Law of 28th Case of the ground that more than three years had elapsed from the time when he was naturalized to the date of his return to France (m). By a recent law, every individual who was born in France of a foreigner, and who, at the time of his majority, is domiciled in France, is a Frenchman; unless, during the year that follows his majority, as regulated by French law, he has declined to be French, and has proved that he has preserved the nationality of his parents by a certificate in due form from his Government, which will remain annexed to his declaration; and unless he has also produced, if there is occasion so to do, a certificate proving that he has complied with the call to serve under the flag in compliance with the military laws of his country, always excepting cases provided for in treaties (n). In the case of Ignacio Tolen, a Spaniard, Mr. Webster said, that if the law of Spain had not permitted him to renounce his allegiance, he must expect it to deal with him as with a subject when he placed himself within its reach (o). (m) [U. S. Senate Documents, 185960, vol. ii. p. 176.] (n) [Law on Nationality, gazetted 28th June, 1889.] (o) [Halleck, p. 698.] CHAPTER III. RIGHTS OF EQUALITY. $152. equality of modified by $153. honours. THE natural equality of sovereign States may be Natural modified by positive compact, or by consent implied States from constant usage, so as to entitle one State to superi- compact and ority over another in respect to certain external objects, usage. such as rank, titles, and other ceremonial distinctions. Thus, the international law of Europe has attributed Royal to certain States what are called royal honours, which are actually enjoyed by every empire or kingdom in Europe, by the Pope, the grand duchies in Germany, and the Germanic and Swiss confederations. They were also formerly conceded to the German empire, and to some of the great republics, such as the United Netherlands and Venice. These royal honours entitle the States by whom they are possessed to precedence over all others who do not enjoy the same rank, with the exclusive right of sending to other States public ministers of the first rank, as ambassadors, together with certain other distinctive titles and ceremonies (a). § 154. among states enjoy Among the princes who enjoy this rank, the Catholic Precedence powers concede the precedency to the Pope, or sove- princes and reign pontiff; but Russia, and the Protestant States ing royal of Europe consider him as bishop of Rome only, and honours. a sovereign prince in Italy, and such of them as enjoy royal honours refuse him the precedence. (a) Vattel, Droit des Gens, tom. i. liv. ii. ch. 3, § 38. Martens, Précis du Droit des Gens Moderne de l'Europe, liv. iii. ch. 2, 129. Klüber, Droit des Gens $155. The great Republics. The Emperor of Germany, under the former constitution of the empire, was entitled to precedence over all other temporal princes, as the supposed successor of Charlemagne and of the Cæsars in the empire of the West; but since the dissolution of the late Germanic constitution, and the abdication of the titles and prerogatives of its head by the Emperor of Austria, the precedence of this sovereign over other princes of the same rank may be considered questionable (¿). The various contests between crowned heads for precedence are matter of curious historical research as illustrative of European manners at different periods; but the practical importance of these discussions has been greatly diminished by the progress of civilization, which no longer permits the serious interests of mankind to be sacrificed to such vain pretensions. The text-writers commonly assigned to what were called the great republics, who were entitled to royal honours, a rank inferior to crowned heads of that class; and the United Netherlands, Venice, and Switzerland, certainly did formerly yield the precedence to emperors and reigning kings, though they contested it with the electors and other inferior princes entitled to royal honours. But disputes of this sort have commonly been determined by the relative power of the contending parties, rather than by any general rule derived from the form of government. Cromwell knew how to make the dignity and equality of the English Commonwealth respected by the crowned heads of Europe; and in the different treaties between the French Republic and other powers, it was expressly stipulated that the same ceremonial as to rank and etiquette should be observed between them and France which had subsisted before the revolution (c). (b) Martens, § 132. Klüber, § 95. [Especially since 1866, when Austria was excluded from taking part in the affairs of Germany. This claim was never acknowledged, but always contested, by England. 24 Hen. 8, c. 12. Bryce, Holy Roman Empire.] (c) Treaty of Campo Formio, art. 23, and of Luneville, art. 17, with Austria. Treaties of Basle with Prussia and Spain. Schoell, Histoire des Traités de Paix, tom. i. p. 610. Edit. Bruxelles. § 156. crowned and Those monarchial sovereigns who are not crowned Monarchs not heads, but who enjoy royal honours, concede the pre- semicedence on all occasions to emperors and kings. Monarchial sovereigns who do not enjoy royal honours yield the precedence to those princes who are entitled to these honours. Semi-sovereign or dependent States rank below sovereign States (d). Semi-sovereign States, and those under the protection or Suzeraineté of another sovereign State, necessarily rank below that State on which they are dependent. But where third parties are concerned, their relative rank must be determined by other considerations; and they may even take precedence of States completely sovereign, as was the case with the electors under the former constitution of the Germanic empire, in respect to other princes not entitled to royal honours (e). These different points respecting the relative rank of sovereigns and States have never been determined by any positive regulation or international compact: they rest on usage and general acquiescence. An abortive attempt was made at the Congress of Vienna to classify the different States of Europe, with a view to determine their relative rank. At the sitting of the 10th December, 1814, the plenipotentiaries of the eight powers who signed the treaty of peace at Paris, named a committee to which this subject was referred. At the sitting of the 9th February, 1815, the report of the committee, which proposed to establish three classes of powers, relatively to the rank of their respective ministers, was discussed by the Congress; but doubts having arisen respecting this classification, and especially as to the rank assigned to the great republics, the question was indefinitely postponed, and a regulation established determining merely the relative rank of the diplomatic agents of crowned heads (ƒ). (d) Klüber, § 98. (e) Heffter, das Europäische Völkerrecht, § 28, No. iii. (f) Klüber, Acten des Weiner Congresses, tom. viii. pp. 98, 102, 108, 116. sovereigns. § 157. Usage of the alternat. $158. Language used in diplomatic intercourse. Where the rank between different States is equal or undetermined, different expedients have been resorted to for the purpose of avoiding a contest, and at the same time reserving the respective rights and pretensions of the parties. Among these is what is called the usage of the alternat, by which the rank and places of different powers are changed from time to time, either in a certain regular order, or one determined by lot. Thus, in drawing up public treaties and conventions, it is the usage of certain powers to alternate, both in the preamble and the signatures, so that each power occupies, in the copy intended to be delivered to it, the first place. The regulation of the Congress of Vienna, above referred to, provides that in acts and treaties between those powers which admit the alternat, the order to be observed by the different ministers shall be determined by lot (g). Another expedient which has frequently been adopted to avoid controversies respecting the order of signatures to treaties and other public acts, is that of signing in the order assigned by the French alphabet to the respective Powers represented by their ministers (h). The primitive equality of nations authorizes each nation to make use of its own language in treating with others, and this right is still, in a certain degree, preserved in the practice of some States. But general convenience early suggested the use of the Latin language in the diplomatic intercourse between the different nations of Europe. Towards the end of the fifteenth century, the preponderance of Spain contributed to the general diffusion of the Castilian tongue as the ordinary medium of political correspondence. This, again, has been superseded by the language of France, which, since the age of Louis XIV., has become the almost universal diplomatic idiom of the civilized world. Those States which still retain the use of their (g) Annexe, xvii. à l'Acte du Congrés de Vienne, art. 7. (h) Klüber, Uebersicht der diplomatischen Verhandlungen des Wiener Congresses, § 164. |