Ambassadors and other public ministers of the first class are Ambassadors. exclusively entitled to what is called the representative character, being considered as peculiarly representing the sovereign or State by whom they are delegated, and entitled to the same honours 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 honours 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 exclusively applied to those sent on permanent missions, the latter to those employed on a particular or extraordinary occasion, though it is sometimes extended to those residing at a foreign court for an indeterminate period (1). The right of sending ambassadors is exclusively confined to crowned heads, the great republics, and other States entitled to royal honours (m). the second class. All other public ministers are destitute of that particular cha- Ministers of racter 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 (n). Ministers of the second class are envoys, envoys extraordinary, and ministers plenipotentiary, while those of the pope are called internuncios (o). So far as the relative rank of diplomatic agents may be deter- Diplomatic precedence. mined by the nature of their respective functions, 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 "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." Martens, Nouv. Rec. ii. 449. The protocol of the Congress of Aixla-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 paraît pas avoir prévu, il est arrêté entre les cinq cours, que les ministres résidens, ac crédités auprès d'elles, formeront, par (1) Vattel, Droit des Gens, liv. iv. (m) Martens, Précis, &c., liv. vii. (n) Martens, Manuel Diplomatique, Ministers of the third class. 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 honours 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 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 (p). In the third class are included ministers, ministers resident, residents, and ministers chargés d'affaires, accredited to sovereigns (q). 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, (P) Pinheiro-Ferreira, Notes to Martens, Précis du Droit des Gens, tom. ii. Notes 12, 14. (7) Martens, Précis, &c., liv. vii. ch. 2, § 194. or chargés d'affaires ad interim, substituted in the place of the minister of their respective nations during his absence (r). According to the rule prescribed by the Congress of Vienna, Precedence. 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 (s). 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 different courts (t). 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 (u). Consuls, and other commercial agents, not being accredited to Consuls. the sovereign or minister of foreign affairs, are not, in general, considered as public ministers; but the consuls maintained by the Christian Powers of Europe and America in Mohammedan countries and in the Orient are accredited and treated as public ministers (v). credence. Every diplomatic agent, in order to be received in that charac- Letters of ter, and to enjoy the privileges and honours attached to his rank, must be furnished with a letter of credence. In the case of an ambassador, envoy, or minister, of any of the first three classes, this letter of credence is addressed by the sovereign, or other chief magistrate of his own State to the sovereign or State to whom Full power. Instructions. Communication of 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 (x). The full power, authorizing the minister to 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 (y). 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 (2). Some States refuse to receive communications from foreign instructions. ministers, either on all or on particular topics, unless a copy is at the same time given to their own minister. In 1825, Canning was informed that the Russian ambassador was about to read him a despatch from St. Petersburg, relating to British policy in South America, but that he would not leave him a copy. At the interview Canning declined to allow the reading of the despatch to commence if no copy would be left, on the ground that he could not, at a single hearing, take in the full bearing of the document, nor weigh its expressions sufficiently to return a suitable reply (a). A public minister, proceeding to his destined post in time of peace requires no other protection than a passport from his own Passport. (x) Martens, Précis, &c., liv. vii. ch. 3, § 202. Wicquefort, De l'Ambassadeur, liv. i. § 15. (y) Wicquefort, liv. i. § 16. Martens, Précis, &c., liv. vii. ch. 3, § 204. Manuel Diplomatique, ch. 2, § 17. (z) Manuel Diplomatique, ch. 2, $ 16. (a) Calvo, Droit International (2nd ed.), vol. i. § 430, p. 550; and see Stapleton, George Canning and his Times, p. 429. Government. In time of war, he must be provided with a safe conduct, or passport, from the Government of the State with which his own country is in hostility, to enable him to travel securely through its territories (b). minister on his post. It is the duty of every public minister, on arriving at his Duties of a destined post, to notify his arrival to the minister of foreign affairs. public If the foreign minister is of the first class, this notification is arriving at usually communicated by a secretary of embassy or legation, or other person attached to the mission, who hands to the minister of foreign affairs a copy of the letter of credence, at the same time requesting an audience of the sovereign for his principal. Ministers of the second and third classes generally notify their arrival by letter to the minister of foreign affairs, requesting him to take the orders of the sovereign, as to the delivery of their letters of credence. Chargés d'affaires, who are not accredited to the sovereign, notify their arrival in the same manner, at the same time requesting an audience of the minister of foreign affairs for the purpose of delivering their letters of credence. or chief Ambassadors, and other ministers of the first class, are en- Audience of titled to a public audience of the sovereign; but this ceremony the sovereign, is not necessary to enable them to enter on their functions, and, magistrate. together with the ceremony of the solemn entry, which was formerly practised with respect to this class of ministers, is now usually dispensed with, and they are received in a private audience, in the same manner as other ministers. At this audience, the letter of credence is delivered, and the minister pronounces a complimentary discourse, to which the sovereign replies. In republican States, the foreign minister is received in a similar manner, by the chief executive magistrate or council, charged with the foreign affairs of the nation (c). Diplomatic The usage of civilized nations has established a certain etiquette, to be observed by the members of the diplomatic corps, etiquette. resident at the same court, towards each other, and towards the members of the Government to which they are accredited. The duties which comity requires to be observed, in this respect, belong rather to the code of manners than of laws, and can hardly be made the subject of positive sanction; but there are certain established rules in respect to them, the non-observance of which may be attended with inconvenience in the performance of more serious and important duties. Such are the visits of etiquette, (b) Vattel, liv. iv. ch. 7, § 85. Manuel Diplomatique, ch. 2, § 19. Flassan, Histoire de la Diplomatie Française, tom. v. p. 246. (c) Martens, Manuel Diplomatique, ch. 4, §§ 33-36. |