treaties are considered in connection with corresponding duties of international law, the general duty of (3) preventing infractions of treaty provisions may conveniently be considered here.

ACTS BY AGENCIES OF GOVERNMENT.

(1) The agencies of government which come in contact with foreign nations in time of peace are the navy, the diplomatic service and the consular service. International law requires that naval vessels obey local regulations on entering foreign jurisdiction, abstain from prohibited acts, and exchange salutes on meeting foreign public vessels. Special duties, when enjoying the hospitality of ports, such as refusing asylum to criminals, slaves and political refugees, are sometimes required by treaty. These duties are specified in the permanent navy regulations and naval instructions2 issued under authority of the president, and are enforced by the executive control exercised over the navy at all times by the president as commander-in-chief, through the navy department, and the authority of courts martial in enforcing the statutory articles for the government of the navy.3

A case involving the enforcement of navy regulations arose in 1893. During the naval revolt in Brazil, Commodore Stanton, an American naval commander, on entering the port of Rio Janeiro, exchanged visits and fired salutes in honor of the naval insurgents. The Brazilian government protested and the navy department on investigation found that Commodore Stanton had violated article 115 of the Navy Regulations of 1893, providing that "no salute shall be fired in honor of any nation

not formally recognized by the government of the United States." As the offense was due to mistake rather than intent the department, although holding that Commodore Stanton had committed "a grave error of judgment," restored him to his command.*

Armed forces are forbidden passing into foreign territory without license, and on such occasions continue subject to military commissions, and army officers are required to observe certain formalities in dealing with representatives of foreign governments.5

2Navy Regulations, 1913 sec. 1502, 1633-1634, 1641-1651 under authority of Rev. Stat. sec. 1547.

3Rev. Stat. sec. 1624.

4 See Moore's Digest, 1;240-241.

"Dig. op. Judge. Ad. Gen. 1912, C. R. Howland ed. pp. 90, 106. Army Regulations, 1913, sec. 398; 407; 889, ch. 3.

(2) Diplomatic officers are likewise subjected to duties while in foreign countries. International law requires diplomatic officers to observe diplomatic etiquette, in making visits, being admitted to audiences and in matters of precedence. It requires abstention from public addresses or expressions of opinion likely to be offensive to the state to which the minister is accredited, and it seems that modern international law requires the minister to prevent his residence being used as a place of asylum by fugitives from justice. This duty is also specified in a number of treaties. In exchange for his immunity from local jurisdiction the diplomatic officer is also required to be especially strict in his observance of local laws. These duties are specified with considerable definiteness in the Instructions to Diplomatic Officers issued by the president under authority of statute,' and a number of them are specified in the statutes themselves. Thus statutes specifically forbid ministers to correspond or give information relating to the affairs of the foreign government to which they are accredited to any but the proper United States officials, and specify a number of matters relating to costume, absention from post, correspondence, etc.

8

The permanent instructions and statutes as well as special instructions issued by the president or secretary of state1o are enforced by executive control of the ministers' tenure of office, requirements of bonds on acceptance of mission, and criminal liability for misconduct in office.

11

By the constitution the president with the advice and consent of the senate has the power of appointing diplomatic officers,11 although special agents have been appointed by the president alone.12 By statute such appointments (or rather salaries for appointees) are limited to citizens of the United States, 13 and provision has been made to prevent the performance of diplomatic functions by unofficial representatives by making such acts criminal.14

Instructions to Diplomatic Officers, 1897, sec. 1-136.

"Rev. Stat. sec. 1752.

Act Aug. 18, 1850. Rev. Stat. 1751.

9Rev. Stat. sec. 1674-1688.

10 See Moore's Digest, 5;565.

11 Constitution, Art. 2 sec. 2, Cl. 2.

12See Moore's Digest, 4;412.

18 Rev. Stat. 1744; Moore's Digest, 4:457.

14 Act Jan. 30, 1799; Rev. Stat. 5335. This act resulted from the efforts of Dr. Geo. Logan, who attempted on his own responsibility a

Ministers are required by statute to give bond for the faithful performance of their duties, and it has been held that the appointment is not complete until the execution of this bond.15 Diplomatic officers are subject to special orders of the president generally transmitted through the department of state, and the president may recall such officers at discretion. By statute diplomatic officers have been made responsible for negligence and misconduct in office.16 Criminal prosecution in United States courts for violation of statutory duties would therefore seem possible.

(3) International law imposes duties upon consuls while in service in foreign territory. They may not enter upon their functions until they have received an exequatur from the government to which they are assigned, and they are bound by its terms. They must observe the local law," although by treaty they are generally exempted from military and jury service, etc. Consulates are frequently declared immune from local jurisdiction by treaty, but it is also a rule of most of these treaties that the consul must refuse to give asylum to persons sought by local authorities.18

These duties of consuls are specified in detail in the Consular regulations issued by the president under authority of statute, 19 and a number of them are specified in the statutes themselves.20 These regulations and statutes are enforced through the executive control exercised over consuls by the president through the department of state, by requirements of bonds and by amenability to criminal prosecutions in the United States for acts done abroad.

