part of the original scheme. At the same time work is proceeding upon the two new docks at Portsmouth and Haulbowline. Unfortunately, even this provision of six docks-including the two floating docks-will not meet the requirements of the Navy three years hence, when it will have twenty-five ships of the Dreadnought type in commission. It is evident that, in the new estimates, provision must be made still further to increase the accommodation for such leviathans. While the seven private docks-only one of which is on the east coastform a valuable reserve, it is open to question whether they will all be available in time of emergency, owing to the fact that they were not constructed to suit naval requirements; and the work of repair would, in any case, be carried out under great difficulties, owing to the absence of suitable workshops and, in many cases, the inaccessibility of trained labour. Now that the Admiralty have finally determined that Jarrow Slake is unsuitable for a floating dock, the question arises whether the authorities could not make arrangements with Messrs Armstrong, Whitworth and Co., under which that firm would, for an annual subsidy, construct a large dock at the new yard which they are now laying out lower down the Tyne. A large dock at this point on the coast would prove very valuable to the Navy in time of war. Such, then, are the urgent needs of the British fleet in ships, in men, and in docks, in face of the rapid expansion of foreign navies, and particularly that of Germany; and it is at this moment that a new conspiracy against our supremacy is being organised. In the story of British sea-power there was never an action more fraught with peril to everything which the people of the Empire hold dear than this attempt to prove an antagonism between security and social reform. Only by energetic counteraction, by a lucid reiteration of the lessons of history, and particularly of Prussian history, by a recital of the measures now being taken to expand rival fleets, and by a temperate effort to apply to ourselves the warnings which recent events have suggested of the influence of armaments on European policy-only thus can this conspiracy against our naval supremacy be defeated. In the most favourable circumstances the next few years must prove a period of difficulty. New and onerous charges on the Exchequer have been created, in pursuance of the policy of the present Government; and these charges for Old-Age Pensions, Labour Exchanges, and other social reforms-are of such a nature that they must have precedence over even the claims of defence. The labour-market is in a state of unrest. All the shipyards in the United Kingdom may, at any moment, be closed in consequence of some trivial and sectional dispute between employers and employed; and naval construction may be brought to a standstill, as it was in 1897, with results which were apparent for two or three years afterwards. We are menaced by dangers on every hand; and only by a policy of energetic concentration on the defensive measures vital to a sea-divided Empire can we hope to overcome the forces, at home and abroad, which assail us. On the most vital of all political questions the nation looks to its political leaders for guidance, and so far has looked in vain. There is now no accepted standard of naval strength. Whichever party had been in power, the two-power standard would probably have been abandoned as unsuited to the new international and naval situation. But the complaint against the Liberal party is that, being in office and responsible for the Navy, it has allowed the traditional standard to drop without substituting for it a new one. In all recent discussions the comparison of strength has been based not on the fleets of two Powers, but on the fleet of one Power only; and Ministers have congratulated themselves on being able to show a shadowy superiority three years hence in the most efficient ships over one rival navy. Even in face of such a confession the Unionist leaders have so far been content with criticism on details; and the broad issue, the need of a new standard, has been ignored. The country wants a new rule-of-thumb formula, such as that of 'two keels to one,' which every inexpert layman can understand and interpret in terms of ships, men, and docks. Throughout the country anxiety exists -an anxiety which would be acute if the gravity of the crisis were appreciated. Surely the time has come when the Unionist leaders should speak out lucidly and strongly, letting it be understood that, until the future of the fleet is assured in sufficiency and efficiency-in short, on a 'two keels to one' basis-all subsidiary measures of defence must be postponed. The maintenance of the fleet is the dominating political issue to a people who live by the sea, and to an empire which can exist only so long as its sea-communications are defended in adequate strength. We stand in want of a great educational movement, in order that we, as a nation, may appreciate the extent of our heritage, and how we may retain it. Mr Corbett's fascinating record of the Trafalgar Campaign and Mr Roosevelt's History of the War of 1812-15 are two of several recent volumes which ought to be in the hands of every person professing to take an interest in Imperial problems. They throw fresh light on the new perils with which we are threatened, by reminding us of the old perils with which our forefathers contended successfully; and they serve to enforce the essential lesson of all British history, that, as did our