are probably not more deceitful or grasping than others of their kind, but they are not in the habit of making a bad bargain for their country. At that time, January, 1894, there was no apparent prospect of Germany entering into naval rivalry with England, and therefore our uncontested naval superiority might have been thought worth having. Lord Rosebery offered the guarantee of the British Fleet in return for the services of the German Army in case of war with France or Russia, or the two Powers allied. But Germans have been compelled to study history and strategy, sciences which at that time were not neglected in England, for they were totally ignored. It was pointed out to us that the fate of the Continent would never be settled by a naval blockade, but inevitably by the decision of a campaign on land and that if we desired to profit by the comradeship in arms of the Central Powers we must reorganize our land forces in such a manner as to bear our share of the decisive conflict. The Germans in 1894 demanded, in fact, no more than British statesmen had always voluntarily offered in former alliances, whether under William III., Anne, George II., or George III. The advisers of Victoria, however, could not bring themselves to face the question of Army reform, although the Army at that period cost little more than half of what it does now, and was numerically almost as strong. Liberal politicians were too busy with the farce of party politics to meddle with statesmanship, and the negotiations with Germany came to nothing.

Then followed the series of events which has produced the present impasse between Britain and Germany: the boom in Transvaal gold mines, the Jameson raid and Kruger telegram, the exasperation of France against England due to the Fashoda incident, and the Dreyfus agitation, followed

closely by the South African War, which revealed a solid hostility to the British Empire right through the length and breadth of the Continent. It was probably the refusal of France to make war on England which alone staved off a catastrophe in the first months of 1900, but in the meanwhile the rapid growth of the German fleet was introducing a new and all-important factor into the situation. To the far-seeing few it was already evident that Britain was not destined to retain for many more decades the monopoly of naval power which she had acquired in the war with Napoleon, and that even her superiority in European waters would shortly be challenged by a Power which had hitherto made good its pretensions whenever they were seriously put forward.

It is hard to say at what precise moment the rulers of Germany decided that friendship with England was likely to be impossible in the near future. It is probable that the continued neglect of our Army made it certain that we' should be almost useless to Germany in a land war, and that the futile negotiations which followed our quarrel with France in Siam and elsewhere in 1893, began to open German eyes to the egotistic but short-sighted policy of Britain as framed by her party managers. Probably, too, the attitude of the British Cabinet towards Europe in general, and Germany in particular, during the Spanish-American war, finally brought home to German statesmen the necessity for achieving independence to the naval pressure which had been so wantonly exerted against them. The patriotic movement in favor of creating the German Navy increased by leaps and bounds, and it must be considered fortunate for us that the dispute between the Continental Powers over Morocco rendered it expedient for one of the two rival groups to seek our alliance. Otherwise we might

still be without an ally, as we still are without an army of our own.

It is plain from the history of European diplomacy before 1895 that German statesmen sincerely desired, and even insisted upon, the resurrection of the British Army before the decision was taken to challenge our naval superiority. At the end of the nineteenth century the power to mobilize 250,000 British troops for service in Europe would have secured the peace of Europe as well as the safety of the Fatherland. How would the same event affect the issue to-day? It would ren

der the invasion of the British Isles a very remote contingency, even in the event of British defeat at sea at the beginning of the war. The landing of such a force on the Continent would probably be sufficient to turn the scale in a war between France and Germany, and it would render the complete and rapid victory of the latter almost impossible, provided the British commander was of even moderate ability. Finally, it would enable the British Government to abate the oppressive taxation, which has otherwise been rendered unavoidable by the competition in naval armaments. It is probably too late to recover the lost confidence of the German people, or to induce them to trust the guardianship of their interests at sea to the British Navy, but directly the British military forces have been revived so as to turn the scale in the decisive struggle, the Powers of Europe, and Germany most of all, can be compelled to listen to reason in the question of limiting naval armaments if the demand is made by our Government. It may be added that no other argument is likely to have the least weight in the matter.

