In the afternoon, at five, the presidents of all the delegations

went to the palace, by appointment, and were presented to the

young Queen and to the Queen-mother. The former is exceedingly

modest, pretty, and pleasant; and as she came into the room,

about which were ranged that line of solemn, elderly men, it

seemed almost pathetic. She was evidently timid, and it was, at

first, hard work for her; but she got along well with Count

Munster, and when she came to me I soon brought the conversation

upon the subject of the "House in the Wood" by thanking her for

the pains her government had taken in providing so beautiful a

place for us. This new topic seemed to please her, and we had

quite a long talk upon it; she speaking of her visits to the

park, for skating and the like, and I dwelling on the beauty of

the works of art and the views in the park. Then the delegates,

going to the apartments of the Queen-mother, went through a

similar formality with her. She is very stout, but fine-looking,

with a kindly face and manner. Both mother and daughter spoke,

with perfect ease, Dutch, French, German English, and how many

other languages I know not. The young Queen was very simply

dressed, like any other young lady of seventeen, except that she

had a triple row of large pearls about her neck. In the evening,

at 9.30, the entire delegations were received at a great

presentation and ball. The music was very fine, but the most

interesting thing to me was the fact that, as the palace was

built under Louis Bonaparte and Hortense, the main rooms were in

the most thoroughgoing style Empire, not only in their

decorations, but in their furniture and accessories,--clocks,

vases, candelabra, and the like. I have never seen that style,

formerly so despised, but now so fashionable, developed as fully.

After the presentation I met Sir John Fisher, one of the English

delegates, an admiral in the British navy, and found him very

intelligent. He said that he was thoroughly for peace, and had

every reason to be so, since he knew something of the horrors of

war. It appears that in one of the recent struggles in China he

went ashore with eleven hundred men and returned with only about

five hundred; but, to my regret, I found him using the same

argument as regards the sea that Count Munster had made regarding

the land. He said that the navy of Great Britain was and would

remain in a state of complete preparation for war; that a vast

deal depended on prompt action by the navy; and that the truce

afforded by arbitration proceedings would give other powers time,

which they would otherwise not have, to put themselves into

complete readiness. He seemed uncertain whether it was best for

Great Britain, under these circumstances, to support a

thoroughgoing plan of arbitration; but, on the whole, seemed

inclined to try it to some extent. Clearly what Great Britain

wants is a permanent system of arbitration with the United

States; but she does not care much, I think, for such a provision

as regards other powers.

There is considerable curiosity among leading members to know

what the United States really intends to do; and during the day

Sir Julian Pauncefote and others have called to talk over the

general subject.

The London "Times" gives quite correctly a conversation of mine,

of rather an optimistic nature, as to the possibilities and

probabilities of arbitration, and the improvement of the customs

of war; but in another quarter matters have not gone so well: the

"Corriere della Sera" of Milan publishes a circumstantial

interview with me, which has been copied extensively in the

European press, to the effect that I have declared my belief in

the adoption of compulsory arbitration and disarmament. This is a

grotesque misstatement. I have never dreamed of saying anything

of the kind; in fact, have constantly said the contrary; and,

what is more, I have never been interviewed by the correspondent

of that or of any other Continental paper.

CHAPTER XLVI

AS PRESIDENT OF THE AMERICAN DELEGATION AT THE PEACE CONFERENCE

OF THE HAGUE--II

May 25. This morning a leading delegate of one of the great

European powers called and gave me a very interesting account of

the situation as he sees it.

He stated that the Russian representatives, on arriving here,

gave out that they were not prepared with any plan for a definite

tribunal of arbitration; but that shortly afterward there

appeared some discrepancy on this point between the statements of

the various members of their delegation; and that they now

propose a system of arbitration, mediation, and examination into

any cause of difficulty between nations.

In the evening our secretary spoke of the matter to M. de Staal,

the president of the Russian delegation and of the conference,

and was told that this plan would, within a day or two, be

printed and laid before the whole body.

This is a favorable sign. More and more it looks as if the great

majority of us are beginning to see the necessity of some scheme

of arbitration embracing a court and definite, well-contrived

accessories.

The above-mentioned discrepancy between various statements of the

Russians leads me to think that what Count Munster told me some

days since may have some truth in it--namely, that

Pobedonostzeff, whom I knew well, when minister to Russia, as the

strongest man of moral, religious, and social questions in that

country, is really the author of the documents that were

originally given to the world as emanating from the Russian

Foreign Office, and that he has now added to them this definite

scheme for arbitration. Remembering our old conversations, in

which he dwelt upon the great need of money in order to increase

the stipends of the Russian clergy, and so improve their moral as

well as religious condition, I can understand easily that he may

have greatly at heart a plan which would save a portion of the

enormous expenditure of Russia on war, and enable him to do more

for the improvement of the church.

Dined at the British legation with the minister, my old friend of

St. Petersburg days, Sir Henry Howard, De Martens, the real head

of the Russian delegation, being of the party, and had a long

talk with the latter about Russia and Russians. He told me that

Pobedonostzeff is now becoming old and infirm, and it appears

that there has been a sort of cleaning out of the Foreign Office

and the Ministry of the Interior--a procedure which was certainly

needed in my time.

Later in the evening we went to a reception by Baron van

Hardenbroek, the grand chamberlain, where I met various

interesting persons, especially M. Descamps, the eminent Belgian

delegate, who, in the fervor of his speech yesterday morning,

upset his inkstand and lavished its contents on his neighbors. He

is a devotee of arbitration, and is preparing a summary for the

committee intrusted with that subject. There seemed to be, in

discussing the matter with various delegates at this reception, a

general feeling of encouragement.

During the day Mr. Loeher, a Berlin sculptor, called, and carried

me off to see his plan of a great statue of "Peace" which he

hopes to induce the Emperor Nicholas to erect in Paris. It seems

to me well conceived, all except the main figure, which I could

not induce myself to like. In the anxiety of the sculptor to

avoid any more female figures, and to embody virile aspirations

for peace, he has placed this main figure at the summit of the

monument in something like a long pea-jacket, with an

insufficient mantle at the back, and a crown upon its head.

The number of people with plans, schemes, notions, nostrums,

whimsies of all sorts, who press upon us and try to take our

time, is enormous; and when to this is added the pest of

interviewers and photographers, life becomes serious indeed.

May 26.

At two the committee on arbitration met, and, as it is the

largest of all, its session was held in the main hall under the

dome. The Russian plan was presented, and was found to embrace

three distinct features:

First, elements of a plan of mediation; secondly, a plan for

international arbitration; thirdly, a plan for the international

examination of questions arising between powers, such examination

being conducted by persons chosen by each of the contestants.

This last is a new feature and is known as a commission

internationale d'enquete.

The project for a plan of arbitration submits a number of minor

matters to compulsory arbitration, but the main mass of

differences to voluntary arbitration.

But there was no definite proposal for a tribunal, and there was

an evident feeling of disappointment, which was presently voiced

by Sir Julian Pauncefote, who, in the sort of plain, dogged way

of a man who does not purpose to lose what he came for, presented

a resolution looking definitely to the establishment, here and

now, of an international tribunal of arbitration. After some

discussion, the whole was referred to a subcommittee, to put this

and any other proposals submitted into shape for discussion by

the main committee. In the course of the morning the American

delegation received an answer to its telegram to the State

Department, which was all that could be desired, since it left us

virtually free to take the course which circumstances might

authorize, in view of the main object to be attained. But it came

too late to enable us to elaborate a plan for the meeting above

referred to, and I obtained permission from the president, M.

Leon Bourgeois, to defer the presentation of our scheme until

about the middle of next week.

Just before the session of the main committee, at which the

Russian plan was received, I had a long and very interesting talk

with Mr. van Karnebeek, one of the leading statesmen of the

Netherlands, a former minister of foreign affairs, and the

present chief of the Dutch delegation in the conference. He seems

clear-headed and far-sighted, and his belief is that the

conference will really do something of value for arbitration. He

says that men who arrived here apparently indifferent have now

become interested, and that amour propre, if nothing else, will

lead them to elaborate something likely to be useful. He went at

considerable length into the value of an international tribunal,

even if it does nothing more than keep nations mindful of the

fact that there is some way, other than war, of settling

disputes.

A delegate also informed me that in talking with M. de Staal the

latter declared that in his opinion the present conference is

only the first of a series, and that it is quite likely that

another will be held next winter or next spring.

In the evening I made the acquaintance of Mr. Marshall, a

newspaper correspondent, who is here preparing some magazine

articles on The Hague and the conference. He is a very

interesting man on various accounts, and especially at present,

since he has but just returned from the Cuban campaign, where he

was fearfully wounded, receiving two shots which carried away

parts of the vertebral column, a bullet being left in his body.

He seems very cheerful, though obliged to get about on crutches.

May 27.

In the morning, calls from various people urging all kinds of

schemes for arbitration and various other good things for the

human race, including considerable advantages, in many cases, for

themselves.

Best of all, by far, was John Bellows of Gloucester, our old

Quaker friend at St. Petersburg, whom I was exceedingly glad to

take by the hand: he, at least, is a thoroughly good

man--sincere, honest, earnest, and blessed with good sense.

The number of documents, printed and written, coming in upon us

is still enormous. Many are virtually sermons displaying the

evils of war, the blessings of peace, and the necessity of

falling back upon the Bible. Considering the fact that our

earlier sacred books indicate approval by the Almighty of some of

the most bloodthirsty peoples and most cruel wars ever known,

such a recommendation seems lacking in "actuality."

This morning we had another visit from Sir Julian Pauncefote,

president of the British delegation, and discussed with him an

amalgamation of the Russian, British, and American proposals for

an arbitration tribunal. He finds himself, as we all do,

agreeably surprised by the Russian document, which, inadequate as

it is, shows ability in devising a permanent scheme both for

mediation and arbitration.

During the day President Low, who had been asked by our

delegation to bring the various proposals agreed to by us into

definite shape, made his report; it was thoroughly well done,

and, with some slight changes, was adopted as the basis for our

final project of an arbitration scheme. We are all to meet on

Monday, the 29th, for a study of it.

In the evening to the concert given to the conference by the

burgomaster and city council. It was very fine, and the audience

was large and brilliant. There was music by Tschaikovsky, Grieg,

and Wagner, some of which was good, but most of it seemed to me

noisy and tending nowhither; happily, in the midst of it came two

noble pieces, one by Beethoven and the other by Mozart, which

gave a delightful relief.

May 28.

Drove with Dr. Holls to Delft, five miles, and attended service

at the "New Church." The building was noble, but the service

seemed very crude and dismal, nearly the whole of it consisting

of two long sermons separated by hymns, and all unspeakably

dreary.

Afterward we saw the tombs of William of Orange and Grotius, and

they stirred many thoughts. I visited them first nearly forty

years ago, with three persons very dear to me, all of whom are

now passed away. More than ever it is clear to me that of all

books ever written--not claiming divine inspiration--the great

work of Grotius on "War and Peace" has been of most benefit to

mankind. Our work here, at the end of the nineteenth century, is

the direct result of his, at the beginning of the seventeenth.