past, so does our future lie on the sea. Adequate sea-defences have a permanent claim on all peoples under the British flag; and those defences must be prepared in advance. Naval power cannot be improvised. To build an armoured ship takes two or three years from the date when Parliamentary sanction is obtained; six years are required to educate a junior officer, and almost as long to train a skilled naval seaman. Only by foresight and by generous financial provision allied with economical administration can we preserve our heritage. As Mr Roosevelt has reminded us, 'it is a very old truth, though one which many legislators seem slow to learn, that no courage and skill on the part of sea-officers can atone for insufficiency in the number, and inefficiency in the quality, of ships.' This is the appointed time for a national movement towards a clearer perception of the meaning of sea-power to us of all the peoples of the world. With the instru ments of war we plan to-day must we be prepared to fight a few years hence, when the Triple Alliance will have combined great fleets with its vast armies, and when every rival navy will show the results of the present prodigal expenditure. Art. 12.-THE POSITION OF TRADE UNIONS. 1. Reports of the judgments given in the Osborne case by the Court of Appeal (Nov. 28, 1908), and by the House of Lords (Dec. 21, 1909). 2. Reports of the proceedings of the Trade Union Congress at Sheffield (September, 1910). 3. Reports in the Daily Press of Labour disputes in various parts of Great Britain. 4. Report of the Board of Trade upon Conciliation and Arbitration Boards, 1910 [Cd. 5346]. 5. Report of the Board of Trade upon Strikes and Lockouts, 1910 [Cd. 5325]. ONE of the most puzzling of recent industrial developments is the sudden outbreak of indiscipline among large bodies of Trade Unionists. Men in well-organised trades, subject to definite agreements for the settling of disputes by means of conciliation, and if necessary by arbitration, have suddenly thrown down their tools, ignoring their agreements and defying their leaders. At the same time there have been ugly scenes of violence, recalling some of the worst incidents of the early days of Trade Unionism. It seems as if the Trade Union movement had suddenly stepped back a generation, and as if the progress achieved in the last thirty years had been temporarily blotted out. Various theories have been put forward to account for this phenomenon, but it is doubtful whether any of the theories are capable of precise demonstration. All that can be safely said is that these symptoms of unrest have followed upon a persistent Socialist agitation among the working classes, and that there is plausible ground for believing that the unrest is partly the result of that agitation. The Socialist agitation operates in two ways. Its first purpose is to create a feeling not merely of discontent, but of passionate revolt. Working men are taught that they are the victims of a systematic and unceasing robbery; that the wealth which they produce is filched from them; and that the capitalist is their worst enemy, who will crush them unless they crush him. Such teaching does not tend to create that conciliatory temper which is requisite if practical grievances with regard to hours and conditions of work are to be settled amicably. In addition, a considerable section of the Socialist party is frankly contemptuous of Trade Unionism, and holds that the only way to secure progress is to gain control of the power of the State, and to use that power for the benefit of the working classes. So far as this doctrine is accepted, it shakes the faith of the working classes in their own Trade Unions, and disposes them to treat as negligible the advice of leaders who, while waiting for the social revolution, wish to make the best of Trade Union methods. Thus the Socialist leaders themselves suffer from the results of their own teaching, for, though they condemn Trade Unionism as a played-out force, they have a very keen sense of the value of discipline, and it does not at all suit them to see the rank and file defying authority. Indeed, one of the most serious difficulties with which Trade Union leaders-most of whom are now Socialistshave to contend is the jealousy which the ordinary workman feels of his elected leaders. Not only is there always some rival waiting for an opportunity to step into the leader's shoes, but throughout the general body of the society there is an undercurrent of feeling that the leader who wears broadcloth and sits in an office or in the House of Commons has got an unduly soft job at the expense of the ordinary workman who has every day to go to the pit or the mill. This feeling finds open expression whenever the leaders advise a course which at the moment is unpopular; and the doctrine of universal equality then recoils somewhat unpleasantly on those who have been busily teaching it. Another factor in the present situation is the recent establishment of Labour Exchanges, managed by the Board of Trade under the authority of an Act of Parliament, and with funds supplied from the National Exchequer. Until these exchanges were established, almost the only machinery for assisting masters to obtain workmen was that created by the Trade Unions. As soon as a member of a Union is out of a job, he reports himself at the Trade Union office; and, when an employer wants more hands, it is to that office that he generally sends. This well-understood system naturally operates so as to give the Unionist a better chance of |