The Dominion THURSDAY, MARCH 7, 1918. LOOKING TO THE FUTURE

Dominion, Volume 11, Issue 144, 7 March 1918, Page 4

The Dominion THURSDAY, MARCH 7, 1918. LOOKING TO THE FUTURE

The opening in London of the exhibition of enemy goods, jvith the object of showing British manufacturers the exact nature of enemy trade in various parts of the Empire and other countries, is a reminder of the big movement developing in tho Mother Country for the expansion nf after-war trade and commerce overseas. The question is receiving very serious attention in Great Britain, and it may be taken as- a hopeful and encouraging evidence that Britain is determined that her manufacturing industries at tho close of the war shall be in a position to face on tho best of terms whatever competition may be forthcoming from enemy or other countries. It is somewhat surprising that while so much attention is being given to after-war 1 production ajid the possibilities of after-war trade compbtition, reference is seldom made and little attention publicly given to the effect on future world trade and world relations which may result from the. colossal thefts committed by Germany and her allies during ' the war. An enormous volume of wealth in various forms has been ruthlessly stolen by the Teutonic Powers from the nations whose territory they have invaded, and any future economic policy decided on by tho Entente Powers cannot afford to ignore this feature of'the situation. The problem in its leading details is lucidly outlined by M. Andre Cheradame, an eminent authority on Pan-German-ism, in a pamphlet 6n German War Profits and the German Formula "No. Annexations and No Indemnities)" Since M. Cheradame wrote, the situation has been altered by the extension of the German invasion in Russia and the up-to-date evidence it affords of a determination to cling to the fruits of plunder, but he points out that even if Germany agreed to ovaciiato the foreign territories she has occu : pied the application of /the formula of "no annexations and no indemnities," as it is understood within her borders, would leave her enormously enriched with stolen wealth and with Pan-German dreams substantially realised. The two main factors to be considered, looking at matters from this standpoint, are the volume of foreign wealth which Gormany has seized and the grip she has obtained on the nations which rank nominally as her allies. The magnitude of the "war-pro-fits" Germany has gained by invasion atid plunder is not commonly realised. M. Chekadame declares that every German occupation of territory has paid Germany far more than it has cost her, and that to suggest that Germany is ruined by the war is to play her ganje' by creating a belief that she is uhable to repair the havoc she has wrought or even to give back tho equivalent of the immense thefts she has committed. . Probably M. Cheradame overstates the position when he asserts that Germany has more than recouped herself from the invaded countries for. the cost of invasion. It certainly does not appear credible. But on the basis of the proportionate estimated wealth before the war of tho countries and territories occupied, he calculates the value of these territories at approximately £6,400,000000, and though much of the woalth seized by Germany has been wantonly destroyed, she has secured also a vast amount of transportable booty —including such items as raw material, live stock, machinery, and machine tools. She has also imposed fines and raised forced loans and taxes which in themselves run into hundreds of millions sterling. Account must be taken also of an enormous amount of labour_ which Germany has secured practically gratis from thrco million prisoners of war and 46,000,000 inhabitants of occupied Allied territory. As tho phrase "no annexations and no indemnities" is used in Germany, it means that Germany is to be left in undisturbed possession of an immense volume of stolen wealth, and in full freedom to work her will in Middle Europe and in Turkey in the territories of the so-called allies \vhom she has reduced to complete financial dependence. These facts demonstrate how far Germany is from being prepared to concedo the' essentials of peace. She is ready, and even anxious to negotiate, but only in the spirit of a robber who names the retention of his loot and of the base from which his robberies were committed as hard and fast conditions on no account to be departed from or varied. Adhering inflexibly to their demand for full restoration and reparation, the Allies are sirpply domanding that the proceeds of wholesale plunder shall be restored to their rightful owners. At the same time they

ave taking the only road to a lasting peace. All other _ questions apart, the rooted determination of the present rulers of Germany to retain possession of the enormous booty in material wealth which the war has brought into their hands raises an issue -which admits of no mistake except on the part of those who blindly ignoro the facts. A comprehensive act of restoration is demanded in the first instance on the score of simple justice, but it is essential on all grounds in the interests of future peace. The stolen wealth she now holds not only enriches Germany, but supplies her with the materials she needs to fetter her vassals and consolidate the Middle Europe of Pan-German dreams. Until the fruits of her unexampled robbery have been disgorged there can be no approach either to peacp or to a sound' adjustment of economic relations in and beyond Europe.