be fought. In 1915, therefore, only Dreadnoughts will count, and it is by Dreadnoughts that British supremacy must be maintained. The outlook is serious, owing to the large number of improved Dreadnoughts now under construction in foreign shipyards. Without going into unnecessary detail, it may be sufficient to set out the actual strength of the British and German fleets at the end of this and the two subsequent years and in the spring of 1915, showing the proportion of British over German strength, even if Germany in the coming year lays down only two large armoured ships as specified in the naval programme : Actual Strength. 1 Percentage of British over German Strength. End of 1912 Spring of 1915 At the last date the United States will have 12 Dreadnoughts complete, Japan 8, and France, Russia, Austria, and Italy, 4 each; while Brazil and Spain will possess 3 each; and Argentina, Chili, and Turkey, 2 each; or a total for the whole world of 101. In the new programme it will be necessary to take into consideration the large number of foreign ships which may be completed by the spring of 1915, and to prepare a new shipbuilding programme in the light of the fact that by that date in preDreadnoughts we shall have dropped to a One Power Standard. Under the terms of our agreement with the Commonwealth and New Zealand Governments, one Dreadnought will have to be sent East of Suez to join the two Colonial Dreadnoughts now completing, and, unless our power in the Mediterranean is to become insignificant, at least eight Dreadnoughts will need to be stationed in 1915 or 1916 in the Midland Sea. From the total British strength of Dreadnoughts there would then be available for immediate action in the North Sea and the English Channel only 21 ships (plus the ships of the new programme), while Germany, even if she lays down only two vessels this year, will possess 23. Of course, it may be that the Admiralty intend to utilise pre-Dreadnoughts in the Mediterranean, even as late as three (1) There is every reason, at the time of writing, to anticipate that Germany in the present year will begin three Dreadnoughts, and in that case she will have 24 complete in 1915, as compared with the British 30. This will represent a British superiority of 25 per cent., whereas the only standard of safety, in view of the position of the British Empire and its dependence on the sea, is 100 per cent., or Two Keels to One. years hence, when Austria and Italy will have eight Dreadnoughts in commission, and that they will trust to the French Fleet to readjust the naval balance. This will amount to an abandonment of our naval pre-eminence on the route to the Far East, India, and Australia, and it will necessarily lead to the present Double Entente with France being changed into an alliance with the costly and disturbing military obligations on the Continent of Europe which such an alliance will involve. In effect, it would amount to this-that the Government would provide a smaller fleet than would be necessary if England still occupied a position of splendid isolation, while at the same time she, maritime Power, would pledge herself to provide increased military force which could be employed on the Continent of Europe in support of French aims. This is a matter of high policy. It cannot be discussed within the limits of this survey of the naval situation. But now and here it should be distinctly emphasised that a policy of this character, accompanied by a relative decline of British naval strength vis-à-vis to Germany, is fraught with the gravest peril not only to the people of the United Kingdom, dependent for their very food and for their raw materials upon the freedom of the seas, but to the existence of the British Empire. Fortunately the British position in cruisers and torpedo craft gives little occasion for anxiety. From the figures prepared by the American Intelligence Department, it is apparent that at present we have more modern cruisers and torpedo craft than any two Powers. On the other hand, the table of British construction given on page 253 indicates that a large number of these cruisers and torpedo craft are well advanced in age, and must be replaced in the immediate future. The amount of money which need be devoted in the immediate future to the construction of cruisers will be limited in extent owing to the influence which the introduction of the Dreadnought has had upon the plans of foreign Powers. According to the last returns of shipbuilding, the pressure of Dreadnought construction upon the exchequers of the world has been so great that most foreign Powers have practically abandoned the building of cruisers. While we shall have 10 authorised or building at the end of next month, Germany will have 4, Japan 3, and Austria and Italy 3 each the Austrian and Italian ships being of about 3,500 tons displacement, while the British ships are 2,000 tons larger. The other naval Powers have for the time being ceased to construct cruisers, and to this extent the danger to British commerce is reduced. But at the same time additional ships must be built for duty upon the trade routes and for Imperial purposes. Mr. Winston Churchill, speaking at the annual dinner of the Incorporated Chambers of Commerce in 1907, when he was Under Secretary for the Colonies, stated: "There are a score of things for which we do not require first-class battleships or cruisers, but for which, nevertheless, we need urgently a squadron of ships of some sort or other. What I hope the Government may be able to effect is the institution of a squadron of vessels that might discharge all those patrol and other duties absolutely necessary to the efficiency and dignified conduct of the administration of an Empire so wide as ours." Now that Mr. Churchill is First Lord of the Admiralty business men and our kinsmen overseas will watch with interest to see the manner in which he will interpret in naval terms this declaration of policy. Happily, since these words were spoken, the Commonwealth and New Zealand have risen to the height of their responsibilities, and now have under construction cruisers which will somewhat relieve the Mother