V POSITION AND PRIVILEGES OF CONSULS
Hall, § 105—Phillimore, II. §§ 261-271—Halleck, I. pp. 371-379—Taylor, §§ 326, 332-333—Moore, V. §§ 702-716—Ullmann, §§ 60 and 62—Bulmerincq in Holtzendorff, III. pp. 710-720—Rivier, I. § 42—Calvo, III. §§ 1385-1420—Bonfils, Nos. 753-761—Pradier-Fodéré, IV. §§ 2114-2121—Fiore, II. No. 1183—Martens, II. § 22—Bodin, "Les immunités consulaires" (1899)—Stowell, "Le Consul," pp. 137-185.
Position.
§ 434. Like diplomatic envoys, consuls are simply objects of International Law. Such rights as they have are granted to them by Municipal Laws in compliance with rights of the appointing States according to International Law.[779] As regards their position, it should nowadays be an established and uncontested fact that consuls do not enjoy the position of diplomatic envoys, since no Christian State actually grants to foreign consuls the privileges of diplomatic agents. On the other hand, it would be incorrect to maintain that their position is in no way different from that of any other individual living within the consular district. Since they are appointed by foreign States and have received the exequatur, they are publicly recognised by the admitting State as agents of the appointing State. Of course, consuls are not diplomatic representatives, for they do not represent the appointing States in the totality of their international relations, but for a limited number of tasks and for local purposes only. Yet they bear a recognised public character, in contradistinction to mere private individuals, and, consequently, their position is different from that of mere private individuals. This is certainly the case with regard to professional consuls, who are officials of their home State and are specially sent to the foreign State for the purpose of administering the consular office. But in regard to non-professional consuls it must likewise be maintained that the admitting State by granting the exequatur recognises their official position towards itself, which demands at least a special protection[780] of their persons and residences. The official position of consuls, however, does not involve direct intercourse with the Government of the admitting State. Consuls are appointed for local purposes only, and they have, therefore, direct intercourse with the local authorities only. If they want to approach the Government itself, they can do so only through the diplomatic envoy, to whom they are subordinate.
[780] According to British and American practice a consul of a neutral Power accredited to the enemy State who embarks upon mercantile ventures, is not by his official position protected against seizure of his goods carried by enemy vessels, for by trading in the enemy country he acquires to a certain extent enemy character; see the case of the Indian Chief, 3 C. Rob. 12.
Consular Privileges.
§ 435. From the undoubted official position of consuls no universally recognised privileges of importance emanate as yet. Apart from the special protection due to consuls according to International Law, there is neither a custom nor a universal agreement between the Powers to grant them important privileges. Such privileges as consuls actually enjoy are granted to them either by courtesy or in compliance with special stipulations of a Commercial or Consular Treaty between the sending and the admitting State. I doubt not that in time the Powers will agree upon a universal treaty in regard to the position and privileges of consuls.[781] Meanwhile, it is of interest to take notice of some of the more important stipulations which are to be found in the innumerable treaties between the several States in regard to consular privileges:
[781] The Institute of International Law at its meeting at Venice in 1896 adopted a Règlement sur les immunités consulaires comprising twenty-one articles. See Annuaire, XV. p. 304.
(1) A distinction is very often made between professional and non-professional consuls in so far as the former are accorded more privileges than the latter.