Afterward to the Prinzenhof, visiting the place where William of

Orange was assassinated. Was glad to see the new statue of

Grotius in front of the church where he lies buried.

May 29.

In the morning President Low and myself walked, and talked over

various proposals for arbitration, especially our own. It looks

much as if we can amalgamate the Russian, British, and original

American plans into a good arrangement for a tribunal. We also

discussed a scheme for the selection, by disagreeing nations, of

"seconding powers," who, before the beginning of hostilities, or

even after, shall attempt to settle difficulties between powers,

or, if unsuccessful, to stop them as soon after war begins as the

honor of the nations concerned may allow. The Germans greatly

favor this plan, since it resembles their tribunal of honor

(Ehrengericht); it was originally suggested to us by our

secretary, Dr. Holls.

In the evening, at six, the American delegation met. We had

before us type-written copies of our whole arbitration project as

elaborated in our previous sessions, and sundry changes having

been made, most of them verbal, the whole, after considerable

discussion, was adopted.

At ten I left, via Hook of Holland and Harwich, for London,

arriving about ten the next morning, and attending to various

matters of business. It was fortunate for me that I could have

for this purpose an almost complete lull in our proceedings, the

first and second committees of the conference being at work on

technical matters, and the third not meeting until next Monday.

In the evening I went to the Lyceum Theatre, saw Henry Irving and

Ellen Terry in Sardou's "Robespierre," and for the first time in

my life was woefully disappointed in them. The play is wretchedly

conceived, and it amazes me that Sardou, who wrote "Thermidor,"

which is as admirable as "Robespierre" is miserable could ever

have attached his name to such a piece.

For the wretchedness of its form there is, no doubt, some excuse

in the fact that it has been done into English, and doubtless

cut, pieced, and altered to suit the Lyceum audiences; but when

one compares the conspiracy part of it with a properly conceived

drama in which a conspiracy is developed, like Schiller's

"Fiesco," the difference is enormously in favor of the latter. As

literature the play in its English dress is below contempt.

As to its historical contents, Sardou resorts to an expedient

which, although quite French in its character, brings the whole

thing down to a lower level than anything in which I had ever

seen Irving before. The center of interest is a young royalist

who, having been present with his mother and sister at the

roll-call of the condemned and the harrowing scenes resulting

therefrom, rushes forth, determined to assassinate Robespierre,

but is discovered by the latter to be his long-lost illegitimate

son, and then occur a series of mystifications suited only to the

lowest boulevard melodrama.

As to the action of the piece, the only thing that showed

Irving's great ability was the scene in the forest of

Montmorency, where, as Robespierre, he reveals at one moment, in

his talk with the English envoy, his ambition, his overestimate

of himself, his suspicion of everybody and everything, his

willingness to be cruel to any extent in order to baffle possible

enemies; and then, next moment, on the arrival of his young

friends, boys and girls, the sentimental, Rousseau side of his

character. This transition was very striking. The changes in the

expression of Irving's face were marvelous--as wonderful as those

in his Louis XI; but that was very nearly all. In everything

else, Coquelin, as I had seen him in Sardou's "Thermidor," was

infinitely better.

Besides this, the piece was, in general, grotesquely

unhistorical. It exhibits Robespierre's colleagues in the

Committee of Public Safety as noisy and dirty street blackguards.

Now, bad as they were, they were not at all of that species, nor

did their deliberations take place in the manner depicted.

Billaud-Varennes is represented as a drunken vagabond sitting on

a table at the committee and declaiming. He was not this at all,

nor was Tallien, vile as he was, anything like the blackguard

shown in this piece.

The final scene, in which Robespierre is brought under accusation

by the Convention, was vastly inferior to the same thing in

"Thermidor"; and, what was worse, instead of paraphrasing or

translating the speeches of Billaud-Varennes, Tallien, and

Robespierre, which he might have found in the "Moniteur," Sardou,

or rather Irving, makes the leading characters yell harangues

very much of the sort which would be made in a meeting of drunken

dock laborers to-day. Irving's part in this was not at all well

done. The unhistorical details now came thick and fast, among

them his putting his head down on the table of the tribune as a

sign of exhaustion, and then, at the close, shooting himself in

front of the tribunal. If he did shoot himself, which is

doubtful, it was neither at that time nor in that place.

But, worst of all, the character of Robespierre was made far too

melodramatic, and was utterly unworthy of Irving, whom, in all

his other pieces, I have vastly admired. He completely

misconceives his hero. Instead of representing him as, from first

to last, a shallow Rousseau sentimentalist, with the proper

mixture of vanity, suspicion, and cruelty, he puts into him a

great deal too much of the ruffian, which was not at all in

Robespierre's character.

The most striking scene in the whole was the roll-call at the

prison. This was perhaps better than that in Sardou's

"Thermidor," and the tableaux were decidedly better.

The scene at the "Festival of the Supreme Being" was also very

striking, and in many respects historical; but, unless I am

greatly mistaken, the performance referred to did not take place

as represented, but in the garden directly in front of the

Tuileries. The family scene at the house of Duplay the carpenter

was exceedingly well managed; old Duplay, smoking his pipe,

listening to his daughters playing on a spinet and singing

sentimental songs of the Rousseau period, was perfect. The old

carpenter and his family evidently felt that the golden age had

at last arrived; that humanity was at the end of its troubles;

and that the world was indebted for it all to their lodger

Robespierre, who sat in the midst of them reading, writing, and

enjoying the coddling and applause lavished upon him. And he and

they were to go to the guillotine within a week!

Incidentally there came a little touch worthy of Sardou; for, as

Robespierre reads his letters, he finds one from his brother, in

which he speaks of a young soldier and revolutionist of ability

whose acquaintance he has just made, whom he very much likes, and

whose republicanism he thoroughly indorses--one Buonaparte. This

might have occurred, and very likely did occur, very much as

shown on the stage; for one of the charges which nearly cost

Bonaparte his life on the Ninth Thermidor was that he was on

friendly terms with the younger Robespierre, who was executed

with his more famous brother.

On the whole, the play was very disappointing. It would certainly

have been hissed at the Porte St. Martin, and probably at any

other Paris theater.

June 1.

Having left London last evening, I arrived at The Hague early

this morning and found, to my great satisfaction, that the

subcommittee of the third committee had unanimously adopted the

American plan of "seconding powers," and that our whole general

plan of arbitration will be to-day in print and translated into

French for presentation. I also find that Sir Julian Pauncefote's

arbitration project has admirable points.

The first article in Sir Julian's proposal states that, with the

desire to facilitate immediate recourse to arbitration by nations

which may fail to adjust by diplomatic negotiations differences

arising between them, the signatory powers agree to organize a

permanent tribunal of international arbitration, accessible at

all times, to be governed by a code, provided by this conference,

so far as applicable and consistent with any special stipulations

agreed to between the contesting parties.

Its second provision is the establishment of a permanent central

office, where the records of the tribunal shall be preserved and

its official business transacted, with a permanent secretary,

archivist, and suitable staff, who shall reside on the spot. This

office shall make arrangements for the assembling of the

tribunal, at the request of contesting parties.

Its third provision is that each of the signatory powers shall

transmit the names of two persons who shall be recognized in

their own country as jurists or publicists of high character and

fitness, and who shall be qualified to act as judges. These

persons shall be members of the tribunal, and a list of their

names shall be recorded in the central office. In case of death

or retirement of any one of these, the vacancy shall be filled up

by new appointment.

Its fourth provision is that any of the signatory powers desiring

to have recourse to the tribunal for the settlement of

differences shall make known such desire to the secretary of the

central office, who shall thereupon furnish the powers concerned

with a list of the members of the tribunal, from which such

powers may select such number of judges as they may think best.

The powers concerned may also, if they think fit, adjoin to these

judges any other person, although his name may not appear on the

list. The persons so selected shall constitute the tribunal for

the purpose of such arbitration, and shall assemble at such date

as may be most convenient for the litigants.

The tribunal shall ordinarily hold its sessions at ----; but it

shall have power to fix its place of session elsewhere, and to

change the same from time to time, as circumstances may suggest.

The fifth provision is that any power, even though not

represented in the present conference, may have recourse to the

tribunal on such terms as may be prescribed by the regulations.

Provision sixth: The government of ---- is charged by the

signatory powers, on their behalf, as soon as possible after the

conclusion of this convention, to name a permanent council of

administration, at ----, composed of five members and a

secretary. This council shall organize and establish the central

office, which shall be under its control and direction. It shall

make such rules and regulations as may be necessary for the

office; it shall dispose of all questions that may arise in

relation to the working of the tribunal, or which may be referred

to it by the central office; it shall make all subordinate

appointments, may suspend or dismiss all employees, and shall fix

their salaries and control their expenditure. This council shall

select its president, who shall have a casting-vote. The

remuneration of the members shall be fixed from time to time by

accord between the signatory powers.

Provision seventh: The signatory powers agree to share among them

the expenses pertaining to the administration of the central

office and the council of administration; but the expenses

incident to every arbitration, including the remuneration of the

arbiters, shall be equally borne by the contesting powers.

From a theoretical point of view, I prefer to this our American

plan of a tribunal permanently in session: the judges, in every

particular case, to be selected from this. Thus would be provided

a court of any odd number between three and nine, as the

contesting powers may desire. But from the practical point of

view, even though the Russian plan of requiring the signatory

powers to send to the tribunal a multitude of smaller matters,

such as those connected with the postal service, etc., is carried

out, the great danger is that such a court, sitting constantly as

we propose, would, for some years, have very little to do, and

that soon we should have demagogues and feather-brained

"reformers" ridiculing them as "useless," "eating their heads

off," and "doing nothing"; that then demagogic appeals might lead

one nation after another to withdraw from an arrangement

involving large expense apparently useless; and in view of this

latter difficulty I am much inclined to think that we may, under

our amended instructions, agree to support, in its essential

features as above given, the British proposal, and, with some

reservations, the code proposed by the Russians.

Among the things named by the Russians as subjects which the

agreeing powers must submit to arbitration, are those relating to

river navigation and international canals; and this, in view of

our present difficulties in Alaska and in the matter of the

Isthmus Canal, we can hardly agree to. During the morning Sir

Julian came in and talked over our plan of arbitration as well as

his own and that submitted by Russia. He said that he had seen M.

de Staal, and that it was agreed between them that the latter

should send Sir Julian, at the first moment possible, an

amalgamation of the Russian and British plans, and this Sir

Julian promised that he would bring to us, giving us a chance to

insert any features from our own plan which, in our judgment,

might be important. He seemed much encouraged, as we all are.

Returning to our rooms, I found Count Munster. As usual, he was

very interesting; and, after discussing sundry features of the

Russian plan, he told one or two rather good stories. He said

that during his stay in St Petersburg as minister, early in the

reign of Alexander II, he had a very serious quarrel with Prince

Gortchakoff the minister of foreign affairs, who afterward became

the famous chancellor of the empire.

