Page:Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States (1st ed, 1833, vol III).djvu/527

court of equity would not tolerate. In such cases, where foreigners were concerned on either side, it would be impossible for the federal judicatories to do justice, without an equitable, as well as a legal jurisdiction. Agreements to convey lands, claimed under the grants of different states, may afford another example of the necessity of an equitable jurisdiction in the federal courts. This reasoning may not be so palpable in those states, where the formal and technical distinction between law and equity is not maintained, as in this state, where it is exemplified by every day's practice.

§ 1652. The next clause, extends the judicial power "to all cases affecting ambassadors, other public ministers, and consuls." The propriety of this delegation of powder to the national judiciary will scarcely be questioned by any persons, who have duly reflected upon the subject. There are various grades of public ministers, from ambassadors (which is the highest grade,) down to common resident ministers, whose rank, and diplomatic precedence, and authority, are well known, and well ascertained in the law and usages of nations.^[1] But whatever may be their relative rank and grade, public ministers of every class are the immediate representatives of their sovereigns. As such representatives, they owe no subjection to any laws, but those of their own

---

1. Three classes are usually distinguished in diplomacy; 1. Ambassadors, who are the highest order, who are considered as personally representing their sovereigns; 2. Envoys Extraordinary, and ministers plenipotentiary; 3. Ministers resident, and ministers chargés d'affaires. Mere common chargés d'affaires, are deemed of still lower rank. Dr. Lieber's Encyclopedia Americana, art. Ministers, Foreign. Vattel, B. 4, ch. 6, §§ 71 to 74.