Tire made to regulate judicial proceedings in the courts of the State. The resulta which would follow from allowing a decree of divorce in andther stàte to Have the same effect upon the pi;operty of either withinthis state as if given here, are sufficiently serious to prevent such a conclusion, unlesa the statute was plain and peremptory to thàt effect. �Divorces may be and are allowed in other states and coun- tries for causes and under circumstances not allowed here, and contrary to the public policy and rhoralB of the state. But if section 495 is takeu absolutely, and construed tp in- clude all cases of a decree for divorce given ' as well without the state as within it, t'heû such divorces, àlthough granted contrary to the laws and polioy of this state, wonld neverthe- less be allowed an extra-territorial force and effect witllin it ; and often, as in this case, against the property of its own citizens. �Aid is sought to be given to the claim of the plaintiff by in- voking the rule prescribed in article. 4 of the national consti- tution, and act of congress, passed in pursuance thereof, of May 26, 1790, (1 St. 122,) which in effect declares that the judgments of each state shaU have the same credit and effeci in every other state that they have in the state where ,they were given. But it is admitted that the decree of the Cali- fomia court is valid and effectuai here as a decree of divorce, and that is all the effect it bas in that state. The law of California, unlike that of this state, does not provide that a decree of divorce shall work a. transfer or forfeiture of one- third of the real property of the one party to the other, and if it did could bave no extra-territorial effect, but would be confined in it^ operation to the property of the parties withiu that state. �The plaintiff 's decree of divorce, although valid and effect- uai, as such, can bave no operation or effect upon real prop- erty in this state, except with its consent declared in its laws. If this decree was within the purview of the provision in sec- tion 495, 1 think this suit could be maintained. But, in my judgment, that not being the case, the demurrer to the bill must be snstained; aud it is so ordered. ����
