THE COMPLEAT DIPLOMATIST.*

SIR ERNEST Saxow has written a learned and interesting book.

His ancient profession has always held aloof from the rest of man- kind, discouraging advice and disdaining criticism, and in England, above all, diplomacy has shrouded itself in the most impenetrable reserve. Yet here is a British Ambassador revealing to the public the mysteries of diplomatic practice as if it were an ordinary calling and explaining in great detail the niceties of diplomatic etiquette.

When Toison d'Or, in Quentin Durward, submitted the sham herald of La Merck to the test, he asked if he were " instructed in the more mysterious and secret terms of the science, by which the more learned do emblematically, and as it were parabolically, express to each other what is conveyed to others in the ordinary language." Sir Ernest Satow makes the reader feel that he is being instructed in this way, and that he may use such terms as" demarche," " note verbale," " prendre acte," or " fin de non recevoir " with as much assurance, " as it were parabolically," as any Envoy Extraordinary in the kingdom. There is an agreeable novelty, too, about the trained diplomatist's view of European history. The ordinary disputes, great or small, fade into the background. Here we may read at large of the things that really matter in the diplomatic world—of precedence among Sovereigns and Envoys, of the correct wording of honorific addresses, of the precise ceremonial to be observed in the reception of Ambassadors, or the forms of opening and closing a Congress—and of the controversies to which they have given rise. Far be it from us to say that these are trifles. On the contrary, the nice punctilios of the diplomatists sweeten international dealings just as the small courtesies usual among gentlemen ease the friction of daily life. Yet it is curious to find that such matters are solemnly regulated. For example :--

" At most Courts there is a marked distinction between the reception of Ambassadors, on the one hand, and of Envoys Extra- ordinary and Ministers Plenipotentiary and diplomatic agents of lesser rank, on the other. An Ambassador is fetched to the Palace by a Court official with one or more Court carriages for himself and his suite, while Envoys and other Ministers use their own carriages. . . . He does not always make a set speech ; this is a point regulated by local custom."

On the other hand, " An Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Plenipotentiary, or a Minister Resident, goes to his audience without the members of his legation and in his own carriage, and makes no set speech when delivering his credentials."

At Washington an Ambassador is brought by a member of the President's military staff in one of the President's carriages, with a cavalry escort, Co the White House. But a mere Envoy drives in his own carriage to the Department of State, and is thence conducted by the Secretary of State to the Blue Room at the White House, where he awaits the President. The ritual at the Vatican is exceptionally elaborate. The new Ambassador has, for instance, to take his whole staff and two pages in three gala carriages to a Court which has zealously maintained its ancient state.

The modern diplomatist escapes a good many of the troubles that vexed his predecessors. While the Holy Roman Empire endured, the Emperor admittedly came first among monarchs, and the second place -was claimed by more than one of the Kings.

• A Guide to Diplomatic Predict. By the Bight lion. Sir Ernest datow. 2 vain. London: Lei/smalls and Co. (28s. neLl Franco asserted her right with unwcarying insistence, and had it confirmed by the Pope in 1304. But Spain also wanted to play second fiddle, and the real importance of the Pacte de Famine " of 1761, diplomatically, was that it settled this dispute in favour of France. Every one has read Evelyn's account of the affray in 1661 between the servants of the French and those of the Spanish Ambassador in London, when the Spaniards killed the postilion and wounded the horses of the French state coach so that their master's coach might take its place next to the Royal coach in a procession. Louis XIV. sent an ultimatum to Madrid as a result of this episode, but it was not an isolated case. In 1633 the Spanish Envoy to Denmark left the country rather than give precedence to the French Ambassador. Russian Ambassadors were instructed not to aelmowledge the French claim. When George III. gave a Court ball in 1768, the Russian Ambassador went early and took a scat on a front bench next to the Emperor's representative. Tho French Ambassador, coming late, climbed over the bench and slipped between his two colleagues. The Russian expostulated, challenged his rival, and was wounded in the duel which followed. Tilsit is memorable because it settled this little difficulty. Endless controversy has been waged over titles. French Envoys to Russia,

even late in the eighteenth century, were coldly received because they would not address the Tsar or Tsaritsa as " Imperial Majesty." But such problems have been solved. It is clearly understood, for example, that President Wilson and President Poineard arc addressed as " Great and Good Friend," and the Swiss Federal Council as " Tres-chers et bons arnis et allies." The Sovereigns of Austria and Spain, among others, have three kinds of titles, the " grand titre," " titre moyen," and " petit titre," and the first of these is a fantastic recital of ancient and modern claims, in which each monarch poses as " King of Jerusalem," while Spain professes to rule over Austria, Burgundy, Flanders, Corsica, and Milan, without exciting the least jealousy in any of those cotuitries. There is more than meets the untrained eye in a Royal salutation at the close of a diplomatic paper. Queen Victoria's correspondence with Louis Philippe is analysed to show the world of meaning implicit in " Ja touto devouee Sour et Arnie," which at the crisis of the quarrel over the Spanish marriages replaced " la hien affectionnee Sceur et fiddle Arnie." When crowned heads meet, as at the Jubilee of 1897, tremendous problems of precedence have to be faced. The author is diplomati- cally vague as to the details, but he suggests that in 1897 the heads of the Great Powers were arranged in the alphabetical orde: of their French names, the minor Powers coming next, followed by Grand Dukes and other reigning Princes. There arose a diffi- culty as to the relative rank of the Heir-Apparent of a Great Power and a reigning Grand Duke ; the Queen is said to have compromised it by giving each one precedence on alternate evenings. Then, again, there is the question of language. At the close of the Middle Ages, French was already the language of the Emperor's Court, and was rivalling Latin as the language of treaties. But we insisted, as a rule, on the use of Latin in European treaties till 1715, after which we used French. Later, we had to contend for the right to use English. Curiously enough, the Prussian Government from 1S26 to 1844 refused to receive English Notes from our Minister at Berlin, on the ground that only French and German were admis- sible. The Minister for a time sent English Notes accompanied by French translations, but Palmerston insisted on his right to use his own tongue. Bismarck, however, declined to pay any attention to Russian Notes from the Tsar's Envoy, and apparently compelled him to write in French. Apart from the admirable clarity of the language, the number of French technical terms employed by diplomatists makes the use of French a great convenience in inter- national documents, and it is not now likely to be superseded.

