Time: Sun Jun 22 00:22:39 1997
by primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id AAA20032;
Sun, 22 Jun 1997 00:12:46 -0700 (MST)
by usr02.primenet.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id AAA18110;
Sun, 22 Jun 1997 00:12:38 -0700 (MST)
Date: Sun, 22 Jun 1997 00:11:04 -0700
To: fwolist@sportsmen.net
From: Paul Andrew Mitchell [address in tool bar]
Subject: SLS: States referred to as "foreign countries"
Yes, I think this was a typo.
The second "31" should be "32".
The source is 14 C.J.S. 4, page 430.
/s/ Paul Mitchell
http://www.supremelaw.com
<snip>
>
>fwolist@sportsmen.net said on 6/20/97 10:31 PM:
>
>> ... [T]he term "citizen," in the United States, is analogous
>> to the term "subject" in the common law31; the change of
>> phrase has resulted from the change of government.32
>>
>> Footnotes:
>>
>> 31. N.C. -- State vs Manuel, 122 N.C. 122
>>
>> 32. N.C. -- State vs Manuel, 20 N.C. 122
[14 C.J.S. 4, page 430]
>
>Paul,
>
>Was this last footnote supposed to be 32? Or are there
>SUPPOSED to be two 31s and no 32? I am very interested
>in proof of the last statement:
>
>'the change of phrase has resulted from the change of government.32'
>
>Also, is all this in the new 'Federal Zone'? If so, how
>much is it? I am interested in purchasing it.
Yes. Some of it is found in Appendix P,
which consists of 130 pages of private letters on
the progress of research which went into the book.
/s/ Paul Mitchell
>
>Thanks
>
>
>Charles
Citizenship is a Term of Municipal Law:
A Collection of Research Findings
by
John E. Trumane, Founder
Account for Better Citizenship
February 11, 1993
2. Nature and source.
Conflict of laws is in reality a part of the subject of
international law, which is commonly divided into two
aspects, public and private. Public international law, or
the law of nations, is that which regulates the political
intercourse of nations with each other8 or concerns
questions of rights between nations,9 whereas private
international law, or conflict of laws, is that which
regulates the comity of states in giving effect in one to
the municipal laws of another relating to private persons,10
or concerns the rights of persons within the territory and
dominion of one state or nation, by reason of acts, private
or public, done within the dominion of another,11 and which
is based on the broad general principle that one country
will respect and give effect to the laws of another so far
as can be done consistently with its own interests.12
Private international law assumes a more important
aspect in the United States than elsewhere, for the reason
that the several states, although united under the same
sovereign authority and governed by the same laws for all
national purposes embraced by the Federal Constitution, are
otherwise, at least so far as private international law is
concerned, in the same relation as foreign countries.13 The
great majority of questions of private international law are
therefore subject to the same rules when they arise between
two states of the Union as when they arise between two
foreign countries, and in the ensuing pages the words
"state," "nation," and "country" are used synonymously and
interchangeably, there being no intention to distinguish
between the several states of the Union and foreign
countries by the use of varying terminology. When a
distinction exists, it will be explicitly pointed out.14
Footnotes:
8. Roche vs Washington, 19 Ind 53.
9. Hilton vs Guyot, 159 US 113, 40 L Ed 95, 16 S Ct 139.
Generally, see 45 Am Jur 2d, International Law.
10. Roche vs Washington, 19 Ind 53.
Conflict of laws is called private international law
because it is applied to adjustment of private
interests, while public international law is applicable
to the relations between states. Garner vs Teamsters,
Chauffeurs & Helpers Local Union, 346 US 485, 98 L Ed
228, 74 S Ct 161.
11. Hilton vs Guyot, 159 US 113, 40 L Ed 95, 16 S Ct 139;
Union Secur. Co. vs Adams, 33 Wyo 45, 236 P 513, 50 ALR
23.
In the sense of public international law, the several
states of the Union are neither foreign to the United
States nor are they foreign to each other, but such is
not the case in the field of private international law.
