immaterial whether the parties are citizens or strangers. This rule, however, seems to be different in England, and in a case where goods were sold in France by a Frenchman to an Englishman for the known purpose of being smuggled into England, it was held that the seller could main- tain suit in England for the price of the goods, upon the ground that the sale was complete in France, and ' Boucher v. Lawson, Cas. Temp. Hard., 85, 194. ' Armstrong v. Toler, 11 Wheat. R., 258. In this case the prin- ciples and authorities are fully discussed by the Court. See also opinion of Mr. Justice Porter in Ohio Ins. Co. v. Ed- monson, 5 Louis R., 595, et post.
the seller had no concern with the smuggling transaction. The contract is complete, said the Court, and nothing is left to be done. The seller indeed knows what the buyer is going to do with the goods ; but he has no concern in the transaction himself. But if he enters at all, as an ingredient, into the contract between the parties that the goods shall be smuggled, or that the seller shall do some act to assist or facili-