Count Munster had received one day from a professor at Gottingen

a letter stating that a young German savant, traveling for

scientific purposes in Russia, had been seized and treated as a

prisoner, without any proper cause whatever; that, while he was

engaged in his peaceful botanizing, a police officer, who was

taking a gang of criminals to Siberia, had come along, and one of

his prisoners having escaped, this officer, in order to avoid

censure, had seized the young savant, quietly clapped the number

of the missing man on his back, put him in with the gang of

prisoners, and carried him off along with the rest; so that he

was now held as a convict in Siberia. The count put the letter in

his pocket, thinking that he might have an opportunity to use it,

and a day or two afterward his chance came. Walking on the quay,

he met the Emperor (Alexander II), who greeted him heartily, and

said, "Let me walk with you." After walking and talking some

time, the count told the story of the young German, whereupon the

Emperor asked for proofs of its truth. At this Munster pulled the

letter out of his pocket; and, both having seated themselves on a

bench at the side of the walk, the Emperor read it. On finishing

it, the Emperor said: "Such a thing as this can happen only in

Russia." That very afternoon he sent a special police squad,

post-haste, all the way to Siberia, ordering them to find the

young German and bring him back to St. Petersburg.

Next day Count Munster called at the Foreign Office on current

business, when Gortchakoff came at him in a great rage, asking

him by what right he communicated directly with the Emperor; and

insisting that he had no business to give a letter directly to

the Emperor, that it ought to have gone through the Foreign

Office. Gortchakoff reproached the count bitterly for this

departure from elementary diplomatic etiquette. At this Munster

replied: "I gave the letter to the Emperor because he asked me

for it, and I did not give it to you because I knew perfectly

well that you would pigeonhole it and the Emperor would never

hear of it. I concede much in making any answer at all to your

talk, which seems to me of a sort not usual between gentlemen."

At this Gortchakoff was much milder, and finally almost

obsequious, becoming apparently one of Munster's devoted friends,

evidently thinking that, as Munster had gained the confidence of

the Emperor, he was a man to be cultivated.

The sequel to the story was also interesting. The policemen,

after their long journey to Siberia, found the young German and

brought him to St. Petersburg, where the Emperor received him

very cordially and gave him twenty thousand rubles as an

indemnity for the wrong done him. The young savant told Munster

that he had not been badly treated, that he had been assigned a

very pleasant little cottage, and had perfect freedom to pursue

his scientific researches.

On my talking with the count about certain Russian abuses, and

maintaining that Russia, at least in court circles, had improved

greatly under Alexander III as regarded corruption, he said that

he feared she was now going back, and he then repeated a remark

made by the old Grand Duke Michael, brother of Alexander II, who

said that if any Russian were intrusted with the official care of

a canary he would immediately set up and maintain a coach and

pair out of it.

At six o'clock our American delegation met and heard reports,

especially from Captain Mahan and Captain Crozier, with reference

to the doings in the subcommittees. Captain Mahan reported that

he had voted against forbidding asphyxiating bombs, etc.,

evidently with the idea that such a provision would prove to be

rather harmful than helpful to the cause of peace.

Captain Crozier reported that his subcommittee of committee No. 2

had, at its recent meeting, tried to take up the exemption of

private property from seizure on the high seas in time of war,

but had been declared out of order by the chairman, De Martens,

the leading Russian delegate, who seems determined to prevent the

subject coming before the conference. The question before our

American delegation now was, Shall we try to push this American

proposal before the subcommittee of the second committee, or

before the entire conference at a later period? and the general

opinion was in favor of the latter course. It was not thought

best to delay the arbitration plan by its introduction at

present.

In the evening dined with Minister Newel, and had a very

interesting talk with Van Karnebeek, who had already favorably

impressed me by his clear-headedness and straightforwardness;

also with Messrs. Asser, member of the Dutch Council of State,

and Rahusen, member of the Upper Chamber of the States General,

both of whom are influential delegates.

All three of these men spoke strongly in favor of our plan for

the exemption of private property on the high seas, Van Karnebeek

with especial earnestness. He said that, looking merely at the

material interests of the Netherlands, he might very well favor

the retention of the present system, since his country is little

likely to go into war, and is certain to profit by the carrying

trade in case of any conflict between the great powers; that, of

course, under such circumstances, a large amount of commerce

would come to Holland as a neutral power; but that it was a

question of right and of a proper development of international

law, and that he, as well as the two other gentlemen above named,

was very earnestly in favor of joint action by the powers who are

in favor of our proposal. He thought that the important thing

just now is to secure the cooperation of Germany, which seems to

be at the parting of the ways, and undecided which to take.

In the course of the evening one of my European colleagues, who

is especially familiar with the inner history of the calling of

the conference, told me that the reason why Professor Stengel was

made a delegate was not that he wrote the book in praise of war

and depreciating arbitration, which caused his appointment to be

so unfavorably commented upon, but because, as an eminent

professor of international law, he represented Bavaria; and that

as Bavaria, though represented at St. Petersburg, was not

invited, it was thought very essential that a well-known man from

that kingdom should be put into the general German delegation.

On my asking why Brazil, though represented at St. Petersburg,

was not invited, he answered that Brazil was invited, but showed

no desire to be represented. On my asking him if he supposed this

was because other South American powers were not invited, he said

that he thought not; that it was rather its own indifference and

carelessness, arising from the present unfortunate state of

government in that country. On my saying that the Emperor Dom

Pedro, in his time, would have taken the opportunity to send a

strong delegation, he said: "Yes, he certainly would have done

so; but the present government is a poor sort of thing."

I also had a talk with one of the most eminent publicists of the

Netherlands, on the questions dividing parties in this country,

telling him that I found it hard to understand the line of

cleavage between them. He answered that it is, in the main, a

line between religious conservatives and liberals; the

conservatives embracing the Roman Catholics and high orthodox

Protestants, and the liberals those of more advanced opinions. He

said that socialism plays no great part in Holland; that the

number of its representatives is very small compared with that in

many European states; that the questions on which parties divide

are mainly those in which clerical ideas are more or less

prominent; that the liberal party, if it keeps together, is much

the stronger party of the two, but that it suffers greatly from

its cliques and factions.

On returning home after dinner, I found a cipher despatch from

the Secretary of State informing us that President McKinley

thinks that our American commission ought not to urge any

proposal for "seconding powers"; that he fears lest it may block

the way of the arbitration proposals. This shows that imperfect

reports have reached the President and his cabinet. The fact is

that the proposal of "seconding powers" was warmly welcomed by

the subcommittee when it was presented; that the members very

generally telegraphed home to their governments, and at once

received orders to support it; that it was passed by a unanimous

vote of the subcommittee; and that its strongest advocates were

the men who are most in favor of an arbitration plan. So far from

injuring the prospects of arbitration, it has increased them; it

is very generally spoken of as a victory for our delegation, and

has increased respect for our country, and for anything we may

hereafter present.

June 2.

This morning we sent a cipher telegram to the Secretary of State,

embodying the facts above stated.

The shoals of telegrams, reports of proceedings of societies,

hortatory letters, crankish proposals, and peace pamphlets from

America continue. One of the telegrams which came late last night

was pathetic; it declared that three millions of Christian

Endeavorers bade us "Godspeed," etc., etc.

During the morning De Martens, Low, Holls, and myself had a very

thoroughgoing discussion of the Russian, British, and American

arbitration plans. We found the eminent Russian under very

curious misapprehensions regarding some minor points, one of them

being that he had mistaken the signification of our word

"publicist"; and we were especially surprised to find his use of

the French word "publiciste" so broad that it would include M.

Henri Rochefort, Mr. Stead, or any newspaper writer; and he was

quite as surprised to find that with us it would include only

such men as Grotius, Wheaton, Calvo, and himself.

After a long and intricate discussion we separated on very good

terms, having made, I think, decided progress toward fusing all

three arbitration plans into one which shall embody the merits of

all.

One difficulty we found, of which neither our State Department

nor ourselves had been fully aware. Our original plan required

that the judges for the arbitration tribunal should be nominated

by the highest courts of the respective nations; but De Martens

showed us that Russia has no highest court in our sense of the

word. Then, too, there is Austria-Hungary, which has two supreme

courts of equal authority. This clause, therefore, we arranged to

alter, though providing that the original might stand as regards

countries possessing supreme courts.

At lunch we had Baron de Bildt, Swedish minister at Rome and

chief of the Swedish delegation at the conference, and Baron de

Bille, Danish minister at London and chief delegate from Denmark.

De Bille declared himself averse to a permanent tribunal to be in

constant session, on the ground that, having so little to do, it

would be in danger of becoming an object of derision to the press

and peoples of the world.

We were all glad to find, upon the arrival of the London "Times,"

that our arbitration project seemed to be receiving extensive

approval, and various telegrams from America during the day

indicated the same thing.

It looks more and more as if we are to accomplish something. The

only thing in sight calculated to throw a cloud over the future

is the attitude of the German press against the whole business

here; the most virulent in its attacks being the high Lutheran

conservative--and religious!--journal in Berlin, the

"Kreuz-Zeitung." Still, it is pleasant to see that eminent

newspaper find, for a time, some other object of denunciation

than the United States.

June 3.

In the afternoon drove to Scheveningen and took tea with Count

Munster and his daughter. He was somewhat pessimistic, as usual,

but came out very strongly in favor of the American view as

regards exemption of private property on the high seas. Whether

this is really because Germany would derive profit from it, or

because she thinks this question a serviceable entering wedge

between the United States and Great Britain, there is no telling

at present. I am sorry to say that our hopes regarding it are to

be dashed, so far as the present conference is concerned. Sundry

newspaper letters and articles in the "Times" show clearly that

the English Government is strongly opposed to dealing with it

here and now; and as France and Russia take the same position,

there is no hope for any action, save such as we can take to keep

the subject alive and to secure attention to it by some future

conference.

CHAPTER XLVII

AS PRESIDENT OF THE AMERICAN DELEGATION AT THE PEACE CONFERENCE

OF THE HAGUE: III--1899

June 4.

We have just had an experience which "adds to the gaiety of

nations." Some days since, representatives of what is called "the

Young Turkish party" appeared and asked to be heard. They

received, generally, the cold shoulder, mainly because the

internal condition of Turkey is not one of the things which the

conference was asked to discuss; but also because there is a

suspicion that these "Young Turks" are enabled to live in luxury

at Paris by blackmailing the Sultan, and that their zeal for

reform becomes fervid whenever their funds run low, and cools

whenever a remittance comes from the Bosphorus. But at last some

of us decided to give them a hearing, informally; the main object

being to get rid of them. At the time appointed, the delegation

appeared in evening dress, and, having been ushered into the

room, the spokesman began as follows, very impressively:

"Your Excellencies, ve are ze Young Turkeys."

This was too much for most of us, and I think that, during our

whole stay at The Hague thus far, we have never undertaken

anything more difficult, physically, than to keep our faces

straight during the harangue which followed.

Later, we went with nearly all the other members of the

conference to Haarlem, in a special train, by invitation of the

burgomaster and town council, to the "Fete Hippique" and the

"Fete des Fleurs." We were treated very well indeed, refreshments

being served on the grand stand during the performances, which

consisted of hurdle races, etc., for which I cared nothing,

followed by a procession of peasants in old chaises of various

periods, and in the costumes of the various provinces of the

Netherlands, which interested me much. The whole closed with a

long train of fine equipages superbly decorated with flowers.

