tion or authority by which it was made, and notice thereof to the consul, to the nation of his residence, and to the local authorities; 5. By his voluntary withdrawal at any time, and notice thereof to the nation of his residence, and to the local authorities; or, 6. By the revocation of the 'permission granted by such nation, and notice thereof to the consul, and to his nation.' 1 1 If the reasons are personal, and for which permission to act might have been refused, according to Article 99, it is sufficient to state the fact, without mentioning particulars. Treaty or Convention between the United States and France, February 23, 1853, Art. I., 10 U. S. Stat. at L., 992. The Netherlands, January 22, 1855, III., 10 Id., 1150. New Granada, May 4, 1850, II., 10 Id., 900. And see note to Article 185. Exclusion in case of war is provided for in Book Second of this Code. Powers not terminated by change of government. 179. Notwithstanding a change in the government of either nation, or a cessation of diplomatic intercourse,' the powers of a consul continue until revoked as provided in the last article. 1 See Guide Pr. des Cons., v. 1, p. 149. 1 Consuls not being representatives of the nation, their functions may be continued in such cases. SECTION IV. IMMUNITIES OF CONSULS. As to their immunities generally, consuls may be considered as of three classes: 1. Those who neither owe allegiance to, nor have a domicil in, the nation of their residence; 2. Those who do not owe allegiance to, but have a domicil in, such nation; the existence of a domicil being indicated either by previous voluntary residence, or by engaging in trade or holding property; and, 3. Those who both owe allegiance to, and have a domicil in, such nation. Halleck, without defining these classes so precisely as to avoid ambiguity in some cases, states the existing doctrine of exemption as follows: Those who owe no allegiance, hold no real property, engage in no business, and have no domicil in the country, have the personal exemptions and disabilities of aliens who are mere sojourners. Those who hold real estate, engage in business, and have a fixed residence, are considered as foreigners domiciled; and the consular privileges do not extend to their property or trade so as to change its national character. Those who owe allegiance can claim no exemptions enjoyed by others in virtue of alienage, but are entitled to those which pertain to the office and are necessary for the performance of its duties, unless they are excluded by conditions imposed in the exequatur. In view of this classification, and the fact that the ground of consular immunity is simply the facilitation of the consular functions, the following provisions are framed to prescribe an uniform rule of personal immunities in whatever can affect the exercise of consular functions, subject only to such exemptions as may be created by the conditions imposed in the exequatur; while, on the other hand, in all that does not hinder the exercise of consular functions, such as taxation, searches of papers not belonging to the affairs of the consulate, attendance as witness within a convenient distance, consuls, of whatever class, are left to the rules applicable to their private status, whether that of transient foreigners, of domiciled foreigners, of property owners and traders, or of members owing allegiance. This is, substantially, the doctrine which was declared by Art. XVI. of the treaty between the United States and Sardinia, (1838,) 8 U. S. Stat. at L., p. 518. Larger immunities have been secured by special compact in the case of non-Christian powers. Some of the earlier treaties exempted consuls from payment of duties on goods brought in for use of their houses and families. Treaty between the United States and Algiers, 1795, 1815 and 1816, 8 U. S. Stat. at L., 136, 227, and 247. The usual provision of the treaties is to the effect that if consuls exercise commerce, they shall be subjected to the same laws and usages to which private individuals of their nation are subject in the same place. Treaty between the United States and Treaty between the United States and Austria, (1829,) Art. X., 8 U. S. Stat. at L., 400, modified this by adding "to which private individuals of their nation are subject in the same place, in respect of their commercial transactions." The treaty between the United States and France, 1853, (10 U. S. Stat. at L., (Tr..) 114, Art. II.,) gives absolute exemption from direct and personal taxation: but it provides that if consuls are citizens of the country of residence; if they are or become owners of property there, or engage in commerce, they are subject to the same taxes, &c., and, with the reservation of the treatment granted to commercial agents, to the same jurisdiction as citizens owning property or engaged in trade. The treaty between the United States and Guatemala, 1849, (10 U. S. Stat. at L., (Tr.,) 14, Art. XXX.,) and others, also except taxes payable on account of property as well as commerce, for which they are taxable like other inhabitants. In addition to the treaties cited in this place, others, chiefly earlier in date, contain provisions more or less similar. Such may be found in De Clercq, vol. 5, pp. 603, 614, 632; Id., vol. 6. pp. 29, 157, 185, 282, 290, 303, 308, 551; Id., vol. 7, pp. 179, 322, 362, 586; and in 10 U. S. Stat. at L., (Tr.,) pp. 45, 80, 95; 11 Id., 591, 650; 12 Id., 1020, 1157. See the United States Consular Regulations, (1870,) ¶ 29, and treaties in App. No. 1. For a statement of the immunities now allowed by European nations to consuls, see Guide Pratique des Consulats, vol. 1, p. 12. ARTICLE 180. Right of passage. 