REAL ESTATE. In general, the mode of conveying, incumbering, transmitting, devis ing, and controlling real is governed by the law of the place of situation of the property ; Bronson v. Lumber Co., 44 Minn. 348, 46 N. W. 570 ; Cochran v. Benton, 126 Ind. 58, 25 N. E. 870 ; U. S. v. Crosby, 7 Cr. (U. S.) 115, 3 L, Ed. 287 ; Oakey v. Bennett, 11 How, (U. S.) 33, 13 L. Ed. 593 ; Augusta Ins. & Banking Co. v. Morton, 3 La. Ann. 418 ; 14 Ves. 541; 4 T. R. 182; Fall v. Eas tin, 215 U. S. 1, 30 Sup. Ct. 3, 54 L. Ed. 65, 23 L. R. A. (N. S.) 924, 17 Ann. Cas. 853 ; Brine v. Ins. Co., 96 U. S. 627, 24 L. Ed. 858. See LEX REI SIT2E.
Perhaps an exception may exist in the case of mortgages ; Bank of England v. Tarleton, 23 Miss. 175 ; Dundas v. Bowler, 3 McLean 397, Fed. Cas. No. 4,141. But the point can not be considered as settled ; 1 Washb. R. P. 524 ; Story, Confi. Laws § 363 ; Westl. Priv.
Int. Law 75. It is said by Wharton (Conti. Laws § 368) that the law governing the mort gage, as such, is the law of situs of the land which the mortgage covers ; but the debt is governed by the law of the domicil of the party to whom it is due, no matter where the property be situated ; see Townsend v. Riley, 46 N. H. 300; Oregon & W. Trust Inv.
Co. v. Rathburn, 5 Sawy. 32, Fed. Cas, No. 10,555; Cope v. Wheeler, 41 N. Y. 313; Post v. Bank, 138 Ill. 559, 28 N. E. 978; Penfield v. Tower, 1 N. D. 216, 46 N. W. 413; and that when the money is invested on the land for which the mortgage is given, the lea site prevails. For the purposes of taxation a debt has its situs at the domicil of the cred itor ; Hauenstein v. Lynham, 100 U. S. 490, 25 L. Ed. 628.