in Spain an outbreak of popular violence, which was marked by attacks on the German embassy and the German consulate at Madid. In order to avert hostilities between the two countries Prince Bismarck proposed the submission of the matter to the mediation of the Pope. This proposal the Spanish Government accepted, and on October 22, 1885, the Pope, as mediator, presented to the two governments certain propositions by which the sovereignty of Spain over the Caroline and Pelew islands was confirmed, but by which Germany acquired exceptional commercial rights, together with the right to establish a naval station and a coal depot in the islands. His Holiness advised that his propositions should be embodied by Germany and Spain in a protocol, which should follow the form of that concluded at Madrid on March 7, 1885, between Germany, Great Britain, and Spain in relation to the Sulu archipelago. Such a protocol was signed at Rome December 17, 1885, by the German and Spanish ambassadors. For. Rel. 1886, 776. Moore, Int. Arbitrations, V. 5043-5046. The Guatemalan minister at Washington having expressed a desire for the friendly offices and moral influence of the United States to prevent a "war for conquest" by Mexico, the American minister at Mexico was instructed to "tender good offices in favor of peace with honor between American republics, and deprecate unnecessary war." Mr. Bayard, Sec. of State, to Mr. Morgan, tel., April 11, 1885, MS. Inst. "For some years past a growing disposition has been manifested by certain states of Central and South America to refer disputes affecting grave questions of international relationship and boundaries to arbitration rather than to the sword. It has been, on several such occasions, a source of profound satisfaction to the Government of the United States to see that this country is, in a large measure, looked to by all the American powers as their friend and mediator. The just and impartial counsel of the President in such cases has never been withheld, and his efforts have been rewarded by the prevention of sanguinary strife or angry contentions between peoples whom we regard as brethren." Mr. Blaine, Sec. of State, to Mr. Morgan, Nov. 29, 1881, MS. Inst. Art. I. of the treaty between the United States and Corea, of May 22, 1882, provides that "if other powers deal unjustly or oppressively with either Government, the other will exert their good offices, on H. Doc. 551-vol 7-2 being informed of the case, to bring about an amicable arrangement, thus showing their friendly feelings." In June, 1894, the Corean minister at Washington, under instructions of his government, represented that its independence was seriously menaced by the action of China and Japan, and invoked the interposition of the United States. The United States tendered its good offices, but the precipitation of hostilities between China and Japan defeated this purpose. Mr. Gresham, Sec. of State, to Mr. Bayard, ambass. to England, No. 28, July 20, 1894, For. Rel. 1894, App. I. 36; President Cleveland, annual message, Dec. 3, 1894. July 9, 1894, Mr. Gresham telegraphed to Mr. Sill, American min. at Seoul, that the United States could not intervene forcibly. (For. Rel. 1894, App. I. 31.) Oct. 12, 1894, Mr. Gresham wrote to a Mr. Goschen, British chargé, that while the President earnestly desired "that China and Japan shall speedily agree upon terms of peace alike honorable to both, and not humiliating to Korea, he can not join England, Germany, Russia, and France in an intervention, as requested." (For. Rel. 1894, App. I. 70.) (3) TO END WAR. § 1067. In 1838, the Government of the United States instructed its minister at Paris to acquaint the French Government with the readiness of the President to afford his assistance in any form in which it might appear likely to prove beneficial for the purpose of bringing an end to the controversy then existing between France and Mexico. The President, it was stated, would feel no delicacy in tendering his good offices for that purpose, if he were not precluded from the adoption of any specific steps by a report that the British Government had offered its mediation. Mr. Vail, Act. Sec. of State, to Mr. Cass, min. to France, No. 30, Oct. A similar communication was addressed to the American minister in "Our minister to China, in obedience to his instructions, has remained perfectly neutral in the war between Great Britain and France and the Chinese Empire, although, in conjunction with the Russian minister, he was ever ready and willing, had the opportunity offered, to employ his good offices in restoring peace between the parties. It is but an act of simple justice, both to our present minister and his predecessor, to state that they have proved fully equal to the delicate, trying, and responsible positions in which they have on different occasions been placed." President Buchanan, annual message, Dec. 3, 1860, Richardson's Messages, June 15, 1861, Lord Lyons, British minister, and M. Mercier, French minister at Washington, called on Mr. Seward, and proposed each to read an instruction which he had received from his Government and to leave a copy of it, if desired. Mr. Seward, before consenting that the papers should be officially communicated to him, inquired as to their contents, and, after inspecting them, he " declined to hear them read, or to receive official notice of them." "The British Government while declining, out of regard to our natural sensibility, to propose mediation for the settlement of the differences which now unhappily divide the American people, have nevertheless expressed, in a very proper manner, their willingness to undertake the kindly duty of mediation, if we should desire it. The President expects you to say on this point to the British Government, that we appreciate this generous and friendly demonstration; but that we can not solicit or accept mediation from any, even the most friendly quarter." Mr. Seward, Sec. of State, to Mr. Adams, min. to England, No. 21, June See supra, § 911; S. Ex. Doc. 38, 37 Cong. 