A person claiming title under a foreign corporation is chargeable with knowledge of its chartered powers and restrictions ; Hoyt v. Thompson's Ex'r„ 19 N. Y. 207.
The effect of foreign laws when proved is properly referable to the court ; the object of the proof of foreign laws is to enable the court to Instruct the jury what is, in point of law, the result from foreign laws to be ap plied to the matters In controversy before them. The court are, therefore, to decide what is the proper evidence of the laws of a foreign country ; and when evidence is given of those laws, the court are to judge of their applicability to the matter in issue ; Story, Confl. Laws § 638 ; Green]. Ey. 486 ; De Sobry v. De Laistre, 2 Harr. & J. (Md.) 193, 3 Am. Dec. 535 ; Brackett v. Norton, 4 Conn. 517, 10 Am. Dec. 179, Where foreign statutes (here Mexican) are the basis of a claim in the United States cir cuit court, parol evidence of an expert is ad missible upon the construction thereof upon any matter of reasonable doubt, notwith standing they are in evidence by a certified copy and an agreed translation; Slater v. R. Co., 194 U. S. 120, 24 Sup. Ct. 581, 48 L. Ed. 900. Statutes and decisions having been
proved or otherwise properly brought to the attention of the court, It may itself deduce from them an opiniOn as to what the law of the foreign jurisdiction is, without being conclusively bound by the testimony of a wit ness who gives his opinion as to • the law which he deduces from these very statutes and opinions ; Finney v. Guy, 189 U. S. 335, 23 Sup. Ct. 558, 47 L. Ed, 839. No witness can conclude a court' by his opinion of the construction and meaning of statutes and de cisions already in evidence ; Laing v. Rigney, 160 U. S. 531, 16 Sup. Ct. 366, 40 L. Ed. 525. But it is held that the testimony of lawyers of a foreign country that certain proven acts, documents and records had the effect of cre ating complainant a corporation under the laws of such country is sufficient prima facie to establish the corporate character of com plainant. The court will not undertake to construe the statutory law of such country for itself to determine if such testimony is in correct ; Badische Anilin & Soda Fabrik v. A. Kliptein & Co., 125 Fed. 543.
See CONFLICT OF LAWS; JUDICIAL NOTICE; PRECEDENT; LEx FORT.