BY GERMANY'S LEAVE.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 712, 11 January 1910, Page 5

BY GERMANY'S LEAVE.

—4 BRITISH DUTIES. . "A POWERFUL WORD" MIGHT. COME , EEOM ABROAD. By Toleeraph—Press Assooiation-Oopyrln hf. Berlin, January 9. Tie Berlin newspapers continue to discuss Mr. Balfour's Hanley speech (in the courso. of which Mr. Balfour stated that eminont though' non-ollicial Germans wero declaring: that Germany would never allow Britain to adopt tariil reform; also that in the opinion of the •statesmen and. diplomatists lof lesser Powers a .struggle between Britain and Germany is inevitable, and "they' : think we .ate 'not. alive .'.to a sense of our responsibilities,; and are therefore ,' predestined , to; 6ucoumb."

| /.Tlie newspaper 'Treisinnige Zoitung," discussing the.-. English, elections and, 'tariffprospects,, declares , that" foreign countries have a powerful, word to say in. the matter. What would Argentina say, asks tlie paper,' 'if, Britain imposed, a duty on wool, tallow, wheat, and frozen meat, while, importing the same goods duly free' from Canada and: Australia? Would othert : countries remain silent if a duty-free market were opened to tho colonics in London? /.

London, January 0. The .Berlin. correspondent, of .the "Daily Jlail" reports, that German? newspapers of all. shades of opinion,'are unanimously assailing: the .. .Conservatives, and heaping .vituperation 'upon /Mr.' Balfour for : his references ;to . Germany.- in his Hanley 'speech.' 7'

WHY A PREDOMINANT NAVY IS ' AN ESSENTIAL. THE SUPREMACY OF GERMANY'S ARMY. ' sLondon, January 9.v.. . . Mr,. Bonar 'Law,. Unionist Tariff: Reformer/.who , was;. Parliamentary' Secretary, to the. Boardof . Trade in the Balfour Government,! addressing, the ''.electors at Camberwell, said: that, while the British Fleet had . been dispersed, Germany's, had; 'been' concentrated in the North Sea. . '

■: ■■ -Germany's army,'!, added the, • speaker,' "is .'the most efficient in the world, /arid if she went to war with .us" she could strike us down' without the 5 possibility of. our offering Tesistiahce, if she had • com-' mand .of. the. .Channel;. hence .wo must have *an * unchallenged navy." navy estimates to be nearly FORTY MILLIONS, A GOVERNMENT ASSURANCE.' (R«c. January 10, 10.40 p.m.) London, January 10. Tlie Chancellor of the. Exchequer, Mr. Lloyd-George/, addressed a;/gathering,)ot 11,000, people. at Plymouth'. ', ;He •' said it might be imagined,.from; tha talk of'the last few: days, .that the" Government had .made no'< provision- /for the .security, of our shores.; : Tho/Government, had really added nearly three millions to tlie Navy, and. would add many more Millions. He predicted; that next year's :Navy. Estimates would, not', be . far short of forty millions. , :

/; He , was not', one / who' 'thought that .British, sailors' were incompetent' to meet' any sailors; in the'world.' .At any rate, the . Government ; was going, to put it beyond question that Britain was absolutely safe. , ;.,/'/.:.

