§. 106. To what burdens they are fubject. § 107. Foreigners continue live under the protection of a state, to participate in a variety of advantages that it affords, and yet make no exertion for its defence, but remain an unconcerned fpectator of the dangers to which the citizens are expofed? He cannot indeed be fubject to those burdens that have only a relation to the quality of citizens; but he ought to bear his share of all the others. Being exempted from ferving in the militia, and from paying those taxes deftined for the fupport of the rights of the nation, he will pay the duties impofed upon provifions, merchandife, &c. and, in a word, every thing that has only a relation to his refidence in the country, or to the affairs which brought him thither. The citizen or the fubject of a state who abfents himself for a time without any intention to abandon the fociety of which he members of is a member, does not lose his privilege by his abfence: he pretheir own ferves his rights, and remains bound by the fame obligations. nation. $108. The state over the perfon of a Being received in a foreign country, in virtue of the natural fociety, the communication, and commerce, which nations are obliged to cultivate with each other (Prelim. §§ 11 and 12; Book II. § 21), he ought to be confidered there as a member of his own nation, and treated as fuch. The state, which ought to refpect the rights of other nations, has no right and in general those of all mankind, cannot arrogate to herself any power over the person of a foreigner, who, though he has enforeigner; tered her territory, has not become her fubject. The foreigner cannot pretend to enjoy the liberty of living in the country without refpecting the laws: if he violates them, he is punishable as a difturber of the public peace, and guilty of a crime against the fociety in which he lives: but he is not obliged to fubmit, like the subjects, to all the commands of the fovereign: and if fuch things are required of him as he is unwilling to perform, he may quit the country. He is free at all times to leave it; nor have we a right to detain him, except for a time, and for very particu lar reafons, as, for instance, an apprehenfion, in war time, left fuch foreigner, acquainted with the ftate of the country and of the fortified places, fhould communicate his knowledge to the enemy. From the voyages of the Dutch to the East Indies, we learn that the kings of Corea forcibly detain foreigners who are fhip-wrecked on their coaft; and Bodinus affures us, that a cuftom fo contrary to the law of nations was practifed in his time in Æthiopia, and even in Mufcovy. This is at once a violation of the rights of individuals, and of thofe of the state to which they belong. Things have been greatly changed in Ruffia; a fingle reign-that of Peter the Great-has placed that vaft empire in the rank of civilifed nations. §109. nor over his pro perty. The property of an individual does not ceafe to belong to him. on account of his being in a foreign country; it still conftitutes a part of the aggregate wealth of his nation (§ 81). Any power, therefore, which the lord of the territory might claim over the property of a foreigner, would be equally derogatory to the rights of the individual owner, and to thofe of the nation of which he is a member. § 110. Since the foreigner still continues to be a citizen of his own Who are country, and a member of his own nation (§ 107), the property the heirs of he leaves at his death in a foreign country ought naturally to de- a foreigner. volve to those who are his heirs according to the laws of the state of which he is a member. But, notwithstanding this general rule, his immovable effects are to be difpofed of according to the laws of the country where they are fituated (fee § 103). Will of a As the right of making a will, or of difpofing of his fortune III. in cafe of death, is a right refulting from property, it cannot, foreigner. without injuftice, be taken from a foreigner. The foreigner therefore, by natural right, has the liberty of making a will. But it is afked by what laws he is obliged to regulate himself either in the form of his teftament or in the difpofal of his property? 1. As to the form or folemnities appointed to fettle the validity of a will, it appears that the teftator ought to obferve those that are established in the country where he makes it, unless it be otherwife ordained by the laws of the state of which he is a member; in which cafe he will be obliged to obferve the forms which they prefcribe, if he would validly difpofe of the property he poffeffes in his own country. I fpeak here of a will which is to be opened in the place where the perfon dies: for if a traveller makes his will, and fends it home under feal, it is the fame thing as if it had been written at home; and in this case it is fubject to the laws of his own country. 2. As to the bequests themselves, we have already obferved that thofe which relate to immovables ought to be conformable to the laws of the country where thofe immovables are fituated. The foreign teftator cannot difpofe of the goods, movable or immovable, which he poffeffes in his own country, otherwise than in a manner conformable to the laws of that country. But as to movable goods, fpecie, and other effects which he poffeffes elfewhere, which he has with him, or which follow his perfon, we ought to diftinguish between the local laws whofe effect cannot extend beyond the territory, and thofe laws which peculiarly affect the character of citizen. The foreigner remaining a citizen of his own country, is ftill bound by thofe last-mentioned laws, wherever he happens to be, and is obliged to conform to them in the difpofal of his perfonal property, and all his movables whatfoever. The laws of this kind made in the country where he refides at the time, but of which he is not a citizen, are not obligatory with refpect to him. Thus, a man who makes his will and dies in a foreign country, cannot deprive his widow of the part of his movable effects affigned to that widow by the laws of his own country. A Genevan, obliged by the law of Geneva to leave a dividend of his perfonal property to his brothers or his coufins, if they be his next heirs, cannot deprive them of it by making his will in a foreign country, while he continues a citizen of Geneva: but a foreigner dying at Geneva is not obliged, in this respect, to conform to the laws of the republic. The cafe is quite otherwife with refpect to local laws: they regulate what may be done in the territory, and do not extend beyond it. The teftator is no longer fubject to them when he is out of the territory; and they do not affect that part of his property which is alfo out of it. The foreigner is obliged to obferve thofe laws in the country where he makes his will, with refpect to the goods he poffeffes there. Thus, an inhabitant of Neufchatel, to whom entails are forbidden