New-York tribune., 1900-03-14
GOOD OFFICES DECLINED.

1t is announced that the British Government
has declined the tender of the good offices of the
United States for the settlement of the South
African war. 1t does not appear that the offer
was made by this Government upon its own
initiative. 1t was made at the request of the
Boer Government, and amounted to nothing
more than statement that the Boer Govern
ment had requested such mediation. That it
was promptly declined was not in the least sur
prising seeing that the British Government had
in the plainest possible manner long ago an
nounced that it would not at any time admit
any mediation by any Power. Indeed it was
certain from the outset that mediation could not
be admitted. any more than arbitration could be
before the war. To have granted arbitration
then would have been to admit the British case
was falsely grounded To admit mediation now
would be to confess the same 1t would be self
qualification.
1t is obvious too that there can be no offence
in this declination. One nation is always free
to tender its good offices for the settlement of
anothers troubles, and the other Is just as free
to decline the offer. No nation can go about i'm
posing its offices upon Others under penalty of
its displeasure, any more than it can be required
to give its services against its will. The vOlun-
tary principle is essential on both sides 1t was
entirely proper and discreet for this Govern
for the reasons have already stated. When
a specific request came from the Beers, how
ever, it had satisfactory pretext for making
the fact known that 1t was willing to serve the
ends of peace. But if Great Britain prefers to
wait until Lord Roberts has reached Pretoria,
she has that right-a fact which no nation can
be more ready to recognize than the United
States.
The point of chief present interest is. how
ever, that if the eager friends of the Beers had
had their way this Government would have
been debarred from rendering its good offices in
the matter. Attempts have been made over
and over again, in Congress and out of it, to
commit this Government to the Boer side by the
adoption of resolutions of sympathy with the
Beers and of denunciation of Great Britain.
Suppose the Senate had adopted some such reso-
luton. With what grace could it now pose as
an impartial friend of both belligerents? What
a spectacle for gods and men 1t would make of
itself if it should first say, THE Beers are in
the right and the British in the wrong" and
then should say Submit your cases to me, as to
an impartial Judge! There Is no more funda-
mental principle than that partisan cannot be
an arbitrator nor mediator, nor even success
fully serve as an intermediary messenger.
Does any one suppose the French Government,
through its accomplished Ambassador at Wash
ington, could have played honorable and
benefcent part in settling the Spanish war if
1t had previously committed itself by formal
declaration TO the theory that Spain was in the
right and the United States in the wrong?
French sympathies may have been largely on
the Spanish side, but the French Government
had the good taste and the good sense to main
tain attitude of benevolent neutrality, in
words as well as in acts
Buncombe in domestic matters is bad enough
But when it is carried into the foreign relations
Of the Nation it is indescribably mischievous.
The buncombe resolutions of sympathy with
the Beers which have been proposed might if
adopted have for their authors some petty
popularity at home. That was of course, their
object But they would more certainly have
disqualified this Government from rendering
the Beers any such service that which has
just been requested and thus would have de-
feated their own purpose. which is not uncom-
mon thing for buncombe to do.