Chapter V offer. Article recognizing the right to refuse the offer of Refusal of the good offices and mediation in terms, and stating that a refusal should not be considered as an unfriendly act. Although the correctness of his point of view was fully recognized, the Committee on Arbitration did not deem it wise or necessary to provide for such an eventuality in the very text of the Convention. The importance of the spontaneous offer of good offices and mediation on the part of a third Power will be recognized, when the difficulty is realized with which States, in controversy, or after the exchange of severe diplomatic notes, can ever be brought to an agreement regarding a joint recourse to some mediating Power. Unfortunately such an attempt has hitherto been surrounded by so many obstacles, that Powers who are most sincerely desirous of helping to safeguard the interests of peace are driven to content themselves with complete inaction. Under these circumstances, it seems most important to recognize in advance, and without ambiguity, in a Convention expressing the judgment of all, the exact status in International Law of useful efforts in this direction. In this manner, mutual good will is encouraged, and estrangement, by reason of an offer in the interests of peace, will be avoided. The limitation in the Article "so far as circumstances may allow " again. indicates that there is no intention to encourage inopportune intervention. In other words, a precise The fact is, that hardly any definition is more difficult in that case. knowledge of the facts and saving common sense are Chapter V recognized as being not less important and necessary than a desire for peace. Upon the motion of Count Nigra the second paragraph giving the right to extend good offices or mediation even during the course of hostilities was inserted, and the same statesman was the author of the last paragraph, which is in the nature of a guarantee to Powers disposed to interest themselves on behalf of general peace, that in no event shall the expression of their good will be regarded in the International Law of the future as unfriendly, or lead to unpleasant complications. ARTICLE 4. The part of the mediator consists in Duty of the reconciling the opposing claims and in appeasing the mediator. feelings of resentment which may have arisen between the States at variance. ARTICLE 5. The functions of the mediator are at when funcan end from the moment when it is declared either tions cease. by one of the parties to the dispute or by the mediating power itself, that the methods of conciliation proposed by it are not accepted. The function of the Power offering good offices or mediation, and the relations in which the very offer may leave all parties concerned, may be so indefinite that it becomes important to provide a method for immediately ending all possible doubt upon the subject. By leaving it within the power of either party concerned, or of the mediating State, to declare the exact time at which all further efforts shall cease, Chapter V Advisory character of good offices and media tion. No interruption of preparations of war, or of hostilities. this point would seem to have been sufficiently safeguarded. ARTICLE 6. Good offices and mediation, whether at the request of the parties at variance or upon the initiative of Powers who are strangers to the dispute, have exclusively the character of advice, and never have binding force. This Article emphasizes the most essential characteristic of good offices and mediation, namely, that of being simply advisory. Mediation is not arbitration, nor can it be in the nature of an intervention backed up by any physical force whatever. The proceeding which has heretofore been called "armed mediation" was improperly so named. According to the present convention the two terms "mediation' and "coercion" are absolutely contradictory. It was particularly stated and emphasized that no possible authority or right could arise under this title for any kind of hegemony or suzerainty, or the attempt to impose individual or collective views by way of obligation or restraint. Mediation must forever remain a friendly counsel, freely offered or asked, and as freely accepted or declined. ARTICLE 7. The acceptance of mediation cannot, unless there be an agreement to the contrary, have the effect of interrupting, delaying, or hindering mobilization or other measures of preparation for war. If mediation occurs after the commencement of hostilities, it causes no interruption of the military operations in progress, unless there be an agreement to the contrary. This Article, of which Count Nigra is the author, Chapter V seemed necessary in order to make the in order to make the acceptance of good offices or mediation easy, or even possible, on the part of Powers having universal military service, and being ready for war at very short notice. No such Power could safely request or accept good offices or mediation if such a request or acceptance implied the slightest obligation to refrain from immediate and continued preparation for war. Moreover, even if the obligation to refrain from such preparations were mutual, the impossibility of control might easily lead to recriminations which would still further embitter feelings, complicate the situation, and increase instead of diminishing the danger of hostilities. Mediation will be all the more acceptable when it is totally dissociated from any fear of impaired defence or of danger to the State. SPECIAL MEDIATION ARTICLE 8. The Signatory Powers are agreed in recommending the application, when circumstances allow, of special mediation in the following form: — In case of a serious difference endangering peace, the States at variance shall each choose a Power to whom they intrust the mission of entering into direct communication with the Power chosen by the other side, with the object of preventing the rupture of pacific relations. During the period of this mandate, the term of which, unless otherwise stipulated, cannot exceed thirty days, the States in conflict shall cease from all direct communication on the subject of the dispute, which shall be regarded as having been re Chapter V M. de ferred exclusively to the mediating Powers, who shall use their best efforts to settle the controversy. In case of a definite rupture of pacific relations these Powers remain charged with the joint duty of taking advantage of every opportunity to restore peace. At the second session of the Comité d'Examen, May 29, the first draft of this Article was introduced by Mr. Holls of the United States, as a personal proposition, for which neither his Government nor his colleagues were in any manner responsible. No claim, whatever, is made for originality of the idea, which the author remembers to have seen made as a suggestion, years ago, in a source of which no trace whatever has been left in his recollection. More recently the idea was formulated with great force by M. de Nelidoff, the Russian Ambassador to Italy, as follows: "The first consideration is not to insist upon the suggestion. parties submitting their dispute to the judgment of a tribunal-possibly impartial, but cold and indifferent, and moved only by the most general considerations regarding the interests or the honor of the parties themselves. What should be done is to insist that, before beginning hostilities, the contending parties should intrust the settlement of the affair to representatives in whom they can have absolute confidence who will act according to instructions, and who will each defend the honor of his principal as he would his own. Everything should then be left to these seconds. They should first decide whether |