Rangitikei Advocate. SATURDAY, MARCH 14, 1908 EDITORIAL NOTES.

Rangitikei Advocate and Manawatu Argus, Volume XXXIII, Issue 9095, 14 March 1908, Page 4

Rangitikei Advocate. SATURDAY, MARCH 14, 1908 EDITORIAL NOTES.

THE debate on the naval estimates in the British Parliament appears to have ended with a clear statement from Mr Asquith which satisfied both sides of the House. The Chancellor of the Exchequer who, in the absence of Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman, is the leader of the LiboraTParty, said; i: lf we find there is a reasonable probability of the German programme being realised in the way the paper figures suggest, we will feel it our duty to provide—and shall provide—a sufficient number of ships, and shall lay them down at such dates that by November, 1911, the superiority of Germany which Mr Balfour foreshadows will not be an actual fact,” Mr Asquith added: “That is the policy of the Government. It remains ou record, and ought to ■reassure the House that we do not intend to bo left behind.” The discussion arose because many members of tbs House felt uncertain whether the Government would yield to the pressure of the. socialists to cut down the navy estimates and endanger ,;the maintenance of the two-power standard for the navy. Mr Asquith’s clear statement seems to have removed these apprehensions. The’euthusiasts who desire a great increase in the British navy always accept the naval programmes of foreign nations as certain to be carried out to the letter whereas experience proves that in most cases performance falls far short of intentions. As Britain can build ships more rapidly than any oth«r nation she can afford to wait until foreign ships are actually on the stocks before preparing her reply to them. Some authorities consider that it was a mistake for Britain to build the Dreadnought at the time she did as the manifest superiority of that vessel started a competition between the nations which might have been deferred. The best course for Britain is to allow other nations to get their vessels well in hand and then produce more efficient ships than those bailding for foreign navies, and this is the method - that Mr Asquith intends to adopt.

IT is a pity that some of the enthusiasts who desire to see the growth of local industries are so hopelessly ignorant of the simplest elements of political economy. The Post began an article the other day will the following astounding statement ‘‘The ideal of trade for any nation is a local consumption supplied entirely by local industry ; importation abolished; and an unlimited export paid for in gold.” So far from such a state of affairs being an ideal one it would laud the country practising it in ruin within a decade. First we may remark that the ships taking away our exports would go away full and return empty as the gold in payment for the goods would occupy little space. Hence the rates for carriage of oiir exports would be double what they would be if the vessels had cargo both ways aud consequently the goods we sent away would either have to be sold at a higher rate or the profits from selling them would be lowered. Next with

a constant inflow of gold to this country prices would rise at a rapid rate ariff exports would automatically cease because goods could only be sold abroad at lower prices than they cos! to produce here. Gold Is useless, apart from its value in the ats or for ornamental purposes, except as a medium of exchange and the country would be little better off—except that gold fillings for teeth might be cheaper—were a hundred million sovereigns dumped here unless they could be sent to pay off debt or used to purchase goods from other countries.