King Country Chronicle Wednesday, May 10, 1911. CREDIT VERSUS WAR.

King Country Chronicle, Volume V, Issue 359, 10 May 1911, Page 4

King Country Chronicle Wednesday, May 10, 1911. CREDIT VERSUS WAR.

In a very interesting article in the "London Magazine" Mr Norman Angell propounds a new theory which, if accepted, revolutionises the whole theory of the effects of war on the victor and the vanquished. He main-

tains that as the telephone, the telegraph, and wireless telegraphy, swift steamship and railroad communication have extended and become more efficient, the interdependence of one civilised nation upon another has increased, and international credit has become so delicate and vet so powerful, that the civilised nation that

brings about war damages its own interests more than those of its enemy, even if it wins. Until recently it was always understood that "to the victor belongs the spoils" — that when one nation vanquished another, the victor was a gainer. To-day the attitude towards warlike preparation is more that a nation must be strong in order to give it a strong position in the world. National wealth is held to be open to being stolen just as much as private wealth is. Nature, too, is red in the tooth and claw, and it is all part of the evolutionary process to struggle and to fight. So, at least, runs orthodox political philosophy. According to Mr Angell, it is all wrong, because it only considers half the facts, and he shows that though struggle is inevitable, it is a struggle of man with nature, not man with man. The law of co-operation enters into the law of life as well as the law of strife. When Olaf, the Viking King, descended on Northumbria and collared the loot, sailing away again, he had few losses to put against his gains in those early pagan times. But if Germany's army landed in England and looted the Bank of England, the Bank of Germany would suspend payment, and the victor's own balance disappear. For every sovereign he took from English merchants German merchants would probably pay one hundred. The factor of co-operation, in short, has profoundly modified the factor of conflict. The actual amount of gold in England at any time would not pay one year's taxes, and may be roughly calculated at £100,000,000 to £150,000,000. But England's total wealth has been calculated at seventeen thousand millions, and her foreign trade alone more than ten times the entire amount of gold she possesses. A mere fraction is geld, therefore, and the great bulk is credit. Credit relies upon commercial contracts, and war means repudiation of such contracts. And as credit is

a mutual operation, the failure of one .party to perforin his section involves the failure of the other party to perform his. That is why, when owing to a financial crisis in New York the bank rate in London goes up to seven per cent, and even in New Zealand money is "tight" and interest high. So much for confiscation of wealth. What of confiscation of territory? Mr Angell shows that adding territory means no addition of wealth to the adders. It merely incorporates the owners of the wealth in a new country. But apart from this, small States are as well to do as large ones. By any possible test applied the citizens of such countries a3 Holland, Belgium, Denmark, Sweden, Norway or Switzerland are as well off as citizens of countries like Germany, Austria or Russia. Germany conquered France and "annexed" Alsace-Lor-raine, but Alsace-Lorraine is owned by its inhabitant, and no one else, and contributes to the Imperial Treasury on exactly the same scale as other portions of the German Empire. But can we destroy a rival's trade? Suppose we destroy the German fleet tomorrow, will German competition cease? The sixty-five million efficient and educated people would still be there, as determined to gain their livings and push their trade as ever. German competition would be keener after defeat than before. And the converse would also be true, If Germany could crush us she would equally suffer, and if by some magic she could wipe Great Britain oft the face of the earth—she would be faced by sheer ruin and the very best market she has in the world would disappear. Mr Angell goes on to point to the British Empire as being a standing proof of the economic futility of military power. Each portion is left to decide for itself how it will trade, and military force has no place. The commercial operations of the Empire and of the rest of the world are essentially mutual, and if a nation is to have sound credit it must not disturb the credit of other nations. Such, in brief form, is the argument Mr Angell so ably propounds. His book "The Great Illusion" is creating a furore in the northern hemisphere, and there seem to be few weaknesses in his arguments. The acceptance of his theory does not imply the abolition of military methods. The systematic training ox the young manhood of our Dominion is desirable from physical and disciplinary points of view, even if we never require to fight. International credit, indeed, seems to be automatically putting an end to national conflicts, and while military training will ever be a good thing, we may reasonably hope, as the yeara roll on, that military conflict will cease and "the war-drum throb no longer and the battle flags be furled,"