Geofroy v. Riggs - 133 U.S. 258, 10 S. Ct. 295 (1890)

Rule:

The meaning of the Consular Convention, Feb. 23, 1853, U.S.-France, art. 7, 10 Stat. 996. is that there shall be reciprocity in respect to the acquisition and inheritance of property in one country by the citizens of the other, that is, in all political communities in the United States where legislation permits aliens to hold real estate, the disability of Frenchmen from alienage in disposing and inheriting property, real and personal, is removed, and the same right, of disposition and inheritance of property, in France, is accorded to citizens of the United States, as are there enjoyed by its own citizens. 

Facts:

On the 19th day of January, 1888, T. Lawrason Riggs, a citizen of the United States and a resident of the District of Columbia, died at Washington, interstate, seized in fee of real estate of great value in the District. The complainants are citizens and residents of France and nephews of the deceased. On the 12th of March, 1872, the sister of the deceased, then named Kate S. Riggs, intermarried with Louis de Geofroy, of France. She was at the time a resident of the District of Columbia and a citizen of the United States. He was then and always has been a citizen of France. The complainants are the children of this marriage, and are infants now residing with their father in France. One of them was born July 14, 1873, at Pekin, in China, whilst his father was the French minister plenipotentiary to that country, and was there only as such minister. The other was born October 18, 1875, at Cannes, in France. Their mother, who was a sister of all the defendants except Medora, wife of the defendant E. Francis Riggs, died February 7, 1881. The deceased, T. Lawrason Riggs, left one brother, E. Francis Riggs, and three sisters, Alice L. Riggs, Jane A. Riggs and Cecilia Howard, surviving him, but no descendants of any deceased brother or deceased sister, except the complainants. The defendants, with the exception of Cecilia Howard, are, and always have been, citizens of the United States and residents of the District of Columbia. Cecilia Howard, in 1867, intermarried with Henry Howard, a British subject, and since that time has resided with him in England. The real property described in the bill of complaint cannot be divided without actual loss and injury, and the interest of the complainants, if they have any, as well as of the defendants, in the property, would be promoted by its sale and a division of the proceeds. To the bill of complaint setting up these facts and praying a sale of the premises described and a division of the proceeds among the parties to the suit according to their respective rights and interests, the defendants demurred, on the ground that the complainants were incapable of inheriting from their uncle any interest in the real estate. The Supreme Court of the District of Columbia sustained the demurrer and dismissed the bill. From the decree the case is brought to the court on appeal.

Issue:

Can citizens of France take land in the District of Columbia by descent from citizens of the United States?

Answer:

Yes.

Conclusion:

The Court held that the nephews, being citizens of France, were entitled to take by inheritance an interest in the real estate in the District of Columbia of which their uncle, a citizen of the United States, died seized. The Court construed the Consular Convention, Feb. 23, 1853, U.S.-France, art. 7, 10 Stat. 996, to mean that in all political communities in the United States where legislation permitted aliens to hold real estate, the disability of Frenchmen from alienage in disposing and inheriting property, real and personal, was removed. This construction found support in § 1 of the Act of Congress of March 3d, 1887, 24 Stat. 476, which plainly implied that property in the District of Columbia could be acquired by aliens by inheritance.