From what has been said in respect to the rule that a government is not required to receive a particular person in a diplomatic capacity, it follows that the recall of a minister, whose conduct has been such as to render his presence no longer acceptable, may be requested, or even demanded, by the government to which he is accredited; indeed, if the occasion be one of sufficient emergency, it may dismiss such an offender, and, if need be, expel him from its territory.'

It has already been explained that the government of a state is the organ through which it communicates with other powers. In such intercourse with other states a government may communicate directly, through its ministry of foreign affairs, or through ambassadors selected by the proper governmental authority in accordance with its constitution and laws. Classification of Diplomatic Agents. Heffter makes the following classification of these agents of intercourse:

(a.) Public ministers. These are clothed with a public and official character, and are sent by the sovereign authority of a state to a foreign government, as its general diplomatic representatives, or to undertake special negotiations. They may have either a permanent or temporary character.

(b.) Diplomatic agents, charged with similar duties, but without public or official character.

(c.) Commissioners, appointed for special purposes, as to locate and mark boundaries, to adjust international differences, or to carry into effect special clauses of treaties. The members of this class do not communicate directly either with a foreign sovereign or with his ministers.

1 The Government of the United States has felt obliged, upon more than one occasion, to take action with a view to expel, or secure the recall, of an offending minister. For references to such cases, see I Dig. Int. Law, §§ 84, 106; VII Opinions of Attorney-General, p. 367; I Amer. State Papers (Foreign Relations), pp. 141, 709; III Ibid. pp. 318ff,352ff, 355ff; Lawrence's Whea

ton (ed. of 1863), p. 437; II Schouler's History of the United States, p. 108; II Madison's Writings, pp. 422, 444, 449, 451, 453, 469, 474. The correspondence in relation to the most recent case of expulsion-that of Lord Sackville, the ambassador of Great Britain - see United States Foreign Relations, 1888, pp. 1667-1730. See also I Dig. Int. Law, § 84.

(d.) Consuls charged with the supervision of commercial in

terests.'

Rank of Ambassadors. The absence of a well-defined rule by which to determine questions arising as to the powers and dignities of the different classes of diplomatic agents gave rise to great confusion, especially at the beginning of the present century. To remedy this the representatives of the European powers assembled in Congress at Vienna, in 1815, agreed upon a classification of public ministers, and recommended the preparation and adoption, in each state, of rules to regulate their precedence. The arrangement proposed at Vienna,' as modified by the action of the Congress of Aix-laChapelle,' in 1818, has received such general sanction as to entitle it to consideration as a rule of international law. In accordance with its provisions diplomatic agents are now arranged into four classes:

(a.) Ambassadors, ordinary and extraordinary, legates and nuncios.

(b.) Envoys, ministers, or other diplomatic agents accredited to sovereigns.

(c.) Ministers resident, accredited to sovereigns.

(d.) Chargés d'affaires, and other diplomatic agents accredited to ministers of foreign affairs (whether bearing the title of minister or not), and consuls charged with diplomatic duties.'

Ambassadors of the first class are alone clothed with the representative character; they have special prerogatives, and are entitled to special honors, as they represent the sovereign in his personal character. Members of the other classes represent his affairs only. In general the immunities to which ministers are entitled depend upon their letters of credence.

1 Heffter, § 201; Lawrence, Int. Law, § 143 Dana's Wheaton, § 211, note; Hall, §§ 96, 98.

2 Lawrence, § 143; Dana's Wheaton, § 211, note; Heffter, § 208; I Dig. Int. Law, § 88; Vattel, liv. iv. chap. vi. §§ 69-71

' Lawrence, § 143; Dana's Wheaton, § 211, note; Heffter, § 208.

Bluntschli, § 171; Dana's Wheaton, § 211, note; Hall, p. 298; Heffter, §§ 208, 219; I Dig, Int. Law, § 88.

Those accredited to sovereigns are entitled to the immunities of ambassadors, those accredited to ministers of foreign affairs are not.'

Titles of Ambassadors. The titles of ambassadors are regulated by the municipal laws of the states which they represent. The terms ordinary and extraordinary at first determined the character of the diplomatic employment of the ministers to whom they were applied. They have now no special meaning. Legates and nuncios are the representatives of the pope at foreign courts. Legates have the rank of cardinal, and represent, to a certain extent, his spiritual as well as his temporal authority. Nuncios represent him in the latter capacity only. In determining the rank and titles of ministers sent to foreign courts, the principle of reciprocity prevails, and a state sends to another a representative of the same class that it receives. Several ministers may be maintained at the same court, and a single person may represent a state at several courts.2