Discussing the question of the immunity of private property, not

contraband of war, on the high seas, I find that the main

argument which our opponents are now using is that, even if the

principle were conceded, new and troublesome questions would

arise as to what really constitutes contraband of war; that ships

themselves would undoubtedly be considered as contraband, since

they can be used in conveying troops, coal, supplies, etc.

June 5.

Having given up the morning of the 5th mainly to work on plans of

arbitration, mediation, and the like, I went to the meeting, at

the "House in the Wood," of the third great committee of the

conference--namely, that on arbitration.

The session went off satisfactorily, our duty being to pass upon

the report from the subcommittee which had put the various

propositions into shape for our discussion. The report was

admirably presented by M. Descamps, and, after considerable

discussion of details, was adopted in all essential features. The

matters thus discussed and accepted for presentation to the

conference as a whole related:

(1) To a plan for tendering "good offices."

(2) To a plan for examining into international differences.

(3) To the "special mediation" plan.

The last was exceedingly well received, and our delegation has

obtained much credit for it. It is the plan of allowing any two

nations drifting into war to appoint "seconding nations," who,

like "seconds" in a duel, shall attempt to avert the conflict;

and, if this be unsuccessful, shall continue acting in the same

capacity, and endeavor to arrest the conflict at the earliest

moment possible.

Very general good feeling was shown, and much encouragement

derived from the fact that these preliminary matters could be

dealt with in so amicable and business-like a spirit.

Before the meeting I took a long walk in the garden back of the

palace with various gentlemen, among them Mr. van Karnebeek, who

discussed admirably with me the question of the exemption of

private property from seizure on the high seas. He agreed with me

that even if the extreme doctrine now contended for--namely, that

which makes ships, coal, provisions, and very nearly everything

else, contraband--be pressed, still a first step, such as the

exemption of private property from seizure, would be none the

less wise, leaving the subordinate questions to be dealt with as

they arise.

I afterward called with Dr. Holls at the house of the burgomaster

of The Hague, and thanked him for his kindness in tendering us

the concert last Saturday, and for various other marks of

consideration.

On the whole, matters continue to look encouraging as regards

both mediation and arbitration.

June 6.

In the morning Sir Julian Pauncefote called, and again went over

certain details in the American, British, and Russian plans of

arbitration, discussing some matters to be stricken out and

others to be inserted. He declared his readiness to strike out a

feature of his plan to which from the first, I have felt a very

great objection--namely, that which, after the tribunal is

constituted, allows the contesting parties to call into it and

mix with it persons simply chosen by the contestants ad hoc. This

seems to me a dilution of the idea of a permanent tribunal, and a

means of delay and of complications which may prove unfortunate.

It would certainly be said that if the contestants were to be

allowed to name two or more judges from outside the tribunal,

they might just as well nominate all, and thus save the expense

attendant upon a regularly constituted international court chosen

by the various governments.

Later in the day I wrote a private letter to the Secretary of

State suggesting that our American delegation be authorized to

lay a wreath of silver and gold upon the tomb of Grotius at

Delft, not only as a tribute to the man who set in motion the

ideas which, nearly three hundred years later, have led to the

assembling of this conference, but as an indication of our

gratitude to the Netherlands Government for its hospitality and

the admirable provision it has made for our work here, and also

as a sign of good-will toward the older governments of the world

on the occasion of their first meeting with delegates from the

new world, in a conference treating of matters most important to

all nations.

In the evening to Mr. van Karnebeek's reception, and there met

Mr. Raffalovitch, one of the Russian secretaries of the

conference, who, as councilor of the Russian Empire and

corresponding member of the French Institute, has a European

reputation, and urged him to aid in striking out the clause in

the plan which admits judges other than those of the court. My

hope is that it will disappear in the subcommittee and not come

up in the general meeting of the third great committee.

June 8.

The American delegation in the afternoon discussed at length the

proposals relating to the Brussels Conference rules for the more

humane carrying on of war. Considerable difference of opinion has

arisen in the section of the conference in which the preliminary

debates are held, and Captain Crozier, our representative, has

been in some doubt as to the ground to be taken between these

opposing views. On one side are those who think it best to go at

considerable length into more or less minute restrictions upon

the conduct of invaders and invaded. On the other side, M.

Bernaert of Belgium, one of the two most eminent men from that

country, and others, take the ground that it would be better to

leave the whole matter to the general development of humanity in

international law. M. de Martens insists that now is the time to

settle the matter, rather than leave it to individuals who, in

time of war, are likely to be more or less exasperated by

accounts of atrocities and to have no adequate time for deciding

upon a policy. After considerable discussion by our delegation,

the whole matter went over.

In the evening to a great reception at the house of Sir Henry

Howard, British minister at this court. It was very brilliant,

and the whole afforded an example of John Bull's good sense in

providing for his representatives abroad, and enabling them to

exercise a social influence on the communities where they are

stationed, which rapidly becomes a political influence with the

governments to which they are accredited. Sir Henry is provided

with a large, attractive house, means to entertain amply, and has

been kept in the service long enough to know everybody and to

become experienced in the right way of getting at the men he

wishes to influence, and of doing the things his government needs

to have done. Throughout the whole world this is John Bull's wise

way of doing things. At every capital I have visited, including

Washington, Constantinople, St. Petersburg, Rome, Paris, Berlin,

and Vienna, the British representative is a man who has been

selected with reference to his fitness, kept in the service long

enough to give him useful experience, and provided with a good,

commodious house and the means to exercise social and, therefore,

political influence. The result is that, although, in every

country in the world, orators and editors are always howling at

John Bull, he everywhere has his way: to use our vernacular, he

"gets there," and can laugh in his sleeve at the speeches against

him in public bodies, and at the diatribes against him in

newspapers. The men who are loudest in such attacks are generally

the most delighted to put their legs under the British

ambassador's mahogany, or to take their daughters to his

receptions and balls, and then quietly to follow the general line

of conduct which he favors.

June 9.

In the morning an interesting visit from M. de Staal, president

of the conference. We discussed arbitration plans, Brussels rules

and Geneva rules, and, finally, our social debts to the Dutch

authorities.

As to the general prospects of arbitration, he expressed the

belief that we can, by amalgamating the British, Russian, and

American plans, produce a good result.

During the day, many members of the conference having gone to

Rotterdam to see the welcoming of the Queen in that city, I took

up, with especial care, the Brussels rules for the conduct of

war, and the amendments of them now proposed in the conference,

some of which have provoked considerable debate. The more I read

the proposals now made, the more admirable most of them seem to

be, and the more it seems to me that we ought, with a few

exceptions, to adopt them. Great Britain declines to sanction

them as part of international law, but still agrees to adopt them

as a general basis for her conduct in time of war; and even this

would be a good thing for us, if we cannot induce our government

to go to the length of making them fully binding.

At six o'clock Dr. Holls, who represents us upon the subcommittee

on arbitration, came in with most discouraging news. It now

appears that the German Emperor is determined to oppose the whole

scheme of arbitration, and will have nothing to do with any plan

for a regular tribunal, whether as given in the British or the

American scheme. This news comes from various sources, and is

confirmed by the fact that, in the subcommittee, one of the

German delegates, Professor Zorn of Konigsberg, who had become

very earnest in behalf of arbitration, now says that he may not

be able to vote for it. There are also signs that the German

Emperor is influencing the minds of his allies--the sovereigns of

Austria, Italy, Turkey, and Roumania--leading them to oppose it.

Curiously enough, in spite of this, Count Nigra, the Italian

ambassador at Vienna and head of the Italian delegation, made a

vigorous speech showing the importance of the work in which the

committee is engaged, urging that the plan be perfected, and

seeming to indicate that he will go on with the representatives

who favor it. This, coming from perhaps the most earnest ally of

Germany, is noteworthy.

At the close of the session Sir Julian Pauncefote informed Dr.

Holls that he was about to telegraph his government regarding the

undoubted efforts of the German Emperor upon the sovereigns above

named, and I decided to cable our State Department, informing

them fully as to this change in the condition of affairs.

At eight went to the dinner of our minister, Mr. Newel and found

there three ambassadors, De Staal, Munster, and Pauncefote, as

well as M. Leon Bourgeois, president of the French delegation;

Sir Henry Howard, the British minister; Baron de Bildt, the

Swedish minister; and some leading Netherlands statesmen. Had a

long talk with M. de Staal and with Sir Julian Pauncefote

regarding the state of things revealed this afternoon in the

subcommittee on arbitration. M. de Staal has called a meeting of

the heads of delegations for Saturday afternoon. Both he and Sir

Julian are evidently much vexed by the unfortunate turn things

have taken. The latter feels, as I do, that the only thing to be

done is to go on and make the plan for arbitration as perfect as

possible, letting those of the powers who are willing to do so

sign it. I assured him and De Staal that we of the United States

would stand by them to the last in the matter.

Late in the evening went to a reception of M. de Beaufort, the

Netherlands minister of foreign affairs, and discussed current

matters with various people, among them Count Nigra, whom I

thanked for his eloquent speech in the afternoon, and Baron de

Bildt, who feels as I do, that the right thing for us is to go

on, no matter who falls away.

June 10.

This morning I gave to studies of the various reports sent in

from the subcommittees, especially those on arbitration and on

the Brussels Conference rules. Both have intensely interested me,

my main attention being, of course, centered on the former; but

the Brussels rules seem to me of much greater importance now than

at first, and my hope is that we shall not only devise a good

working plan of arbitration, but greatly humanize the laws of

war.

At four o'clock in the afternoon met the four other ambassadors

and two or three other heads of delegations, at the rooms of M.

de Staal, to discuss the question of relaxing the rules of

secrecy as regards the proceedings of committees, etc. The whole

original Russian plan of maintaining absolute secrecy has

collapsed, just as the representatives from constitutional

countries in the beginning said it would. Every day there are

published minute accounts in Dutch, French, and English journals

which show that, in some way, their representatives obtain enough

information to enable them, with such additional things as they

can imagine, to make readable reports. The result is that various

gentlemen in the conference who formerly favored a policy of

complete secrecy find themselves credited with speeches which

they did not make, and which they dislike to be considered

capable of making.

After a great deal of talk, it was decided to authorize the

chairman of each committee to give to the press complete reports,

so far as possible, keeping in the background the part taken by

individuals.

At six the American delegation met, and the subject of our

instructions regarding the presentation of the American view of

the immunity of private property on the high seas in time of war

was taken up. It was decided to ask some of the leading

supporters of this view to meet us at luncheon at 12.30 on

Monday, in order to discuss the best way of overcoming the

Russian plan of suppressing the matter, and to concert means for

getting the whole subject before the full conference.

June 11.

Instead of going to hear the Bishop of Hereford preach on

"Peace," I walked with Dr. Holls to Scheveningen, four miles, to

work off a nervous headache and to invite Count Munster to our

luncheon on Monday, when we purpose to take counsel together

regarding private property on the high seas. He accepted, but was

out of humor with nearly all the proceedings of the conference.

He is more than ever opposed to arbitration, and declares that,

in view of the original Russian programme under which we were

called to meet, we have no right to take it up at all, since it

was not mentioned. He was decidedly pessimistic regarding the

continuance of the sessions, asking me when I thought it would

all end; and on my answering that I had not the slightest idea,

he said that he was entirely in the dark on the subject; that

nobody could tell how long it would last, or how it would break

off.

