foreign Courts and capitals, were by conditions constrained to be more politic, procrastinating, prevaricating than in our own day. There was an ample supply of 'instructions'— general and specific, initial and supplementary, royal and ministerial; and these two last were at times, and in a notable instance, irreconcilable. But time and space were then so far from having been overcome that ambassadors had, in many emergencies, to act at their own discretion, to temporize, and make false or merely conditional promises: they had to wait until explicit orders came to them from their Government or their royal master, or from both, thus making explanations necessary, and, it might be, a fresh line of action, a new plan of campaign.[1] We have an impressive illustration in the history
- ↑ The obstacles imposed by distance upon the rapid transmission of reports and communication of instructions must never be omitted in an estimate of diplomacy before the nineteenth century, and of its 'manœuvres machiavéliques' (Note du Comte de Ségur pour le Prince de Nassau, Pétersbourg, January 31, 1789: Instructions: Russie, ii. 453). 'L'éloignement de Pétersbourg à Versailles étant trop grand pour qu'on puisse toujours recevoir des instructions précises au moment où il seroit convenable dans certaines circonstances, il faut en profiter avec sagesse,' Instructions: Russie, ii. 335 (November 21, 1777). Cf. i. 485: 'Si des incidents imprévus et qu'il faut ensevelir dans le silence, si une conduite quelquefois peu régulière de la part de nos ministres que l'éloignement ne nous permettoit pas de guider, ont paru apporter quelque refroidissement entre les deux cours …' (December 1747). Cf. i. 320, ii. 184. The third Lord Malmesbury, editor of the Diaries and Correspondence of James Harris, the first Earl, has said (iv. 417): 'The difference of character between old and modern diplomacy fostered his disposition to assume responsibility, and seek the most laborious and hopeless missions; for when the European Capitals were, in point of communication with England, at treble the distance at which they now [1844] stand, the resident Minister had necessarily far greater latitude and scope for action, and was constantly obliged and expected to trust to his own judgment, when instructions were beyond his reach.' Harris, writing in July 1779 from Petersburg to Morton Eden at Copenhagen, said: '… You will see the difficult and
