Page:Diplomacy and the Study of International Relations (1919).djvu/40

This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
18
Diplomacy and the

permanent embassies were accepted the resident ambassador did not divest himself of that character;[1] nor has he entirely done so yet. The part has become merged in a larger function and has almost assumed the dress of constitutional propriety, but he is still the eyes and the ears of his State. There is still to-day a distinction in character between the reception by a State of an envoy accredited to it for the special purpose of negotiating an understanding, and the recognition of permanent envoys, representatives of foreign States. The reception and use of the former were essential to the conduct of the art of negotiating. But to send or to receive the latter is discretionary on the part of a State, although it has become an established convention for all full-Sovereign States to send and to receive them, with a view to the maintenance of intercourse among the members of the Family of Nations.[2] With

  1. The character was continued in the standing general duties of ambassadors, such as all during their residence were required to discharge. These are usually stated at the conclusion of the ‘Instructions’ to the French Ambassadors of the eighteenth century and earlier: see Recueil des Instructions, e.g. t. i.: Autriche, 77, 103, 113, 123, 148, 336. Definite information was sought regarding ‘l’état des cours et des pays dans lesquels ils auront été employés, la qualité et quantité des troupes qui y sont entretenues, le bon ou mauvais état de leurs finances, sur l’étendue et qualité de leur commerce, sur le génie et les inclinations des princes et de leurs ministres, tant ceux qui dans toutes les cours ont la part principale à l’administration des affaires génerales, mais aussi de tous ceux qui, sous quelque denomination que ce soit, ont quelque influence dans les déliberations et résolutions relatives aux intérêts publics, enfin sur tous les objets, soit de simple curiosité, soit d’intérêt réel pour le service du Roi’ (anno 1756)—op. cit. 336. Cf. t. viii: Russie, i. 81, 98 (‘enfin il [M. Baluze, in 1702] doit rendre un compte exact de tout ce qui pourra mériter la curiosité de Sa Majesté dans un pays éloigné d’elle et où jusqu’à présent elle a eu peu de relations’), 134, 467.
  2. Grotius, whose great work was published in 1625, thinking, as his illustrations show, of the abuse of having resident ambassadors, and ignoring the convenience, was on the side of ancient custom in holding that