The mirror. (Stillwater, Minn.) 1894-1925, 1911-05-18
Negative, By ERlD.

Various publications have lately devoted
considerable space, exploiting and discuss
ing the pros and cons of this subject. Ev-
cry person who can lay claim to possession
of common sense ought to favor Peace on
Earth, Goodwill among men. cannot
say positively, but / believe there are too
many devoid of common sense to enable us
to turn this earthly domain into Elysian
Fields. international Peace is good doc
trine to preach. You can preach Interna-
tional Peace and few will be able to guess
at what you are talking about. 1t isa slip
perry subject. When you are asked any
definite question concerning it, you may
don Mr.. HIS smile and smoothly evade
giving comprehensive reply.
We are discussing the plain question: ssIs
International Peace Possibles'' There ma
turally arises the question as to what is
meant by the phrase, international Peaces''
In broad sense it may include conflicts
of every description. The propensity Of
individuals to disagree and probable resort
to Jeffries and Johnson methods of determ-
ining championship, is so well understood
that we cannot hope for conditions that will
promote peace among mankind There
fore the evident aim and purpose of today's
discussion is to consider the question as in
ternational termination of warning. 1t is
not Worldly Peace, but international Peace
that confronts us to discuss.
My supporters will fully agree with me
that all efforts to alleviate the lot of humans
ity are far too laudable to be belittled.
Peace among mankind and nations is de-
sirable, but it is an impossible condition
to expect or hope for. If the affirmative
contentious were remotely probable, no
proofs can be nationally adduced to make
such contentious plausible. The opposi-
tion must confine their arguments by actual
necessity, to bold presumptions, weak sup
positions, far-fetched theories, imaginery
assumptions, hap-hazzard guessing finn
sy basis for arguments! No other lines of
argumentiveness presents itself to the oppo-
sition. Whereas, the whole history of the
world, diverse creeds, individual beliefs,
national preservation all the past and pres
ent show conclusively that International
Peace is not merely impossible but it is an
absurd theory. In fact, the very nature of
the question before us, considered fairly
and impartially, precludes the possibility of
bringing forth any evidences to impress our
minds with single convincing idea that
international Peace is possible.
The gentlemen on the affirmative side
today are, / sincerely believe, greatly con-
fused. They have probably been reading
that president Taft and many other persons
have sounded the keynote to bring about
international Peace. Noble men who stand
high in national affairs are not so devoid of
practical common-sense as to be advancing
absurd theories. The question occupying
the attention of great national leaders is to
establish an International Arbitration Court.
While delivering speech advocating great
er naval expenditures BY England, Sir Ed
ward Grey is quoted as saying:
81 should perhaps have thought It un
profitable to mention arbitration, had it not
been for the fact that twice within the last
twelve months the President Of the United
States has sketched out step in advance
more momentous than any one thing that
any one statesman in his position has ven
tured to say before. His words are preg-