ANGLOPHOBIA AND. A. BRITISH TARIFF. , ~, /LORD, .CROMER'S V;VIEW: 1 , ,"THE ' TIMES'"VPRO'rESTr"'' - i It. .triil lie remembered that the eamo ,issue--how. foreign nations, would regard •a British tariff-was - : ro.ised ■. fy : ford-' Cromer. (Unionist. Free-trader): in 1907 and. again m 1903.. /', ;/; :/ ■ 'Not a Free People." ...Lord Cromer- feared that British /Pro-' teotion : would:/ arouse, dormant Anglo-' phobia- into / activity./'. On/./this' ."The Ximes"'commented/ ;'-. , / :/ ' v'? jwa dare. not use at home,'! ;'. ; • / for/defonsivo .purposes,'-the/ mn- : / chmery frcoly.;Used by all-, other*, : nations offensively;and defensively,/. what is; the: good • of: talking. about . /: our: Pleets:On that .showing'.we ;■ ■/"-' aro not a free people, ;brit exist by - /. tho kind permission of-others so - ; . : long as we allow them to do as . they please in. our markets. /As ' jir tho Empire,, it: consists mainly :of 'independent -communities,who ■/, -their- own fiscal arrangements. Can it be seriously argued: / ' : that \ve may not enter into arrangements/ with ' them / without stirring .up uuivereal onimosily? . Prom an Imperialist . this is ■■ ■' strange doctrine." : </■ Quickening Anglophobia. : |/ :J .The .speech' which -aroused .this protest ■Trand , whioh ' will now be read with a rien interest .in view of Balfour's recent remarks,- and _tho - ineriaoing; view attributed : to .a. Gorman paper in to-day's ■ cablegrams— wa9 ,made by Lord - Cromer before the •/: Unionist ./ Preo-trade ■ Club./ Lord Cromer said-he had been a Free-trader all his .life, and-, till recently had''thought that, the /principles. ;laid down by Sin -Robert 'Peel/and his coadjutors- some 60 iyears ago were so' generally accepted in' this country, that there was. no/need/to defend - them. . One -result of tho reversal ■of. the. policy under, which/we had for so many yeafa/grown :and: prprie9sed would be , to; .quicken;. into ■ life whatever-more or /less-dormant ./Anglophobia; existed throughout the: /worid: -Moreover, once' tho passions which Protection or preference would evoke'had been let loose,- our present naval establishment, great though it "was, :would be. insufficient to/ 1 maintain the security-of. our .vast possessions. One of the main.reasons why we hdd been able to do a good piece of work in' Egypt, and .why we had eventually* been : able to get Europe to acquiesce- in'our continuance of that work, had. been that; during' the /whole oou'rso of the occupation the prin/ciples of Pree-trade had been rigidly ap; ;plied in', that country./ Once depart from these, principles, and he was convinced that our/occupation would be'regarded in a very different light/ from that in which it was. now viewed.

Defensive, Not Agoressive, Tariff. . . In the . course of its comments on the above, "The . Times"., observes:—"Lord' Cromer .maintains that return to Protection would awaken dormant Anglophobia everywhere. .Possibly it'might, but as no' responsible .leader'has', committed Tariff. Reformers to - anything of the kind the point .is riot .worth, arguing.: We cannot ■see, however,, why our adoption of.a:sysitem- followed by all the rest of the world■ -[should'expose us. to any particular odium, 'especially, if, as ;'Lord: Cromer • maintains, it v;ou!d render- us less' formidable com-: petitors than we are'at present. In any case; Tariff' Reform is widely: different from Protection, particularly in being defensive, not aggressive, as regards other, nations, and we have yet to hear any argument to show that it would provoke 'any keener hostility than our present com-, raercial activity calls forth. It will' at least bo very difficult for a Free-trader to ■produce such an argument without tacitly, admitting that there is a'flaw in his reading of. Free-trade. I:.' Egypt's PosHion Peculiar. , "Lord Cromer relies too much upon his own experience in Egypt, forgetting for tho moment the very ..exceptional conditions obtainiug in that oountry. We could not have set up an exclusive system there for . a very simple reason. Other nations had rights in Egypt.: It was not our,possession, it: is: not our possession. to-day. and wo still administer the country undet international' supervision- which' is real, although, thanks mainly to Lord, Cromer luinselt, it is rarely, seen in overt action. There is no analogy between our rights in Egypt.and our rights over, the ouston/s. and the municipal laiys of our .own country. The Sudan .'.belongs in part to Egypt and is oovered by the same argument. '-