the return of peace, unless expressly abrogated or altered, Other stipulations entirely cease on the declaration of war, and require a new treaty to revive them. But this subject will be more particularly discussed in the chapter on the observance and interpretation of treaties. We shall here point out only some prominent distinctions in the general character of treaties. (Wheaton, Elem. Int. Law, pt. 3, ch. 2, §§ 9, 10, 11; Kent, Com. on Am. Law, vol. 1, p. 175; Vattel, Droit des Gens, liv. 3, ch. 10, § 175; Martens, Precis du Droit des Gens, § 58; Bello, Derecho Internacional, pt. 1, cap. 2, § 2; Heffter, Droit International, § 99; The Society, etc. v. New Haven, 8 Wheaton Rep., p. 464; Sutton v. Sutton, 1 Russell and Mylne Rep., p. 663.)

§ 22. Treaties are sometimes divided by publicists into equal and unequal. Equal treaties are where the contracting parties promise the same or equivalent things; and unequal treaties, are where the things promised are neither the same nor equilably proportioned. These different classes of engagements are sometimes spoken of as bilateral and unilateral. The latter, however, are more properly applied to treaties where promises are made by only one party, without any corresponding engagements, either equal or unequal, by the other. Equal and unequal treaties are to be distinguished from equal and unequal alliances, the latter division having reference to the equality or difference in the rank or dignity of the contracting parties, rather than the character of the engagements entered into. Thus, in treaties of alliance, the treaty may be equal, and the alliance very unequal, and vice versa. The inequality in the stipulations, or engagements of a treaty, does not, in general, render such engagements any the less binding upon the contracting parties. (Vattel, Droit des Gens, liv. 2, ch. 12, §§ 172–175; Heffter, Droit International, §§ 83, 92; Grotius, de Jur. Bel. ac Pac., lib. 2, cap. 16, § 10; Wildman, International Law, vol. 1, p, 138; Puffendorf, Jur. Nat. et Gent., lib. 8, cap. 9, §6; Heineccius, Elementa de Jur. et Gent., lib. 2, §§ 207-211.)

§ 23. Treaties of guarantee, and of surety, are engagements by which a state promises to aid another against any interruption of certain specified rights, such as boundaries, territory, constitution or form of government, etc. A distinction.

is made between guaranty and surety; where the matter relates to things to be done by the party for whom the obligation is contracted, the surety is bound to make good the promise in default of the principal, while the guarantee is only obliged to use his best endeavors to obtain its performance from the principal himself. How far a state may legally contract this class of obligations, must depend first, upon its own constitution, and second, upon the nature of the stipulations with respect to any interference with, or infringment of, the sovereign rights of other independent states. (Wheaton, Elem. Int. Law, pt. 3, ch. 2, § 12; Vattel, Droit des Gens, liv. 2, ch. 16, §§ 235-239; Kluber, Droit des Gens Mod., §§ 157, 158; Martens, Precis du Droit des Gens, §63; Flassan, Hist. de la Dip., tome 8, p. 195; Phillimore, On Int. Law, vol, 2, §§ 56, et seq.)

§ 24. Treaties of confederation, and treaties of association, not only differ from treaties of general alliance, but are to be distinguished from each other. Treaties of confederation are usually made for the purpose of forming a union, more or less close, in reference to certain specified objects with respect to internal or external matters; as, for instance, the German custom-house confederation, and the American colonial confederation. Treaties of association are usually made for the purpose of war, two or more states associating themselves together for the purpose of carrying on joint operations against a common enemy. Treaties of alliance are, on the contrary, usually entered into for the purpose of common security and general defense, but without reference to any particular power, or to any special event. They may, however, in certain cases, as will be shown hereafter, amount to a warlike association. (Heffter, Droit International, §§ 91–93; Puffendorf, de Jur. Nat. et Gent., lib. 5, cap. 8, §3; Grotius, de Jur. Bel. ac Pac., lib. 2, cap. 12, § 24; Kluber, Precis du Droit des Gens, § 129.)

