4. Chargés d'affaires accredited to the minister of foreign affairs. (a)

§ 212. Ambassadors and other public ministers of the Ambasfirst class are exclusively entitled to what is called sadors. the representative character, being considered as peculiarly representing the sovereign or State by whom they are delegated, and entitled to the same honors to which their constituent would be entitled, were he personally present. This must, however, be taken in a general sense, as indicating the sort of honors to which they are entitled; but the exact ceremonial to be observed towards this class of ministers depends upon usage, which has fluctuated at different periods of European history. There is a slight shade. of difference between ambassadors ordinary and extraordinary; the former designation being exlusively applied to those sent on permanent missions, the latter to those employed on a particular or extraordinary occasion, though it is sometimes ex

(a) The recez of the Congress of Vienna of the 19th of March, 1815, provides: — "ART. 1. Les employés diplomatiques sont partagés en trois classes: "Celle des ambassadeurs, légats ou nonces ;

"Celle des envoyés, ministres, ou autres accrédités auprès des souverains; "Celle des chargés d'affaires accrédités auprès des ministres chargés des affaires étrangères.

"ART. 2. Les ambassadeurs, légats ou nonces, ont seuls le caractère représentatif. "ART. 3. Les employés diplomatiques en mission extraordinaire, n'ont, à ce titre, aucune supériorité de rang.

"ART. 4. Les employés diplomatiques prendront rang, entre eux, dans chaque classe, d'après la date de la notification officielle de leur arrivée.

"Le présent réglement n'apportera aucune innovation relativement aux représentans du Pape.

"ART. 5. Il sera déterminé dans chaque état un mode uniforme pour la réception des employés diplomatiques de chaque classe.

"ART. 6. Les liens de parenté ou d'alliance de famille entre les cours, ne donnent aucun rang à leurs employés diplomatiques.

"Il en est de même des alliances politiques.

"ART. 7. Dans les actes ou traités entre plusieurs puissances, qui admettent l'alternat, le sort décidera, entre les ministres, de l'ordre qui devra être suivi dans les signatures."

The protocol of the Congress of Aix-la-Chapelle of the 21st November, 1818, declares:

"Pour éviter les discussions désagréables qui pourraient avoir lieu à l'avenir sur un point d'étiquette diplomatique, que l'annexe du recez de Vienne, par lequel les questions de rang ont été réglées, ne parait pas avoir prévu, il est arrêté entres les cinq cours, que les ministres résidens, accrédités auprès d'elles formeront, par rapport à leur rang, une classe intermédiaire entre les ministres du second ordre et les chargés d'affaires."

tended to those residing at a foreign court for an indeterminate period. (a)

The right of sending ambassadors is exclusively confined to crowned heads, the great republics, and other States entitled to royal honors. (b)

Ministers of the second class.

§ 213. All other public ministers are destitute of that particular character which is supposed to be derived from representing generally the person and dignity of the sovereign. They represent him only in respect to the particular business committed to their charge at the court to which they are accredited. (a)

Ministers of the second class are envoys, envoys extraordinary, ministers plenipotentiary, envoys extraordinary and ministers plenipotentiary, and internuncios of the Pope. (b)

§ 214. So far as the relative rank of diplomatic agents Diplomatic prece- may be determined by the nature of their respective funcdence. tions, there is no essential difference between public

ministers of the first class and those of the second. Both are accredited by the sovereign, or supreme executive power of the State, to a foreign sovereign. The distinction between ambassadors and envoys was originally grounded upon the supposition, that the former are authorized to negotiate directly with the sovereign himself; whilst the latter, although accredited to him, are only authorized to treat with the minister of foreign affairs or other person empowered by the sovereign. The authority to treat directly with the sovereign was supposed to involve a higher degree of confidence, and to entitle the person on whom it was conferred, to the honors due to the highest rank of public ministers. This distinction, so far as it is founded upon any essential difference between the functions of the two classes of diplomatic agents, is more apparent than real. The usage of all times, and especially the more recent times, authorizes public ministers of every class to confer, on all suitable occasions, with the sovereign at whose court they are accredited, on the political relations.

(a) Vattel, Droit des Gens, liv. iv. ch. 6, §§ 70-79. Martens, Précis du Droit des Gens Moderne de l'Europe, liv. vii. ch. 9, § 192. Martens, Manuel Diplomatique, ch. 1, § 9.

(b) Martens, Précis, &c., liv. vii. ch. 2, § 198.
(a) Martens, Manuel Diplomatique, ch. 1, § 10.
(b) Ibid. ch. 1, § 10.

Vide ante, § 153

between the two States. But even at those periods when the etiquette of European courts confined this privilege to ambassadors, such verbal conferences with the sovereign were never considered as binding official acts. Negotiations were then, as now, conducted and concluded with the minister of foreign affairs, and it is through him that the determinations of the sovereign are made known to foreign ministers of every class. If this observation be applicable as between States, according to whose constitutions of government negotiations may, under certain circumstances, be conducted directly between their respective sovereigns, it is still more applicable to representative governments, whether constitutional monarchies or republics. In the former, the sovereign acts, or is supposed to act, only through his responsible ministers, and can only bind the State and pledge the national faith through their agency. In the latter, the supreme executive magistrate cannot be supposed to have any relations with a foreign sovereign, such as would require or authorize direct negotiations between them respecting the mutual interests of the two States. (a) 122

of the third

§ 215. In the third class are included ministers, min- Ministers isters resident, residents, and ministers chargés d'affaires, oft accredited to sovereigns. (a)

class.