June 12.

At half-past twelve came our American luncheon to Count Munster,

Mr. van Karnebeek, and Baron de Bildt, each of whom is at the

head of his delegation,--our purpose being to discuss with them

the best manner of getting the subject of immunity of private

property at sea, not contraband, before the conference, these

gentlemen being especially devoted to such a measure.

All went off very well, full interchange of views took place, and

the general opinion was that the best way would be for us, as the

only delegation instructed on the subject, to draw up a formal

memorial asking that the question be brought before the

conference, and sending this to M. de Staal as our president.

Curious things came out during our conversation Baron de Bildt

informed me that, strongly as he favored the measure, and

prepared as he was to vote for it, he should have to be very

careful in discussing it publicly, since his instructions were to

avoid, just as far as possible, any clash between the opinions

expressed by the Swedish representatives and those of the great

powers. Never before have I so thoroughly realized the difficult

position which the lesser powers in Europe hold as regards really

serious questions.

More surprising was the conversation of Count Munster, he being

on one side of me and Mr. van Karnebeek on the other. Bearing in

mind that the Emperor William during his long talk with me just

before I left Berlin in referring to the approaching Peace

Congress had said that he was sending Count Munster because what

the conference would most need would be "common sense," and

because, in his opinion, Count Munster had "lots of it," some of

the count's utterances astonished me. He now came out, as he did

the day before in his talk with me, utterly against arbitration,

declaring it a "humbug," and that we had no right to consider it,

since it was not mentioned in the first proposals from Russia,

etc., etc.

A little later, something having been said about telegraphs and

telephones, he expressed his belief that they are a curse as

regards the relations between nations; that they interfere with

diplomacy, and do more harm than good. This did not especially

surprise me, for I had heard the same opinions uttered by others;

but what did surprise me greatly was to hear him say, when the

subject of bacteria and microbes was casually mentioned, that

they were "all a modern humbug."

It is clear that, with all his fine qualities,--and he is really

a splendid specimen of an old-fashioned German nobleman devoted

to the diplomatic service of his country,--he is saturated with

the ideas of fifty years ago.

Returning from a drive to Scheveningen with Major Burbank of the

United States army, I sketched the first part of a draft for a

letter from our delegation to M. de Staal, and at our meeting at

six presented it, when it met with general approval. President

Low had also sketched a draft which it was thought could be

worked very well into the one which I had offered, and so we two

were made a subcommittee to prepare the letter in full.

June 13.

This morning come more disquieting statements regarding Germany.

There seems no longer any doubt that the German Emperor is

opposing arbitration, and, indeed, the whole work of the

conference, and that he will insist on his main allies, Austria

and Italy, going with him. Count Nigra, who is personally devoted

to arbitration, allowed this in talking with Dr. Holls; and the

German delegates--all of whom, with the exception of Count

Munster, are favorably inclined to a good arbitration plan--show

that they are disappointed.

I had learned from a high imperial official, before I left

Berlin, that the Emperor considered arbitration as derogatory to

his sovereignty, and I was also well aware, from his

conversation, that he was by no means in love with the conference

idea; but, in view of his speech at Wiesbaden, and the petitions

which had come in to him from Bavaria, I had hoped that he had

experienced a "change of heart."

Possibly he might have changed his opinion had not Count Munster

been here, reporting to him constantly against every step taken

by the conference.

There seems danger of a catastrophe. Those of us who are faithful

to arbitration plans will go on and do the best we can; but there

is no telling what stumbling-blocks Germany and her allies may

put in our way; and, of course, the whole result, without their

final agreement, will seem to the world a failure and, perhaps, a

farce.

The immediate results will be that the Russian Emperor will

become an idol of the "plain people" throughout the world, the

German Emperor will be bitterly hated, and the socialists, who

form the most dreaded party on the continent of Europe, will be

furnished with a thoroughly effective weapon against their

rulers.

Some days since I said to a leading diplomatist here, "The

ministers of the German Emperor ought to tell him that, should he

oppose arbitration, there will be concentrated upon him an amount

of hatred which no minister ought to allow a sovereign to incur."

To this he answered, "That is true; but there is not a minister

in Germany who dares tell him."

June 14.

This noon our delegation gave a breakfast to sundry members of

the conference who are especially interested in an effective plan

of arbitration, the principal of these being Count Nigra from

Italy; Count Welsersheimb, first delegate of Austria; M. Descamps

of Belgium; Baron d'Estournelles of France; and M. Asser of the

Netherlands. After some preliminary talk, I read to them the

proposal, which Sir Julian had handed me in the morning, for the

purpose of obviating the objection to the council of

administration in charge of the court of arbitration here in The

Hague, which was an important feature of his original plan, but

which had been generally rejected as involving expensive

machinery. His proposal now is that, instead of a council

specially appointed and salaried to watch over and provide for

the necessities of the court, such council shall simply be made

up of the ministers of sundry powers residing here,--thus doing

away entirely with the trouble and expense of a special council.

This I amended by adding the Netherlands minister of foreign

affairs as ex-officio president, there being various reasons for

this, and among these the fact that, without some such provision,

the Netherlands would have no representative in the council.

The plan and my amendment were well received, and I trust that

our full and friendly discussion of these and various matters

connected with them will produce a good effect in the committees.

Count Nigra expressed himself to me as personally most earnestly

in favor of arbitration, but it was clear that his position was

complicated by the relations of his country to Germany as one of

the Triple Alliance; and the same difficulty was observable in

the case of Count Welsersheimb, the representative of Austria,

the third ally in the combination of which Germany is the head.

In the course of our breakfast, Baron d'Estournelles made a

statement which I think impressed every person present. It was

that, as he was leaving Paris, Jaures, the famous socialist, whom

he knows well, said to him, "Go on; do all you can at The Hague,

but you will labor in vain: you can accomplish nothing there,

your schemes will fail, and we shall triumph," or words to that

effect. So clear an indication as this of the effect which a

failure of the conference to produce a good scheme of arbitration

will have in promoting the designs of the great international

socialist and anarchist combinations cannot fail to impress every

thinking man.

Dined in the evening with the French minister at this court, and

very pleasantly. There were present M. Leon Bourgeois, the French

first delegate, and the first delegates from Japan, China,

Mexico, and Turkey, with subordinate delegates from other

countries. Sitting next the lady at the right of the host, I

found her to be the wife of the premier, M. Piersoon, minister of

finance, and very agreeable. I took in to dinner Madame Behrends,

wife of the Russian charge, evidently a very thoughtful and

accomplished woman, who was born, as she told me, of English

parents in the city of New York when her father and mother were

on their way to England. I found her very interesting, and her

discussions of Russia, as well as of England and the Netherlands,

especially good.

In the smoking-room I had a long talk with M. Leon Bourgeois,

who, according to the papers, is likely to be appointed minister

of foreign affairs in the new French cabinet. He dwelt upon the

difficulties of any plan for a tribunal, but seemed ready to do

what he could for the compromise plan, which is all that, during

some time past, we have hoped to adopt.

June 15.

Early this morning Count Munster called, wishing to see me

especially, and at once plunged into the question of the immunity

of private property from seizure on the high seas. He said that

he had just received instructions from his government to join us

heartily in bringing the question before the conference; that his

government, much as it inclines to favor the principle, could not

yet see its way to commit itself fully; that its action must, of

course, depend upon the conduct of other powers in the matter, as

foreshadowed by discussions in the conference, but that he was to

aid us in bringing it up.

I told him I was now preparing a draft of a memorial to the

conference giving the reasons why the subject ought to be

submitted, and that he should have it as soon as completed.

This matter being for the time disposed of, we took up the state

of the arbitration question, and the consequences of opposition

by Germany and her two allies to every feasible plan.

He was very much in earnest, and declared especially against

compulsory arbitration. To this I answered that the plan thus far

adopted contemplated entirely voluntary arbitration, with the

exception that an obligatory system was agreed upon as regards

sundry petty matters in which arbitration would assist all the

states concerned; and that if he disliked this latter feature,

but would agree to the others, we would go with him in striking

it out, though we should vastly prefer to retain it.

He said, "Yes; you have already stricken out part of it in the

interest of the United States," referring to the features

concerning the Monroe Doctrine, the regulation of canals, rivers,

etc.

"Very true," I answered; "and if there are any special features

which affect unfavorably German policy or interests, move to

strike them out, and we will heartily support you."

He then dwelt in his usual manner on his special hobby, which is

that modern nations are taking an entirely false route in

preventing the settlement of their difficulties by trained

diplomatists, and intrusting them to arbitration by men

inexperienced in international matters, who really cannot be

unprejudiced or uninfluenced; and he spoke with especial contempt

of the plan for creating a bureau, composed, as he said, of

university professors and the like, to carry on the machinery of

the tribunal.

Here I happened to have a trump card. I showed him Sir Julian

Pauncefote's plan to substitute a council composed of all the

ministers of the signatory powers residing at The Hague, with my

amendment making the Dutch minister of foreign affairs its

president. This he read and said he liked it; in fact, it seemed

to remove a mass of prejudice from his mind.

I then spoke very earnestly to him--more so than ever

before--about the present condition of affairs. I told him that

the counselors in whom the Emperor trusted--such men as himself

and the principal advisers of his Majesty--ought never to allow

their young sovereign to be exposed to the mass of hatred,

obloquy, and opposition which would converge upon him from all

nations in case he became known to the whole world as the

sovereign who had broken down the conference and brought to

naught the plan of arbitration. I took the liberty of telling him

what the Emperor said to me regarding the count himself--namely,

that what the conference was most likely to need was good common

sense, and that he was sending Count Munster because he possessed

that. This seemed to please him, and I then went on to say that

he of all men ought to prevent, by all means, placing the young

Emperor in such a position. I dwelt on the gifts and graces of

the young sovereign, expressed my feeling of admiration for his

noble ambitions, for his abilities, for the statesmanship he had

recently shown, for his grasp of public affairs, and for his way

of conciliating all classes, and then dwelt on the pity of making

such a monarch an object of hatred in all parts of the world.

He seemed impressed by this, but said the calling of the

conference was simply a political trick--the most detestable

trick ever practised. It was done, he said mainly to embarrass

Germany, to glorify the young Russian Emperor, and to put Germany

and nations which Russia dislikes into a false position. To this

I answered, "If this be the case, why not trump the Russian

trick? or, as the poker-players say, 'Go them one better,' take

them at their word, support a good tribunal of arbitration more

efficient even than the Russians have dared to propose; let your

sovereign throw himself heartily into the movement and become a

recognized leader and power here; we will all support him, and to

him will come the credit of it.

"Then, in addition to this, support us as far as you can as

regards the immunity of private property on the high seas, and

thus you will gain another great point; for, owing to her

relations to France, Russia has not dared commit herself to this

principle as otherwise she doubtless would have done, but, on the

contrary, has opposed any consideration of it by the conference.

