Contracts with reference to property which is situated in the country of the enemy are not invalid if they do not involve communications across the lines of war and if they are not intended to defeat the right of the country, whose courts are asked to enforce such contract, to confiscate or to forfeit such property.1 A contract which is entered into between alien enemies who are resident in the territory of the enemy, for the sale and conveyance of realty, situated in the territory of the enemy, is not rendered invalid by the fact that they are alien enemies.2 A contract between two subjects of one of the belligerent powers, who are domiciled in the territory of such power, for the sale of personal property which is situated in the territory of the other belligerent power, is not invalid if it does not operate to defeat the right of the country in which they are resident, to confiscate such property under its right in time of war.3 These principles were applied in the Civil War, and the courts of the United States upheld sales of realty which were situated within the limits of the Confederacy as between persons who were domiciled in the limits of the Confederacy,4 and also upheld sales of personalty which was situated within the limits of the Confederacy where the parties to such sale were both domiciled in states which adhered to the Union,5 as long as such sales did not interfere with the right of the United States to confiscate or to forfeit such property.

The contract entered into during the Civil War, between persons who were domiciled within the limits of the Confederacy, is valid, and will be enforced in the courts of the United States after the war, if such contract did not tend to aid the Confederacy in carrying on the war.6 A bond given pursuant to Confederate stay laws, will be enforced after the war,7 and even if such laws are unconstitutional, the parties who have obtained a stay under such laws will not be permitted to take advantage of their unconstitutionality.1

16 Nelson v. Trigg, 3 Tenn. Cas. 733.

1 Conrad v. Waples, 96 U. S. 279, 24 L. ed. 721.

See also, Corbett v. Nutt, 77 U. S. (10 Wall.) 464, 10 L. ed. 976; Briggs v. United States, 143 U. S. 346, 36 L. ed. 180.

2 Conrad v. Waples, 96 U. S. 279, 24 L. ed. 721.

See also, Corbett v. Nutt, 77 U. S. (10 Wall.) 464, 19 L. ed. 976.

3Briggs v. United States, 143 U. S. 346, 36 L. ed. 180.

4 Conrad v. Waples, 96 U. S. 279, 24 L. ed. 721.

See also, Corbett v. Nutt, 77 U. S. (10 Wall.) 464, 19 L. ed. 976.

5 Briggs v. United States, 143 U. S. 346, 36 L. ed. 180.