294 The Winning of the West 



neither case was there any previous settlement of 

 moment by the conquerors in the conquered terri- 

 tory. In neither case was there much direct pres- 

 sure by the people of the conquering races upon the 

 soil which was won for them by their soldiers and 

 statesmen. The acquisition of the territory must be 

 set down to the credit of these soldiers and states- 

 men, representing the nation in its collective capac- 

 ity; though in the case of New Mexico there would 

 of course ultimately have been a direct pressure of 

 rifle-bearing settlers upon the people of the ranches 

 and the mud-walled towns. 



In such cases it is the government itself, rather 

 than any individual or aggregate of individuals, 

 which wins the new land for the race. When it is 

 won without appeal to arms, the credit, which would 

 otherwise be divided between soldiers and states- 

 men, of course accrues solely to the latter. Alaska, 

 for instance, was acquired by mere diplomacy. No 

 American settlers were thronging into Alaska. The 

 desire to acquire it among the people at large was 

 vague, and was fanned into sluggish activity only 

 by the genius of the far-seeing statesmen who pur- 

 chased it. The credit of such an acquisition really 

 does belong to the men who secured the adoption 

 of the treaty by which it was acquired. The honor 

 of adding Alaska to the national domain belongs to 

 the statesmen who at the time controlled the Wash- 

 ington Government. They were not figureheads in 

 the transaction. They were the vital, moving forces. 



Just the contrary is true of cases like that of the 