If the British people ceased to fear German hostility, if they could depend on their army to render invasion impossible, even after naval defeat, and if the power to turn the scale in a Eu

ropean war had the effect of stopping the almost open hostility of rival shipbuilding, it might confidently be hoped that the ancient friendship between England and the German Powers would return, but in existing circumstances such friendship is impossible. For let us briefly consider the alternatives open to us under our present scheme of armament and alliances. Even if we beat Germany in the shipbuilding race, the feeling of hostility will certainly remain. At any moment we may find ourselves committed to a war with her, as so nearly happened last autumn. The friends of peace assert that such a war would settle nothing. This statement, however, is one more proof of how the friends of peace misunderstand the world they live in. Wars nowadays are apt to end decisively, and at any rate they all effect important settlements. If France and Russia defeated Germany in the next war, and England assists the victors, the new situation is not likely to be even approximately as favorable to Britain as the present. The balance of power, in fact, would be wiped out, and there would be no guarantee of its renewal. Moreover, if France took the place of Germany as the acknowledged rival of Britain, her antagonism would threaten British security even more directly than the enmity of Central Europe, on account of her geographical position. It would become imperative to re-establish the balance of power destroyed by our own connivance; for a real balance of power now exists approximately, and would exist actually, if England resuscitated her military strength.

support and make good, but the consideration which may appeal most powerfully to our House of Commons is the inordinate cost of the present policy, which guarantees nothing. The revival of the British Army on the scale indicated, that is, to mobilize from 250,000 to 300,000 troops for European service, demands, not increased expenditure, but improved organization and more economical administration. No one need expect that Germany will be bought off by cessions of territory and similar claims on her gratitude. The Goths were not grateful to the Romans for paying ransom, nor are the Germans grateful for the surrender of Heligoland. If they were presented with Gibraltar, Malta, and Egypt by Viscount Haldane on his next trip to Berlin, they would still remain ungrateful; but they would certainly become hungrier than ever before. The lesson The Fortnightly Review.

of all history is that a nation must rely on its own strength both for immediate safety and to secure advantageous alliances. There is also one other lesson of equal importance which the British people have still to learn, namely, that an island Power can no more dispense with an army than a Continental Power in these days can disregard naval development. Land and sea power must be proportional and symmetrical, like the muscular power of the human body. An Empire with naval superiority, and which also possesses land forces in proportion, can count on maintaining the record of England under the Plantagenets and of modern Japan. But a naval Power without land forces inevitably goes along the broad and easy path followed in turn by Tyre and Carthage, Holland and Venice, by all the purely naval States of the world's history.

Cecil Battine.

To say that the general description of the British workman one reads in the Press is distorted or exaggerated is, in my opinion, a generous way of exonerating the average writer from the charge of gross inaccuracy. I know of no author or journalist who has yet accurately portrayed the inner domestic life or the everyday experiences of the British working man. Whether the ability to describe the working man truly pertains to literary acumen or to the science of Psychology, Physiology, or Philosophy I know not; but I do know that as a theme for an essay it is of entrancing interest, deep study, and circuitous and almost labyrinthian involution. It is not because of these seemingly monumental difficulties that so many fail in the work of description, but because of the extreme difference of environment. The surroundings of

the average middle-class writer are not at all conducive to a full comprehension of the secret troubles of industrial competition. A naturalist will devote half a lifetime to studying the habits and food and life of a microscopic insect. A geologist will delve and scrape and chip and weigh tons of strata to resolve a problem of crustacea. A historian will revel in mountains of books and dry-asdust records to discover the genealogical origin of an ancient royal family. But when an account of the most wonderful of all human beings is called for a half-hour's visit to a so-called typical family and an investigation of the brilliancy of the kitchen fire irons is considered sufficient to dub the author "one who knows."

It is quite true that there is a general condition of existence for all human beings-food, clothing, shelter, rest, rec

has his house built and furnished to suit his taste and his comfort; the latter subordinates his taste and his comfort to the limits of his purse and his home. In every phase of life this general differentiation is conspicuous, and no writer, so far as I know, has yet fully elaborated the hidden details of the working man's life. I propose to do this. Not as a scribe revelling in a vocabulary of floral phraseology, nor as a biographer versed in romantic incidents of historical data, but as "a plain blunt man, that love my friend."

Born fifty-eight years ago, in the Walworth Road, I started as a breadwinner at nine years of age, and am still struggling for a bare subsistence in the ranks of the great industrial army. To me, as to thousands of others, the tragedy of industrial warfare has been a constant source of anxiety and worry, and the unconsidered trifles, which most writers would dismiss as n'importe, have impressed and oppressed me seriously.

To begin with the birth of the child. Every child of working-class parents is

Born to trouble as the sparks fly upward.