21

Consuls are appointed by the president with the advice and consent of the senate, and it appears that inferior consular mission of conciliation in France in 1798. It is known as the "Logan Act." There have been no prosecutions under it. See Moore's Digest, 4;448450. Reference is made to the act in U. S. vs. Craig, 28 Fed. Rep. 795, 801; American Banana Co., vs. United Fruit Co., 213 U. S. 347, 356.

15 Williams vs. U. S. 23 Ct. Cl. 46; Moore's Digest, 4;457. On liability of bondsman, see U. S. vs. Bee, 4 C. C. A. 219.

16 Act. June 27, 1860, Rev. Stat. 4110; See also Rev. Stat. sec. 1734; act Dec. 21, 1898, 30 Stat. 771.

17 See Moore's Digest, 5;698.

18 Supra, p. 54.

19 See Consular Regulations, 1896. Duties under International law, sec. 71-76; under treaties, 77-93; under authority of Rev. Stat. sec. 1752. 20 Rev. Stat. sec. 1751-1752; 1716-1737; Act June 30, 1902, 32 Stat. 547. 21 Constitution, art. 2, sec. 2; Cl. 2.

22

officers may be appointed by the president alone or even by diplomatic or superior consular officers. According to a statute of 1906,23 only American citizens may be appointed to positions with a salary of $1,000 a year or more. A limited application of the civil service principle in making appointments has been put into operation by executive order. Consuls are subject to special instructions of the department of state and the president, and may be removed at the president's discretion.

24

Consuls are required by statute to give bond for the faithful performance of their duties and they are subject to criminal prosecution in the United States courts for specified acts committed abroad such as accepting appointments as administrator without giving bond or account of money, exacting excessive fees, making false oath, neglecting duty toward seamen, making false certification of property,25 etc., as well as for general misconduct in office.26

The international duties of these governmental agents are enforced largely through methods of executive control. The executive orders and instructions prescribing the conduct of such officers are specifically authorized by statute and are to be regarded as law27 which may be effectively enforced through the appointment and removal power of the executive. The requireinents of bonds, the amenability of naval officers to courts martial, and of consular and diplomatic officials to the criminal jurisdiction of American courts for specified statutory offenses, add further sanction to the enforcement of these duties.

ACTS BY THE CIVIL POPULATION.

Governments are not generally responsible for acts by private citizens committed abroad or on the high seas.2 28 Private 22 Act. Apr. 5, 1906, sec. 2, 3; Consular Regulations, 1888, sec. 8, 7; 1896; sec. 21. See U. S. vs. Eaton, 169 U. S. 331. Moore's Digest, 5; 8-9. 23 Act Apr. 5, 1906, sec. 5; Moore's Digest, 5;12.

24 Ex. Ord. June 27, 1906; Dec. 12, 1906; Apr. 20, 1907; Dec. 23, 1910. under authority Rev. Stat. sec. 1753, Act Apr. 5, 1906, and May 11, 1908. See Information Regarding Appointments and Promotions in the Consular Service of the United States, Govt. Printing Office.

25 Rev. Stat. sec. 1716, 1728, 1734-1737; act Dec. 21, 1898, 30 stat. 771; act June 30, 1902, 32 stat. 547.

26 Act June 22, 1860, rev. stat. sec. 4110; Moore's Digest, 2;267, note.

27 See Rev. Stat. sec. 1752. On legal status of executive orders and regulations, see J. A. Fairlie, The National Administration of the United States of America, N. Y. 1905, p. 27.

28 See Moore's Digest, 6;787.

individuals in such cases are amenable to the jurisdiction of the courts of the foreign government, or if they commit piracy on the high seas to those of any government catching them. They may be punished, but their government can not be held responsible for their acts, and no reparation may be demanded. This principle does not apply in countries where citizens are exempt from local jurisdiction by treaty, and consequently in such places the responsibility of the government of nationality continues, to a limited extent.

There has been some difference of opinion as to whether a state is responsible for the acts of private citizens even within its territory, but the doctrine of responsibility appears to be established.29 A state is supposed to maintain order and protect life and property within its territory. It therefore is liable to make reparation for failure to do so if such failure results in an injury to a foreign state or its citizens.

This principle is subject to exceptions. Where insurrections are of considerable magnitude or where the country is invaded by hostile forces, incidental injury to aliens is beyond the power of the government to prevent, and the government is therefore not responsible The general principle, however, is as stated, and clearly implies a duty on the part of the state to prevent acts injurious to foreign states or persons being committed by its civil population.

The subject may be considered under the three heads, (1) injury to foreign states, (2) injury to resident foreign public officers, (3) injury to alien private persons.

(1) International law requires a government to prevent persons within its jurisdiction doing acts directly injurious to foreign states. The supreme court of the United States has held30 that the measure of this duty is "due diligence" and that as foreign relations are exclusively in the hands of the national government, legislation punishing acts directed against foreign governments is warranted under the constitutional authority to "define and punish offenses against the law of nations." By treaty the United States has recognized its obligation to prevent injury to adjacent states by hostile bands of

29 See article by Julius Goebel, Jr., The International Responsibility of states for injuries sustained by aliens on account of mob violence, insurrection and civil war. Am. Jour. of Int. Law. 8;802, Nov. 1914.

30U. S. vs. Arjona, 120 U. S. 479, (1887), Moore's Digest, 1;61. 31 Constitution, art. 1, sec. 8, cl. 10.