Page:The New International Encyclopædia 1st ed. v. 06.djvu/318

DIPLOMA. 272 DIPLOMACY. is now restricted, for the most part, to instru- ments given by imiversities, colleges, and other leanu-il .■.(nielies in i)roof o£ the holjer's having attained a certain degree; or to the licenses held by prolessional ])crsc)ns as an essential qualifica- tion to tlie practice of their art. Wliile the old legal significance of such diplomas has largely lost its force, they are yet required by the public as a protection from imposture and as an indi- cation of some qualification in the art professed. In the United States there is a decided tendency toward bringing all such diploma-conferring bod- ies under the supervision and control of the State, thus putting them upon much the same plane that they occupy in Continental Europe. See CnARTKRs; Coi,i.KnE.s, .merican; Degree: Paleogr.wuv: I.'niversity. DIPLOMACY. In the wider sense, the art or science of foreign politics. The term is, how- ever, more commonly employed in the more re- stricted meaning of the art of managing the in- tercourse and adjusting the relations of .States to one another by negotiation. Used in this sense, the word is of modern origin, dating back only to the latter part of the eighteenth century. The art ami the processes connoted by the term, how- ever, are as old as international relations, and cover the whole field of such relaticms, whether strictly political or not. The jirincipal objects of diplomacy have always been the same — to pre- serve the independence and safeguard the security of the State, or to secure some coveted political advantage over other States. Subsidiary to these principal objects have been the more immediate jiurposcs of preserving certain political arrange- ments — such as the Euro])can 'balance of power' — intended to prevent the aggrandizement of cer- tain States at the expense of others, the preven- tion of general wars, and the securing of com- mercial advantages to the subjects of trading na- tions. Under settled political conditicms, such as now exist in Kurope and in North America, the commercial purposes of diplomacy tend to be- come more prominent than those of a purely po- litical character, though the latter never lo.se their supreme importaiu<'. and are never far in the background of international intercourse. The methods of di|)loniatic action varj- accord- ing to the magnitude of the interests involved and the nature of the cnicigcncy which calls them into i)lay. For the settlement of questions vital- ly affecting several .States, or such as involve the peace of a continent, or the general policy of the great powers of Christendom, a general congress or international conference may be summoned. Of this character was the Congress of Westphalia, held in UMS to settle the issues involved .in the Thirty Years' War: the Congress of Vienna ( I8I4-1.T), by which the affairs of Europe, thrown into confusion by the Napoleonic wars, were re- adjusted : and the recent Hague Conference (1899), held at the instance of the Czar of Rus- sia, for the promotion of the peaceful Sfttlement of international differences among all civilized States. Questions of less general importance, arising among two or more Stales, are more frequently settled by formal treaties, directly negotiated by the regular diplomatic representatives of the States nirected. though these may also be con- sidered and the conflicting claims' of the parties adjusted by joint conmiissions appointed for the purpose. Where these claims cannot be so ad- justed by negotiation, resort may 1k> had to a [wrmanent tribunal of arbitration, like that es- tablished as the resiilt of The Hague I'onferenec above referred to, or by arbitrators agreed ipon by the parties to the conlrover.sy. -Matters of less importance, not recpiiriiig formal adjudica- tion or the solemn sanction of a treaty, are com- monly dealt with in informal conferences between the foreign ofliccs of the States concerned, and the.se result in friendly understandings as to the policy to be pursued by them. The management of the foreign intercourse of a nation is one of the chief functions of the executive head of the State. Formerly it was largely performed by the ruler in person, but it has in modern times passed into the hands of a class of otlicials known as diplomatic aiicnts, though the most important of these, as andjas- sadors. are invested with an extraordinary de- gree of dignity, from the fact that they are' sup- posed to represent the person of the "sovereign, and not merely the foreign office of the State by which the}' are accredited. I'nder modern con- ditions, the usual instruments of di|)lomacy are: (1) The princi|)al secretaries of State for for- eign affairs: (2) regular diplomatic agents of various grades, ranging from ambassadors to charges d'affaires: (3) occasional end)assies or agents of diplomatic intercourse anuointed for the accomplishment of a particular purpose. Sec DirLOMATic Agents. Prior to the fifteenth century diplomatic inter- course was conducted almost entirely by ambas- sadors and other agents of the last-named clas.s, and was as inetfective as its irregularity and lack of knowledge would lead us to ex|)ect. l!ut with the establishment of resident legations in that century, the practice of diplomacy was raised to a fine art, which rapidly assumed com- manding importance in Euro|M'an politics. At a period when international relations were based on personal and dynastic interests, and when statecraft was another name for intrigue, the role of the ambassador was second in importance only to that of the sovereign. .Success in diplomacy turned largely upon the personal qualities of the ambassador. U]ion smooth and engaging manners, cunning, a.id astuteness, and was thus a matter of per.son,~il intlucnce. Heing Wyond the reach of instructions, he occupied a position of great in- dependence and |iower. There was no diplomatic profession, but tiic great posts in the service were sought after by the greatest persons in Church and State. The institition by all the great pow- ers of a traineil di|doniatie service in the last century, and the astonishing improvement in methods of communication, especially in the use of the telegraph, have greatly impaired the power and importance of amtiassadors, anil have tended more and more to reduce them to the position of mere intermediaries, acting under instructions from the governments which they represent. It may be doubted whether diplomacy can fairly lie held responsible for the dishonorable methods with which the term has come to l)e asso- ciated. If it has at times been characterized by intrigue and deception, by the absence of large views anil generous motives, by selfishness, and a disposition to sacrifice the interests of the weaker to the stronger, it bris in these respects oidy too accurately reflected the statesmanship of its time. And that statesmanship was for centuries based on the jicrfectly just supposition that "Europe