The amount of trouble to which the workers' children are born varies considerably. If the parents are in comfortable cicumstances, the likelihood of the child being well cared for is tolerably good. If the parents are poorly off, then the child has less chance of being properly reared. There are ap

proximately three fundamental conditions necessary to ensure strong, healthy, intelligent children; (1) Wholesome food; (2) intelligent care; (3) genial and healthy surroundings. In connection with No. 1, the fulfilment of that condition in the vast majority of cases borders on the impossible, because the amount of wages paid to the breadwinner is seldom sufficient to procure wholesome food, even if the worker had the necessary knowledge of the essential constituent qualities of foodproteids, carbohydrates, fat-to know which to buy. And though he may know what is required, and purchase his foodstuffs accordingly, it by no means follows that he will get wholesome food even then. The amount of adulteration practised by manufacturers of foodstuffs is alarming, notwithstanding the efforts of our legislators and administrators to check the evil; and the worker is, of course, the victim.

As to No. 2-intelligent care this also depends greatly upon the social status of the parents. If the parents of the parents had been in a position to give their children a good training and comfortable home, then the babies we are referring to would probably fare better. Heredity plays an important part in these matters, and the hereditary taint of child-slavery in the "forties" has not by any means been entirely eradicated, so there is a further difficulty from this source.

No. 3-genial and healthy surroundings. In London this factor is almost impossible of acquirement. For is it not true that for a radius of two miles beyond London habitations the air remains impregnated with more or less poisonous gases? And certainly the social environment in many workingclass neighborhoods is far from being conducive to intellectual health. genial chacacter of the surroundings is not less doubtful than the healthy.

The

Rows upon rows of flat, lifeless bricks and mortar, an entire absence of anything approaching art or nature, the mixed stench of numerous factories and workshops, the distracting noise of incessant traffic, and the look of anguish and anxiety on everybody's face, are aspects not calculated to impress the young and inquiring mind with any pleasant anticipations of future joy.

These, however, are the average conditions under which the town-bred child (and I am not speaking now of the poorest class by any means) is reared into manhood. Amongst the poorest class of workers, in which, strange to say, the production of offspring is most prolific, the conditions of birth alone are hard enough to mar any child's future. The mother has to work-either at home or out, or bothtill within an hour or so of her delivery. Then either the parish doctor or a midwife is called in to prevent, if possible, the death of either the mother or the child, but is apparently unable to do anything more than sit by and advise the poor woman to be patient and brave, and so forth, and to administer some drug, or a prescription for a drug, and, at the last moment, perhaps, to render physical assistance. The rooms in which these "incidents" occur are as varied as the rates of wages in the different branches of industry, for the worker is taught to cut his coat according to his cloth. Sometimes the woman has to go to the lying-in hospital, sometimes she is confined in the same room in which she and her husband and family sleep and eat and play; and during her actual hour of trouble the rest of the family are turned out to shift for themselves as best they can. But it is not of this unfortunate class I want to speak. Their sorrows and woes are pretty well known. I want to reveal the state of mind and body of that class of workers whose wages are too high to attract the attention of phil

anthropists and charity donors; who are themselves too proud to show the distress they endure; and who, as a result, have to bear, in quiet patience, unknown hardships and sufferings. In these families the baby never comes at the right time. It is always either when the husband is out of work, or the quarter's rent is due, or the taxes have to be paid, or the other children want new clothes or boots, or some unexpected burden has been sprung suddenly upon them. The margin between distress and comfort is so fine that a natural function may be turned into an unnatural disaster by reason of the period at which it takes place. The maternity clause in the National Insurance Act may help to alleviate, in a very slight measure, the anxiety felt in these cases. It will not remove the trouble altogether. At these timesand, as far as possible, all arrangements are made beforehand-the capacity of the family income is strained to the uttermost. Out of the pound or thirty shillings which is received from the coffers of a benefit society the doctor's charges have to be met, the fortnight's pay to the monthly nurse has to be made, and the extra cost of living, in the shape of little delicacies for the woman, have to be borne. Imagine what that means, when every penny of wages is swallowed up every week to keep the family on the better side of the poverty line. It is not that this class object to the struggle, but that, struggle as they may, they never seem able to escape from the necessity of a continuous and incessant struggle.

No sooner does the mother leave her bed and start on her household duties than one of her other children falls ill -possibly because the nurse, in order that the child should not cry and distress its mother during her illness, allowed the little one to do certain things it ought not to have done. The father returns from work, and his wife meets