Page:Encyclopædia Britannica, Ninth Edition, v. 1.djvu/696

Rh G58 AMBASSADOR tivcs of a foreign power, has been an essential and funda mental principle of the law of nations. Indeed it vms the law of nations when there was no other. Alexander the Great destroyed Tyre for an insult offered to his ambas sador; and it stands recorded in the Roman law, &quot; Si quis legatum hostium pulsasset, contra jus gentium id commis- sum esse existimatur, qiiia sancti habentur legati&quot; (Dig. L. Tit. vii. 17). In moments of excessive excitement or revolutionary frenzy even this principle has been vio lated, as in the murder of Dr Dorislaus at the Hague (1649), and of the French envoys at Rastadt (1799); but such acts leave an indelible disgrace on those who have committed them. For it is the interest of all mankind that ambassadors and envoys should have absolute security to perform their missions with freedom of speech and the liberty &quot;eundi et redeundi&quot; undis turbed, insomuch that to intercept or refuse passage to an ambassador, even through the territory of a third party, is justly regarded as a base action, though probably the leave of the third party to grant the passage ought to be asked. It was the barbarous custom of Turkey to send an ambas sador to the Seven Towers on a declaration of war. and detain him there as long as the war lasted; but the Porte formally relinquished and abandoned this practice on the breaking out of war with Russia in 1827. To secure this immunity from all interference, an accredited ambassador or envoy is wholly free from the jurisdiction of the courts of law, or of any other authority in the country in which he is sent to reside. This constitutes the doctrine of extra territoriality. His house is as sacred as his person. It is supposed, like a ship at sea, to form part of the territory represented by the flag which he may hoist over it. All the members of the embassy, and even the servants of the ambassador, share the same inviolability. They cannot even be arrested and prosecuted for offences without his consent. Hence, as the courts of justice have no jurisdiction over them, and indeed would have no means of enforcing an adverse decision either by distress or imprisonment, these diplomatic agents cannot be impleaded or sued. The only means of obtaining redress for an injury or breach of con tract is an appeal to the head of the mission, or a further appeal to the government which he represents, which, it must be presumed, will not allow a wrong to be committed with impunity under the shelter of privilege. In England, by the statute 7 Anne, c. 12, it is expressly enacted that any process against foreign ambassadors or ministers, or their goods and chattels, shall be altogether void. This Act was passed in consequence of an attempt, made in 1 708, to arrest an ambassador of Peter the Great in London for a debt of 50, and it is still law; but in fact it is only declaratory, and in confirmation of the common law and the law of nations. An ambassador or envoy pays no taxes or contributions to the public revenue of the country in which he resides, and on this principle he is entitled to receive commodities from abroad free of customs duties. But he is not exempted from the payment of local rates, -though, indeed, if he were to decline to pay them, no process could issue against him for the purpose of levying them. He also pays the ordinary rates of postage, but he has the privi lege of sending his own couriers carrying sealed despatches, which exempts him from the monopoly of the post office. These couriers, and their despatches or mails, are also regarded by common consent as inviolable messengers, unless they chance in time of war to fall into the hands of a hostile belligerent. In some countries ambassadors and their couriers have been allowed to have a prior claim for post horses over private travellers. Another of the important privileges of an ambassador or envoy is the free exercise of the religion or form of worship to which he adheres; but it is laid down by the best writers on the subject that a foreign minister has not the right of maintaining a chapel or chaplain within his hotel, under the law of nations; hence the liberty of religious worship for the ambassador and his suite was made a matter of treaty engagement between Catholics and Protestants, and between Christians and Mussulmans. Ity courtesy, though not of strict right, the usage of ambassadors chapels has, however, become general; and it had a real importance in countries where the free exercise of different forms of belief was not tolerated by law. Thus, at the time when the rites of the Church of Rome were forbidden in England, the Spanish and Bavarian chapels in London were free; and they have remained in existence till our own days, although the enlarged tolerance of the present age has removed in eveiy civilised country those barriers. In China and Japan the free exercise of the Christian religion by the Christian embassies is formally secured by treaty. B. We now pass to the duties of an ambassador, and we place at the head, of them that of keeping his own sove reign well informed of all that may concern his interests in foreign countries. He is the eye of the government he serves, specially directed to a particular spot, and he ought to be thoroughly acquainted with the course of policy, the movements of parties, the character and disposition of individual statesmen, and the material and commercial resources of the country in which he resides. His public despatches, and his private correspondence with the Minister of Foreign Affairs under whom he serves, ought to be a record of all that can interest or concern the state which he represents. In this sense the diplomatic reports of the ambassadors of former times are invaluable materials for history. His next duty is to protect and defend, if neces sary, the persons and interests of his fellow-countrymen abroad; and this is of especial moment in the case of a British ambassador, whose countrymen are to be met with as travellers, navigators, or merchants in all parts of the globe. To them the presence and influence of the diplo matic representatives of their country is of incalculable value, and nothing can be more ill-judged than the pro posals that have been made to cut down and contract our foreign embassies and missions. A third, but not less important, duty of an ambassador is to maintain the most amicable relations with the sovereign to whom he ir&amp;gt; accredited, and with his ministers, and to observe towards them the strictest respect, veracity, and good-will. It has been said in joke that the first duty of an ambassador is to keep a good cook; but if this implies that he is to exercise a liberal hospitality and to make his house agreeable, those no doubt are means which may powerfully assist him in the objects of his mission. In former times it, was con sidered to be essential to good diplomacy to act as a spy upon the motives and conduct of foreign statesmen, to cheat without being cheated, to use clandestine means to obtain information, to endeavour to form a party in foreign states favourable to the ambassador s own national interests, to observe and resist with the utmost jealousy the demeanour of other foreign envoys, and to carry on a species of warfare under the mask of courtesy and good-breeding. These practices have given diplomacy and the functions of ambassadors a bad name, but it must be said that they are repudiated by the principles and practice of the present time, and more especially by the foreign policy of this country. Down to a recent period, these struggles for ascendancy in foreign countries were carried on with great eagerness, and they led to unfor tunate results. In Spain, for example, the untoward marriage of Queen Isabella was notoriously brought about by the violent and arbitrary interference of the French ambassador; and in 1848, when Lord Palmerston instructed