The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1906-12-16
".

ALLEVIATE from IL half OF Europe.
".
Among the results of the rivalry for
supremacy in Italy the most important
End the most enduring was the establish
, ent OF permanent diplomatic relations
Letween the chief European countries.
AS we saw in DR.. Hills first volume, occa-
sional embassies had always been customary
from the fall Of the Roman Empire; but
the continuous residence OF diplomatic
agents in foreign capitals was unknown
until affairs in Italy rendered il imperative.
The Italian States, indeed. had long en-
joyed a diplomatic system made obligatory
by their mutual r~ivalries and by the En-
pire's abdication OF a general authority
over them; but until the wars OF Italy had
awakened the monsrchs OF Europe to the
necessity OF constant vigilance n asso-
ciated action the great Powers were hardly
more advanced in their international inter-
course than the barbarian Kingdoms Of
the early Middle Ages. The plans Of
Charles 1. Of France for the conquest OF
Italy suddenly brought Europe to a con-
seriousness of its peril n of the need and
value of alliances between the Powers.
In close connection with the great coalitions
which followed was developed the insti-
tuition Of continuous diplomatic repre-
~sentation. By the end OF the fifteenth
century permanent embassies were estab-
lished by France and by nearly all the
Powers Of western Europe. Thus came
into being the corps diplomatique." the
first permanent diplomatic representation
of sovereign States. Questions OF form,
ceremony and precedents inevitably be-
came the chief objects OF its interest until
a later age gave it a new Significance
through the regulation Of its functions by
principles Of international Jurisprudence
and by conventional agreements. Had
this body been from the first an association
of authorized agents for the maintenance
of international justice IND equity the
history OF Europe might have been alto
gether different; but the political theory
Of that time made no provision for a rule
of law among the nations.
The political thought of the first quarter
Of the sixteenth century ound its most
complete expression in the writings OF
Niccolo Machiaveli, whose career as diplo-
matio agent and secretary Of the Ten"
at Florence had we'll fitted him TO become
an e~xpounder OF the age in which he lived.
Having entered the service Of the republic
az a clerk Of its Government at the time Of
the expulsion OF the Medici in 1894. he was
constantly engaged in political activity,
as envoy or secretary, till their restoration
in 1912. In some pages allotted to the
subject our author shows hat it is not
from the famous work entitled The Prince"
alone, but from the whole of his writings,
49, Il ~zy;SgooI 0hsIoaAnhu - aobsa yaIt
is to be gathered. His fundamental premise
is the depravity Of mankind. Because the
bad prevails over the good in human nature
there is, he says, no sufficient law Of human
conduct in the constitution Of man. Rules
OF right action must therefore be imposed
on men from without; for, since their pre-
vailing impulses prompt them TO disorder,
life without laws would be chaotic. If
men were not corrupt the best form Of
human government would be a free re-
public; but, because the strength Of a State
lies in its unity and authority, a republic
cannot exist in a corrupt condition Of 40
ciety, and a prince is necessary. As the
creator Of law and order the prince is not
to be bound by conventional morality, for
such a limitation would defeat his purpose.
Whatever he finds it necessary TO do in
order to establish his authority is proper
for him. Force, deceit, falsehood and
even murder may be necessary in establish
ing this authority, but while these are not
oommendable in themselves they are per-
MISSILE as necessary means TO so great
an End. Being the source Of moral order
in society, the prince is not himself sub
iect to ordinary rules Of morality. The
state, in a word, is essentially non-moral. |
As between States, therefore. there is
no law or obligation; for, since there il no
.~uperior authority to impose rules of action
upon them, each sovereign power is a law
to itself.
DIR. Hill points out in a footnote that
although this remarkable work, THE
prince" was written in 1919 il was not pub !
lished until 1882, five years after Machia-
velli's death. The book then quickly ac- |
ouired a wide circulation and great prestige.
The Empero Charles V. and Philip III. of |
Spain were close students Of il. Catherine |
do Medici introduced il into France. and
both Henry Ill. and Henry w. are said 10
have had il on their persons when they were
murdered. Richelieu esteemed it highly. |
IL il evidently from The Prince" that he
narrowed the a~pothegm abou eking out
the lions skin with the fox's. The treatise
was well known and studied at the English
court. Pope Sixtus v, though publicly he
condemned il, made for his private Use a
summary OF it in bis own handwriting, and
Queen Christina of Sweden left marginal an
notations In a cOpy OF the work.
In DIR. Hills opinion the current con- |
demnation OF Machiavelli's coldblOoded
philosophy. az a shocking example OF in
tellectual perversity. Overlooks both tho
origin OF his doctrines and the practical
purpose he had in view when he wrote the
book. With regard to the origin Of his doc
trines we are reminded that Machiavelli's
writings amount simply to a faithful expo
sition Of practices that already had been