ient performance of his mission. Questions in regard to the immunities of the non-official suite have sometimes arisen. To avoid this it is customary for the diplomat to furnish the receiving state with a list of his family. Great Britain does not admit the full immunity of domestic servants. When Mr. Gallatin was United States minister to Great Britain, his coachman, who had committed an assault beyond the hôtel of the minister, was held liable to the local jurisdiction. As a diplomatic agent can voluntarily turn over an offender to the local authorities, and as he would naturally desire the observance of local law, there would be little danger of friction with local authorities anywhere, provided a just cause could be shown. Couriers and bearers of dispatches are entitled to immunities so far as is necessary for the free performance of the specific function. (4) The house and all grounds and buildings within the limits of the diplomatic residence are regarded as exempt from local jurisdiction. Great Britain claimed the right of entry to arrest Mr. Gallatin's coachman above mentioned, though admitting that such entrance should be made at a time to suit the convenience of the minister if he did not care to hand him over directly. This immunity extends also to carriages and other necessary appurtenances of the mission. Children born to the official family in the house of the diplomatic agent are considered as born in the state by which the agent is accredited. (5) The right of asylum in the house of the ambassador is now generally denied. In 1726 the celebrated case of the Duke of Ripperda, charged with treason, gave rise to the decision by the Council of Castile that the duke could be taken from the English legation by force if necessary, because the legation, which had been established to promote good relations between the states, would otherwise be used for overthrowing the state in which it had been established.1 It may be regarded as a rule that, in Europe and in the United. States, the house of a diplomatic agent affords only temporary protection for a criminal, whether political or otherwise, and that on demand of the proper authority the criminal must be surrendered. Refusal is a just ground for demand for recall of the diplomatic agent. The United States instructs its agents that "The privilege of immunity from local jurisdiction does not embrace the right of asylum for persons outside of a representative's diplomatic or personal household." This right is, however, recognized in practice, both by the United States and European nations, so far as pertains to the houses of the diplomats in South American states. The United States, in 1870, tried without avail to induce the European nations to agree to the discontinuance of the practice. In 1891, in Chile, Minister Egan, of the United States, afforded refuge in the legation to a large number of the political followers of Balmaceda. Chile demanded his recall, but the United States maintained that there must be 2 sufficient grounds for such action. In Eastern countries it has been the practice to afford asylum in legations in times of political disturbance and to political 1 De Martens, "Causes Cél.,” I., 174. 2 Instructions to Diplomatic Officers, 1897, § 50. offenders. In 1895 the British ambassador at Constantinople gave asylum to the deposed grand vizier at Constantinople. It can be said, however, that the tendency is to limit the granting of asylum to the fullest possible extent,1 and finally to abolish the practice altogether, as has been the case with the ancient extension of this privilege to the neighborhood of the legation under the name of jus quarteriorum.2 (6) In general, the diplomatic agent is exempt from personal taxes and from taxes upon his personal goods. The property owned by and devoted to the use of the mission is usually exempt from taxation. In this respect the principle of reciprocity is followed among some states. The taxes for betterments, such as paving, sewerage, etc., are regarded as proper charges upon the mission. A state has a right to make such regulations as it deems necessary to prevent the abuse of this immunity from taxation. It is also customary for a third state to grant to a diplomat passing through its territory immunity from duties. Diplomatic agents are also exempt from income, military, window, and similar taxes. (7) It is hardly necessary now to mention the fact that the diplomatic agent is entitled to freedom of religious worship within the mission, provided there be no attempt by bell, symbol, or otherwise to attract the attention of the passer-by to the observance. This privilege was formerly of importance, but now is never questioned. 1 Hall, § 52, p. 189. 2 See the "Right of Asylum in the Legations of the United States in Central and South America," by Barry Gilbert, in Harvard Law Review for June, 1901, p. 118. § 79. Diplomatic Practice of the United States1 Some of the minor points of procedure and functions may be seen by the study of the customs and rules of any large state, as in the United States. (a) Official communications involving international relations and general international negotiations are within the exclusive province of the Department of State, at the head of which stands the Secretary of State. In other states this department is commonly called the Department of Foreign Affairs, and its chief is the Minister or Secretary for Foreign Affairs, and was so designated in the United States from 1781 to 1789. The Department of State of the United States, however, performs many functions not strictly within a Department of Foreign Affairs, as an enumeration of the Bureaus will show. (1) Bureau of Appointments. (2) Diplomatic Bureau. (3) Consular Bureau. (4) Bureau of Indexes and Archives. (5) Bureau of Accounts. (6) Bureau of Rolls and Library, which, besides other duties, has charge of the publication of the laws, treaties, proclamations, and executive orders. (7) Bureau of Foreign Commerce (before July 1, 1897, called Bureau of Statistics). (b) The Constitution provides that, "In all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers, and consuls," the Supreme Court has original jurisdiction.2 1 Concise bibliography, Hart, “Foundations of American Foreign Policy," pp. 241–293. 2 U. S. Constitution, Art. III., § 2, 2. (c) A diplomatic agent cannot, without consent of Congress, "accept of any present, emolument, office, or title of any kind whatever from any king, prince, or foreign state."1 This provision does not, however, prevent the rendering of a friendly service to a foreign power, and it may be proper for him, having first obtained permission from the Department of State, to accede to the request to discharge temporarily the duties of a diplomatic agent of any other state.2 (d) In case of revolution a diplomatic agent may extend protection to the subjects of other friendly powers left for the time without a representative.3 In neither this nor in the preceding case does the United States become responsible for the acts of its diplomatic representative in so far as he is acting as agent of the other state or states. (e) "It is forbidden to diplomatic officers to partici pate in any manner in the political concerns of the country of their residence; and they are directed especially to refrain from public expressions of opinion upon local political or other questions arising within their jurisdiction. It is deemed advisable to extend similar prohibition against public addresses, unless upon exceptional festal occasions, in the country of official residence. Even upon such occasions any reference to political issues, pending in the United States or elsewhere, should be carefully avoided.”4 A diplomatic agent is forbidden to recommend any person for office 1 U. S. Constitution, Art. I., § 9, 8. 21 Whart., § 100. 4 Instructions to Diplomatic Officers, U. S., 1897, §§ 68, 69, |