writings through Christendom is likely, from a practical point of view, to secure its object. Here before me as I write is one work of Anatole France in the 38th edition, another in the 49th, another in the 97th, and another in the 122nd edition. I do not know what number of copies this actually indicates, but facts like these do not make the condemnations of the Index appear very effective. Is it possible they may even increase the evil which they justly deplore? One of the most effective advertisements of recent years was a sandwich-man with the warning written on the board carried before him, 'Do not look upon my back.' This prohibition proved an irresistible temptation. Everybody read what they were requested not to read. No doubt the well-disciplined obedience of the Roman Communion may conquer the tendencies of the natural man. But it is still a question whether it is wise to impose this strain upon it. We have to reckon with the fact that prohibition increases desire.

It must, of course, be remembered that permission to read and to keep prohibited books can be granted by the Roman Congregations, of the Index, of the Holy Office, or of the Propaganda. The uncompromising and wholesale character of the prohibition is therefore, to that extent, mitigated. To what extent such indulgence is permitted can only be a matter of conjecture. the nature of the case such exceptions must be a private matter.

In

If the question be asked, What is the penalty for disobedience to this regulation? Catholics are not left in the smallest doubt about that. Leo XIII, in 1897, in a Constitution addressed to the Catholic world, declared that the penalty for reading prohibited books is ipso facto excommunication, the removal of which is expressly reserved to the Holy See. This particular exercise of ecclesiastical authority is, of course, intended to promote edification, by protecting the faithful against erroneous ideas, but it is very questionable whether it is in the interest of truth. It imposes a restraint which is hardly calculated to promote an impartial statement of the facts. It is not only Anglicans who think that a different treatment ought to have been given to such writers as Turmel, Batiffol, and Duchesne. Who can wonder that Vol. 247.-No. 489.

B

it has been said that Roman historians write with the Damocles sword of the Index suspended over their heads? We cannot forget the effect which the prospect of delation to Rome had on such a writer as John Henry Newman.

'I know, anyhow, that, however honest are my thoughts, and earnest my endeavours to keep rigidly within the lines of Catholic doctrine, every word I publish will be malevolently scrutinised, and every expression which can possibly be perverted sent straight to Rome-that I shall be fighting under the lash, which does not tend to produce vigorous efforts in the battle, or to inspire either courage or presence of mind.'

There are undeniably many cases when the advice should be given to an individual not to read this or that. A parent will say it to a child, a priest to a penitent, an educated person to the ignorant. The mischief done to a half-instructed person by a volume of criticism which he is incompetent to estimate aright is incalculable. Nevertheless, the system of protecting whole nations from the dangers of literature is surely more applicable to the childhood of the race than to its maturity. To many it will seem that Europe of the 20th century has outgrown the stage in which it can be trained by restricting its liberty to read the products of contemporary thought under penalty of excommunication.

It is right that Authority should indicate definite errors, and warn the faithful against lines of thought which are incompatible with the Christian revelation; but it is quite another matter when Authority condemns a book, or the writings of an author wholesale, without any indication what his errors are, and where their incompatibility with the Faith may lie. Authority, if it is to discharge this delicate function aright, must surely name the errors which prompt it to condemn. There is something, I will not say merely un-English, nor merely contrary to modern ideals of frankness and fairness, in this vague and general prohibition, but something contrary to the purpose which any literary condemnation must presumably have in view, namely, that of enabling the faithful to distinguish intelligently between falsehood and truth. The action of the Roman

Index is too vague to serve the true purpose of a warning.

We may be also haunted by a serious misgiving whether the methods of the Index do not tend to alienate the educated in all the great European cities. There are certainly many thinking people outside the Roman enclosure who feel acutely that it is not only particular dogmas concerning the papal authority which are obstructions to Reunion, but also practical methods of procedure which appear painfully ill-adapted to secure the allegiance of the modern world, and are admitted sorrowfully to be so by some of the most faithful and devoted adherents of the Roman Church.