§ 25. Treaties of alliance have been subdivided into different classes, such as treaties of real and personal alliance; of equal and unequal alliance; of general and special alliance; of defensive and offensive alliance, etc. The first two classes have already been described. General and special alliances may be either defensive or offensive, or both. They, how

ever, differ from each other in their character, and in their effects, with respect to the casus foederis, in the event of a war between one of the allies and a third party. General alliances must, also, be distinguished from treaties of limited succor and subsidy. The latter may have no reference to an eventual engagement in general hostilities, and they do not necessarily render the party furnishing them the enemy of the opposite belligerent. Treaties of alliance may expire by their own limitation, or may be dissolved by the consent of the contracting parties, or by a declaration of war between them. (Vattel, Droit des Gens, liv. 2, chs. 12, 13; liv. 3, ch. 6; Wheaton, Elem. Int. Law, pt. 3, ch. 2, §§ 13, 14; Wildman, Int. Law, vol. 1, ch. 4; Bello, Derecho Internacional, pt. 1, cap. 9, §2; Heffter, Droit International, §§ 82, 90.)

§ 26. Among the ancient nations treaties were sometimes entered into, by which the parties simply stipulated to remain friends, and to observe toward each other those pacific relations which international law now impose upon all, without the formality of formal engagements, such as the obligations to render justice, to accord satisfaction for injuries, etc. These were called treaties of amity or frienaship. But, in modern times, this term is usually applied to treaties of recognition, which have for their object the admission of a new body politic into the family of nations, or the recognition of a new title assumed by a state, or its ruler, already recognized as sovereign and independent. (Vattel, Droit des Gens, liv. 2,.ch. 12, § 171; Heffter, Droit International, §92; Wildman, Int. Law, vol. 1, p. 138; Ortolan, Diplomatie de la Mer, liv. 1, ch. 5.)

§ 27. Treaties of commerce are those which regulate the conditions of reciprocal trade, and define and secure the imperfect rights and duties of commercial intercourse. It will be shown hereafter that such treaties usually terminate with a declaration of war between the contracting parties. Treaties of boundary and of cession are usually of a more permanent character. What particular branch of the government may make these different kinds of treaties, and how, in general, they are to be ratified, when they become obligatory, and when the legislative authority is requisite to carry them into effect, will depend upon the constitution or political

organization of the governments of the contracting parties. The proceedings and formalities requisite for this purpose are not only different in different states, but frequently vary, in the same state, with the character of the treaty and the nature of its stipulations. This subject will be more particularly discussed in other chapters. (Ortolan, Diplomatie de la Mer, liv. 1, ch. 5; Heffter, Droit International, §92; Mably, Droit Pub. de l'Europe, tome 2, ch. 12; Kluber, Droit des Gens Mod., § 152.)

CHAPTER IX.

RIGHTS AND DUTIES OF PUBLIC MINISTERS.

CONTENTS.

1. Establishment of permanent legations-2 2. Distinction of diplomatic agents-3. Modern classification-24. Ambassadors, legates and nuncios-25. Envoys and ministers plenipotentiary-26. Ministers and ministers resident-27. Chargés d'affaires-? 8. Secretaries of embassy and legation-9. Attachés and the families of ministers-10. Messengers and couriers-11. Domestics and servants-212. General immunities of public ministers - 13. Exemption from local jurisdiction? 14. In case of plotting against local government - 15. In case of owing allegiance16. In case of voluntary submission to local jurisdiction- 17. Extent of such civil jurisdiction-2 18. Extent of such criminal jurisdiction19. Public ministers, how punished-? 20. Their dependents, how punished 21. Testimony of ministers, how taken- 22. Exemption of minister's house and personal effects-23. His real estate and private personal property- 24. Of taxes and duties-? 25. Freedom of religious worship 26. Letters of credence-27. Full power to negotiate — 28. The minister's instructions - 29. Notification of his appointment— 30. Presentation and reception-231. His passports and safe-conduct32. Passage through other states- -233. Termination of public missions-34. By death of minister-235. By his recall- 36. By expiration of term, or by promotion- 37. By change of government - 38. Dismissal of a public minister-239. Duty of respect to local authorities.

§1. We have already discussed, under the head of legation and treaty, the general rights and duties of a sovereign state with respect to its diplomatic intercourse with others; we will now consider the rights and duties of the various agents which are usually employed for this purpose. As has already