had closed with a great display of activity among the friends of silver. In the preparations for the coming Presidential Election, the advocates of free coinage had been showing their strength, both in the Republican and the Democratic camp.

The evils he pointed out were left without remedy, and new financial difficulties arose; but before concluding the account of his administration up to the autumn of 1896, some space must be given to a new line of policy adopted in December last, which he announced shortly after the opening of the new Congress. On Tuesday, the 17th December, he sent a message to Congress which not only aroused keen interest throughout the Union, but made him famous in countries where American Presidents had rarely been heard of. Up to this time, he was known as the fearless champion of law and public integrity. Acts of Congress were not to him advertisements of particular opinions, but assertions of principle binding on the community. He insisted that they should be definite and practical, and should be faithfully administered. Schemes for the aggrandizement of individuals, or of localities, at the expense of the public, he resisted, absolutely indifferent whether they came from one party or the other. He had been hitherto known to his countrymen as the inexorable enemy of the political jobber. Suddenly he appeared before the world on this Tuesday evening as the founder of a new foreign policy.

CHAPTER XIII.

FOREIGN RELATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES.

Washington's injunction

Popular desire for a foreign policyAmerican diplomatists-The Keiley dispute-Hawaiian Revolution Mr. Cleveland withdraws Annexation Treaty The Blount inquiry - Public sentiment as to "Monarchic Government"Senator Morgan-Cuba.

THE

HE struggle made by Mr. Cleveland to promote financial and fiscal reforms; the unflinching spirit in which he endeavoured to apply the old principles of Democratic policy to the complex life of the vast community which has grown up within the last sixty years, seem topics sufficient to fill this small volume. The Venezuela Message, however, has attracted so much attention to the foreign relations of the Union, that it is necessary to give some account of this side of American policy. Washington's famous injunction to avoid entangling alliances with other Powers has been hitherto regarded as the Alpha and Omega of the external policy of the Republic, and to this celebrated utterance Mr. Cleveland has more than once appealed. As the country grew in wealth and population, there gradually sprang up a widespread desire that American citizens should have their part in those excitements

which, owing to hereditary animosities, to frontier disputes, to intersecting waves of population, and limited territory, the older nations enjoy in great abundance. This feeling is active among the great multitude of well-to-do Americans who travel in Europe and other parts of the world, and are not content that their country should be without a share of the interests which occupy the minds of Europeans. The existence of such tendencies encourages some study of international relations: and accordingly, for many years past, a large portion of the time of Congress, particularly in the Senate, has been given up to discussions upon the affairs of other nations. This habit is agreeable to the self-esteem of the Senators. It is an opportunity for flights of eloquence; it compromises no one, and suggests a number of topics to the local orators throughout the country. Disquisitions on foreign affairs are exceedingly vague, and generally without any distinct aim or political result. These themes are to ambitious statesmen much what certain classes of securities on the Stock Exchange are to the frequenters of that institution, counters to play with when serious business is not on hand. They amuse the outside public, and may sometimes bring an increase of fame and influence.

Closely connected with this inclination to look at foreign questions from their bearing on the future of individual statesmen, or the chances of securing votes at some election, is the unwillingness to recognize diplomacy as a regular profession. The United States. is the only nation-I do not say of the first rank, but of any international position-which thinks it possible

to dispense with a long course of training for the men who may be charged to conduct correspondence with foreign countries. They vaunt that, as a plain people, the Americans are able to dispense with any service of the kind. Accordingly their Ambassadors and Ministers to Europe are generally retired politicians, with now and again an eminent man of letters. None of them retain their positions long enough to exercise much influence on the relations between European Governments and Washington. There are occasionally notable exceptions -men who have made a special study of European affairs, and whose tact and knowledge inspire confidence," and secure them authority with the governments to which they are accredited. Mr. Charles Francis Adams, at the Court of St. James', Mr. Motley, serving his successive appointments in Germany and Austria, and, in later years, General Meredith Reade, in Athens, are instances of this exceptional class which will at once occur to the mind of the reader. But the prevailing rule is that the Ambassador or Minister is appointed because it suits his convenience or the convenience of the Government that he should find employment abroad, rather than because he possesses any special qualifications for the work.

A curious example of the mode in which these posts are filled occurred in Mr. Cleveland's first year of office. Mr. Keiley was nominated ambassador to Rome, and was about to undertake the duties, when the Italian Government reminded Mr. Bayard that the new ambassador had become notorious in previous years, owing to an unmeasured attack upon the personal character

of King Victor Emmanuel.

King Humbert declined

to receive at his Court the popular assailant of his father. This objection was, of course, insuperable, and Mr. Bayard consoled himself with the idea that the difficulty might be solved by sending the orator to Vienna. Perhaps it was fondly imagined that the animosity of the American diplomatist towards the destroyers of the Temporal Power would evoke a sympathetic welcome from Austrian society. Count Kalnoky, however, objected to receiving an envoy whose presence had been found impossible at the Court of the Emperor of Austria's neighbour and ally. In the course of subsequent semi-official communications, it was incidentally remarked that Mr. Keiley had married a lady of the Hebrew race. This circumstance, it was suggested, might entail social difficulties, in the then state of opinion at Vienna, and make it more agreeable for Mr. Keiley to find a sphere for his abilities elsewhere. The fact was mentioned, rather as one for the consideration of the envoy than as a ground of objection; but the observation was immediately taken advantage of to send Count Kalnoky a lecture on the American Constitution.

Austria was reminded that the Republic is “a government of laws, that religious liberty is the chief corner-stone of the American system of government.” * "The self-respect of a nation of sixty millions of free men" was invoked. In reply to this eloquence, Count Kalnoky remarked, "We do not want Mr. Keiley, and ought we not to be judges for ourselves?"

An Ambassador, according to European notions, is a * House Ex. Docs. 1885-86, vol. i. p. 40.