"Next, let attention be called to the fact--and we will gladly

aid in making the world fully aware of it--that Germany, through

you, has constantly urged the greatest publicity of our

proceedings, while certain other powers have insisted on secrecy

until secrecy has utterly broken down, and then have made the

least concession possible. In this way you will come out of the

conference triumphant, and the German Emperor will be looked upon

as, after all, the arbiter of Europe. Everybody knows that France

has never wished arbitration, and that Russian statesmen are

really, at heart, none too ardent for it. Come forward, then, and

make the matter thoroughly your own; and, having done this,

maintain your present attitude strongly as regards the two other

matters above named,--that is, the immunity from seizure of

private property on the high seas, and the throwing open of our

proceedings,--and the honors of the whole conference is yours."

He seemed impressed by all this, and took a different tone from

any which has been noted in him since we came together. I then

asked him if he had heard Baron d'Estournelles's story. He said

that he had not. I told it to him, as given in my diary

yesterday; and said, "You see there what the failure to obtain a

result which is really so much longed for by all the peoples of

the world will do to promote the designs of the socialistic

forces which are so powerful in all parts of the Continent, and

nowhere more so than in Germany and the nations allied with her."

This, too, seemed to impress him. I then went on to say, "This is

not all. By opposing arbitration, you not only put a club into

the hands of socialists, anarchists, and all the other

anti-social forces, but you alienate the substantial middle class

and the great body of religious people in all nations. You have

no conception of the depth of feeling on this subject which

exists in my own country, to say nothing of others; and if

Germany stands in the way, the distrust of her which Americans

have felt, and which as minister and ambassador at Berlin I have

labored so hard to dispel, will be infinitely increased. It will

render more and more difficult the maintenance of proper

relations between the two countries. Your sovereign will be

looked upon as the enemy of all nations, and will be exposed to

every sort of attack and calumny, while the young Emperor of

Russia will become a popular idol throughout the world, since he

will represent to the popular mind, and even to the minds of

great bodies of thinking and religious people, the effort to

prevent war and to solve public questions as much as possible

without bloodshed; while the Emperor of Germany will represent to

their minds the desire to solve all great questions by force.

Mind, I don't say this is a just view: I only say that it is the

view sure to be taken, and that by resisting arbitration here you

are playing the game of Russia, as you yourself have stated

it--that is, you are giving Russia the moral support of the whole

world at the expense of the neighboring powers, and above all of

Germany."

I then took up an argument which, it is understood, has had much

influence with the Emperor,--namely, that arbitration must be in

derogation of his sovereignty,--and asked, "How can any such

derogation be possible? Your sovereign would submit only such

questions to the arbitration tribunal as he thought best; and,

more than all that, you have already committed yourselves to the

principle. You are aware that Bismarck submitted the question of

the Caroline Islands for arbitration to the Pope, and the first

Emperor William consented to act as arbiter between the United

States and Great Britain in the matter of the American

northwestern boundary. How could arbitration affect the true

position of the sovereign? Take, for example, matters as they now

stand between Germany and the United States. There is a vast mass

of petty questions which constantly trouble the relations between

the two countries. These little questions embitter debates,

whether in your Reichstag on one hand, or in our Congress on the

other, and make the position of the Berlin and Washington

governments especially difficult. The American papers attack me

because I yield too much to Germany, the German papers attack Von

Bulow because he yields too much to America, and these little

questions remain. If Von Bulow and I were allowed to sit down and

settle them, we could do so at short notice; but behind him

stands the Reichstag, and behind our Secretary of State and

myself stands the American Congress."

I referred to such questions as the tonnage dues, the additional

tariff on bounty-promoted sugar, Samoa, the most-favored-nation

clause, in treaties between Germany and the United States, in

relation to the same clause in sundry treaties between the United

States and other powers, and said, "What a blessing it would be

if all these questions, of which both governments are tired, and

which make the more important questions constantly arising

between the two countries so difficult to settle, could be sent

at once to a tribunal and decided one way or the other! In

themselves they amount to little. It is not at all unlikely that

most of them--possibly all of them--would be decided in favor of

Germany; but the United States would acquiesce at once in the

decision by a tribunal such as is proposed. And this is just what

would take place between Germany and other nations. A mass of

vexatious questions would be settled by the tribunal, and the

sovereign and his government would thus be relieved from

parliamentary chicanery based, not upon knowledge, but upon party

tactics or personal grudges or inherited prejudices."

He seemed now more inclined to give weight to these

considerations, and will, I hope, urge his government to take a

better view than that which for some time past has seemed to be

indicated by the conduct of its representatives here.

In the afternoon I went to the five-o'clock tea of the Baroness

d'Estournelles, found a great crowd there, including the leading

delegates, and all anxious as to the conduct of Germany. Meeting

the Baroness von Suttner who has been writing such earnest books

in behalf of peace, I urged her to write with all her might to

influence public prints in Austria, Italy, and Germany in behalf

of arbitration, telling her that we are just arriving at the

parting of the ways, and that everything possible must be done

now, or all may be lost. To this she responded very heartily, and

I have no doubt will use her pen with much effect.

In the evening went to a great reception at the house of the

Austrian ambassador, M. Okolicsanyi. There was a crush. Had a

long talk with Mr. Stead, telling him D'Estournelles's story, and

urging him to use it in every way to show what a boon the failure

of arbitration would be to the anti-social forces in all parts of

Europe.

In the intervals during the day I busied myself in completing the

memorial to the conference regarding the immunity from seizure of

private property at sea. If we cannot secure it now, we must at

least pave the way for its admission by a future international

conference.

CHAPTER XLVIII

AS PRESIDENT OF THE AMERICAN DELEGATION AT THE PEACE CONFERENCE

OF THE HAGUE: IV--1899

June 16. This morning Count Munster called and seemed much

excited by the fact that he had received a despatch from Berlin

in which the German Government--which, of course, means the

Emperor--had strongly and finally declared against everything

like an arbitration tribunal. He was clearly disconcerted by this

too literal acceptance of his own earlier views, and said that he

had sent to M. de Staal insisting that the meeting of the

subcommittee on arbitration, which had been appointed for this

day (Friday), should be adjourned on some pretext until next

Monday; "for," said he, "if the session takes place to-day, Zorn

must make the declaration in behalf of Germany which these new

instructions order him to make, and that would be a misfortune."

I was very glad to see this evidence of change of heart in the

count, and immediately joined him in securing the adjournment he

desired. The meeting of the subcommittee has therefore been

deferred, the reason assigned, as I understand, being that Baron

d'Estournelles is too much occupied to be present at the time

first named. Later Count Munster told me that he had decided to

send Professor Zorn to Berlin at once in order to lay the whole

matter before the Foreign Office and induce the authorities to

modify the instructions. I approved this course strongly,

whereupon he suggested that I should do something to the same

purpose, and this finally ended in the agreement that Holls

should go with Zorn.

In view of the fact that Von Bulow had agreed that the German

delegates should stand side by side with us in the conference, I

immediately prepared a letter of introduction and a personal

letter to Bulow for Holls to take, and he started about five in

the afternoon. This latter is as follows:

(Copy.) (Personal.)

June 16, 1899

DEAR BARON VON BULOW:

I trust that, in view of the kindly relations which exist between

us, succeeding as they do similar relations begun twenty years

ago with your honored father, you will allow me to write you

informally, but fully and frankly, regarding the interests of

both our governments in the peace conference. The relations

between your delegates and ours have, from the first, been of the

kindest; your assurances on this point have been thoroughly

carried out. But we seem now to be at "the parting of the ways,"

and on the greatest question submitted to us,--the greatest, as I

believe, that any conference or any congress has taken up in our

time,--namely, the provision for a tribunal of arbitration.

It is generally said here that Germany is opposed to the whole

thing, that she is utterly hostile to anything like arbitration,

and that she will do all in her power, either alone or through

her allies, to thwart every feasible plan of providing for a

tribunal which shall give some hope to the world of settling some

of the many difficulties between nations otherwise than by

bloodshed.

No rational man here expects all wars to be ended by anything

done here; no one proposes to submit to any such tribunal

questions involving the honor of any nation or the inviolability

of its territory, or any of those things which nations feel

instinctively must be reserved for their own decision. Nor does

any thinking man here propose obligatory arbitration in any case,

save, possibly, in sundry petty matters where such arbitration

would be a help to the ordinary administration of all

governments; and, even as to these, they can be left out of the

scheme if your government seriously desires it.

The great thing is that there be a provision made or easily

calling together a court of arbitration which shall be seen of

all nations, indicate a sincere desire to promote peace, and, in

some measure, relieve the various peoples of the fear which so

heavily oppresses them all--the dread of an outburst of war at

any moment.

I note that it has been believed by many that the motives of

Russia in proposing this conference were none too good,--indeed,

that they were possibly perfidious; but, even if this be granted,

how does this affect the conduct of Germany? Should it not rather

lead Germany to go forward boldly and thoughtfully, to accept the

championship of the idea of arbitration, and to take the lead in

the whole business here?

Germany, if she will do this, will certainly stand before the

whole world as the leading power of Europe; for she can then say

to the whole world that she has taken the proposal of Russia au

serieux; has supported a thoroughly good plan of arbitration; has

done what Russia and France have not been willing to do,--favored

the presentation to the conference of a plan providing for the

immunity of private property from seizure on the high seas during

war,--and that while, as regards the proceedings of the

conference, Russia has wished secrecy, Germany has steadily, from

the first, promoted frankness and openness.

With these three points in your favor, you can stand before the

whole world as the great Continental power which has stood up f

or peace as neither Russia nor France has been able to do. On the

other hand, if you do not do this, if you put a stumbling-block

in the way of arbitration, what results? The other powers will go

on and create as good a tribunal as possible, and whatever

failure may come will be imputed to Germany and to its Emperor.

In any case, whether failure or success may come, the Emperor of

Russia will be hailed in all parts of the world as a deliverer

and, virtually, as a saint, while there will be a wide-spread

outburst of hatred against the German Emperor.

And this will come not alone from the anti-social forces which

are hoping that the conference may fail, in order that thereby

they may have a new weapon in their hands, but it will also come

from the middle and substantial classes of other nations.

It is sure to make the relations between Germany and the United

States, which have been of late improving infinitely more bitter

than they have ever before been and it is no less sure to provoke

the most bitter hatred of the German monarchy in nearly all other

nations.

Should his advisers permit so noble and so gifted a sovereign to

incur this political storm of obloquy, this convergence of hatred

upon him? Should a ruler of such noble ambitions and such

admirable powers be exposed to this? I fully believe that he

should not, and that his advisers should beg him not to place

himself before the world as the antagonist of a plan to which

millions upon millions in all parts of the world are devoted.

From the United States come evidences of a feeling wide-spread

and deep on this subject beyond anything I have ever known. This

very morning I received a prayer set forth by the most

conservative of all Protestant religious bodies--namely, the

American branch of the Anglican Church--to be said in all

churches, begging the Almighty to favor the work of the peace

conference; and this is what is going on in various other

American churches, and in vast numbers of households. Something

of the same sort is true in Great Britain and, perhaps in many

parts of the Continent.

Granted that expectations are overwrought, still this fact

indicates that here is a feeling which cannot be disregarded.

