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.1

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 The great called the great republics, who were entitled to royal Republics. honors, 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 honors. 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.2

Those monarchical sovereigns who are not crowned heads, but who enjoy royal honors, concede the precedence on all occasions to emperors and kings.

1 Martens, § 152. Klüber, § 95.

2 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.

Monarchical sovereigns who do not enjoy royal honors yield the precedence to those princes who are entitled to these honors.

Semi-sovereign or dependent States rank below sovereign

States.1

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 honors.2

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.3

nat.

Where the rank between different States is equal or § 4. Usage of the alter- 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

1 Klüber, § 98.

2 Heffter, Das Euröpäische Völkerrecht, § 28, No. III.

3 Klüber, Acten des Weiner Congresses, tom. viii. pp. 98, 102, 108, 116.

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 allernal, the order to be observed by the different ministers shall be determined by lot.1

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.2

§ 5. Lan

in diploma

course.

The primitive equality of nations authorizes each nation to make use of its own language in treating guage used with others, and this right is still, in a certain degree, tic interpreserved 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 national language in treaties and diplomatic correspondence, usually annex to the papers transmitted by them a translation in the language of the opposite party, wherever it is understood that this comity will be reciprocated. Such is the usage of the Germanic Confederation, of Spain, and the Italian courts. Those States which have a common language generally use it in their transactions with each other. Such is the case between the Germanic Confederation and its different members, and between the respective members them

1 Annexe, xvii. à l'Acte du Congrès de Vienne, art 7.

2 Klüber, Uebersicht der diplomatischen Verhandlungen des Wiener Congresses, § 164.

selves; between the different States of Italy; and between Great Britain and the United States of America.

§ 6. Titles

All sovereign princes or States may assume whatof sovereign ever titles of dignity they think fit, and may exact from princes and States. their own subjects these marks of honor. But their recognition by other States is not a matter of strict right, especially in the case of new titles of higher dignity, assumed by sovereigns. Thus the royal title of King of Prussia, which was assumed by Frederick I. in 1701, was first acknowledged by the Emperor of Germany, and subsequently by the other princes and States of Europe. It was not acknowledged by the Pope until the reign of Frederick William II. in 1786, and by the Tuetonic knights until 1792, this once famous military order still retaining the shadow of its antiquated claims to the Duchy of Prussia until that period.1 So also the title of Emperor of all the Russias, which was taken by the Czar, Peter the Great, in 1701, was successively acknowledged by Prussia, the United Netherlands, and Sweden in 1723, by Denmark in 1732, by Turkey in 1739, by the emperor and the empire in 1745-6, by France in 1745, by Spain in 1750, and by the Republic of Poland in 1764. In the recognition of this title by France, a reservation of the right of precedence claimed by that crown was insisted on, and a stipulation entered into by Russia in the form of a Réversale, that this change of title should make no alteration in the ceremonies observed between the two courts. On the accession of the Empress Catharine II. in 1762, she refused to renew this stipulation in that form, but declared that the imperial title should make no change in the ceremonial observed between the two courts. This declaration was answered by the court of Versailles in a counter declaration, renewing the recognition of that title, upon the express condition, that, if any alteration should be made by the court of St. Petersburg in the rules previously observed by the two courts as to rank and precedence, the French crown would resume its ancient style, and cease to give the title of Imperial to that of Russia.2

1 Ward's History of the Law of Nations, vol. ii. pp. 245-248. Klüber, Droit des Gens Moderne de l'Europe, pt. ii. tit. 1, ch. 2, § 107, note c.

2 Flassan, Histoire de la Diplomatie Française, tom. vi. liv. iii. pp. 328–364.

The title of Emperor, from the historical associations with which it is connected, was formerly considered the most eminent and honorable among all sovereign titles; but it was never regarded by other crowned heads as conferring, except in the single case of the Emperor of Germany, any prerogative or precedence over those princes.

The usage of nations has established certain mari§ 7. Maritime ceremonials to be observed, either on the ocean, time cereor those parts of the sea over which a sort of supremacy is claimed by a particular State.

monials.

Among these is the salute by striking the flag or the sails, or by firing a certain number of guns on approaching a fleet or a ship of war, or entering a fortified port or harbor.

Every sovereign State has the exclusive right, in virtue of its independence and equality, to regulate the maritime ceremonial to be observed by its own vessels towards each other, or towards those of another nation, on the high seas, or within its own territorial jurisdiction. It has a similar right to regulate the ceremonial to be observed within its own exclusive jurisdiction by the vessels of all nations, as well with respect to each other, as towards its own fortresses and ships of war, and the reciprocal honors to be rendered by the latter to foreign ships. These regulations are established either by its own municipal ordinances, or by reciprocal treaties with other maritime powers.1

Where the dominion claimed by the State is contested by foreign nations, as in the case of Great Britain in the Narrow Seas, the maritime honors to be rendered by its flag are also the subject of contention. The disputes on this subject have not unfrequently formed the motives or pretexts for war between the powers asserting these pretensions, and those by whom they were resisted. The maritime honors required by Denmark, in consequence of the supremacy claimed by that power over the Sound and Belts, at the entrance of the Baltic Sea, have been regulated and modified by different treaties with other States, and espe

1 Bynkershoek, de Dominio Maris, cap. 2, 4. Martens, Précis du Droit des Gens Moderne de l'Europe, liv. iv. ch. 4, § 159. Klüber, Droit des Gens Moderne de l'Europe, pt. ii. tit. 1, ch. 3, §§ 117-122.