Apart from any higher consideration, it is a mere measure of prudence to avoid sending an envoy who may be presumed to be a _persona ingrata_ at the foreign court, for he will certainly, whether he will or not, create a prejudice against his own country and will be quite unable to meet his competitors in diplomacy on equal terms, for he will start with the handicap of unpopularity. The Foreign Minister, therefore, should not wait until matters go wrong at a foreign capital, but should be in a position, when each appointment is made, to know the character of the new ambassador, and thus to veto a bad appointment. This, alas, is not by any means always the case. I do not need to enter upon a minute examination of the faults to avoid and the virtues to encourage in the complete diplomat. I have already said enough to show where my opinion lies in a general way. I will only add one or two further considerations. I said a few moments ago that loose living is a great handicap in diplomacy; but, since there is no rule which has not some exception, let me point out that a too abstemious negotiator will miss many opportunities of finding out what is going on. Especially in the northern countries the diplomat who loves a glass will quickly make friends among ministers, though, to be sure, he should drink in such a manner as not to lose control of his own faculties while endeavouring to loosen the self-control of others. [Sidenote: _The Nation judged by its Servants._] In diplomacy a nation is judged by its ministers, and its whole reputation may rest upon the popularity or unpopularity of an ambassador. In this respect the personal conduct of the ambassador and his staff is almost as important as the policy with which he is charged, for the success of the policy will depend largely upon the actual relations which exist between the two nations. The ambassador is, as it were, the very embodiment of these relations, and if a proper adept in his profession will know how to turn every occasion to advantage. I need not repeat my tale of the qualities and practices by which such advantage may be drawn from the current of events, but I may perhaps point out that obviously men of birth and breeding are better able to discharge the kind of function which I have described. Their rank will command a certain respect, and the qualities usually inherited by those of good birth should stand them in good stead at a foreign court. At the same time such qualities must not be regarded as more than a foundation. They cannot in themselves equip a diplomatist for his office. He must by assiduous application acquire the other necessary qualities, for there is no man more liable to suspicion than he who plumes himself on an experience which he does not possess. Further, it is usually unwise to entrust important negotiations to young men, who are commonly presumptuous and vain as well as indiscreet. Old age is equally inappropriate. The best time of life is