3 sess.; 55 Br. & For. State In the war between Spain and the republics on the west coast of South America in 1865-66, the United States "seeks the friendship of neither at the cost of unfairness or concealment in its communications to the other. We have tendered our own good offices to each. They have not been accepted. We have concurred in a suggestion that the merits if these unhappy controversies should be referred to the Emperor of Russia. We are quite willing to see Great Britain and France undertake the task of mediation. We will favor that or any other mediation the parties may be inclined to adopt. We seek no acknowledgments or concessions from either party as an equivalent for impartiality and friendship.” Mr. Seward, Sec. of State, to Mr. Hale, Oct. 27, 1866, MS. Inst. Spain XV. 582. See same to same, Dec. 20, 1866, inclosing mediating action of House of Representatives, and making specific proposals of mediation; and see, also, same to same, Feb. 25, 1867, Aug. 27, 1868. One of the most remarkable mediations of the United States is that which was begun in 1866 and concluded in 1872 for the purpose of bringing to a close the war between Spain, on the one hand, and the allied republics of Peru, Chile, Bolivia, and Ecuador on the other. As early as December 20, 1866, Mr. Seward instructed the diplomatic representatives of the United States near the belligerent governments to propose that a conference should be held at Washington. Spain was willing to accept the proposal on certain conditions. Bolivia and Ecuador were disposed to do whatever Chile and Peru might agree upon. Chile and Peru were willing to accept only on certain conditions, one of which was that Spain should acknowledge that the bombardment of Valparaiso was a violation of international law. This Spain refused to do, and Mr. Seward's first effort was thus unsuccessful; but, as the war itself eventually fell into a state of "technical continuance," he renewed his proposals on March 27, 1868. Spain substantially accepted. Chile thought that the conclusion of a definitive peace would be impossible, but intimated a readiness to enter into a truce, which would offer to neutrals all the guarantees and securities which they could properly claim. Bolivia concurred in Chile's views; Peru and Ecuador were disposed to accept unreservedly. On October 22, 1869, Mr. Fish, as Secretary of State, renewed the invitation for a conference. Such a conference was opened at the Department of State October 29, 1870, under the presidency of Mr. Fish. Owing to the question as to the bombardment of Valparaiso, it was found to be impossible to conclude a formal peace; but on April 11, 1871, the delegates in the conference agreed upon and signed an armistice by which the de facto suspension of hostilities between the belligerents was "converted into a general armistice or truce," which was to “continue indefinitely," and could not be broken by any of the belligerents "save in three years after having expressly and explicitly notified the other," through the Government of the United States, "of its intention to renew hostilities;" and it was provided that, during the continuance of the armistice, all restrictions on neutral commerce which were incident to a state of war should cease. See, more fully, Moore, Int. Arbitrations V. 5048-5056. The conference reassembled January 24, 1872, but adjourned on the same See, also, Mr. Seward, Sec. of State, to Mr. Robinson, min. to Peru, No. between that country and Spain had been exchanged. This intelligence was "received with much gratification." (Mr. Bayard, Sec. of State, to Mr. Flores, July 31, 1886, MS. Notes to Ecuador, I. 99.) Separate treaties of peace were previously concluded by Spain with Peru and Bolivia. (Moore, Int. Arbitrations, V. 5056.) "A pressure upon the belligerents to secure their acceptance of the good offices of the United States for the attainment of peace would prove impracticable; and even if it were practicable, I can not think it would be expedient. If our proposition is a beneficent one, as we suppose, it may be expected to commend itself to favor. If not beneficent, it ought to be rejected. In either case our high responsibility is discharged." Mr. Seward, Sec. of State, to Mr. Asboth, No. 28, April 1, 1867, MS. Inst. "Washburne telegraphs that France requests United States to join other powers in effort for peace. Uniform policy and true interest of United States not to join European powers in interference in European questions. President strongly desires to see war arrested and blessings of peace restored. If Germany also desires to have good offices of United States interposed, President will be glad to contribute all aid in his power to secure restoration of peace between the two great powers now at war, and with whom United States has so many traditions of friendship. Ascertain if North Germany desires such offices, but without making the tender thereof unless assured they will be accepted." Mr. Fish, Sec. of State, to Mr. Bancroft, min. to Prussia, tel., Sept. 9, See, also, Mr. Fish, Sec. of State, to Mr. Washburne, min, to France, tel., Sir Edward Thornton, writing to Earl Granville, September 12, 1870, reported that on the preceding day Mr. Fish, in a conversation at his own house, stated that Mr. Washburne had been requested by the French minister of foreign affairs to ask whether the United States would be disposed to mediate conjointly with the European power for the restoration of peace between North Germany and France. Mr. Fish, by direction of the President, had instructed Mr. Wa-hburne that it was contrary to the traditional policy of the United States to intervene in the affairs of Europe, and that the Government was therefore precluded from offering mediation conjointly with the European powers. In this particular case, said Mr. Fish, it was the more impossible for the United States to interfere, because it was a question of dynasty which had been the origin of the war and in which the United States could take no part. But Mr. Washburne |