BRITAIN'S SEA SUPREMACY.
A WORLD-WIDE MISSION. •Preaching- from, the text, "Hold fast that thou hast that no man take thy crownV •' RevV. iii, 11, α-t . Pitt ; Street Church last evening, the Rev. J. A. Luxford, who is senior Methodist chaplain of the New Zealand .Militia Volunteers, said Great Britain's supremacy on the sea was God-given for purposes of> benenuenue and benevolence, if our nation were to lose her prestige as the tirst na-val Power, she would lose her influence among the nations, and this loss of prestige -would mean loss of opportunity for benefiting the weak, the oppressed, and the uncivilised. The Anglo-Saxon people had a Divine vocation; they were called of God to govern, to administer .justice, to colonise, to evangelise, and to bless. 'He did not endorse the AngloIsrael theory, but he believed the peoplo who lived nearest to God wore the true children of Abraham, Isaac, and , Jacob. Great Britain had succeeded to a grand and world-wide mission, spiritually and ethically the same as God gave to His ancient Israel. Sho was a privileged nation entrusted with enormous powers, governing one-fifth o£ the whole inhabitants of the planet, with a territory covering one-sixth of the globe. Her rulers had not been faultless men; her ems were legion; but no people on the face of the earth could have ruled for the weal of millions as the Anglo-Saxons. The facility with which Great Britain colonised, to6k possession of, God-unoccu-I pied mansions and furnished them with guests; the rectifying of abuses and tho encouragement of righteous legislation, made their rule a benign power. There were writers who thought Great Britain's vast possessions had been godlessly gained. He had heard it said that even the South Island of New Zealand had I been obtained through a ruse, and that not a legitimate one. If such statements were correct, our possessions ought to have been limited to one little island, and the English should have been a conquered and dependent people. Could anyI one be so blind to history to say it would have been well for the world if our nation had not ranked first among the Powers? (References were made to India, to Lord Cromer's rule in Egypt and the Soudan, to Canada, South Africa, the Australaeian States, and the seagirt isles of New Zealand. If it had not been for supremacy on the sea, Great Britain would never luwe had this power to govern, to colonise, iuid enrich. It was naval power that saved her from her enemies in the sixteenth century, and prevented her becoming n. province of France in the nineteenth century. Her naval influence had been beneficial to missionary enterprise; it hud helped to break the iron yoke of slavery; and it had been, and would be, a guarantee of peace. A writer in the "XIX Century and After" recently eaid, "A British nnvy of supreme power is undoubtedly one of the greatest gun.runtees of the pence of the world, and the adoption of the two-Power standard in its broadest sense ought not to give offence in any quarters, because no other country depends for its existence upon a command of the sea." The determination to maintain this naval prestige when analysed was not born of "frantic boast or foolish word"; it was not a craving for further conquests, nor merely a desire for selling in a bigger shop; it had the clement of duty, not glory or wealth —duty to those dependent on our protection. Inn McLaren hud said: '"What nation has planted so many colonies, explored so many unknown lands, made Ro many practical contributions to civilisation, and' set such illustrious examples of liberty? What nation' has such a genius for government, such passion for justice, eueh love of adventure?" Three hundred yeaS.s ngo all this would have been called idealistic; to-day it is realistic. Sanctified ideals became facts. Those ideals would never have been realised but for the nation's supremacy on the sea, which had been made subservient to the spreading of the Kingdom of the Christ. "No nation," contiuued Mr. Luxford, "shall with impunity step in nnd make us dependent on our allies, or expose us to the mercy of hostile fleets. No nation shall filch from us our crown, which is our duty—our responsibility—to the millions whom Kipling calls, 'the lesser breeds.' No nation shall hinder us doing the work which our supremacy of the sea enables us to do in promoting the happiness and welfare of the millions of our Knipire and the weaker nations of the earth. Great Britain, in her command of the aea, has an enormous power, which has not been like a vortex, but like a. river of water, clear as crystal, enriching all who have been brought under her influence."
Permanent link to this item
BRITAIN'S SEA SUPREMACY., Auckland Star, Volume XL, Issue 75, 29 March 1909
BRITAIN'S SEA SUPREMACY. Auckland Star, Volume XL, Issue 75, 29 March 1909
Using This Item
Fairfax Media is the copyright owner for the Auckland Star. You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons New Zealand BY-NC-SA licence . This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Fairfax Media. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.
This newspaper was digitised in partnership with Auckland Libraries.