her presence, seated on her throne, to the surprise of the attendant courtiers, the commissioners fell in a group upon their faces, crawled on all fours to the foot of the throne, and there delivered the presents.1

The date of reception of credentials regulates the order of standing or precedence of envoys of the same rank at the capital where they are stationed, the one newly received going to the foot of the list. After the passage of the statute of 1893, authorizing ambassadors in the United States diplomatic service, it was determined by the leading powers of Europe to raise their ministers in Washington to the rank of ambassadors, and there occurred a quiet struggle for the first presentation of such credentials, as that act would make the deliverer of them the head or dean of the local diplomatic corps. The French government first nominated its minister an ambassador, and was soon followed by the British government. The London foreign office was, however, more prompt in forwarding the queen's letter of credence, and her majesty's minister was enabled to deliver it into the hands of the President before his French colleague was received, and therefore the British ambassador became the dean of the diplomatic corps and took rank next after the President and Vice-President.

The practice in monarchical governments of accrediting anew their diplomatic representatives on the accession of every new ruler has occasioned some question as to the relative precedence of envoys. Between 1870 and 1874 various changes of rulers occurred in Spain.

1 Letters from London by George M. Dallas, 356.

On the accession of King Alphonso the British minister was and for some time had been the oldest resident minister, but, the ministers of Portugal and Russia having presented their new credentials to the king before their British colleague, they claimed precedence over him. After much discussion, it was decided that foreign ministers preserve their relative precedence according to the date of their official notification of their first arrival, without regard to the order in which they may afterwards deliver fresh credentials on the occasion of a new sovereign. Such was the view taken by the American minister, Mr. Cushing, and it was approved by his government.1

Following his reception, the American envoy has a round of official visits to make. If accredited to a royal court, there are usually certain presentations to be made to the heir apparent and other members of the royal family, and these are arranged through the master of ceremonies. This official also furnishes him a list of the higher members of the government upon whom the envoy is expected to make the first call. He likewise makes the first call upon his colleagues of the diplomatic corps. If of the grade of minister, he cannot call upon the ambassadors except by appointment, which is usually made upon written application. Even a new ambassador has a certain formality to observe, which is not very clearly defined, as was shown in the case of the newly created ambassador of Mexico, whose ambassadorial colleagues declined to accept an invitation to his embassy because of the omission of some not very well

1 U. S. For. Rel. 1875, 1105, 1108.

understood formality; although it is possible they took that method of exhibiting their displeasure at the creation of an embassy by Mexico, it being felt by them that ambassadorial distinction should be reserved for the Great Powers of Europe.

An early duty of an American envoy after his arrival is to find a location for his office and residence. These are usually combined in the same building, although in a few capitals, as London, Paris, and Berlin, offices are provided separate from the residence. Our government makes no provision for residences for its diplomatic representatives, and this omission is a source of great embarrassment to the newly arrived envoy, and in a lesser degree to those who have relations with him, as a change in the location of the legation usually occurs with the arrival of every new minister. The desirability of having the legation residences owned by the government has often been urged upon Congress, and the secretaries of state have collected information as to their cost and importance, but thus far Congress has not thought proper to authorize the appropriation necessary to this new dignity and usefulness of its foreign representation. It has, however, been found necessary for the government to erect and own legation houses in China, Japan, Korea, and Siam, owing to the fact that it was not possible to rent suitable legation residences in those countries.

The practice of owning their own legations is observed by a number of the nations of the world. Legation houses are now owned in Washington by the following governments: Great Britain, Germany, Mexico,

Austria, Italy, Japan, China, and Korea, and the number is likely to be increased.

A curious incident of congressional legislation is connected with this subject. Yielding to the demand for some restraint upon the extensive ownership of lands in the West by foreign syndicates and corporations, an act was passed in 1887 restricting the ownership of real estate in the Territories to American citizens. It was not intended to have it apply to legation property in Washington, but its language operated to that end, and it became necessary to pass an act the following year so amending the law as not to apply to the ownership of legations in the District of Columbia.

CHAPTER V

DUTIES OF A DIPLOMAT

TO HIS OWN GOVERNMENT

THE duties of a diplomatic representative may be divided into two general classifications: first, to his own government and its citizens; second, to the government of his residence and its people.

It is, as a matter of course, the duty of the envoy to keep his own government informed of the state and progress of all business intrusted to him by it, or which may arise in the regular course of affairs; but Vin addition to this, he is to keep it informed of all that occurs in the country of his residence affecting the government of the latter, its policy and spirit, whether it has relation to his own or other countries; and the general sentiment of the country, its commercial, industrial, and scientific development.

An envoy can hardly be too diligent in attention to these duties, but one occasionally oversteps the proper limits of desired information. A minister going to his post in South America, having never before been out of his own country, sent back to the Department of State a detailed account of his journey, in which he described in such florid language the beauties of the scenery and the experiences of foreign travel to him so novel, that when the dispatch appeared in the annual publication of the department it exposed him to the