Moreover, to my certain knowledge, within a month, a leading

socialist in France has boasted to one of the members of this

conference that it would end in failure; that the monarchs and

governments of Europe do not wish to diminish bloodshed; that

they would refuse to yield to the desire of the peoples for

peace, and that by the resentment thus aroused a new path to

victory would be open to socialism.

Grant, too, that this is overstated, still such a declaration is

significant.

I know it has been said that arbitration is derogatory to

sovereignty. I really fail to see how this can be said in

Germany. Germany has already submitted a great political question

between herself and Spain to arbitration, and the Emperor William

I was himself the arbiter between the United States and Great

Britain in the matter of our northwestern boundary.

Bear in mind again that it is only VOLUNTARY arbitration that is

proposed, and that it will always rest with the German Emperor to

decide what questions he will submit to the tribunal and what he

will not.

It has also been said that arbitration proceedings would give the

enemies of Germany time to put themselves in readiness for war;

but if this be feared in any emergency, the Emperor and his

government are always free to mobilize the German army at once.

As you are aware, what is seriously proposed here now, in the way

of arbitration, is not a tribunal constantly in session, but a

system under which each of the signatory powers shall be free to

choose, for a limited time, from an international court, say two

or more judges who can go to The Hague if their services are

required, but to be paid only while actually in session here;

such payment to be made by the litigating parties.

As to the machinery, the plan is that there shall be a dignified

body composed of the diplomatic representatives of the various

signatory powers, to sit at The Hague, presided over by the

Netherlands minister of foreign affairs, and to select and to

control such secretaries and officers as may be necessary for the

ordinary conduct of affairs.

Such council would receive notice from powers having differences

with each other which are willing to submit the questions between

them to a court, and would then give notice to the judges

selected by the parties. The whole of the present plan, except

some subordinate features of little account, which can easily be

stricken out, is voluntary. There is nothing whatever obligatory

about it. Every signatory power is free to resort to such a

tribunal or not, as it may think best. Surely a concession like

this may well be made to the deep and wide sentiment throughout

the world in favor of some possible means of settling

controversies between nations other than by bloodshed.

Pardon me for earnestly pressing upon you these facts and

considerations. I beg that you will not consider me as going

beyond my province. I present them to you as man to man, not only

in the interest of good relations between Germany and the United

States, but of interests common to all the great nations of the

earth,--of their common interest in giving something like

satisfaction to a desire so earnest and wide-spread as that which

has been shown in all parts of the world for arbitration.

I remain, dear Baron von Bulow,

Most respectfully and sincerely yours,

(Sgd.) ANDREW D. WHITE.

P. S. Think how easily, if some such tribunal existed, your

government and mine could refer to it the whole mass of minor

questions which our respective parliamentary bodies have got

control of, and entangled in all sorts of petty prejudices and

demagogical utterances; for instance, Samoa, the tonnage dues,

the sugar-bounty question, the most-favored-nation clause, etc.,

etc., which keep the two countries constantly at loggerheads. Do

you not see that submission of such questions to such a tribunal

as is now proposed, so far from being derogatory to sovereignty,

really relieves the sovereign and the Foreign Office of the most

vexatious fetters and limitations of parliamentarianism. It is

not at all unlikely that such a court would decide in your favor;

and if so, every thoughtful American would say, "Well and good;

it appears that, in spite of all the speeches in Congress, we

were wrong." And the matter would then be ended with the

good-will of all parties.

(Sgd.) A.D.W.

It is indeed a crisis in the history of the conference, and

perhaps in the history of Germany. I can only hope that Bulow

will give careful attention to the considerations which Munster

and myself press upon him.

Later in the day Sir Julian Pauncefote called, evidently much

vexed that the sitting of the subcommittee had been deferred, and

even more vexed since he had learned from De Staal the real

reason. He declared that he was opposed to stringing out the

conference much longer; that the subcommittee could get along

perfectly well without Dr. Zorn; that if Germany did not wish to

come in, she could keep out; etc., etc. He seemed to forget that

Germany's going out means the departure of Austria and Italy, to

say nothing of one or two minor powers, and therefore the

bringing to naught of the conference. I did not think it best to

say anything about Molls's departure, but soothed him as much as

I could by dwelling on the success of his proposal that the

permanent council here shall be composed of the resident

diplomatic representatives.

The other members of our commission, and especially President

Low, were at first very much opposed to Dr. Holls's going, on the

ground that it might be considered an interference in a matter

pertaining to Germany; but I persisted in sending him, agreeing

to take all the responsibility, and declaring that he should go

simply as a messenger from me, as the American ambassador at

Berlin, to the imperial minister of foreign affairs.

June 17.

The morning was given largely to completing my draft of our

memorial to the conference regarding the immunity of private

property in time of war from seizure on the high seas.

In the afternoon drove to Scheveningen to make sundry official

visits, and in the evening to the great festival given by the

Netherlands Government to the conference.

Its first feature was a series of tableaux representing some of

the most famous pictures in the Dutch galleries the most

successful of all being Rembrandt's "Night Watch." Jan Steen's

"Wedding Party" was also very beautiful. Then came peasant dances

given, in the midst of the great hall, by persons in the costumes

of all the different provinces. These were characteristic and

interesting, some of them being wonderfully quaint.

The violinist of the late King, Johannes Wolff, played some solos

in a masterly way.

The music by the great military band, especially the hymn of

William of Nassau and the Dutch and Russian national anthems, was

splendidly rendered, and the old Dutch provincial music played in

connection with the dances and tableaux was also noteworthy.

It was an exceedingly brilliant assemblage, and the whole

festival from first to last a decided success.

June 18, Sunday.

Went to Leyden to attend service at St. Peter's. Both the church

and its monuments are interesting. Visited also the church of St.

Pancras, a remarkable specimen of Gothic architecture, and looked

upon the tomb of Van der Werf, the brave burgomaster who defended

the town against the Spaniards during the siege.

At the university I was much interested in the public hall where

degrees are conferred, and above all in the many portraits of

distinguished professors. Lingered next in the botanical gardens

back of the university, which are very beautiful.

Then to the Museum of Antiquities, which is remarkably rich in

Egyptian and other monuments. Roman art is also very fully

represented.

Thence home, and, on arriving, found, of all men in the world,

Thomas B. Reed, Speaker of our House of Representatives. Mr.

Newel, our minister, took us both for a drive to Scheveningen,

and Mr. Reed's conversation was exceedingly interesting; he is

well read in history and, apparently, in every field of English

literature. There is a bigness, a heartiness, a shrewdness, and a

genuineness about him which greatly attract me.

June 19.

Called on M. de Staal to show him Holls's telegram from Berlin,

which is encouraging. De Staal thinks that we may have to give up

the tenth section of the arbitration plan, which includes

obligatory arbitration in sundry minor matters; but while I shall

be very sorry to see this done, we ought to make the sacrifice if

it will hold Germany, Italy, and Austria to us.

A little later received a hearty telegram from the Secretary of

State authorizing our ordering the wreath of silver and gold and

placing it on the tomb of Grotius. Telegraphed and wrote Major

Allen at Berlin full directions on the subject. I am determined

that the tribute shall be worthy of our country, of its object,

and of the occasion.

In the afternoon took Speaker Reed, with his wife and daughter,

through the "House in the Wood," afterward through the grounds,

which are more beautiful than ever, and then to Delft, where we

visited the tombs of William the Silent and Grotius, and finally

the house in which William was assassinated. It was even more

interesting to me than during either of my former visits, and was

evidently quite as interesting to Mr. Reed.

At six attended a long meeting of the American delegation, which

elaborated the final draft of our communication to M. de Staal on

the immunity of private property on the high seas. Various

passages were stricken out, some of them--and, indeed, one of the

best--in deference to the ideas of Captain Mahan, who, though he

is willing, under instructions from the government, to join in

presenting the memorial, does not wish to sign anything which can

possibly be regarded as indicating a personal belief in the

establishment of such immunity. His is the natural view of a

sailor; but the argument with which he supports it does not at

all convince me. It is that during war we should do everything

possible to weaken and worry the adversary, in order that he may

be the sooner ready for peace; but this argument proves too much,

since it would oblige us, if logically carried out, to go back to

the marauding and atrocities of the Thirty Years' War.

June 20.

Went to the session of one of the committees at the "House in the

Wood," and showed Mr. van Karnebeek our private-property

memorial, which he read, and on which he heartily complimented

us.

I then made known to him our proposal to lay a wreath on the tomb

of Grotius, and with this he seemed exceedingly pleased, saying

that the minister of foreign affairs, M. de Beaufort, would be

especially delighted, since he is devoted to the memory of

Grotius, and delivered the historical address when the statue in

front of the great church at Delft was unveiled.

A little later submitted the memorial; as previously agreed upon,

to Count Munster, who also approved it.

Holls telegraphs me from Berlin that he has been admirably

received by the chancellor, Prince Hohenlohe, and by Baron von

Bulow, and that he is leaving for Hamburg to see the Emperor.

At four P.M. to a meeting of the full conference to receive

report on improvements and extension of the Red Cross rules, etc.

This was adopted in a happy-go-lucky unparliamentary way, for the

eminent diplomatist who presides over the conference still

betrays a Russian lack of acquaintance with parliamentary

proceedings. So begins the first full movement of the conference

in the right direction; and it is a good beginning.

Walked home through the beautiful avenues of the park with Mr.

van Karnebeek and Baron d'Estournelles, who is also a charming

man. He has been a minister plenipotentiary, but is now a member

of the French Chamber of Deputies and of the conference.

June 21.

Early in the morning received a report from Holls, who arrived

from Hamburg late last night. His talks with Bulow and Prince

Hohenlohe had been most encouraging. Bulow has sent to the

Emperor my long private letter to himself, earnestly urging the

acceptance by Germany of our plan of arbitration. Prince

Hohenlohe seems to have entered most cordially into our ideas,

giving Holls a card which would admit him to the Emperor, and

telegraphing a request that his Majesty see him. But the Emperor

was still upon his yacht, at sea, and Holls could stay no longer.

Bulow is trying to make an appointment for him to meet the

Emperor at the close of the week.

Early in the afternoon went with Minister Newel and Mr. Low to

call on M. de Beaufort regarding plans for the Grotius

celebration, on July 4, at Delft. It was in general decided that

we should have the ceremony in the great church at eleven o

'clock, with sundry speeches, and that at half-past twelve the

American delegation should give a luncheon to all the invited

guests in the town hall opposite.

Holls tells me that last night, at the dinner of the president of

the Austrian delegation, he met Munster, who said to him, "I can

get along with Hohenlohe, and also with Bulow, but not with those

d--d lawyers in the Foreign Office" ("Mit Hohenlohe kann ich

auskommen, mit Bulow auch, aber mit diesen verdammten Juristen im

Auswartigen Amt, nicht.").

June 22.

Up at four o'clock and at ten attended a session of the first

section at the "House in the Wood." Very interesting were the

discussions regarding bullets and asphyxiating bombs. As to the

former, Sir John Ardagh of the British delegation repelled

earnestly the charges made regarding the British bullets used in

India, and offered to substitute for the original proposal one

which certainly would be much more effective in preventing

unnecessary suffering and death; but the Russians seemed glad to

score a point against Great Britain, and Sir John's proposal was

voted down, its only support being derived from our own

delegation. Captain Crozier, our military delegate, took an

active part in supporting Sir John Ardagh, but the majority

against us was overwhelming.