181. Immunities of consuls. 182. Duty as witnesses. 183. Books, papers, &c., not to be seized. 184. Dwelling and office inviolable. Right of passage. 180. A consul, who is not a domiciled member of the nation of his residence,' if he has received the formal act of permission required by article 166, has the right of passage through the territory of the nation of his residence, for the purpose of leaving the country; which right continues for a reasonable time after his powers have terminated. Bluntschli, § 275; Viveash v. Becker, 3 Maule & Selwyn's Rep., 297, cited in 2 Phill. Int. Law, pp. 260, 268. 1 A person having a foreign domicil before appointment, does not lose it by residing as consul; and, therefore, it seems that his right of return to his domicil should be secured equally as if he were a foreigner. Immunities of consuls. 181. A consul, authorized as provided in the last article,' is entitled to the following immunities: 1. From military billetings' in his consular dwellings and office ;* 2. From military and naval service' of every kind; 3. From jury and police duty, and all other civil service; and, 6 4. From arrest on civil process in all cases." Taxation, of all kinds, is not included among the immunities allowed by this Code, for reasons stated in the introductory note to this section. 1 It is supposed proper to require an exequatur in all cases, as a foundation for the consular immunities; (see Articles 166-169 ;) though this is not now an universal rule. The first consular convention between the United States and France, 1788, (8 U. S. Stat. at L., (Tr.,) 106,) extended the general immunities to vice-consuls and secretaries, though the latter were not required to have an exequatur. The convention of 1853, however, (10 Id., (Tr.,) 116, Art. II.,) secures the same to consular pupils and to secretaries, &c., discharging the consular duties ad interim. The treaty between the United States and Hayti, (Nov. 3, 1864,) 13 U. S. Stat. at L., 711, Art. XXXV., extends the immunity from taxes to persons, not being citizens, attached to the service of consuls. And to the same effect, with the additional exemption from public service, is the treaty between the United States and Brazil, 1828, 8 Id., 397. See, also, the treaty between the United States and In order that a nation may retain full jurisdiction over its own members, when appointed consuls by a foreign nation, a waiver of immunity, as a condition of granting the exequatur, should be required. 22 Phill. Int. Law, p. 244. Treaty between the United States and Italy, Feb. 8, 1868, Art. III., 15 U. S. Stat. at L., (Tr.,) 185. 4 The authorities usually speak of the consular dwelling only; but as the dwelling is sometimes separate from the office, the latter is specially mentioned, for it is peculiarly entitled to exemption. 5 Martens says, that if necessary, the consul may be required to provide a substitute; but it is suggested as better to disallow this qualification. Guide Dip., tome 1, § 74; cited in Halleck, pp. 248, 249. See United States Consular Regulations, (1870,) T 30; and treaties in Appendix No. 1. 6 Halleck, pp. 248, 249. 'The existing rule only extends this exemption to consuls who do not engage in commerce. 2 Phill. Int. Law, 268. The consular conventions between France and Brazil, Dec. 10, 1860, 8 De Clercq, 153. provide that arrest of the person can only be applied in civil cases, in causes of action of a commercial nature, where the consul is engaged in commerce. But it is believed that the necessity of the efficient performance of consular functions, and a harmony with the general tendency restricting imprisonment in civil cases, requires the adoption of the rule in the text. Arrest in criminal cases is generally sanctioned by the authorities, and there seems to be good reason for allowing it, notwithstanding the interruption of the consular functions thereby caused. It is an important question, however, whether arrest should be allowed for crimes only, or also for misdemeanors, (delits.) The recent treaty between the United States and Italy allows of arrest only for offenses which are crimes by the local law, and punishable as such. The treaty between the United States and France, 1853, (10 U. S. Stat. at L., (Tr.,) 114, Art. II.,) is to the same effect. It is understood, however, that the French law generally holds foreign consuls amenable in cases of delit. The latter rule seems preferable, and, therefore, no exemption in criminal cases is specified. See U. S. Cons. Reg., (1870,) ¶T 27, and treaties in App. No. 1. Duty as witnesses. 182. A consul may be required to attend as a witness in the tribunals of the nation of his residence, within five leagues from the consular office, in the same manner as any other witness. When the testimony of a consul is required for a tribunal beyond that distance, it must be taken in writing, at the consular office, in the manner prescribed by the law of the place for taking depositions. This is suggested as, on the whole, a more reasonable and convenient rule than that embodied in many of the treaties. The convention between the United States and Italy, cited above, provides that no consular officer, who is a member of the nation by which he was appointed, and who is not engaged in business, shall be compelled to |