Robinson vs Norato, 71 RI 256, 43 A2d 467, 162 ALR 362.
12. Lowndes vs Cooch, 87 Md 478, 39 A 1045.
Ehrenzweig, Interstate and International Conflict of
Law: A Plea for Segregation, 41 Minn L Rev 717 (1957);
Prebble, Choice of Law to Determine the Validity and
Effect of Contracts: A Comparison of English and
American Approaches to the Conflict of Laws, 58 Cornell
L Rev 433, 485 (1972); Scoles, Interstate and
International Distinctions in Conflict of Laws in the
United States, 54 Calif L Rev 1599 (1966); Stevenson,
The Relationship of Private International Law to Public
International Law, 52 Columbia L Rev 561 (1952).
13. Hanley vs Donoghue, 116 US 1, 29 L Ed 535, 6 S Ct 242;
Stewart vs Thomson, 97 Ky 575, 31 SW 133; Emery vs
Berry, 28 NH 473.
14. The Restatement recognizes that there may be factors in
a particular international case which call for a result
different from that which would be reached in an
interstate case. Restatement, Conflict of Laws 2d
Section 10.
[16 Am Jur 2d, Conflict of Laws, Section 2]
[emphasis added]
In the United States, each state constitutes a discrete
and independent sovereignty, and consequently the laws of
one state do not operate of their own force in any other
state. 16 Am Jur J2d, "Conflict of Laws", Section 2.
[Ballentine's Law Dictionary, third edition]
[emphasis added]
Foreign states.
Nations which are outside the United States. Term may
also refer to another state; i.e. a sister state.
The term "foreign nations," as used in a statement of
the rule that the laws of foreign nations should be proved
in a certain manner, should be construed to mean all nations
and states other than that in which the action is brought;
and hence one state of the union is foreign to another, in
the sense of that rule.
[Black's Law Dictionary, sixth edition]
[emphasis added]
Country.
A nation or land, also the people of a nation or state.
As the word "country" is used in the revenue laws of
the United States, it has always been construed to embrace
all the possessions of a nation, however widely separated,
which are subject to the same supreme executive and
legislative control. Stairs vs Peeslee, (US) 18 How. 521,
15 L Ed 474, 476.
[Ballentine's Law Dictionary, third edition]
[emphasis added]
Citizenship.
It is a term of municipal law,34 and carries with it
the idea of connection or identification with the state and
a participation in its functions, and as such implies much
more than residence.35
Footnotes:
34. Roa vs Collector of Customs, 23 Philippine 315, 332
35. Harding vs Standard Oil Co., 182 Fed. 421
[11 C.J. 775-776, emphasis added]
Citizen.
But a state and the federal government each has
citizens of its own, and the same person may be at the same
time a citizen of the United States and a citizen of a
state. The government of the United States can neither
grant nor secure to its citizens rights or privileges which
are not expressly or by implication placed under its
jurisdiction. All that cannot be so granted or secured are
left to the exclusive protection of the states. U.S. vs
Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542, 23 L Ed 588
[Black's Law Dictionary, fourth edition]
[emphasis added]
Citizenship.
Citizenship in the United States is distinguishable
from citizenship in a state.
[11 C.J. page 776, footnote 38a]
Domicile and citizen are synonymous in federal courts.
Earley vs Hershey Transit Co., D.C. Pa., 55 F Supp 981, 982.
[Black's Law Dictionary, fourth edition]
Alien.
A person who owes allegiance to a foreign government.
De Cano vs State, 7 Wash. 2d 613, 110 P.2d 627, 631, 633.
[Black's Law Dictionary, fourth edition]
[emphasis added]
Nonresident alien.
[not defined]
[Black's Law Dictionary, fourth edition]
... [I]t has been held or recognized that "state
citizenship" and "domicile" are substantially synonymous.68
Footnotes:
68. U.S. -- Baker vs Keck, D.C. Ill., 13 F.Supp. 486
[Black's Law Dictionary, fourth edition]
When a person establishes a foreign domicile he loses
state citizenship.95
Footnotes:
95. Okl. -- Suglove vs Oklahoma Tax Commission, Oklahoma,
605 P.2d 1315
[14 C.J.S. 29, page 451]
[emphasis added]
Nonresident Alien.
