Image provided by the Yale Club & Scholarship Foundation of Hartford, Inc.
About Yale Alumni Magazine | View Entire Issue (Dec. 9, 1897)
SALMA LLU bee [Continued from Ist page.] the islands as a naval outpost, a point which John Kirkland Clark, ’99, of New York, Yale’s next speaker, was not slow to make use of. His argument that there was already a strongly fortified post in the Pacific held by England much nearer than Hawaii, namely Van- couver, was not combatted by Harvard during the whole debate. He showed that by coaling at sea a fleet could Operate against the Pacific coast no matter in whose hands Hawaii might be. The expense of adequate defenses would be perfectly enormous if the United States should ever be inclined to build them; but it was more than probable that the happy-go-lucky pol- icy of the government would result in annexation without fortification, a pol- icy pursued if the case of Pearl Harbor at present. | Clark’s argument was very logical, and his closing remark, a quotation from Carl Schurz, was very striking, “our defensive position is to-day unas- sailable and Hawaii would be our Achilles’ heel” MR. GRILK’S APPEAL. Charles Grilk, ’98, of Iowa, who closed the main argument for Harvard, was easily the most eloquent speaker of the evening. He branded the happy- go-lucky argument advanced by Clark as a disgrace to our nation and insisted that there were but four political solutions to the Hawaiian problem, three of- which would be disastrous to our interests. If the islands were let go, American trade and prestige in the Pacific would suffer; the guarantee of Hawaii's independence had already been refused and would be a change in our settled policy: and the establishment of a protectorate by the United States would be an act without parallel in our history. He said in concluding: “For sixty years our political history has been drawing these islands closer to us. With the friendly help of our government, our citizens have brought the natives out of barbarism into civili- zation, so that now American methods of education are employed and Ameri- can forms of law and government pre- vail. Hawaii is an American outpost. Our fellow citizens in Hawaii have been led to hope for annexation. They wish to come into the union. “Beyond the question of future naval and commercial advantages, is that of keeping what we now have, of preserv- ing American civilization as well as American interests in the islands and on the Pacific. We find the solution of this problem in carrying our policy of the last sixty years to its natural conclusion—annexation.” Mr. Grilk’s appeal was eloquent and effective and was delivered with deep feeling. THE ECONOMIC SIDE PRESENTED. Herbert Wescott Fisher, ’98, of Con- necticut, the last speaker for the nega- tive, was remarkably quick in picking out the weak points in his opponents’ arguments and in general form he showed great improvement over his work against Princeton last Spring. He dealt with the problem in its econo- mic aspect. He showed the compara- tive insignificance of the trade with Hawaii at present and pointed out the evil results of a flow of capital from the United States to a land where American labor could not compete with the natives. He dwelt at some length upon diplomatic complications which would probably ensue if annexation were consummated. His argument closed the opening debate. _ Up to this point it was difficult to decide who had the better of the argu- ment. Yale had condemned annexa- tion as a political, strategic or econo- mic measure, while Harvard had laid great stress on the possibility of seizure of the islands by Japan and had shown annexation to be the only truly Ameri- can policy. Harvard had excelled in form and delivery, Yale in earnestness and force. The latter, also, was a trifle more aggressive in presenting argu- ments. YALE’S STRONG REBUTTAL. It was in the rebuttal, however, that Yale gained an undeniable advantage. This was all the more surprising since WwW HL y rebuttal had, in all the preparatory work, been regarded as the team’s weak point. The speakers showed sin- gularly good judgment in refuting merely the main arguments of the other side and in refusing to be drawn into discussing the lesser and unimportant phases of the question. Harvard failed to meet squarely a number of Yale’s vital points and thereby lost much ground. Keith, who had spoken second for Harvard in the debate proper, opened the rebuttal by quoting Fitzgerald to show that Americans could afford to work in Hawaii if not forced to com- pete with Asiatic contract labor. He cited Alaska and Santa Barbara to prove that the United States had no absolute policy in regard to annexation, but was bound to consider each case on its own merits. As regards expense, he said, Hawaii was a bargain for the United States at any cost. Clark devoted himself entirely to the aspect of the question which he had proposed at first and disposed of all the arguments which the affirmative had advanced for the strategic value of the islands. He showed that every officer whom the affirmative mentioned as favoring annexation had an_ ulterior HON. CHAUNCEY M. DEPEW. reason for so doing; he quoted Captain Mahan at length to the effect that there was great danger that the United States would not protect the islands after annexation, and concluded by as- serting that the Pacific coast could much more easily be rendered impreg- nable than an island two thousand miles distant. Mr. Morse reiterated Mr. Grilk’s ar- gument that the United States had no right to continue her happy-go-lucky policy. Since the United States had an increasing navy he thought its policy should be to make it more and more efficient. Annexation would improve the population and give it a permanent base of supplies. His rebuttal was mainly a summation of the case already presented by the affirmative. Mr. Fisher was the quickest of the six in his replies and confined himself en- tirely to an attack on his opponents’ position, leaving to Mr. Jump the sum- mation of the argument. He showed that the interference of other nations was hardly possible under the present state of affairs, and that the official documents of the United States for sixty years back had not for a moment implied that annexation was the con- summation of our policy toward the islands. 