worship could be lawfully held in Madrid, Spain, was in the chapel maintained by the British legation.

A diplomatic representative is conceded the privilege of the free importation of effects for his personal or official use, or for the use of his immediate family. The privilege is extended only to the heads of missions. It is a usage founded upon comity rather than an inherent right. In the United States it is not based upon a law of Congress, and is a matter entirely within the discretion of the treasury department. In some countries, as in Spain, the amount in value which a minister may import free is limited to a fixed sum. In the United States it is unlimited, but granted only upon written application or notice by the foreign minister to the secretary of state, who advises the customs authorities through the secretary of the treasury, and in this way a record is kept of the importations. American diplomatic officers returning to the United States are allowed free entry of their personal effects, but this also is founded upon courtesy, and is not specifically authorized by law.

As there exists no positive law for the exemption at the custom house of the duties on personal effects of foreign officials, a notice to the customs authorities of their expected arrival is required in each case. J. Q. Adams related that during his residence in England the Allied Sovereigns who visited London after the battle of Waterloo were required to submit to an examination of their baggage at Dover, because of the failure of the customs authorities to receive instructions. For a like reason, Mr. Rush, before the time of steam vessels, driven by

stress of weather in 1817 into an unexpected English port, was subjected to a rigid scrutiny of his effects at the custom house. "Everything was ransacked; even the folds of linen opened; nothing was overlooked;" and some articles contraband under the law were temporarily detained.1

Foreign ministers enjoy certain privileges in time of war. They are entitled to free communication by correspondence with their own government, even if the place of their residence is in a state of siege or blockade. During the siege of Paris in 1870 the diplomatic corps received notice from the German authorities that dispatch bags for their respective governments would be permitted to pass only on condition that the dispatches were unsealed and subject to their inspection. The diplomatic corps protested, and Mr. Washburn determined not to send dispatches under such conditions. In the correspondence which ensued between the two governments Secretary Fish declared the condition to be humiliating and such as could not be accepted by a diplomatic agent with any self-respect. Count Bismarck recognized the right of diplomats to have free and confidential intercourse with their governments, but stated that some allowance should be made for military exigencies, and that the temporary obstruction arose from causes which he could not control. The suspension of free intercourse was brief.?

Diplomatic agents are entitled to pass through a

1 Rush's Court of London, 14.

2 For correspondence, U. S. For. Rel. 1870, 127; 1871, 283, 377; Washburn's Recollections, 159, 308.

blockade. A belligerent has no right to stop the passage of a minister from a neutral state to the other belligerent, unless the mission of such representative is hostile to the first belligerent. A minister residing at the capital has the right to communicate with the consuls of his government located in a portion of the country in revolt. During the American Civil War some trouble was occasioned the British minister in communicating with British consuls within the Confederate lines by the military officers of the United States, but all detention or interference with the official dispatch bags was promptly disavowed by the secretary of state.

The immunity of a diplomatic representative may be surrendered by his own act, as when he institutes a suit or voluntarily submits to judicial jurisdiction; when he is a citizen of the state to which he is accredited; or when he engages in trade, and suit is brought in respect of such trading arrangements.

The diplomatic immunities apply to a foreign representative for a reasonable time after he has given up his post, while he is preparing to leave the country. A change in the government by which a foreign minister is accredited suspends the activity of his functions, but does not necessarily terminate them, and during such suspension he is entitled to the immunities of a public minister.1

1 Case of Portuguese minister in Washington, 1 Wharton's Digest, 618; 2 Opinions Attorneys-General, 290.

CHAPTER IX

THE TERMINATION OF MISSIONS

A DIPLOMATIC official terminates his mission by resignation, by his transfer to another post, by his dismissal, by his recall. A change of parties in the United States by popular election brings about an almost complete change in the diplomatic service. Ambassadors and ministers are expected to tender their resignations on a change of the home government, and the resignations usually reach Washington in time to be in the hands of the new secretary of state when or very soon after he assumes office. If in any case a resignation is not so tendered, when a new appointment is determined upon the delinquent incumbent is informed of the posed change, and, if his resignation is not then tendered, he is usually summarily recalled.

pro

Likewise changes often occur during the same administration by removal. In the case of an envoy against whom no charges are brought, when a change is determined upon, the incumbent should be notified in advance of the intended change and an opportunity afforded him to tender his resignation. Instances have occurred where grave injustice has been done to faithful representatives by allowing them to learn of their removal through the public press. Such occurrences bring the American diplomatic service into disrepute.

The commission of an American diplomatic officer runs without limit as to time. At the beginning of the government, appointments were made for a given period, usually three years; for instance, Franklin and Jefferson, ministers to France, and John Adams, to England, were appointed for the specified period of three years. Mr. Jefferson was of the opinion that no American minister ought ever to be absent from home at European courts more than five or six years at a time. When secretary of state, he declined to support the application for appointment of Mr. Short, his successor at Paris, an intimate friend and neighbor, because he had already been too long out of the country.1

It was the early practice of American officials to return their commissions on the expiration of their term of service. A notable instance was that of Washington, who at the close of the War of Independence returned his commission as general-in-chief to Congress in open session in 1783. The archives of the Department of State show similar instances. But in 1831 President Jackson, when John Branch resigned as secretary of the navy, returned to him his commission, saying, "It is your own private property, and by no means to be considered part of the archives of the government." Since that date the practice of returning commissions has been

1 September 30, 1790, Secretary Jefferson wrote Mr. Short at Paris, as follows: "I think it possible that it will be established into a maxim of the new government to discontinue its foreign servants after a certain time of absence from their own country, because they lose in time that sufficient degree of intimacy with its circumstances which alone can enable them to know and pursue its interests. Seven years have been talked of. Be assured it is for your happiness and success to return."-5 Jefferson's Writings, 242.