We English people, conscious of the reduction of authority among ourselves to a shadow and a name, may well look with wonder on an authority which excommunicates a man if he dares to read a book; but, in spite of the disorders which the absence of authority can and does produce, we may still have misgivings whether this imperious despotic rule is after all the better state. If it is possible, as it is, to err by defect of authority, it is equally possible to err by excess. And painfully aware, as we all must be, of the troubles of our English condition, we may still be entirely convinced that the system of the Roman Index complicates the position by introducing troubles of another kind; producing dangers and evils from which, with all our inconsistencies, the Anglican Communion is exempt. Few of us, if any, would welcome among ourselves, were it possible, a reproduction of the Roman post-tridentine method of prohibition.

W. J. SPARROW-SIMPSON.

Art. 2.-BRITISH AIR POWER.

SINCE the days of the legend of mythical Icarus and his fatal attempt to fly the Egean Sea, man has dreamed of being able to ride the air. Having at length conquered the immutable laws of gravity, and made himself machines in which he can fly, he finds that he has created a new peril to humanity-the peril of war from the air. Certain romantic writers, ever on the alert for some new subject with which to fire popular imagination, have of late been harrowing the simple-minded with the bogie of an omnipotent power for evil which, they suggest, can obliterate not only navies and armies, but even whole cities and large sections of nations. Having conjured up this awesome spectacle, it is easy for them to argue that there is but one outstanding danger against which we should arm ourselves, and that any other forms of defence are, if not wasted effort, at least of very secondary importance.

From time to time there have been nervous statesmen in this country who have been haunted with the fear of invasion. Instead of realising that the true defence against invasion for an Island Power is sea security, they have been wont to waste effort on land forces and coast defences, while they sought to fetter the free movement of the fleet. So to-day it behoves us to examine critically and dispassionately this new menace of air attack and the powers of aircraft, and then see whether our system of defence against a new danger is adequate, and whether it attunes with defences which must still be maintained against older, but none the less real, dangers. Only so can we guard against a false policy promoted by fictitious arguments and popular clamour.

We must first study the development of aircraft, especially with regard to their radius of action and weight-carrying capabilities. The former limits their striking range, and the latter the power of their attacks. Having obtained some working data on these two points, we can pass on to geographical considerations combined with a review of foreign air forces. We shall then be able to form a fair appreciation of what should be the scope of British Air Power. It will remain to examine

how far the Air Ministry and the Royal Air Force meet our requirements. If we are to form a proper estimate of the true power of aircraft as a weapon of offence, we must disabuse our minds of exceptional achievements, like the flights across the North and, more recently, the South Atlantic, or that of a Farman Goliath aeroplane which is reported to have made a world's record by completing 2734 miles on a circular course without landing. Remarkable performances like these may be indications of what will be'; but they have been accomplished by specially prepared aircraft, whose weightcarrying capacity was chiefly devoted to fuel. They had no war equipment and were free to choose favourable weather, and to fly at whatever height was most convenient. In fact, what may be achieved by an independent unit, equipped for the sole purpose of making a long-distance flight, is quite out of the question at present for a large number of aircraft, flying under war conditions, and it is only the latter which would constitute a formidable menace.

Exact figures are by no means easy to obtain, and the Air Ministry is very shy with regard to making known the capabilities of British aircraft, doubtless due to reasons which will be apparent in the course of this article, but obviously, the most aggressive type of aeroplane is the big bombing machine. The largest of these known to exist is the United States' six-engined Barling triplane, which can carry 5000 lbs. weight of bombs, and has a maximum endurance of about 1100 miles. The French four-engined Farman with a full military load is good for 700 miles; the Italian Fiat day-bomber for 600 miles; and a number of other types, French, Italian and German in design, have air endurance of 450 to 500 miles. These figures, be it noted, represent the total distance the machines are capable of flying fully loaded. Their war radius of action is, probably, appreciably more than half their total mileage, because they will return home light, after releasing their bombs. Even so, the striking-range of the heavy bombers of our continental neighbours does not as yet appear to be more than about 250 to 350 miles.

In the late war, the German air offensive against this country was facilitated by the enemy being able to