The Argentine Republic has a territory of 1,153,119 square miles in extent. Her population is over 8,000,000, having doubled during the last twenty years. At this rate of a yearly increase of five per cent., it is easily foreseen what large total it will reach in a few years. It is wealthy, doing the best with her splendid resources, already contributing extensively to feed the population of Europe. The other Southern American Republics--the Bolivian, the Chilean, the Colombian, the Peruvian, the Venezuelan--have all territorial areas double in extent of those of the Great Powers of Western and Central Europe. In Southern America, like everywhere else, the rising tide is not running in favour of a multiplicity of small Sovereignties, always in a warring frame of mind. Since her political reorganization, South America, as a whole, has enjoyed the advantages of peace and of a large material progress. In reality the same political phenomenon is to be found in the five continents forming the whole earthly globe. Let the "Nationalists" call it _Imperialism_ if they like, I cannot help concluding that it is the outgrowth of natural causes operating in the sense of larger political units, giving to the Nations getting so constituted, prestige, power, grandeur, favouring public order and, in many instances, the development of free institutions. CHAPTER XX. BRITISH IMPERIALISM. Let me now consider the wonderful development of what I have called Monarchical Democratic or free Imperialism. It has so far been exclusively of British growth. It is the typical form of Imperialism which has been honoured with the most violent, the most unjust, denunciations of our "Nationalists". How did it deserve such an hysterical reprobation? Such is the question to which I shall now endeavour to give a decisive negative answer. I have previously once said that British Imperialism, like American Imperialism, has Political Liberty as its foundation stone. I think this can easily be proven. Any close observer of political events, will agree with me, I am confident, that Imperialism is also "OFFENSIVE" and "DEFENSIVE" in its expansion. The meaning of these two terms is clear. For the last fifty years, "OFFENSIVE" IMPERIALISM has been the GERMAN DESPOTIC IMPERIALISM. The present war--its criminal work--is the convincing evidence in support of the charge. I have, I believe, proved to the satisfaction of every fair minded man, that during the same last fifty years England's constant efforts have been to maintain peace. Consequently, I am authorized to draw the conclusion that British Imperialism was not intended to be, and has not been "OFFENSIVE".