NOTES AND COMMENTS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXIV, Issue 19721, 22 August 1927, Page 8

NOTES AND COMMENTS.

ARMIES IN EUROPE. Reviewing the prospects of disarmament in Europe, Major-General Sir Frederick Maurice recently stated that while it was true in 1921 that there were then a million moro men under arms in Europe than in 1913, the position to-day was that there were 1,200,000 fewer than in 1913. As an illustration of the tendencies, he said that not long ago France, the most powerful military State in the world, passed a law that, in the emergency of warfare, the services of every man and woman should bo at the disposal of the State. This step was regarded by many people in Great Britain as a militarist measure, but he did not share that view. In 1913 France had permanently tinder arms 820,000 men, serving mostly for three years. At present, she had 400,000 men under arms, the term of service being only one year. In 1913. she could at short notice, put 42 divisions in the field, but now she could put only 14. What had been happening in Europe recently was a general approximation of military forces to the Swiss system of 1913—an army suitable for defence, not for aggression. This system was now in vogue in many of the smaller European States, and was gradually being adopted in France.

LUXURIOUS CIVILISATION

"If 1 am optimistic about Ehe general outlook of affairs to-day, it is because I believe that, in spite of tendencies that are regrettable and even alarming, the coming generation will believe even more firmly than ours that 'reward of a thing well done is to have done it,' " writes Sir Charles Wakefield, a former Lord Mayor of London, in a book on the choice of a career on leaving school. "The rewards of material success are easily catalogued. The remarkable thing is that essential luxuries, if I may coin a slight paradox, are to-day within the reach of people of quite moderate means. We all, rich and poor equally, want to rest, to sleep, to eat and to move about the countryside. Opportunities for reading, hearing music and visiting the theatre are available for the great majority of people. Wireless transmission and the development of popular motoring have removed practically all barriers between the man in the street and a life reasonably full and varied. What more can be desired ? The success that is assessed in terms of money can only bring the victor more than is needed of everything that is- already easy of attainment. If, in the effort to equip himself for money-getting, he has crushed or ignored all the nobler side of his personality, what has he gained, even if he is successful to the pitch of notoriety ? The mere power to slacken off and to loiter in idleness and folly with the camp-fol-lowers in the battle of life! That way lies moral death, and something that wo are perhaps more sensitive to—boredom!" YOUTH IN BUSINESS. "From ago to age, Youth is the builder, Age the guardian and preserver," says Sir Charles Wakefield, and proceeds to expound his view that the development of British industry is hindered bv lack of resiliency in its directive power. "For financial success, caution, tradition and long-headedness are some of the essentials, and these are traits characteristic of our people in middle age," he says. "For the active and successful control of giant industrial undertakings, technical skill and daring allied to youthful energy of brain and muscle are absolutely necessary. There are many prominent men in commercial life to-day who say very definitely, and! with the weight of high position in the business world, that what is wanted is 'new blood in industry.' I believe that to bo true. I believe that wo want new courage and larger vision to revive British industry under the new conditions, and for these we must look to Youth, for these wo must be willing to smooth the way for Youth." WHERE IS THE ENEMY? " British needs have been explained in detail, but the nature of American needs is still loft obscure," the Times stated in a leading article on the Geneva Conference. " Tliero has been an immense amount of talk about ratios and guns and tonnage, but no attempt has been made to provide an agreed answer to the simple question: What are all these battleships, cruisers and destroyers for? The vague answer is defence. But against whom or what ? In the background of all theso naval discussions lurks the idea of a potential enemy. Who is lie ? These three greatest sea Powers of the world have, at any rate, modified the conception of the potential enemy in relation to each other, since they have met on the assumption that it is desirable not to build against each other indefinitely, and that a great common interest would be served by an agreed limitation of their naval forces. Yet the spectre is not wholly banned. The failure to prepare for the Conference by confidential consultation, and the avoidance of the real issue during the Conference itself, show that tho full implications of the method of limitation of naval armaments by agreement have not yet been accepted by all the participating Powers. Tho idea of naval rivalry persists even in Ihe discussions on limitation. War between Great Britain and the United States is, of course, unthinkable, and war between Great Britain and Japan, or between Japan and America, is highly improbable. The German Navy has disappeared, and there is little prospect of a formidable navy appealing in any other part of the world in the near future. In llieso circumstances nn.tli might have resulted from the frank discussion suggested by Mr. Bridgerran about what all tho sh'ps are fo!\ The lack of it vitiated the work of the Conference."