CHAP. VII. BOOK IV. every measure which may be necessary for the purpose of warding off the mischief he meditates against her,-of defeating his projects, and preventing their evil consequences. It was on this principle that the parliament were authorized to interrogate Bruneau, for the purpose of discovering all the parties concerned in so dangerous a conspiracy. The question, whether foreign ministers who violate the law of nations do thereby forfeit their privileges, was warmly debated at Paris, but, without waiting to have the point decided, the king restored Bruneau to his master.* ? 102. Whe It is not lawful to maltreat an ambassador by way of retather repri- liation: for the prince who uses violence against a public sals may be minister is guilty of a crime; and we are not to take venambassador. geance for his misconduct by copying his example. We made on an never can, under pretence of retaliation, be authorized to commit actions which are in their own nature unjustifiable: and such undoubtedly would be any instance of ill treatment inflicted on an unoffending minister as a punishment for his master's faults. If it be an indispensable duty to pay a general regard to this rule in cases of retaliation, it is more particularly obligatory with regard to an ambassador, on account of the respect due to his character. The Carthaginians having violated the law of nations in the persons of the Roman ambassadors, the ambassadors of that perfidious nation were brought to Scipio, who, being asked how he would have them to be treated, replied, "Not in the manner that the Carthaginians have treated ours." Accordingly he [ 482] dismissed them in safety:† but at the same time he made preparations for chastising, by force of arms, the state which had violated the law of nations. There cannot be a better See the discussion of the question, and the discourse which Henry IV. held on this subject to the Spanish ambassador, in the Memoires de Nevers, vol. ii. p. 858, et seq., in Matthieu, vol. ii. book iii. and other historians. Joseph Sofi, king of Carezem, having imprisoned an ambassador of TimurBec, Timur's secretary of state wrote him a letter couched in strong terms of expostulation on the subject of that infraction of the law of nations,-informing him that "it is a maxim with kings to consider the person of an ambassador as sacred: for which reason he is always held exempt from the punishment of death or imprisonment, if the sovereign to whom he is sent has even the slightest knowledge of the law of nations, or the ambassador himself does but possess sufficient prudence to refrain from the commission of any heinous offence, and to behave with common decency." La Croix, 1797. † Appian, quoted by Grotius, lib. ii. Livy, book xxx. chap. 28, 8 7. CHAP. VII. pattern for sovereigns to follow on such an occasion. If the BOOK Iv. injury for which we would make retaliation does not concern a public minister, there exists a still stronger certainty that we must not retaliate on the ambassador of the sovereign against whom our complaint lies. The safety of public ministers would be very precarious, if it were liable to be affected by every casual difference that might arise. But there is one particular case in which it appears perfectly justifiable to arrest an ambassador, provided no ill treatment be given to him in other respects. When, for instance, a prince has, in open violation of the law of nations, caused our ambassador to be arrested, we may arrest and detain his, as a pledge for the life and liberty of ours. But should this expedient prove unsuccessful, it would become our duty to liberate the unoffending minister, and to seek redress by more efficacious measures. Charles the Fifth caused the French ambassador, who had made him a declaration of war, to be put under an arrest; whereupon Francis the First caused Granvelle, the emperor's ambassador, to be arrested in like manner. At length, however, it was agreed that both those ministers should be conducted to the frontier, and released at the same time.* of nations dors. We have derived the independence and inviolability of the ? 103. ambassadorial character from the natural and necessary prin- Agreement ciples of the law of nations. These prerogatives are further concerning confirmed by the uniform practice and general consent of the privimankind. We have seen above (§ 84), that the Spaniards leges of found the right of embassies established and respected in ambassaMexico. The same principle also prevails even among the savage tribes of North America: and if we thence turn our eye to the other extremity of the globe, we find that ambassadors are highly respected in China. In India also the same rule is observed, though with less scrupulous punctuality:† the king of Ceylon, for instance, has sometimes imprisoned the ambassadors of the Dutch East-India company. Being master of the places which produce cinnamon, he knows that the Dutch, in consideration of a profitable commerce, will overlook many irregularities in his conduct; and, with the true disposition of a barbarian, he takes an undue advantage of that circumstance. The Koran enjoins the moslems to respect public ministers: and if the Turks have not in all instances uniformly observed that precept, their violations of [483] it are rather imputable to the ferocity of particular princes than to the principles of the nation at large. The rights of ambassadors were formerly very well known among the law of nations, in the person of our ambassadors, I will do nothing against theirs that is unworthy of the maxims of the Roman people, and of my own principles." *Mezeray's Hist. of France, vol. ii. p. 470. General Hist. of Voyages, art. BOOK IV. Arabs. A writer of that nation* relates the following inciCHAP. VII. dent: Khaled, an Arabian chief, having come, in the cha 104. Free racter of ambassador, to the army of the emperor Heraclius, used insolent language to the general: whereupon the latter observed to him, that "ambassadors were protected from all kind of violence by the law which universally prevailed among nations: and it was probably that consideration which had emboldened the Arab to speak to him in so indecent a manner." It would be quite unnecessary, in this place, to accumulate the various examples with which the history of the European nations presents us: the enumeration would be endless; and the established customs of Europe on this subject are sufficiently known. Saint Louis, when at Acra in Palestine, gave a remarkable instance of the protection due to public ministers :-an ambassador from the Old Man of the Mountain, or prince of the Assassins, speaking insolently to the French monarch, the grand-masters of the orders of the Temple and the Hospital informed that minister, that, "were it not for the respect paid to the character with which he was invested, they would cause him to be thrown into the sea." The king, however, dismissed him without suffering the slightest injury to be done him. Nevertheless, as the prince of the Assassins was on his own part guilty of grossly violating the most sacred rights of nations, it would have been reasonable