Herald of the times. [volume] (Newport, R.I.) 1830-1846, 1831-03-09

\ feSldem at the COurt OF St. IcterSDuTgn, !,
for it is too much to say, that stopping
ten days at that city, would make him,
in legal acceptation, resident there, but
that six months residence in England will
not render him legally non resident at
St. Petersburgh. If, then, he can be
our minister at all, he must be our non
resident Minister. He has been sent to
St. Petersburgh, to be accredited there
by his Imperial majesty; and by form OF
being thus accredited, we are gravely
told by the Secretary of State, that he
has acquired the rights, and powers Of a
Minister from the United States, whererer
he may choose to reside. Sir, will ma
tons admit this kind of non resident, this
migratory mission, this diplomatic gossip
ping This doctrine of "no locaHty," so
essential in the Secretary's constitutional
creed, to the existence of national road
he will find does not belong to the char
acter of resident public Minister, and
really has no place among nations om
of the Cabinet, so adroitly conducted by
himself.
If gentlemen still contend that Mr..
Randolph is our Envoy Extraordinary,
s. Minister Plenipotentiary NON RES
IDENT at the Court ofSt. Petersburgh,
they must contend, that mheresoerer he
does reside, he is still vested with the
| high diplomatic qualities and attributes,
which by the law of nations, belong to
such public Minister. What are these !?
They are comprehended in two very ex-
pressive words; personal inriolabihty.
Not only are his person and effects ex-
empted from all legal distress, but who
soever shall treat him with insult or dis
respect, is liable to be punished. A pub
lie Minister cannot be sued for con-
tract, or a trespass; he cannot be prose-
cuted for felony. If he commit homi-
eide, with every circumstance of malice,
or conspire with traitors to overthrow the
Government TO achich he IS sent, he can
neither be punished nor even questioned
concerning these crimes. Vattel asserts:
/ ''The necessity and right of embassies being es-
tabshed, (See Chap. V. of this book) the perfect
security, the invioability Of Ambassadors and other
Ministers is a certain consequence of it; for if
| their person be not defended from violence of eve
ry kind the right of embassies becomes precarious
I & success very uncertain. right TO the end is a
right to the necessary means. Embassies then be-
ing Of such great importance III the universal socie-
ty of nations, and so necessary to their common
/ well being, the person of Ministers charged with
this embassy is to be sacred and inviolabe among
all nations (See Book II. 2lS,) Whosoever
offers any violence to an Ambassador, or amy other
public Minister, not only Injuries the sovereign
whom this Minister represents, but he also hurts
/ the common safety and well being Of nations; he
becomes guilty of an atrocious crime towards the
/ whole world"
i This doctrine is further confirmed:
II 'In fine if an Ambassador could be indicted for
common trespasses, be crminally prosecuted taken
into custody, punished; ifhe might be sued IN civil
cases the consequence will often be, that he will
want the power, leisure, or freedom of mind, which
| his masters affairs require. How will the dignity
| Of the representation be supported in such sub
jecton' From all these reasons il is impossible to
/ conceive, that the Prince, III sending an AnDassa-
DOR or any other Minister, intends to submit him to
| the authority of Foreign Power This Is a
fresh reason w hch fixes the independency Of pub
lie Minister. If it cannot be reasonably presumed
that his master means to submit him to the author
ity of sovereign, TO whom he is sent, this sover-
! egn, in receiving the Minister, consents to admit
him on the footing Of independency. And thus
/ there subsists between the two Princes passive
convention giving new force 10 the natural obli-
CATION"
In 1867, Leslie, Bishop of Ross, came
to the Court of Elizabeth, as amb ASA
dor of Mary, Queen of Scots, who was
then detained a prisoner by her royal
cousin. This man, in taking care OF the
concerns of Mary, conspred with GER
tain English noblemen to depose Liza
beth, and place Mary on the throne OF
England. The plot was discovered
The Duke Of Norfolk and others were
executed for treason; but, tho Elizabeth
dared afterwards to steep her hands III
the blood other royal captive, and there
by to violate all other laws, human and
divine, she dared not violate the laws OF
nations, by punishing the Ambassador ol
the unfortunate Queen of Scotland. In
1884 Mendoza, the Spanish Ambassador
in England, conspired to dethrone the
Queen, by introducing foreign troops IN
to the country. This conspiracy being
discovered, the Court of Elizabeth took
the opinions, as Ward tells us, ofthe Gel
cbrated Albericus Gentilis, then in Eng
land, and of Hottoman in France, anoth-
er great civilian, concerning the manner
of proceeding against Mendoza. "They
both asserted that an Ambassador, though
consprator, could not be put to death;
but must be remanded to his principal
for punishment. In consequence Of this,
Mendoza was simply ordered to depart
the realm; and commission sent to Spain
to prefer complaint against him."
Three years afterwards, L'Aubaspine,
the French Ambassador, in his devotion
Ito Mary conspired not only to dcthrone, :,