more particular art there are lessons of guidance that may serve as lessons of caution and warning to the student of history in his survey of international relations. There are, said the elder Charles Francis Adams,[1] three sorts of diplomatic composition which are habitually resorted to, in accordance with the traditional diplomacy, in meeting particular necessities. One is used when hostility is intended. 'The language is then courteous, but short, every word covering intelligible offence.' The second is used when dissatisfaction is to be expressed but no action is to follow. 'Then the notes are apt to be long and full of argument, with abundant citation of authorities, yet terminating with nothing but assurances of the highest consideration, et cetera.' The third is used when there prevails a sincere desire for harmony. 'Then the phrases are less studied and the intent more directly signified—the whole sense conveyed in brief notes.'[2] The effect of the difference between a letter in the first person and a note in the third is greater, it has been observed, than would be surmised by any one who has not been habituated to both modes in diplomatic intercourse. 'The third person, "The Undersigned," is stiff, cold, formal, and dignified; it is negotiation in court dress, bag wig, sword by side, chapeau de bras, white silk stockings, and patent shoe-buckles. Letters in the first person are negotiations in frock coat, pantaloons, half-boots, and a round hat.'[3]
The student of international relations needs precise as well as vast equipment in knowledge, but, not less, he needs equipment in a habit of mind.
- ↑ Son of John Quincy Adams, and grandson of John Adams; United States Minister to the Court of St. James, 1861–8.
- ↑ Quoted by W. V. Kellen in Henry Wheaton: An Appreciation (Boston, 1902), p. 31—a high and finely sympathetic tribute.
- ↑ J. Q. Adams' Memoirs, iv. 327, quoted by J. W. Forster, Practice of Diplomacy, 76, and thence by Satow, A Guide to Diplomatic Practice, i. 69.