7 REBUTTALS CLOSED. The rebuttal for Harvard was closed by Mr. Grilk. He summed up the main arguments of the affirmative, commer- cial and strategic, and claimed that the quotation from Captain Mahan, which Clark had read, was not fairly made. He reiterated the testimony of ex-Min- ister Castle and showed that it had never been the policy of the United States to ask the consent of the people whose territory it annexed, citing as examples Texas, Louisiana and Alaska. Mr. Jump had spoken first for Yale in the opening debate, but in the re- buttal he had been reserved till the last. This move by Yale proved to be a most timely one, for that speaker not only had the advantage of closing the whole argument but he had heard the entire debate and rebuttal of the nega- tive, with the exception of Mr. Morse’s opening speech, without interruption. He quickly defined the position of his opponents in a syllogism. “Hawaii would prove advantageous to the United States; the only method to pre- serve it, is annexation; hence it should be annexed.” Harvard had spent her entire time, he said, on the minor pre- mise and had failed to prove the ad- vantages of the islands. He concluded that annexation would lessen their com- mercial value, would cause political expansion at the expense of political cohesion, would be a strain on Ameri- can institutions and would not in any way strengthen our coast defense. JUDGES DECIDE FOR YALE. The judges immediately retired to the room on the right. While they were de- liberating Mr. Depew entertained the audience with several stories which elicited much mirth, and complimented both Yale and Harvard on their mature grasp of the subject and marked con- trol of themselves in the presentation of the arguments. After a few minutes the re-appearance of the judges showed that a decision had been reached and the hall was deathly still while Mr. McCook, as chairman of the committee, made the announcement. When he stated that the decision was unanimous in favor of Yale the whole audience rose with a perfect thunder of applause and cheers were given for both Har- vard and Yale. Soon after eleven a large bonfire was built in the center of the Campus in honor of the victory and the under- graduates gathered around it and cele- brated with songs and cheers till after midnight. The Banquet. Immediately after the debate a ban- quet was tendered the Harvard debaters at the New Haven House. There were forty present. Hon. Chauncey M. Depew, ’56, acted as toastmaster. Professor Albert Bushnell Hart of Harvard responded to the toast, ‘Har- vard.” Among other things, Professor Hart said that no Harvard man con- sidered it a disgrace to be beaten by Yale in athletics or any other line. _ The other toasts responded to were, “Yale,” by Professor Arthur Twining Hadley; ‘Graduate Coaching,” by Dr. E. V. Raynolds. Col. John J. McCook, Professor Nicholas Murray Butler and Hon. William B. Hornblower, the judges of the debate, also spoke. The other invited guests were: Presi- dent Dwight; Dean Wayland of the Law School; Professor H. P. Wright; Professor J. F. Wier; Professor W. L. Phelps; Professor ©. H. Smith; : Pro- fessor R. C. Ringwalt of Columbia; Colonel N. G. Osborn, ’80, editor of the New Haven Register; C. G. Clarke, ’95; Chauncey W. Wells, ’96; W. H. Clark, 706; GC. V. Glark, -o73. 1620. Sinth,. 07; C. H. Studinski, 207; G.-S, McParland, 97 I. S:; Juhan 5S.) Mason, 05:: Mor- ton L. Fearey, ‘98; H. A. Price, ’98 1. S,; :O. Ho. Dowelk 68:52 6. A. Fuller, 908 L. S.; the Harvard and Yale spedkers, F. E. Richardson, ’98, the officers of the Harvard Union and the officers of the Yale Union. A quartette from the University Glee Club, com- posed of H. M. Dewey, ’99; R. A. Mc- cee; ‘00: S.: D. Be Hddy; 06; and 2. T. Noble, ’99, sang the songs of Har- vard and Yale. —__—__+4—__ Yale Alumni of Philadelphia. The Yale Alumni Association of Philadelphia held its annual meeting on December 3d. The annual report showed the asso- ciation to be in a very prosperous con- dition, and a proposition to hold several informal smokers in addition to the regular banquet was favorably con- sidered. It was announced that for the first time in several years Phila- delphia would be included in the Christ- mas trip of the Yale Glee and Banjo Club. The officers elected for the ensuing year are: President, William H. Ing- ham, ’67; Vice Presidents, T. Dewitt Cuyler, ’74; and G. H. Makuen, 784; Executive Committee, Sharswood Brin- ton, *86; George S. Woodward, ’87; Edward Brooks, Jr., ’90; and James A. McCrea, tr. os S. ‘Hall, last Thursday afternoon. A small fire broke out in 334 White The fire department was called out, but the fire was extinguished by some students before they arrived. Little damage was done beyond the burning of the mat- tress and wainscoting in one of the bed- rooms. A Building Committee from the Uni- versity of Pennsylvania inspected the gymnasium last week, to get ideas for the new Pennsylvania gymnasium. J. EDWARD SOMERS, IMPORTING TAILOR, 63 Center Street, NEW HAVEN, - CONN. F. R. BLISS & CO., - -(AILORS,) = CHURCH AND CHAPEL STREETS, New Haven, Conn. CTLARLES 1, PENNELL, Successor to Wm. Franklin & Co., IMPORTING | AILOR, 40 Center St., New Haven, Conn. PACH BROS., COLLEGE PHOTOGRAPHERS, 1024 Chapel St., New Haven. Branch of No. 935 Broadway, - New York STORES: PROVIDENCE PHILADELPHIA pede: Cope | o) 5 E . 4) CL ali: 2 4 ‘ Gem Cork Sole. ...Lhis style Z fe) ais6o made : 5 with invisible e a cork sole in (9 be Calf, Patent )" < Calf, and En- B amel. This last is straight with }a a toe slightly (2 Z rounded. : 4 Delivered to 2 5 any address in FA Oe 10r 4 ] $3 50}: * wv | seed: g | R < and 25 Cents 2 e additional iZ D express ea) charges. . : &CO., |§ a 109 Summer St. { 2 i N. © B} Catalogue eee a | E A ‘a %2 Mail Order | FREE. z Dept. EN VER——WALLA WALLA (Wash.)——_ UTICA