in his own country with refpect to the property he poffeffes there, freely makes an entail of the eftate he poffeffes out of the jurifdiction of the country, if he dies in a place where entails are allowed; and a foreigner making a will at Neufchatel cannot make an entail of even the movable property he poffeffes there,-unless indeed we may fuppofe that his movable property is excepted by the fpirit of the law. § 112. What we have established in the three preceding fections is fufEfcheatage. ficient to fhew with how little juftice the crown, in fome ftates, lays claim to the effects left there by a foreigner at his death. This practice is founded on what is called Echeatage, by which foreigners are excluded from all inheritances in the ftate, either of the property of a citizen or that of an alien, and confequently cannot be appointed heirs by will, nor receive any legacy. Grotius juftly obferves that this law has defcended to us from thofe ages when foreigners were almost considered as enemies*. Even after the Romans were become a very polite and learned people, they could not accuftom themselves to confider foreigners as men entitled to any right in common with them. "Those nations, fays Pomponius the civilian, with whom we "have neither friendship, nor hospitality, nor alliance, are not "therefore our enemies: yet if any thing belonging to us falls "into their hands, it becomes their property; our free citizens "become flaves to them: and they are on the fame terms with "refpect to us +." We cannot fuppofe that fo wife a people retained fuch inhuman laws with any other view than that of a neceffary retaliation, as they could not otherwife obtain fatisfaction from barbarous nations with whom they had no connection or treaties exifting. Bodinus fhews that Efcheatage is derived from thefe worthy fources! It has been fucceffively mitigated, or even abolished in moft civilifed ftates. The emperor Frederic II. first abolished it by an edict, which permitted all foreigners dying within the limits of the empire to difpofe of their fubflance by will, or, if they died inteftate, to have their nearest relations for heirs §. But Bodinus complains that this edict is but ill executed. Why does there ftill remain any veftige of fo barbarous *De Jure Belli er Pacis, lib. ii. cap. vi. § 14. Digeft. lib. x ix tit xv. De Captivis & Poftlimin. a law a law in Europe, which is now fo enlightened and fo full of humanity? The law of nature cannot fuffer it to be put in practice, except by way of retaliation. This is the ufe made of it by the king of Poland in his hereditary ftates. Efcheatage is eftablifhed in Saxony: but the fovereign is fo juft and equitable, that he enforces it only against those nations which fubject the Saxons to a fimilar law. The right The right of traite foraine (called in Latin jus detractûs) is $ ་་。 more conformable to juftice, and the mutual obligation of na-ofaite tions. We give this name to the right by virtue of which the foraine. fovereign retains a moderate portion of the property either of citizens or aliens which is fent out of his territories to pass into the hands of foreigners. As the exportation of that property is a lofs to the ftate, the may fairly receive an equitable compenfation for it. $114. Immov. ble property Every state has the liberty of granting or refufing to foreigners the power of poffeffing lands or other immovable property within her territory. If the grants them that privilege, all fuch property, poffeffed by poffeffed by aliens, remains fubject to the jurifdiction and laws an alien. of the country, and to the fame taxes as other property of the fame kind. The authority of the fovereign extends over the whole territory; and it would be abfurd to except fome parts of it, on account of their being poffeffed by foreigners. If the fovereign does not permit aliens to poffefs immovable property, nobody has a right to complain of fuch prohibition; for he may have very good reasons for acting in this manner: and as foreigners cannot claim any right in his territories (§ 79), they ought not to take it amifs that he makes ufe of his power and of his rights in the manner which he thinks moft for the advantage of the ftate. And as the fovereign may refufe to foreigners the privilege of poffeffing immovable property, he is doubtles at liberty to forbear granting it except with certain conditions an nexed. Marriages of aliens. There exifts no natural impediment to prevent foreigners from § 5. contracting marriages in the state. But if thefe marriages are found prejudicial or dangerous to a nation, fhe has a right, and is even in duty bound to prohibit them, or to fubject to certain conditions the permiflion to contract them: and as it belongs to the nation or to her fovereign to determine what appears moit conducive to the welfare of the ftate, other nations ought to acquiefce in the regulations which any fovereign ftate has made on this head. Citizens are almost every-where forbid to marry foreign wives of a different religion; and in many parts of Switzerland a citizen cannot marry a foreign woman, unless he prove that the brings him in marriage a certain fum fixed by the law. will in a foreign country, while he continues a § 112. What we have established in '' Efcheatage, ficient to fhew with how litt lays claim to the effects left This practice is founded which foreigners are c ftate, either of the propere confequently cannot b legacy. Grotius juttiy us from thofe ages w enemies. Even after : and learned people, t'. der foreigners as me "Thofe nations, fex "have neither frie "therefore our e: "into their hand ›, "become flaves "respect to us! tained fuch inher ceffary retaliatio from barbarous » treaties exiti from thefe gated, or c Frederic II. reigners y ftance by for bes cuted. * H J. Ch. IX. the Introduction of ed, gives a right to e fulfilled, every ab ion produces in this and indefeafible. Naout giving them the abfolute right to the deprive them of that fulfilling their natural , men had, without diang, as far as was necessary arations. And as nothing troduction of domain and ut leaving to every man the , the ufe abfolutely required gations. We cannot then een place without this tacit Hi preferve fome right to the meie cafes, where, without this deprived of the neceffary use t is a neceffary remnant of ..nations, therefore, each nation s poffelfed by others, in thofe ..x deprived of the neceffary ufe abfolutely debarred from ufing rer being other people's property. every circumftance in order to inciple. -ty. We thus call the right se performance of certain actions when, without thefe actions, it is able obligation. But it is carea cafe, the obligation must really the act in queftion the only means If either of thefe conditions be ty does not exist on the occafion. cuffed in treatifes on the law of t of Mr. Wolf. I confine myfelf acte principles whofe aid is neceffary of nations. The |