Tribunal Of The First Ins...
The Times, 1824-01-01T00:00:00

ID L.rie lCiqUi nliis nay nnisneo ni1S spectn Oti ueOati l)t i11 r. slver Cooper, the representative of' Messrs. Marsh andl Roche, the clai,i- ants against the Count Georges Stackpoole. Tbe learned advocate observed, that a robber snmetilines succeedeid in escaping fromn justice, but it was only to drag on a miserable existenice, seeking temporary asvlums iar from his own country. That, however, was not the uase witlh Lord Stackpoole. He bad, duinzg a period of 24 years, po)sscssed before the eyes of all England, the nituiiensc fortune of svilch lie was the administrator he had come into France not for the purpose of concealment, but to obtain the advantage ot elljoying the riches wlhich he had possessed hinmself of, and when lie tnight die lie would leaye to his heirs the patrimony of his (1. Ilennequin's) clients. Such a systenm of fraud was the mnore dangerous to socivs-. because it was practised with impunity, and attendede witi comfnirt antd opulence, and the culprit was not even reduced to the Pecessitt of concealing himself. Every European society, and indeed ever; society in the world, formed .in independetir plver. lie knew weLl that every republican or rionarchical state liad a right to be master v.ithin its own territories; that the officers of justice should obey only the votce of the sovereign or of the senate. He also knew that decrees made iniaforeign country must, before they coul(lbe executed inFrance,belaid before the Judges of his 31 jesty thc King; but it was asked, should the orlinance of execution, the form-111la of pariatis or rxequalur, which was demanded in this case, be granted without an examination of ftats?Hewould reterto the principles of the oldFrencet law to prove that it might. In article 21, of the celebrated ordinance of 11129, the following absolute principle was laid dowtn *_1- No .(dgm'ent given, nor act passed in foreign kitngdomns, shall have power of execution in France, but shall be consi(lereel as simiple pro- tiiises." The ordinanice added, " Notwithsta!ndirng the jutlgtueito deliveredl, our .,ujJeels may contest tlteir rights ::s entire betore the Frencl judges." According to that passage, anid to the authorities of the Advocate-General Sequier, aiiml of many compilers of de- crees, who have adopted those authorities, le cui.ten(led that judg- iniets delivered in foreign countries agaitist a Frenchitnaii could not be executed in France until after new trial * but a simple decree of erequatur, after the manner of tho.,e rendered in cases of arbitration, was sufficient to give the povwer of execution to foreign judgnients as between two foreigners. The Couirt of Cassation, by 2 juilgnient pronounced in 1806, had sanctioned that interpretation of 129. The cause in which that judgment was pronounced had this peculiarity_ that the parties were two French emigrants who had returtted to their native cottntry, but who vere considered as having been stricken bv civil deat7h, and consequently as having been foreigners at the period whenjudgosene vwa pronounceti between them by a tribunal of Neufchatel in Switzerland. The learned advocate concluded by calling upon the tribunal to distinguish in its judgment the case of Messrs. Alarsh and Roche from that of WNilliam Stackroole anti other heirs, who had separate interests. DI. Dupin afterwards addressed the Court on bchalf of Wl'illiam Stackpoole, and contented hiniself with adopting and further do- veloping the arguments which had been adducdfi by the counsel who hail preceded Iitin. M. Tripier will commence his reply for CoLnt Georges at the ex- piration of a week. TRIBUNAL OF THE FIRST INSTANCE. PAR1Ts T)Fc. 99 THE srACKPO(T.E CAUSE.