(5
Til 10 II KS-PKI,1 I A N
M
1
111
unity is preserved. Mr. Donnison urged
first, Policy is natural; second, Expan
sion is with growth of social organism;
third, Saxon race assiniulatos adjacent
population; forth, Our institutions' adapt
themselves to new territory; fifth, Inter
communication unifies our nation; sixth,
Federal government is best fitted for
governing a wide domain. Mr. Donnison
quoted copiously to verify his propos
tions. Fred Wood followed Mr. Duiinison.
He took up the argument of his coUegue
and emphasized the need of the United
States looking after her internal condi
tions. There were many questions of
supremo importance confronting the peo
ple and they should be adjusted before
annexing more territory and new evils.
What is thoU. S. to gain by adopting
the expansion policy? We can got com
mercial ad vantage through treaties and
commercial union. Mr. Wood spoke
deliberately and with force.
R. S3. Baker of Nebraska University
followed for the affirmative. The ex
pansion policy was warranted by our in
ternal conditions. The Anglo Saxon
race had already shown its political wis
dom in oneoiving and forming the fed
oral union. As society becomes more
coinplnx man becomes more qualified to
cope with the problems. There is a con
stant exchange of products between the
East and West, the North and the South.
A mutual economic interest results. To
admit the necessity of a commercial un
ion with adjacent territory is to admit
there exists the primary essential for the
formation of a state. The political or
ganism should extend with the social and
industrial organism. The Federal State
is capable of great capacity for it recon
ciles local autonomy with national unity
in political actions. The expansion pol
icy is the dominant force in American
character. The Frontier has developed
the principle of democracy and national
ized our institutions. Wo should con
tinue. Continuing our historic policy,
Ave would strengthen our resources.
Petty jealousies, commercial hostilities
and war-like contentions would bo
avoided. By extending our boundaries
with the growth of our nationality wo
Avould not incorporate new antagonistic
forces within the state. We would ho
fulfilling the essentials of an expanding
moral organism. The assimilating
power of the Anglo Saxon, his political
sagacity, his adaptability and theaohiov
ments of science and inventions show
our vitality as a state and the possible
growth of our institutions. The logical
policy is expansion.
Mr. F. 0. Coleman replied to Mr. Ba
ker. He said the negative intended to
show that the expansion policy would in
crease our internal difficulties and en
danger our existence. The people aro
asking for the solution of many ques
tions and why not attend to them before
annexing more territory. Our policy
should be to unify our people and our in
terests. The Anglo Saxon is not adapted
to the tropic regions and he has done
little in Americanizing Canada. Mr.
Coleman was the strongest speaker on
the negative, and practically presented
the merits of his side of the question.
Mr. Baker spoke in rebuttal for Ne
braska. Ho analyzed the argument of
the opposition and contrasted it with the
merits of the affirmative, closing with u
brief summary of. his side of the ques
tion. He contended that many of the in
ternal problems would only be solved
through the slow process of time and
others would only find their solution in
the evolution of the Anglo Saxon race,
which was consistent with the policy of
expansion. The fact that our people are
going boyond our boundaries shows that
we are in need of new territory and com
mercial advantages. Our national mor
ality and the vitality of our political or
ganism secures our internal destiny and
Ave c in only fulfill the highest end of the
state by perfecting our geographical
unity To accept the policy of the neg
ative would be territorial stagnation and
the aloption of the iron clad rule that
the limit of a state should not chango
with changing conditions.
Mr. Sharpe closed by reviewing the
argument of the negative. He urged
that they had shown that expansion was
not consistent with our internal develop
ment and thus the policy was uncallod
for No necessity existed for additional
annexation.
