like manner as to members of the nation. Troiss, (1 Law of Nations, 225,) states the rule which obtains in Great Britain, the United States, the Germanic States and Holland, in substance, as follows: A foreigner equally with a citizen may bring a personal action against a foreigner before the tribunals of the country where the defendant may be. He may bring real or possessory actions, before the tribunals of the country where the thing in controversy is. The French rule is more restricted. See the case of Casalini against Isabella, ex-Queen of Spain, Feb., 1870. Some exceptions which are now recognized in the application of this rule should be noticed. No suit or proceeding can be maintained in the courts of a neutral nation, by the subjects of one belligerent against the subjects of the other for acts growing out of the war. Juando v. Taylor, 2 Paine's U. S. Circ. Ct. Rep., 652. In France, with few exceptions the tribunals do not exercise jurisdiction of controversies between foreigners respecting personal rights and interests, but this is a matter of mere municipal policy and convenience, and does not result from any principles of international law. Story, Confl. of L., § 542. The American courts make similar exceptions in some cases between thẻ master and seamen of foreign vessels, and other controversies between transient foreigners. 2 De La Vega v. Vianna, 1 Barnewall & Adolphus, 284, 288; Liverpool Marine Credit Co. v. Hunter, Law Rep.,3 Chancery App., 486. 3 The right is thus limited by the provisions of several treaties, e. g., Treaty between France and Sardinia, The same. March 24, 176_, i Fælix, p. 304. July 18, 1828, 1 Fœlix, p. 304. 622. The provisions of the last article apply to a for |