THE PRACTICE OF DIPLOMACY CHAPTER I UTILITY OF THE DIPLOMATIC SERVICE In a previous volume I sought to show that the United States, in the first hundred years of its existence, has had a marked influence in shaping and improving international law. Its influence in elevating the diplomatic intercourse of nations has been scarcely less conspicubus Our first plenipotentiary was distinguished for the frankness and simplicity of his conduct, and for his advanced and humane political views; our first President enjoined upon our foreign representatives high ideals and the avoidance of chicanery; and the last among our secretaries of state, whose lamented death is yet fresh in our memories, epitomized the diplomacy of the United States as the practical application of the Golden Rule. The fact that the United States began its career as an independent state with no national history behind it, and untrammeled by precedents and traditions, made it easier for its foreign agents to discard the devious methods of the then existing diplomacy, and to follow a more sincere and upright course. It was fortunate, also, that its earliest representatives to foreign courts were men of the first order of talents and of the highest character. Franklin and Jefferson at Paris, Adams and Gouverneur Morris at London, and Jay and Pinckney at Madrid, were unsurpassed among their contemporaries in any land for intellectual attainments and statesmanship. They were well fitted to inaugurate the diplomatic service of the new republic. It will be the purpose of this volume to set forth the character of that service, to describe in some detail its methods and duties, and to record the achievements and mistakes of American diplomats abroad. International law is of modern origin and recent growth, the attempt at its codification dating from the seventeenth century only, and it scarcely came to be recognized as binding upon nations before the nineteenth; but the practice of sending and receiving ambassadors or diplomatic representatives has existed among nations from the earliest recorded history. The ancient Egyptians are known to have frequently observed the practice; early biblical history contains references to the custom; it was quite common among the Greek states; and observed by Rome during both the Republic and the Empire. But in all these cases and during the early period of modern European nations embassies or missions were used on special or extraordinary occasions only, and were of a temporary character. Not until late in the fifteenth century did the diplomatic service become permanent in its character and the governments establish resident missions or embassies. This stage of organized growth was reached, however, a century and a half before Grotius began the task of giving shape and authority to international law. Nevertheless, the rights and duties of diplomatic representatives were at that period imperfectly defined. The great congresses or conferences following the long wars of the European powers, such as those of Westphalia, Ryswick, and Utrecht, had a marked influence in fixing more accurately their status; but not until the Congress of Vienna in 1815, at the close of the Napoleonic wars, did the grade of ambassadors and ministers become authoritatively established. The United States, when it entered the family of nations, accepted the existing practice, and has maintained a diplomatic service similar to that of the European countries. But the question has often been raised, in and out of Congress, whether or not, in the existing conditions of the world, the system is necessary and whether its utility justifies its expense. As early as 1783, John Adams, who had just participated in the negotiation of the treaty of peace and independence, wrote Mr. Livingston, the Continental Secretary of Foreign Affairs: "I confess I have sometimes thought that after a few years it will be the best thing we can do to recall every minister from Europe, and send embassies only on special occasions." 1 It is claimed that, with the present development of steam communication, the rapid transmission of intelligence by electricity, and the general diffusion of news by the press, diplomatic negotiations and correspond 18 The Works of John Adams, edited by Charles Francis Adams (1853), 37. ence might readily be carried on directly between the foreign offices of the various governments, that the interests of our citizens might be attended to by consuls, and that on extraordinary occasions the business might be intrusted to special temporary missions. With many in our country the diplomatic service is regarded as hardly more than a showy appendage of the government, and its maintenance a useless expenditure of public money. Whenever the question has been made the subject of inquiry by Congress, the various presidents and secretaries of state have given their opinion in favor of the utility and necessity of the service, and Congress has continued to authorize it. The controlling judgment is well expressed in the language of Secretary Frelinghuysen to Congress: "Diplomatic representation is a definite factor in the political economy of the world; and no better scheme has yet been devised for the dispatch of international affairs, or for the preservation of friendly relations between governments." President Harrison, after his retirement from public life, left on record his view of it as follows: "The diplomatic service has sometimes been assailed in Congress as a purely ornamental one; and while the evident necessity of maintaining the service is such as ought to save it from the destructionists, it is quite true that our diplomatic relations with some of the powers is more ceremonious than practical. But we must be equipped for emergencies, and every now and then, even at the smallest and most remote courts, there is a 1 House of Reps. Executive Document No. 146, 48th Congress, 1st Session, p. 1. |