Manner of Sending and Receiving Ambassadors. To

1 Article 4 of the "Reglement sur le rang entre les agens diplomatiques" adopted at the Congress of Vienna in the protocol of March 19, 1815, contained the requirement that "diplomatic employés shall take rank, as regards each other, in each class from the date of the official notification of their arrival." It was held, in a discussion respecting the application of this article which arose among the diplomatic representatives accredited to the court of Spain in 1875, that the precedence of diplomatic employés did not depend upon the date of actual presentation, but upon the date of official notification of readiness to be presented. It was contended, however, that the term "arrivée," as used in the article, was restricted in its application to the case of each government; since a minister holding over might have

been accredited to and received by some previous intruded, usurping, illegitimate, and odious dynasty or government, the recognition of whose previous rank would therefore implicate the legitimate dynasty or government in quasi admission of such previous assumption or intrusion, and would also be prejudicial to the rights of such foreign governments as had refused to recognize such usurpers or intruders, and had done so in the interest of legitimate and regular government. The weight of opinion seemed to be, however, that inquiries as to legitimacy should be disregarded, and the question of recognition be restricted to the fact of the existence of the government in every case.- United States Foreign Relations, 1875, p. 1105.

2

Lawrence, Int. Law, §§ 141-144; Bluntschli, § 172; Heffter, §§ 201, 208.

enable a minister to be received in that character, he is provided by the sovereign or other chief executive authority of his own state with two important papers, called his Letter of Credence and Full Power. The Letter of Credence is addressed to the sovereign to whom he is accredited. It contains his name and title, confers upon him the diplomatic character, and serves to identify him as a public minister, but does not authorize him to enter upon any particular negotiation.' The Full Power authorizes him to act as the general diplomatic representative of his government at the court to which he is accredited. It describes the limits of his authority to negotiate, if such there be, and upon it the validity of his acts as a minister largely depends. Ambassadors who represent states at Congresses and Conferences, or as members of International Courts, or Boards of Arbitration, are not usually provided with Letters of Credence. They bear Full Powers, under the authority of which they act, and copies of them are exchanged among the different members of the board or conference.' Reception of Ambassadors. An ambassador or minister accredited to a sovereign, upon arriving at his station, forwards a copy of his Letter of Credence to the Minister of Foreign Affairs, and requests an audience with the sovereign. At this audience, which may be either public or private, his Letter of Credence is presented, and complimentary speeches are usually exchanged. He may then enter upon the performance of his duties.

"Among the several characters established by custom, it rests with the sovereign to determine with what particular one he chooses to invest his minister; and he makes known the minister's character in the credentials which he gives him for the sovereign to whom he sends him. Credentials are the instrument which authorizes and establishes the minister in his character with the prince to whom they are addressed. If the prince receives the minister, he can receive him

They

solely only in the quality attributed
to him in his credentials.
are, as it were, his general letter of
attorney, his mandate patent, man-
datum manifestum." -Vattel, liv.
iv. chap. vi. § 76.

2 II De Martens, pp. 84-86; Heffter, §§ 209, 210; Bluntschli, §§ 183190; Lawrence, § 147; I Dig. Int. Law, § 85; I Twiss, §§ 212-216.

For many years the Chinese emperor refused to accord to foreign ambassadors and ministers accredited to his court the personal au

Duties of Ambassadors. The duties of a public minister are not susceptible of exact description. Some of them are regulated by international law, and some by the municipal law of the ambassador's state. They depend upon the importance of the power to which he is accredited, upon the amount of intercourse, commercial and otherwise, existing between it and the state which he represents, and, to some extent, upon the difference in their systems of government. He is expected to keep his government informed upon all questions of general interest, and to advise it of any change in the government, constitution, or state policy of the country in which he is resident. It is also his duty to make proper representations in behalf of subjects of his own state who may stand in need of protection, to secure a remedy for injuries which they may have received, or, in case they exceed his jurisdiction, to inform his government fully of the facts in each case in order that proper measures of redress may be taken. In general he represents the interests of his state, and those of its individual subjects, in the country to which he is accredited. That he may do so effectively at all times, and under all circumstances, he is bound by every consideration of honor and duty to scrupulously abstain from all interference in the internal affairs of the state to which he is accredited.'

Diplomatic Language. Every state has a right to employ its own language in its communications to other powers, and

dience to which by long established usage they believed themselves entitled. After some preliminary correspondence on the part of the powers interested an understanding was reached by their representatives at Pekin, and the matter of an audience was again presented to the Chinese Government in a joint note submitted to Prince Kung the prime-minister of China. After considerable discussion the request of the foreign ministers was acceded to, and a personal audience with the emperor was had on June 29, 1873.United States Foreign Relations,

1873, part i. pp. 149-201. See also Lawrence, Int. Law, § 147; I Twiss, §§ 212-216.

A foreign minister should correspond with the Secretary of State on matters which interest his nation, and not through the press of our country. He has no authority to communicate his sentiments to the people of the United States by publication in manuscript or print. -I Opinions of Attorney-General, p. 74; Heffter, pp. 425-432; I Dig. Int. Law, §§ 89–91, 107–107b; Klüber, §§ 197-201.