Sir Ernest Satow deals with many other interesting topics, such as the immunities of Ambassadors and their houses, or the definition of persona grata, but his " counsels to diplomatists " are especially worthy of note. He quotes freely from Callieres, one of Louis XIV.'s Ambassadors, who wrote a shrewd manual on The Art of Negotiating with Sovereigns. Callieres insisted on the value of a plauoible, open manner, and on the uses of hospitality, when " the warmth of the wine often reveals important secrets," and he did not disdain to pay polite attentions to the ladies of the Court to which be was accredited, or to grease the palms of the minor oflioials who know so much. But the ideal Ambassador should above all, he thought, be a good listener :-

" Most men who have to talk ceser public affairs pay more attention to what they want to say than to what is said to them ; they are so full of their own ideas that their only concern is to be listened to, and they can scarcely force themselves to listen in their turn. . . . One of the qualities most necessary to a good negotiator is to know how to listen attentively and thoughtfully to all that people want to say to him, and to answer carefully and appropriately to the matters that are represented to him, and in no wise to be in a hurry to declare all that he knows, and all that lie wants."

Harris, the first Earl of Mahnesbury, who served Pitt so welt in building up his coalitions, is also cited to much the same purpose. Writing to Lord Camden a letter of advice for a youth who was entering the Service, Harris said :-

" The first and beat advice I can give a young man on entering *his career is to listen, not to talk—at least, not more than is neeess ary to induce others to talk. I have in the course of my life, by endeavouring to follow this method, drawn from my opponents much information, and concealed from them my own views, much more than by the employment of spies or money. Be very cautious in any country, or at any court, of such as, on your first arrival, appear the most eager to make your acquaintance and' communicate their ideas to you. I have ever found their pro- fessions insincere, and their intelligence false. They have been the first I have wished to shake off, whenever I have been so impru- dent as to give them credit for sincerity. They are either persons• who are not considered or respected in their own country, or are put about you to entrap and circumvent you as newly arrived. Englishmen should be most particularly on their guard against uch men, for we have none such on our side the water, and are ourselves so little coming towards foreigners, that we are astonished; and gratified when we find• a different treatment from that which strangers experience here ; but our reserve and ill 1)10114243r8 are infinitely less dangerous to the stranger than these premature and hollow civilities."

It may be noted that though Wotton, writing in a friend's "album, jestingly defined an Ambassador as "s'ir bonus peregre missus ad. mentiendum Reipublicre cause," which Izaak Walton cleverly rendered as " an honest man sent to lie abroad for the good of his country," Harris strongly deprecated the use of falsehood, which could at best have only a " precarious and baseless success."' Wotton's mature belief, according to Izaak Walton, was much the same, for he advised a young Envoy " That, to be in safety himself, and serviceable to his country, he• should always and upon all occasions speak the truth (it seems a State paradox), for, says Sir Henry Wotton, you shall never be believed ; and by this means, your. truth will secure yourself, if you shall ever be called in question ; and 'twill also put your adver- saries (who will still hunt counter) to a loss in all their diaquisitions. and undertakings."

Lord Stanhope, Walpole's ally, and Torey, the French statesman, also practised this method of deceiving their suspicious opponents; by telling them the truth. The author's own statement of the qualifications necessary for a diplomatist is interesting. :- "Good temper, good health, and good looks. Rather more than average intelligence, though brilliant genius is not necessary. A straightforward character, devoid. of. selfish ambition. A mind trained by the study of the beat literature, and by that of history. Capacity to judge of evidence. In short, the candidate must be a; gentleman. These points cannot be ascertained by means of written examinations. . . . Science is not necessary. Geography, beyond elementary notions, is not of great value, The diplomatist will acquire what geographical knowledge he needs of the country to which he is appointed while residing at his post. . . . Some private income, even though the Government should give a special foreign service allowance, is very desirable in the lower grades of the diplomatic service, and the higher the grade the more of it the better."

It will be evident that Sir Ernest Satiny has no sympathy with the demand for the reform of our Diplomatic Service which has been heard of late. But he insists, over and over again, that if our diplomacy has failed anywhere, it has not been the fault of the agents- but of the Governments directing them. There is some truth in the suggestion that the Ambassador is often unjustly saddled with the blunders of the politician; but we should hesitate to concur in Sir Ernest Satow's belief that the Diplomatic Service attracts its full share of the intellect of the-country.