The Logan Republican. [volume] (Logan, Utah) 1902-1924, 1914-04-30
DISTINCTION BETWEEN GOOD
OFFICES AND MEDIATION

| dsnmSton, April rs. President
Wilson's acceptance Of the good of.
fees of Brazil, Argentina and Chile
to compose the Mexican conflict has
centered the attention Of international
authorities on just what the proce-
| alie will be and what good Offices,
ae under the practice OF nations.
The offer OF the South American en-.
voys speaks of good Offices, and the
reply of the United States govern.
ment makes references to intermedi.
alton.
| John Bassett Moore, former counse-
lor of the state department and An
authority on international law. points
out a distinction between the case of
good offices and mediation, and SAYS:
The demand Of good offices or their
acceptance does not confer the right
| Of mediating.
John Hay. when secretary OF state,
said:
The phrase good offices being some
what elastic. should be confined to
two contingencies. In its first sense.
II corresponds to the French term.
ofacioux. In It's second sense. It Is
allied to arbitral INTERPRETATION as
an impartial adviser Of both parties.
and not only implies but requires the
assent Of both parties and oftener a
spontaneous invitation from each.
The Hague convention uses two
terms, good Offices and mediation IN
terchangeably. The Hague provisions
follows:
Article lin case of serious DIS
agreement or conflict before an APP
peal to arms, the signatory powers
agree to have recourse, as far as cir
cumstances allow, to the good offices
or mediation of one or more friendly
powers.
Article III Independently Of this
recourse, the signatory powers rec
| hst nr1
strangers to the dispute, should, on
their own initiative and as far as cir
cumstances may allow, offer their
good offices or mediation to the states
at variances.
Powers, strangers to the dispute,
have the right to offer their good Of
fees or mediation even during the
course Of hostilities.
The exercise Of this right can new.
err be regarded by one Of the other
of the parties In conflict as an I'M
friendly act.
The Hague convention also pro-
vides that the acceptance Of media,
ton cannot, unless there be agree
ment to the contrary. have the effect
Of interrupting, delaying or hinderlng
mobilization or other measures OF
preparation for war. If mediation &C,
ours after the commencement Of hos
tilities 1t causes no interruption to
the military operations In progress,
unless there be an agreement to the
contrary.
Most of the precedents on good Of
fees and mediation are those In
which established governments are
concerned and to what extent the
practice would apply to a de facto
government is not clear. But the ad
option in the present case OF the us
ual course Of rendering good offices
and its acceptance by the United
States probably would result In the
usual procedure being employed.
One or the precedents on good Of
fees was during the Cleveland ad
ministration and involved Mexico. Al
that time Secretary Baynard tender
ed to Mexico the good offices OF me
United States in settling the coniiic
between Mexico and Guatemala. An
other precedent involving Mexico "a'
when that country and France were
5 in conflict in 1898. Then the Ameri
can minister to Paris, Mr.. Cass wal
instructed to offer his assistance II
any form which might prove bench