Chargés d'affaires, accredited to the ministers of foreign affairs of the court at which they reside, are either chargés d'affaires ad hoc, who are originally sent and accredited by their governments,

(a) Pinheiro-Ferreira, Notes to Martens, Précis du Droit des Gens, tom. ii.: Notes 12, 14.

[122 In the United States, it is the settled practice for all communications of a business character by foreign ministers to be made to the Secretary of State, and none to the President. This was settled in the case of M. Genet, the minister of the French Republic, who attempted to address President Washington directly with complaints as to his official conduct in relation to France. It is also settled, that messages from the President to Congress, as well as debates in Congress, are not proper subjects for notice by a foreign minister in correspondence with the Department of State. Mr. Jefferson to M. Genet, Aug. 19, 1793. Mr. Forsyth to Señ. Castillo, Dec. 16, 1835. Mr. Buchanan to Señ. de la Rosa, Feb. 15, 1849. Mr. Webster to M. Hülsemann, Dec. 21, 1850. Mr. Webster to Señ. de la Rosa, Feb. 21, 1851. Mr. Webster, in the case of M. Hülsemann, the Austrian Chargé d'Affaires, took the ground, that, as Chargé d'Affaires, he not only could not hold any direct intercourse on public affairs with the President, but, as matter of strict right, was not entitled to be presented to him. Letter of June 8, 1852.]-D.

(a) Martens, Précis, &c., liv. vii. ch. 2, § 194.

or chargés d'affaires per interim, substituted in the place of the minister of their respective nations during his absence. (b)

According to the rule prescribed by the Congress of Vienna, and which has since been generally adopted, public ministers take rank between themselves, in each class, according to the date of the official notification of their arrival at the court to which they are accredited. (c)

The same decision of the Congress of Vienna has also abolished all distinctions of rank between public ministers, arising from consanguinity and family or political relations between their dif ferent courts. (d)

A State, which has a right to send public ministers of different classes, may determine for itself what rank it chooses to confer upon its diplomatic agents; but usage generally requires that those who maintain permanent missions near the government of each other should send and receive ministers of equal rank. One minister may represent his sovereign at different courts, and a State may send several ministers to the same court. A minister or ministers may also have full powers to treat with foreign States, as at a Congress of different nations, without being accredited to any particular court. (e)

Consuls

mercial

§ 216. Consuls, and other commercial agents, not and com- being accredited to the sovereign or minister of foreign agents. affairs, are not, in general, considered as public ministers; but the consuls maintained by the Christian Powers of Europe and America near the Barbary States are accredited and treated as public ministers. (a)

Letters of § 217. Every diplomatic agent, in order to be received. credence. in that character, and to enjoy the privileges and honors attached to his rank, must be furnished with a letter of credence. In the case of an ambassador, envoy, or minister, of either of the three first classes, this letter of credence is addressed by the sovereign, or other chief magistrate of his own State, to the sovereign

(b) Martens, Manuel Diplomatique, ch. 1, § 11.

(c) Recez du Congrès de Vienne du 19 Mars, 1815, art. 4.

(d) Ibid. art. 6.

(e) Martens, Précis, &c., liv. vii. ch. 2, §§ 199–204.

(a) Bynkershoek, de Foro Legatorum, cap. 10, §§ 4-6. Martens, Manuel Diplomatique, ch. 1, § 13. Vattel, liv. ii. ch. 2, § 34. Wicquefort, de l'Ambassadeur, liv. i. § 1, p. 63.

or State to whom the minister is delegated. In the case of a chargé d'affaires, it is addressed by the secretary, or minister of state charged with the department of foreign affairs, to the minister of foreign affairs of the other government. It may be in the form of a cabinet letter, but is more generally in that of a letter of council. If the latter, it is signed by the sovereign or chief magistrate, and sealed with the great seal of State. The minister is furnished with an authenticated copy, to be delivered to the minister of foreign affairs, on asking an audience for the purpose of delivering the original to the sovereign, or other chief magistrate of the State, to whom he is sent. The letter of credence states the general object of his mission, and requests that full faith and credit may be given to what he shall say on the part of his court. (a)

§ 218. The full power, authorizing the minister to Full power. negotiate, may be inserted in the letter of credence, but it is more usually drawn up in the form of letters-patent. In general, ministers sent to a Congress are not provided with a letter of credence, but only with a full power, of which they reciprocally exchange copies with each other, or deposit them in the hands of the mediating power or presiding minister. (a)

Instructions.

§ 219. The instructions of the minister are for his own direction only, and not to be communicated to the government to which he is accredited, unless he is ordered by his own government to communicate them in extenso, or partially; or unless, in the exercise of his discretion, he deems it expedient to make such a communication. (a)123

Passport.

§ 220. A public minister, proceeding to his destined post in time of peace, requires no other protection than a passport from his own government. In time of war, he must be provided with a safe-conduct or passport, from the government of

(a) Martens, Précis, &c., liv. vii. ch. 3, § 202. Wicquefort, de l'Ambassadeur, liv. i. § 15.

(a) Wicquefort, liv. i. § 16. Martens, Précis, &c., liv. vii. ch. 3, § 204. Manuel Diplomatique, ch. 2, § 17.

(a) Manuel Diplomatique, ch. 2, § 16.

[123 It is understood that a Minister of Foreign Affairs may decline to hear a despatch, or other written communication, read to him by a diplomatic agent, unless a copy is left with him. The reason is, that it puts him to the disadvantage of being obliged to trust to his memory, while the other party to the interview has the writing. In case of verbal communications, the two parties are on an equality.] — D.