\\ bile it is not in general open to a State to r• fuse to receive a .liphanatic agent from an other power, it may. for special reasons, obj••t to receive a particular in a diplomatic capacity. If. however, the grommls for such ob je•tion do not commend themselves to the State ly whom the minister was aceredited, it may, as a mark of its disapproval, leave the post vaeant ft r a considerable time. An instance of this was the rejection in Is8.1 of a minister appointed by President Cleveland by the Italian and Austrian governments in succession. The grounds of the objection by Italy being satisfactory, another appointment was promptly made. hut the Aus trian objection being regarded as frivolous and unreasonable, the legation at Vienna wag left in the hands of a chargt• d'affaires. So, ton. a State may, without giving international offense. request the withdrawal Of a foreign minister who has rendered himself obnoxious to the Co•ent went to which he is accredited, or may even. in n serious case, peremptorily dismiss him. This was done in the case of Lord Saekville. the Brit ish :Minister to the United States, who, on the eve of the Presidential election of IS'S. in it private letter incautiously expressed himself the question of the prohable relations of the Government with Great Britain in the event of President Cleveland's reidect ion. This diplomatic indiscretion, occurring in the heat of a Presi dential campaign, was treated by the American Government as an open and intentional affront, and the offending minister dismi-sed without waiting for his 'Wall by his Government. Ob viousl• the right is one to be exercised with cau tion, in order to avoid giving offense to the state by whom the minister was accredited.
The distinction of the ambassadorial office. as the direct representative of a sovereign power, and the importance of the duties intrusted to it have combined to invest it with a peculiar sane tity. This has, in modern times, taken on the form of a privileged status. attended with certain inanuniti• which a foreign minister enjoys in the country to which he is accredited. These may be briefly enumerated as Hi Ex emption of the minister front the local jurisdie t at. both civil and eri al. (2) Liyiolahility of his house, l•is paper:. mid goods front search and seizure. (31 Exemption of his personal ef feels from imposts and taxation. (41 Liberty of worship Ic r himself and the members of his family and suite. (51 .\ qualified exemption of his family and train from the local jurisdiction. These immunities are generally referred to the principle of txterritori•lity, the domest ic juris diction of the minister being supposed. by a legal fiction, to go with him and to exclude the local jurisdiction of the State to which see EXTLIOt1l010.‘LITY. ). But in its ilium form the doctrine more properly ex plained on principles of convenience and inter national comity. the independence of the minister and the inN of his person, his fa tally, and prop/ rty being essential to the due performance of the high and importalit functions with which he is invested. The subject is fully treat,..1 iu ancient and mod( rut t I eat i.e- on intermit Mimi law ( l'onsult : hall, Treatise on rm., tionul ',air (1111 ed., London. 1S95 ; Woolsey. Introdifition to Eller isali ed.„ New York, Ifs91) Moore, St of the Interluitionni Lair of Coiled slati a (11 ashington, 1UO31,