Seattle University - Aegis Yearbook (Seattle, WA)

Page 24 text:

22 T II E P A L E S T li A “PEACE ON EARTH” Full nineteen hundred years ago, Near Bethlehem's humble site, A Child was born, and was proclaimed By angels through the night. With joy they sang “Hosanna!” “On earth be peace to men!” Their hymn was echoed far and wide Thro’ lowland, glade, and glen. And hearing, hearts were gladdened, And uttered songs of praise To Christ the King and Saviour, Who brightened weary ways. But now, ’mid Culture’s boasted pomp, We know that peace has fled : And sec on Europe’s bloody fields Great mounds of ghastly dead. The widow’s sob in vain is heard, 'Phe orphan’s cry is hush’d, Whilst Death and Hunger stalk abroad To satisfy men’s lust. Alas! those tidings seem forgot. Which came at Jesus’ birth; “Hosanna in excclsis”, “And peace to men on earth.” A message have those angels brought For cv’ry heart to know, That Christ, the Giver of all good, Will grant us Peace below. Oh! let us ask the promised gift. Oh! let us beg again; And we shall know through blessed peace Our prayer was not in vain. Come! let us seek the Infant’s crib, And beg his help once more, That Love which brought Him down on earth May end this bloody war. George Batllargeon, ’19.

Page 23 text:

SKATTLK COLLKGK A XX CAL 21 argues all the time and seems to think he is right but to no avail. Tom Rattigan will never stand for his proofs. Gerald has peculiar views of the value of Greek,—some one said that they were similar to those held by one “Babe” McAtccr. But to return to Tom Rattigan. Tom is President of the Agathon Fraternity, a mysterious secret society which has quarters on the second floor of the Administration Building. It is the only Fiat of its kind west of the Mississippi. Its paraphernalia consists of—well, all we shall say is that the Pilgrim’s Progress and Aesop’s Fables are to be found in the Library. Well, as we were saying, Tom is responsible for it all. But moreover he is Business -Manager of the Palestra. The other business head of the Year Book is a member of Freshmen, Maurice Sullivan, Maurice has just invested in a new pair of glasses, and is trying to look intellectual. 'Flic aforesaid glasses do help, we have noticed. Another member of the clan of Sullivan who dwells in our midst is Leo, the class president. Leo is a pedestrian, Leo is large of brain and body, and genial of soul—and thus has endeared himself to all. Let the Class of ’19 march on to victory. We yield to none and always try to lead in whatever is taking place. And now, dear reader, farewell. I THE DAYS OF MAN I struck the steel upon the flint And nothingness soon claimed the glint; I struck a match upon the wall, It flashed and vanished—that was all. And so it seems with men and mice, All vanish hence but in a trice— However neat this simile. It doesn’t work by electricity. Robert J. Neilan, ’18.

Page 25 text:

S E A T T L E C () L L E G E A N N U A L 23 iEtljira nf War THE “man on the street” will tell you that war is a disgrace to civilization. Perhaps it is. In the minds of nearly all it excites horror. Nowadays “the proud pomp and circumstance” of it is seldom alluded to. Men have come to look upon deadly strife as an evil. The atrocities of it, poets have lamented over pathetically, in rhythmic cadences. According to some of their predictions the future has in store for our befretted race a blessed time of permanent peace: mankind’s common sense, its increased largeness of view, the public conscience and the world’s statesmanship must one day elaborate an universal peace-pact,—and that binding agreement shall be more lasting than a monument of bronze. Meanwhile eleven different peoples are patriotically slaughtering one another in the European shambles. Thus are men unceremoniously undeceived, made to realize the inadvisability of changing their swords into ploughshares. However mighty the pen, disputes will most likely continue to be settled by the arbitrament of the “shotted gun”. Philosophers, politicians, thinkers of high and low degree, have all reasoned out pretentious schemes for the suppression of war. Some have condemned an appeal to arms as intrinsically immoral. Others of opinions less radical would nevertheless maintain peace at any cost. Hut a judgment as to war’s why and wherefore we can hardly trust to poetic dreams and political speculations. “Cuique in sua arte credcndum”. To the moralist, to the moral philosopher rather, must we have recourse for a final decision. Nobody can pronounce war intrinsically wrong without giving proof of defective judgment. A right,—viz., that in virtue of which a person calls anything his own,—and the obligation all others arc under to respect it, arc correlative. Coercion of some kind, therefore, is intrinsic to a right. Neither must that coercion be limited to moral suasion. Because “man calls himself his own”, Rickaby writes, “and calls his powers his own, and they are his own by the very fact of his calling them so by a natural act. And as justice is to give to another his own, others are bound in justice to leave him free to dispose of himself and his powers, at least within certain limits. Hut this would be for man a barren freedom, were he not empowered to lay hold of and make his own some things, nay many things, outside of himself, for man is not self-sufficient, but has many natural necessities. Hut the power to lay hold of and make some things his own would be futile and derisive without the right to forcibly debar others therefrom. Perfect rights, therefore, viz., those that arc backed up by law, natural or positive, may be vindicated by physical force. Wherefore, according to civil or canon law, one is allowed to repel force by force with the moderation of a blameless defence. That doctrine exactly coincides with and is fully justified by universal practice. Now, what is here said of the private citizen, may be said of the portion of the state: clearly, the corporate rights of the one may be. defended bv violent means with as much justice as the individual rights of the other. War is purely an instance of self-defense on a grand scale, and self-defense even when offered merely to repel a personal attack may go to the extreme of bloodshed in a proportionately serious cause. The killing we suppose to be indirect, although Card, dc Lugo and others justify direct killing. Whether or not homicide may be intended directly as a means of defense, moralists have been unable to decide. That is one of their nu-