An alien who does not reside within the state. See
Estate of Gill, 79 Iowa 296, 9 LRA 126, 44 N.W. Rep. 553
[Ballentine's Law Dictionary, second edition]
Nonresident Alien.
One who is neither a resident nor a citizen of the
United States. Citizenship is determined under the federal
immigration and naturalization laws (U.S. Code Title 8).
[Ballentine's Law Dictionary, third edition]
United States citizen.
The antithesis of alien. A person born or naturalized
in the United States and subject to the jurisdiction
thereof.
[Ballentine's Law Dictionary, third edition]
... [T]he term "citizen," in the United States, is analogous
to the term "subject" in the common law31; the change of
phrase has resulted from the change of government.32
Footnotes:
31. N.C. -- State vs Manuel, 122 N.C. 122
32. N.C. -- State vs Manuel, 20 N.C. 122
[14 C.J.S. 4, page 430]
[emphasis added]
Inland and Foreign Bills.
... the NIL declares that an inland bill of exchange is a
bill which is, or on its face purports to be, both drawn and
payable within "the state." Any other bill is a foreign
bill.
[11 Am Jur 2d, Inland and Foreign Bills, Section 20]
[emphasis added]
IRS Forms 1040 are foreign bills of exchange.
[John E. Trumane, February 11, 1993]
No court is to be charged with the knowledge of foreign
laws; but they are well understood to be facts which must,
like other facts, be proved before they can be received in a
court of justice. [cites omitted] It is equally well
settled that the several states of the Union are to be
considered as in this respect foreign to each other, and
that the courts of one state are not presumed to know, and
therefore not bound to take judicial notice of, the laws of
another state. In Buckner vs Finley, 2 Pet. 586, in which
it was held that bills of exchange drawn in one of the
states or persons living in another were foreign bills, it
was said by Mr. Justice Washington, delivering the unanimous
opinion of this court:
"For all national purposes embraced by the federal
constitution the states and the citizens thereof are one,
united under the same sovereign authority, and governed by
the same laws. In all other respects the states are
necessarily foreign to and independent of each other; their
constitutions and forms of government being, although
republican, altogether different, as are their laws and
institutions."
[Hanley vs Donoghue, 116 U.S. 1, 29 L Ed 535]
[6 S Ct 242, 244 (1885), emphasis added]
... [T]he body of learning we call conflict of laws
elsewhere is called private international law because it is
applied to adjustment of private interests, while public
international law is applicable to the relations between
states.16
[Garner vs Teamsters, Chauffeurs & Helpers Local Union]
[346 US 485, 495; 98 L Ed 228; 74 S Ct 161]
Footnotes:
16. Goodrich, Conflict of Laws (3rd Ed. 1949),
Sections 1, 5
Cheshire, Private International Law (4th Ed. 1952),
Section 16
========================================================================
Paul Andrew Mitchell : Counselor at Law, federal witness
B.A., Political Science, UCLA; M.S., Public Administration, U.C. Irvine
tel: (520) 320-1514: machine; fax: (520) 320-1256: 24-hour/day-night
email: [address in tool bar] : using Eudora Pro 3.0.2 on 586 CPU
website: http://www.supremelaw.com : visit the Supreme Law Library now
ship to: c/o 2509 N. Campbell, #1776 : this is free speech, at its best
Tucson, Arizona state : state zone, not the federal zone
Postal Zone 85719/tdc : USPS delays first class w/o this
As agents of the Most High, we came here to establish justice. We shall
not leave, until our mission is accomplished and justice reigns eternal.
========================================================================
[This text formatted on-screen in Courier 11, non-proportional spacing.]
Return to Table of Contents for
Supreme Law School: E-mail