24 How to Pay for tlie War 



Crown Prince, and the whole of the German War Party 

 put together. The British Citizen is an excellent publica- 

 tion, we read it very carefully, and find it full of views with 

 which we are entirely in agreement, whilst its policy is 

 virile and go-ahead, but we cannot agree with anything it 

 has to say as to the best way to develop the economic 

 resources of the Empire, and sincerely trust that its views- 

 will never be accepted by the country at large until softened 

 down and considerably modified. 



In answer to the above criticisms, Mr. Victor Fisher, the 

 founder, as well as the honorary secretary of the League^ 

 addressed the following letter to us : — 



The British Workers' League. 



To the Editor of Tropical Life. 



Sir, — In your issue of December last you published a 

 critical article in regard to myself and the British Workers' 

 League touching the question of Empire Development. 



The point in the League's programme which has appar- 

 ently roused your opposition is the statement : " That the 

 unrestricted commercial competition in, and the private 

 ownership of, vital and key industries lead to waste^ 

 inefficiency, fraud, and national disunion." 



The question here raised is the question between a 

 system based on unrestricted individualism and a system 

 based on national co-operation, and it would take up far 

 too much of your space to discuss so great a problem. I 

 must, therefore, limit myself here to pointing out that the 

 economic system characterized by unrestricted competition 

 between individuals has, as a matter of fact, already practi- 

 cally ceased to exist in the commercial and industrial 

 worlds. It is no longer a question of laissev faire indi- 

 vidualism versus co-operation based on nationalities, but 

 rather as between the latter system and joint-stock under- 

 takings, tending to develop into trusts or cartels. The 

 British Workers' League is of opinion — speaking in general 

 terms — that the modern State cannot much longer afford to 

 allow rings of private stockholders undiluted control of 

 vital industries. This does not in the least mean, what is 

 suggested by your footnote, that we are in favour of State 

 monopolies. We do believe, however, that in a steadily 

 increasing degree, both in the interests of the consumer 

 and in regard to public revenue, public authorities will have 

 to control in varying degrees the commercial undertakings 

 affecting commodities vital to national security. Such 

 control, as applied, would have to be tentative, and would 



