Volume I Part 54 (1/2)

[Footnote 711: Martens, I. -- 80; Bluntschli, -- 134; Despagnet, No. 254; Hall, -- 97.]

[Footnote 712: Bonfils, No. 632; Nys, II. p. 287; Merignhac, II. p. 298; Liszt, -- 13; Walther, op. cit., p. 195.]

IV

FOREIGN OFFICES

Heffter, -- 201--Geffcken in Holtzendorff, III. p. 668--Ullmann, -- 43--Rivier, I. -- 34--Bonfils, Nos. 648-651--Nys, II. pp. 330-334.

[Sidenote: Position of the Secretary for Foreign Affairs.]

-- 357. As a rule nowadays no head of a State, be he a monarch or a president, negotiates directly and in person with a foreign Power, although this happens occasionally. The necessary negotiations are regularly conducted by the Foreign Office, an office which since the Westphalian Peace has been in existence in every civilised State. The chief of this office, the Secretary for Foreign Affairs, who is a Cabinet Minister, directs the foreign affairs of the State in the name of the head and with the latter's consent; he is the middle-man between the head of the State and other States. And although many a head of a State directs in fact all the foreign affairs himself, the Secretary for Foreign Affairs is nevertheless the person through whose hands all transactions must pa.s.s. Now, as regards the position of such Foreign Secretary at home, it is the Munic.i.p.al Law of a State which regulates this. International Law defines his position regarding international intercourse with other States. He is the chief over all the amba.s.sadors of the State, over its consuls, and over its other agents in matters international. It is he who, either in person or through the envoys of his State, approaches foreign States for the purpose of negotiating matters international. And again it is he whom foreign States through their Foreign Secretaries or their envoys approach for the like purpose.

He is present when Ministers hand in their credentials to the head of the State. All doc.u.ments of importance regarding foreign matters are signed by him or his subst.i.tute, the Under-Secretary for Foreign Affairs. It is, therefore, usual to notify the appointment of a new Foreign Secretary of a State to such foreign States as are represented within its boundaries by diplomatic envoys; the new Foreign Secretary himself makes this notification.

CHAPTER II

DIPLOMATIC ENVOYS

I

THE INSt.i.tUTION OF LEGATION

Phillimore, II. ---- 143-153--Taylor, -- 274--Twiss, -- 199--Geffcken in Holtzendorff, III. pp. 605-618--Nys, II. pp. 335-339--Rivier, I. -- 35--Ullmann, -- 44--Martens, II. -- 6--Gentilis, ”De legationibus libri III.” (1585)--Wicquefort, ”L'Amba.s.sadeur et ses fonctions” (1680)--Bynkershoek, ”De foro legatorum”

(1721)--Garden, ”Traite complet de diplomatie” (3 vols.

1833)--Mirus, ”Das europaische Gesandtschaftsrecht” (2 vols.

1847)--Charles de Martens, ”Le guide diplomatique” (2 vols. 1832; 6th ed. by Geffcken, 1866)--Montague Bernard, ”Four Lectures on Subjects connected with Diplomacy” (1868), pp. 111-162 (3rd Lecture)--Alt, ”Handbuch des Europaischen Gesandtschaftsrechts”

(1870)--Pradier-Fodere, ”Cours de droit diplomatique” (2 vols. 2nd ed. 1899)--Krauske, ”Die Entwickelung der standigen Diplomatie,”

&c. (1885)--Lehr, ”Manuel theorique et pratique des agents diplomatiques” (1888)--Hill, ”History of Diplomacy in the International Development of Europe,” vol. I. (1905), vol. II.

(1906; the other vols. have not yet appeared).

[Sidenote: Development of Legations.]

-- 358. Legation as an inst.i.tution for the purpose of negotiating between different States is as old as history, whose records are full of examples of legations sent and received by the oldest nations. And it is remarkable that even in antiquity, where no such law as the modern International Law was known, amba.s.sadors enjoyed everywhere a special protection and certain privileges, although not by law but by religion, amba.s.sadors being looked upon as sacrosanct. Yet permanent legations were unknown till very late in the Middle Ages. The fact that the Popes had permanent representatives--so-called _apocrisiarii_ or _responsales_--at the Court of the Frankish Kings and at Constantinople until the final separation of the Eastern from the Western Church, ought not to be considered as the first example of permanent legations, as the task of these papal representatives had nothing to do with international affairs, but with those of the Church only. It was not until the thirteenth century that the first permanent legations made their appearance. The Italian Republics, and Venice in especial, created the example[713] by keeping representatives stationed at one another's capitals for the better negotiation of their international affairs. And in the fifteenth century these Republics began to keep permanent representatives in Spain, Germany, France, and England. Other States followed the example. Special treaties were often concluded stipulating permanent legations, such as in 1520, for instance, between the King of England and the Emperor of Germany. From the end of the fifteenth century England, France, Spain, and Germany kept up permanent legations at one another's Courts. But it was not until the second half of the seventeenth century that permanent legations became a general inst.i.tution, the Powers following the example of France under Louis XIV.

and Richelieu. It ought to be specially mentioned that Grotius[714]

thought permanent legations to be wholly unnecessary. The course of events has, however, shown that Grotius's views as regards permanent legations were short-sighted. Nowadays the Family of Nations could not exist without them, as they are the channel through which nearly the whole, and certainly all important, official intercourse of the States flows.

[Footnote 713: See Nys, ”Les Origines du droit international” (1894), p.

295.]

[Footnote 714: ”De jure belli ac pacis,” II. c. 28, -- 3: ”Optimo autem jure rejici possunt, quae nunc in usu sunt, legationes a.s.siduae, quibus c.u.m non sit opus, docet mos antiquus, cui illae ignoratae.”]

[Sidenote: Diplomacy.]

-- 359. The rise of permanent legations created the necessity for a new cla.s.s of State officials, the so-called diplomatists; yet it was not until the end of the eighteenth century that the terms ”diplomatist”