CONTROL OF THE PACIFIC.

Dominion, Volume 1, Issue 226, 17 June 1908, Page 8

CONTROL OF THE PACIFIC.

1 NARROWING SCOPE OF THE NAVY. LORD. ESHER'S ARTICLE. Has Great Britain lost tho naval supremacy of tho Pacific? asks the London correspondent of the. Melbourne "Ago." Officially, .ho answers, there has been no admission that it has. When tile Admiralty experts are not permitted to spend sufficient money they occupy themselves in spinning theories. A judicious . and comforting selection is niad6 from these by tho Cabinet, and passed on to tile publio. Lord Esher is a member of the Committee of Imperial Defence. Ho has been in direct and intimate association with tho heads of the Army and ™Ji a . ll d has mado a close personal study (n both services. His opportunities for knowing, and maintaining a knowledge of, expert opinion—including the opinion which Cabinet Ministers cither feel that they must withhold m the interests of the country, or suppress in order to gain a temporary advantage—are exceptional. With regard to tho Pacific, the statement he' now makes in a striking article which he has contributed to tho "National Review" is clear and definite. Ho says:— "Twenty years ago, in the eighties, France appeared to bo tho only rival to Great Britain at sea, and the centre of gravity of maritime power in Europe was still sought for m tho Mediterranean. To-day it liasshifted to the North Sea, while in the Pacific tho naval power of England has yielded to the United States on tho western littoral and to Japan in the' Far East. Even ten years ago, 011 the evo of tho South African'war, the flag of England flew supreme over tho oceans and seas of the world. To-day wo have been forced to abandon our supremacy over tho great waterway which separates Canada as woll as the United States from the Ear East."

We flatter ourselves that this abandonment is tbevrcsult of the Japanese alliance oil tho one hand and of ■ our 'blood relation to tho United States on tho other. Actually, says Lord Esher, it is duo .to tho riso of German sea power, and to the consequent threat of a'struggle in the North Sea. '"So rapid has been the acquisition of naval strength by Germany, and so formidable are her fleets in being and in preparation, that sho has forced on England 'a concentration which has thrown the control of the Pacific into other hands." And at the same time Germany has made her mercantile marine' in efficiency, attractiveness, and freight charges a serious rival of our own. The -trade routes of tho world are.covered with Gorman shipping, and into every nook and corner of tho civilised aud half civilised world Gorman goods are rapidly and surely pushing thoir way. All .this, as Lord Esher points out, is not a matter cither for surprise or unreasoning jealousy. If the positions wore reversed, Englishmen would display tho, same ambitions as those which now inspiro German policy. .The Germans are struggling for commercial development, and are determined to-achievo their purpose. Like other commercial rivalry, the rivalry of nations requires a victim. "If we take advantage of our insular position, of our vast maritime seaboard, of our splendid maritime population, and of the incomparable uses which could be made of Groater Britain oversea,'.' wo need have no fear But if tho British people prove raint-heartod in peace, they will share tho hue of tho Dutch, 1 'although England could bardly hope for that degree of immunity from absorption which bo far Holland enjoys." Lord Esher urges (and this is the chief object ho has m view) that tho public should bo enabled by the Government to gain a far clearer understanding than it now has of the dangers of the position that it should be permitted to see the need of steady continuity in its defence expenditure, that it should be made better acquainted with the work of tho Admiralty and not confused with endless discussion of "paper programmes." Naval supremacy "cannot be extemporised." It is the outcome of forethought and consistent policy. The position Should, ho thinks bo considered without delay bv tho whole Empire, and in referring to the "peoplo" in the following passage he means the peoplo m the self-governing dominions as well as those at home: —

Our people, therefore, must-inevitably decide, and the decision cannot bo safely postponed, whether they mean to remain one nation, although broken up into different States, and whether they .mean, both aa States and. individuals, to take their full slia.ro of all the burdens of national defence. Australians hare already shown signs that they recognise the obligation, and are not • unready to meet it. But our own people, the forty millions inhabiting these islands, \yith older traditions and wider experience, and greater - responsibilities and moro perilously. situated, should surely take the lead." . Like Lord Roberts, Lord Milnor, and other authorities who write or speak on the question irom a non-narty point of view, Lord iDsher dismisses the hope that international peace .can be maintained. The idea that it can is "an idle dream."