As to asphyxiating bombs, Captain Mahan spoke at length against

the provision to forbid them: his ground being that not the

slightest thing had yet been done looking to such an invention;

that, even if there had been, their use would not be so bad as

the use of torpedoes against ships of war; that asphyxiating men

by means of deleterious gases was no worse than asphyxiating them

with water; indeed, that the former was the less dangerous of the

two, since the gases used might simply incapacitate men for a

short time, while the blowing up of a ship of war means death to

all or nearly all of those upon it.

To this it was answered--and, as it seemed to me, with

force--that asphyxiating bombs might be used against towns for

the destruction of vast numbers of non-combatants, including

women and children, while torpedoes at sea are used only against

the military and naval forces of the enemy. The original proposal

was carried by a unanimous vote, save ours. I am not satisfied

with our attitude on this question; but what can a layman do when

he has against him the foremost contemporary military and naval

experts? My hope is that the United States will yet stand with

the majority on the record.

I stated afterward in a bantering way to Captain Mahan, as well

as others, that while I could not support any of the arguments

that had been made in favor of allowing asphyxiating bombs, there

was one which somewhat appealed to me--namely, that the dread of

them might do something to prevent the rush of the rural

population to the cities, and the aggregation of the poorer

classes in them, which is one of the most threatening things to

modern society, and also a second argument that such bombs would

bring home to warlike stay-at-home orators and writers the

realities of war.

At noon received the French translation of our memorial to De

Staal, but found it very imperfect throughout, and in some parts

absolutely inadmissible; so I worked with Baron de Bildt,

president of the Swedish delegation here, all the afternoon in

revising it.

At six the American delegation met and chose me for their orator

at the approaching Grotius festival at Delft. I naturally feel

proud to discharge a duty of this kind, and can put my heart into

it, for Grotius has long been to me almost an object of idolatry,

and his main works a subject of earnest study. There are few men

in history whom I so deeply venerate. Twenty years ago, when

minister at Berlin, I sent an eminent American artist to Holland

and secured admirable copies of the two best portraits of the

great man. One of these now hangs in the Law Library of Cornell

University, and the other over my work-table at the Berlin

Embassy.

June 23.

At work all the morning on letters and revising final draft of

memorial on immunity of private property at sea, and lunched

afterward at the "House in the Wood" to talk it over with Baron

de Bildt.

At the same table met M. de Martens, who has just returned by

night to his work here, after presiding a day or two over the

Venezuela arbitration tribunal at Paris. He told me that Sir

Richard Webster, in opening the case, is to speak for sixteen

days, and De Martens added that he himself had read our entire

Venezuelan report, as well as the other documents on the subject

which form quite a large library. And yet we do not include men

like him in "the working-classes"!

In the evening to a reception at the house of M. de Beaufort,

minister of foreign affairs, and was cordially greeted by him and

his wife, both promising that they would accept our invitation to

Delft. I took in to the buffet the wife of the present Dutch

prime minister, who also expressed great interest in our

proposal, and declared her intention of being present.

Count Zanini, the Italian minister and delegate here, gave me a

comical account of two speeches in the session of the first

section this morning; one being by a delegate from Persia, Mirza

Riza Khan, who is minister at St. Petersburg. His Persian

Excellency waxed eloquent over the noble qualities of the Emperor

of Russia, and especially over his sincerity as shown by the fact

that when his Excellency tumbled from his horse at a review, his

Majesty sent twice to inquire after his health. The whole effect

upon the conference was to provoke roars of laughter.

But the great matter of the day was the news, which has not yet

been made public, that Prince Hohenlohe, the German chancellor,

has come out strongly for the arbitration tribunal, and has sent

instructions here accordingly. This is a great gain, and seems to

remove one of the worst stumbling-blocks. But we will have to pay

for this removal, probably, by giving up section 10 of the

present plan, which includes a system of obligatory arbitration

in various minor matters,--a system which would be of use to the

world in many ways. While the American delegation, as stated in

my letter which Holls took to Bulow, and which has been forwarded

to the Emperor, will aid in throwing out of the arbitration plan

everything of an obligatory nature, if Germany insists upon it, I

learn that the Dutch Government is much opposed to this

concession, and may publicly protest against it.

A curious part of the means used in bringing about this change of

opinion was the pastoral letter, elsewhere referred to, issued by

the Protestant Episcopal bishop of Texas, calling for prayers

throughout the State for the success of the conference in its

efforts to diminish the horrors of war. This pastoral letter, to

which I referred in my letter to Minister von Bulow, I intrusted

to Holls, authorizing him to use it as he thought fit. He showed

it to Prince Hohenlohe, and the latter, although a Roman

Catholic, was evidently affected by it, and especially by the

depth and extent of the longing for peace which it showed. It is

perhaps an interesting example of an indirect "answer to prayer,"

since it undoubtedly strengthened the feelings in the prince

chancellor's mind which led him to favor arbitration.

June 24.

Sent to M. de Staal, as president of the conference, the memorial

relating to the exemption of private property, not contraband of

war, from capture on the high seas. Devoted the morning to

blocking out my Grotius address, and afterward drove with Holls

to Delft to look over the ground for our Fourth-of-July festival.

The town hall is interesting and contains, among other portraits,

one which is evidently a good likeness of Grotius; the only

difficulty is that, for our intended luncheon, the rooms, though

beautiful, seem inadequate.

Thence to the church, and after looking over that part of it near

the monuments, with reference to the Grotius ceremony, went into

the organ-loft with the organist. There I listened for nearly an

hour while he and Holls played finely on that noble instrument;

and as I sat and looked down over the church and upon the distant

monuments, the old historic scenes of four hundred years ago came

up before me, with memories almost overpowering of my first visit

thirty-five years ago. And all then with me are now dead.

June 25.

At nine in the morning off with Holls to Rotterdam, and on

arriving took the tram through the city to the steamboat wharf,

going thence by steamer to Dort. Arrived, just before the close

of service, at the great church where various sessions of the

synod were held. The organ was very fine; the choir-stalls, where

those wretched theologians wrangled through so many sessions and

did so much harm to their own country and others, were the only

other fine things in the church, and they were much dilapidated.

I could not but reflect bitterly on the monstrous evils provoked

by these men who sat so long there spinning a monstrous theology

to be substituted for the teachings of Christ himself.

Thence back to The Hague and to Scheveningen, and talked over

conference matters with Count Munster. Received telegrams from

Count von Bulow in answer to mine congratulating him on his

promotion, also one from Baron von Mumm, the German minister at

Luxemburg, who goes temporarily to Washington.

June 26.

At work all the morning on my Grotius address Lunched at the

"House in the Wood," and walked to town with sundry delegates. In

the afternoon went to a "tea" at the house of Madame Boreel and

met a number of charming people; but the great attraction was the

house, which is that formerly occupied by John De Witt--that from

which he went to prison and to assassination. Here also Motley

lived, and I was shown the room in which a large part of his

history was written, and where Queen Sophia used to discuss Dutch

events and personages with him.

The house is beautiful, spacious, and most charmingly decorated,

many of the ornaments and paintings having been placed there in

the time of De Witt.

June 27.

At all sorts of work during the morning, and then, on invitation

of President Low, went with the other members of the delegation

to Haarlem, where we saw the wonderful portraits by Frans Hals,

which impressed me more than ever, and heard the great organ. It

has been rebuilt since I was there thirty-five years ago; but it

is still the same great clumsy machine, and very poorly

played,--that is, with no spirit, and without any effort to

exhibit anything beyond the ordinary effects for which any little

church organ would do as well.

In the evening dined with Count Zanini, the Italian minister and

delegate, and discussed French matters with Baron d'Estournelles.

He represents the best type of French diplomatist, and is in

every way attractive.

Afterward to Mr. van Karnebeek's reception, meeting various

people in a semi-satisfactory way.

June 29.

In the morning, in order to work off the beginnings of a

headache, I went to Rotterdam and walked until noon about the

streets and places, recalling my former visit, which came very

vividly before me as I gazed upon the statue of Erasmus, and

thought upon his life here. No man in history has had more

persistent injustice done him. If my life were long enough I

would gladly use my great collection of Erasmiana in illustrating

his services to the world. To say nothing of other things, the

modern "Higher Criticism" has its roots in his work.

June 30.

Engaged on the final revision of my Grotius speech, and on

various documents.

At noon to the "House in the Wood" for lunch, and afterward took

a walk in the grounds with Beldiman, the Roumanian delegate, who

explained to me the trouble in Switzerland over the vote on the

Red Cross Conference.

It appears that whereas Switzerland initiated the Red Cross

movement, has ever since cherished it, and has been urged by

Italy and other powers to take still further practical measures

for it, the Dutch delegation recently interposed, secured for one

of their number the presidency of the special conference, and

thus threw out my Berlin colleague, Colonel Roth, who had been

previously asked to take the position and had accepted it, with

the result that the whole matter has been taken out of the hands

of Switzerland, where it justly belonged, and put under the care

of the Netherlands. This has provoked much ill feeling in

Switzerland, and there is especial astonishment at the fact that

when Beldiman moved an amendment undoing this unjust arrangement

it was, by some misunderstanding lost, and that therefore there

has been perpetuated what seems much like an injustice against

Switzerland. I promised to exert myself to have the matter

rectified so far as the American delegation was concerned, and

later was successful in doing so.

In the evening dined at Minister Newel's. Sat between Minister

Okolicsanyi of the Austrian delegation, and Count Welsersheimb,

the chairman of that delegation, and had interesting talks with

them, with the Duke of Tetuan, and others. It appears that the

Duke, who is a very charming, kindly man, has, like myself, a

passion both for cathedral architecture and for organ music; he

dwelt much upon Burgos, which he called the gem of Spanish

cathedrals.

Thence to the final reception at the house of M. de Beaufort,

minister of foreign affairs, who showed me a contemporary

portrait of Grotius which displays the traits observable in the

copies which Burleigh painted for me twenty years ago at

Amsterdam and Leyden. Talked with Sir Julian Pauncefote regarding

the Swiss matter; he had abstained from voting for the reason

that he had no instructions in the premises.

July 2.

In the morning Major Allen, military attache of our embassy at

Berlin, arrived, bringing the Grotius wreath. Under Secretary

Hay's permission, I had given to one of the best Berlin

silversmiths virtually carte blanche, and the result is most

satisfactory. The wreath is very large, being made up, on one

side, of a laurel branch with leaves of frosted silver and

berries of gold, and, on the other, of an oak branch with silver

leaves and gold acorns, both boughs being tied together at the

bottom by a large knot of ribbon in silver gilded, bearing the

arms of the Netherlands and the United States on enameled

shields, and an inscription as follows:

To the Memory of HUGO GROTIUS;

In Reverence and Gratitude,

From the United States of America;

On the Occasion of the International Peace Conference

of The Hague.

July 4th, 1899.

It is a superb piece of work, and its ebony case, with silver

clasps, and bearing a silver shield with suitable inscription, is

also perfect: the whole thing attracts most favorable attention.

CHAPTER XLIX