to suppose that his ambassador had no claim to protection, except indeed on this single consideration, that, as the privilege of inviolability is founded on the necessity of keeping open a safe channel of communication, through which sovereigns may reciprocally make proposals to each other, and carry on negotiations both in peace and in war, the protection should therefore extend even to the envoys of those princes, who, guilty themselves of violating the law of nations, would otherwise have no title to our respect. There are rights of another nature, which, though not exercise of necessarily annexed to the character of a public minister, religion. are nevertheless allowed to him by established custom in almost every country. One of the principal of these is the free exercise of his religion. It is, indeed, highly proper that a minister, and especially a resident minister, should enjoy the free exercise of his religion within his own house, for himself and his retinue. But it cannot be said that this right, like those of independence and inviolability, is absolutely necessary to the success of his commission, particularly in the case of a non-resident minister, the only one whom nations are bound to admit (§ 66). The minister may, * Alvakedi's History of the Conquest of Syria. Ockley's History of the Saracens, vol. i. Choisy's History of St. Louis. in this respect, do what he pleases in his own house, into BOOK IV. which nobody has a right to pry or to enter. But, if the CHAP. VII. sovereign of the country where he resides should, for substantial reasons, refuse him permission to practise his religion in any manner which might render it an object of public notice, we must not presume to condemn the conduct of that sovereign, much less to accuse him of violating the law of nations. At present, ambassadors are not debarred the free exercise of their religion in any civilized country: for a privilege which is founded on reason cannot be refused when it is attended with no ill consequence. ther an ambassador be exempted Among those rights that are not necessary to the success? 105. Wheof embassies, there are, on the other hand, some which are not founded on a general consent of nations, but which are nevertheless, by the custom of several countries, annexed to from all imthe ambassadorial character. Of this number is the exemp-posts. tion of things brought into or sent out of the country by a foreign minister from the customary duties on importation and exportation. There is no necessity that he should be favoured with any distinction in that respect, since his payment of those duties will not render him the less capable of discharging his functions. If the sovereign is pleased to exempt him from them, it is an instance of civility which the minister could not claim as matter of right, any more than that his baggage, or any chests or packages which he imports from abroad, shall not be searched at the custom-house. Thomas Chaloner, the English ambassador in Spain, sent home a bitter complaint to Queen Elizabeth, his mistress, that the custom-house officers had opened his trunks in order to search them. But the queen returned him for answer, that it was "the duty of an ambassador to wink at every thing which did not directly offend the dignity of his sovereign."* The independency of the ambassador exempts him indeed from every personal imposition, capitation, or other duty of that nature, and in general from every tax relating to the character of a subject of the state. But as for duties laid on any kind of goods or provisions, the most absolute independency does not exempt him from the payment of them: even sovereigns themselves are subject to them. In Holland, the following rule is observed:-ambassadors are exempt from the taxes on consumption,-doubtless, because those taxes are more directly of a personal nature: but they pay the duties on importation and exportation. However extensive their exemption may be, it is manifest that it solely relates to things intended for their own use. Should they abuse and make a shameful traffic of it by lending their name to merchants, the sovereign has unquestionably * Wicquefort's Ambass. book i. § 28, towards the end. BOOK IV. CHAP. VII. use and custom. a right to put a stop to the fraud, even by suppressing the privilege. Such things have been known in several places; and the sordid avarice of some ministers, who made a trade of their exemption, has obliged the sovereign to deprive them of it. At present, the foreign ministers at Petersburgh are subject to the duties on importation; but the empress has the generosity to indemnify them for the loss of a privilege which they had no right to claim, and which, from the frequency of its abuse, she had been obliged to abolish. 2 106. Obli- But, here it is asked, whether a nation may abolish what gation general custom has established with respect to foreign minisfounded on ters? Let us then consider what obligation custom and received usage can impose on nations, not only in what concerns ministers, but also in any other instance, in general. The usages and customs of other nations are no further obligatory on an independent state, than as she has expressly or tacitly given her consent to them. But when once a custom, indifferent in itself, has been generally established and received, it carries the force of an obligation on the states which have tacitly or expressly adopted it. Nevertheless, if, in process of time, any nation perceives that such custom is attended with inconveniences, she is at liberty to declare that she no longer chooses to conform to it: and when once she has made this explicit declaration, no cause of complaint lies against her for refusing thenceforward to observe the custom in question. But such a declaration should be made beforehand, and at the time when it does not affect any particular nation: it is too late to make it when the case actually exists: for it is a maxim universally received, that a law must never be changed at the moment of the actual existence of the particular case to which we would apply it. Thus, on the subject before us, a sovereign who has previously notified his intentions, and received an ambassador only on that footing, is not obliged to allow him the enjoyment of all the privileges, or to pay him all the honours, which custom had before annexed to the ambassadorial character,-provided that the privileges and honours which are withheld be not essential to the nature of the embassy, and necessary to insure its legitimate success. To refuse privileges of this latter kind, would be the same thing in effect as refusing the embassy itself,—a conduct which a state is not at liberty to pursue generally and on every occasion (§ 65), but in those instances only where the refusal is founded on some very substantial reason To withhold honours which are consecrated by custom and become in a manner essential, is an expression of contempt, and an actual injury. Here it must be further observed, that, when a sovereign intends to break through an established custom, the rule should be general. To refuse certain customary honours or |