Various Orders of Agents. the part of his own Sovereign who receives him, he will be entitled to the full Jus legationis. Vattel in discussing this question says, that "a Natural-born Subject of a State may, without renouncing his country for ever, become independent of it during the whole time that he spends in the service of a foreign Prince,' and the presumption is certainly in favour of such independence, for the Status and Functions of a Public Minister naturally require, that he should depend only on his Master or the Prince who has intrusted him with the management of his affairs. Whenever, therefore, there does not exist any circumstance which furnishes a proof or indication to the contrary, a Foreign Minister, though antecedently a Subject of the State to which he is accredited, is reputed to be absolutely independent of it during the whole time of his commission. If his original Sovereign does not choose to allow him such independence within his dominions, he may refuse to admit him in the character of a Foreign Minister 20. § 187. In the early intercourse of European Nations Diplomatic a distinction of title amongst Diplomatic Agents was unknown. They were indifferently styled in Latin documents Legati or Oratores, and in more modern records they are designated Ambassadeurs, Ambasciadori, or Embascadores, respectively in French, Italian, and Spanish records. Grotius treats of Legati under a single head. The vanity of Princes in regard to Ceremonial on the one hand, and motives of parsimony on the other, contributed to introduce a distinction in or about the 15th Century between Diplomatic Agents who should represent the personal dignity as well as the independent rights of their Sovereign, and diplomatic agents who should represent the affairs alone 20 Droit des Gens, L. IV. c. 8. § 112. of the Sovereign who accredited them. Louis XI of France is said to have been the first of the European Sovereigns, who accredited to another Sovereign Power a Public Minister to represent him in the conduct of his affairs only, and not in respect of his personal dignity; and his example led the way to the introduction of two distinct classes of diplomatic Agents, a higher class representing the dignity of the person of their Constituent as well as his affairs, and a lower class simply representing him in the transaction of his affairs. At the time when Vattel wrote his work on the Law of Nations a third degree of Representation had become established by Custom, and Vattel divides accordingly the Diplomatic Body into Ambassadors, Envoys, and Residents. In the Treaty of Peace concluded at Passarovitz 20 between the Emperor Charles VI and the Sultan Ahmed III (anno 1718) we find mention of three classes of Public Ministers as distinguished from the simple Agent 21, the latter of whom, if his functions were not commercial, was included in the protection of the same Treaty-stipulations which guaranteed the personal safety of other Public Ministers. It is not easy to ascertain the precise line of demarcation, which distinguished the functions of the Resident from those of the Envoy, for the former class of Diplomatic Agents were more frequently than otherwise entrusted with the negociation of affairs of State 20 Ministri porro Cæsarei, sive Oratoris, sive Ablegati, sive Residentis, sive Agentis munere fungantur. Schmauss, Corp. Jur. Gent. Academ. p. 1703. In the Treaty of Commerce and Navigation concluded at the same time and place between the same Powers, Agents are mentioned in the list of Officials connected with Commerce: pariter Consules, Vice-Consules, Agentes, Factores, Interpretes. Schmauss, p. 1717. equally as the Envoy; but the office of Resident seems to have been held in less honour and consideration than that of Envoy, as it was frequently delegated to a subject of the State, to which the Resident was accredited. The title of Resident appears also to have been sometimes conferred upon persons who were only entrusted with the management of the private affairs of a Sovereign. The functions of the simple Agent on the other hand seem to have been originally very indefinite. Vattel speaks of him as having been formerly a kind of public Minister; but the title of Agent in Vattel's time had come in practice to be confined to persons appointed by Princes exclusively to transact their private affairs, and who were not unfrequently subjects of the Country where they resided. Such Agents are not the bearers of Letters of Credence properly speaking, and they are consequently not Public Ministers, nor under the protection of the Law of Nations, as such. Residents also appear sometimes not to have been furnished with Letters of Credence, and under such circumstances the title alone of Resident was no protection to them. This may serve as an explanation of the fact alluded to by Bynkershoek", that Wicquefort, who was a native of Amsterdam, was in the military service of the States General at the time that he was appointed the Resident of the Duke of Luneburg at the Hague. Wicquefort, notwithstanding his office of Resident, was cited before a Dutch Court and condemned to imprisonment for life. Bynkershoek holds that the office of Resident did not, under the Law of Nations, exempt Wicquefort from the jurisdiction of the Dutch Courts. The Office of Resident, as exercised in this case, seems to have differed very little from the office 22 De Foro Legatorum, c. 11. of a Consul or Commercial Agent, for Vattel23 speaks of "Dutch Merchants who obtain the title of Residents of certain foreign Princes, and nevertheless continue to carry on their commerce, thereby sufficiently denoting that they remain subjects of the States General." tion of 18th §188. The Law of Nations, antecedently to the Classificainstitution of permanent Foreign Missions at the dif- Public Miferent European Courts, did not recognise any dis-nisters in tinction of Class or Order amongst Public Ministers. Century. Each Minister or Envoy received such special consideration as the nature of his Mission entitled him to. But with the introduction of Resident Ministers, a question of Ceremonial and Precedence arose amongst the Representatives of Foreign Sovereigns at each Court. The Ambassador was received with higher honours, and took precedence of the Envoy. The Envoy, on the other hand, had precedence of the Resident; the Resident in his turn, being a Public Minister, took precedence of the Agent, whose duties were confined to the private affairs of his Sovereign. Such and so many were the grades of the diplomatic hierarchy at the commencement of the Eighteenth Century. The Agent has for the most part disappeared, and is replaced by the Chargé d'Affaires, but the French mission in Spain still retains amongst the personnel of its establishment an Agent of the French Nation, who is charged with the conduct of the affairs of his countrymen, which are of a secondary order 21 In the course of the Eighteenth Century a practice was introduced of accrediting public Ministers without any particular designation of rank or character. 23 Vattel, L. IV. c. 8. § 112. 4 Ch. de Martens, Guide Diplomatique, Tom. I. § 12. Rule of the Vattel states that this expedient was adopted to We thus find the title of Minister Plenipotentiary introduced, such Minister Plenipotentiary taking rank immediately after an Ambassador. The office of Minister Plenipotentiary came gradually to be united with that of Envoy Extraordinary, and was placed in the same rank. Ministers Resident and Ministers Chargés d'Affaires shortly afterwards completed the Catalogue, which we find in general acceptance at the commencement of the Nineteenth Century. § 189. The precise rank and precedence however of Diplomatic Agents was not a matter universally agreed upon amongst the Nations of Europe, until the Powers assembled in Congress at Vienna came to 25 Droit des Gens, L. IV. § 74. |