Country of the duty of providing ships for the patrol of the waters of these Dominions. The shipbuilding programme will also have to make provision for an additional number of torpedo craft. This financial year the Admiralty laid down 20 destroyers and 6 submarines; in the coming year, since Germany will begin at least 12 destroyers and about 10 submarines, a somewhat larger British programme of torpedo craft must be faced, and it may be hoped that, in view of the dramatic success achieved by the latest type of submarine, the Board of Admiralty will have the courage to devote more attention to these craft, even if this policy involves, for financial reasons, some reduction in the number of destroyers laid down. The submarine is the most effective and decisive defence against the invasion bogey which from time to time frightens the British people, and which might, in a period of grave international disquiet, deflect the defence policy of the country from its proper expression in action, as occurred, for instance, when the plans of the authorities in the United States had to be recast, owing to the fears of the people on the Atlantic coast of depredations by Spanish cruisers. It is in the light of these facts, and not of the present satisfactory standing of the British Fleet, that the new shipbuilding programme must be examined. We have an ample margin to-day, but the Admiralty's new proposals will have to be based on the conditions which will exist in 1915. In the interval we shall have added to the sea-going fleet 10 Dreadnoughts, Germany 14, Russia, Austria, Italy, France, and the United States, at least 4 each. If this is not a grave outlook in view of the kaleidoscopic changes which are apt suddenly to occur in the groupings of the Powers and the rapidity with which storm clouds gather, what adjective can be applied to it? Nor can the building of further cruisers and torpedo craft be avoided. The personnel must also be increased. It is apparent that, even though there be no renewed naval activity abroad-and Germany will apparently adopt at an early date a new programme-the outlook is one which flatly negatives any hope of a long period of naval economy. There will be a slight reduction in the Estimates to be presented this month, because, while 8 armoured ships were laid in 1909, only 5 were begun in 1910, and 5 again this year, and thus work in continuing 10 ships only will have to be provided for. Consequently there will be a slight fall in the expenditure on new construction. But the reduction cannot be large unless the cost of Rosyth is thrown upon a naval loan. The assurance may be accepted that British naval expenditure cannot with any degree of safety be reduced below £42,000,000 or £43,000,000 in any year during the lifetime of the present generation, and it will more probably rise in three or four years to £45,000,000. This is the price we must pay for peace. Let us exercise ordinary foresight and see that we are prepared to pay it. Since the present century began, national revenue has been forced up by forty-two millions sterling-from £140,000,000 in 1900 to nearly £182,000,000 this year. It is still rising, and all who are concerned for the maintenance of our unquestionable supremacy upon the seas must experience serious misgivings as to the influence of the present extravagance, in the form of new and increasing permanent charges, upon the Navy Estimates when the inevitable period of trade depression occurs, and the receipts of the Exchequer fall from the present high level. So far the millions of economy secured by the Dreadnought policy have been "earmarked " for social reform, but we must not forget that an unchallengeable fleet is vital to poor and rich alike. PRINCE PROLETARIAT. MORE and more the nation gets not what it wants but what Ministers want, or what is extorted from them by warring minorities. We get our fill and will be surfeited as time advances. There is no real representation under the prevailing system, and the demands put forward are mostly engineered by a few. If the few sometimes speak for the many, the many have a knack of quarrelling with the few, and this is especially the case with the proletariat. From the humorous point of view, has not our old friend "Do-the-boys Hall" some faint resemblance to Government tactics? "If you want morals you have come to the right shop," said Mr. Squeers, and his "shop" might well have aired the advertisement of the fourpenny "fruit " now selling at the sign of the Welsh Harp. Mr. Squeers, too, uttered another exclamation not quite out of point at this moment. "Here's richness for you," he cried, as he peered into the bottom of the nigh-emptied milk-jug. In Labour lugged at loggerheads, in an insurance opportunity spoiled by illusions and injustices, in glib promises of "national improvements," including universal suffrage and warranting universal payment, above all in the pose towards the lower grades of handworkers, "Here's richness," indeed! The "boys,' however, good or bad, are of another opinion. They will not take their masters quite at their own valuation, and some of them actually run away from the school when no kind teacher is looking. It is, of course, base ingratitude, but the provender is none too nourishing, and the lessons are like the fare. The terms, too, are growing excessive, and that is neither good statesmanship nor good salesmanship. Our “Liberal" teachers are also preachers. They are most liberal in advice. But the advice has not always a first-hand ring, and seems to be learned by rote from those whom the Government subserve yet fear. Even allowing for good intentions, there is a sort of Cabinet conscience that makes cowards of them all. Individually they may be different, but collectively, even when they fall out, they are like that. Hence their show of democratic affection meets with scant spontaneous response, for they seem prime protectors of those whom they strive to keep under lock and key. In the throes of veiled revolution, when only half a Parliament survives, they point with callous certainty to fresh vistas of absorptive dictatorship, and they almost threaten us with |