xo 
LAND & WATER 
January ii, 1917 
such mo\-ements as the fire control party on shore could 
not anticipate. The monitor could only be hit by chance 
shots — but could make its proper total of hits on the 
fort. But if monitors are neither shell-proof nor endowed 
with a capacity to shoot under hehii then, clearly, they 
are useless. 
In theory there seems no reason why the monitor 
type should not be de\'eIoped along both of these lines, 
and a form of ship produced which would unquestionably 
make the barricading of the fleet exits effective, and hence 
the establishment and maintenance of an anti-submarine 
in the bamer possible. It would involve, of course, a 
temporary monopoly of a huge proportion of the \yhole 
of our shipbuilding "capacity. But in this matter it is as. 
well to keep one measurement in our minds. The Ger- 
mans have clahncd that they arc sinking our merchant 
tonnage at the rate of 3,600,000 tons per annum. This 
is a gross exaggeration. 
What would be the equivalent in merchant tonnage of 
the output required for making an unsinkablc fleet — 
making a sufiicient proportion of our present Jleet unsink- 
ablc, otherwise making the necessary material for effective 
blockade ? And how long would it^take to produce such . 
a fleet and other material ? If it took six months in 
time and the equivalent of a miUion tons in ship-building 
and engineering effort, it would be a cheap price to pay 
for putting an end to the submarine menace altogether. 
Arthuk Pollen 
The People and the Duties of Empire 
By the Master of Bailiol College 
THE question has often been asked, can a demo- 
cracy hold an Empire ? The question put in this 
form suggested that the answer should be. No. 
But we are rapidly coming to see that the truer 
form in which to put the question would be— can an 
Empire be built up out of a federation of kindred but 
separated democratic communities, or even out of a 
looser system of alliances between such communities ? 
In either case the answer depends, in the last resort, on 
the degree of intelligence and the moral character of the 
mass of citizens in those communities. Federation is an 
artificial and intricate machinery ; it requires much 
" give and take " and much political aptitude in those 
who live under it. A system of alliances is still more 
delicate to handle. Mere good will is not enough. If 
the British Empire, which is really a commonwealth of 
democratic states, is to continue in either form, it pre- 
supposes that these democracies shall consist of men who 
are in the main not only honest and fair-minded, but also 
intelhgent and fairly well instructed. 
Imperial and Anti-Imperial Sentiment 
Now we have been learning many things since July 
1914. We have learnt that what seemed a narrow anti- 
Imperialist sentiment in our working classes, was partly 
mere ignorance and partly a healthy disgust at things 
which seemed to be associated with the shoddy Empire 
of Napoleon III., reactionary Russia, mihtarist Germany, 
and our own Jingoes. We have learnt, on the other 
hand, that the supposed anti-Imperialist tendencies in 
the Dominions were partly a dying tradition and partly 
a healthy distrust of " Downing Street." All the while 
on this side of the oceans, as well as on that side, the 
hearts of the people held a deeper and truer Imperial 
sentiment than the ruling classes either di\'ined or de- 
served. 
When politicians and economists were talking of the 
desirability of " cutting the painter," were comparing 
colonies to " fruit which should fall off when ripe," were 
describing the severance of the United States from Eng- 
land in 1786 as " the best thing which ever happened," 
in the teeth of these theories our own people persisted in 
feeling the colonists to be our kinsmen, in holding blood 
to be thicker than water, and in not resenting colonial 
tariffs ; and, on the other side, the colonials persisted in 
speaking of going " Home," in refusing to provide for 
themselves as States on the brink of separation, and in 
regarding their Protection as quite compatible with our 
Free Trade, and regarding their patriotism as a part of, 
not a substitute for, wider Imperial patriotism. The 
instantaneous and spontaneous response of the Colonies 
in August 1914 was more of a surprise to the politicians 
and officials than to the man in the street. 
But we must not assume that it was all from love of 6ur 
beaux yeux. " We have not come to light for you," said 
an Australian, " but for what you and we have in 
common." 
Nor must we assume in dealing with our own people 
that they yet understand either the wonderful possi- 
bilities implied in a union of Dominions which embrace 
one-fourth of the earth's area and one-fourth of the 
human race, or the unprecedented difficulty of building 
this union into a permanent structure. It is true that 
the mere presence of Canadians and Anzacs, South 
Africans and Indians has powerfully appealed to their 
imagination. ,, 
" If we can only have one lecture, let it be one on the 
Empire " — this is often said in centres which even with 
overtime and munition work can supply eager audiences. 
Three years ago the word Empire had but an ill sound 
to the ordinary workman ; in August 1914, it suddenly 
acquired a new note, and already his attitude to it is 
transformed. Yet the whole meaning of it was there all 
the time, latent. The bond with the Dominions was 
growing ever closer ; few working-class families had not 
a close blood tic with them through some near relative ; 
few localities had not had an industrial ctisis at some 
time or other relieved by an overflow to homes oversea. 
That bond has suddenly proved itself of unsuspected 
strength ; half a million Canadians, 300,000 Australians 
— who could have imagined such figures three years ago ? 
That meaning latent in the term Empire is now made 
manifest as by a revelation. It is not merely the splen- 
did physique, the splendid courage and initiative of the 
men from overseas that impress our people, but still more 
the deep feehng for Britain and British ideals that brings 
these men across the oceans. There are recent signs ,of 
this feeling in the rejection by the Canadians of the idea 
of special Canadian hospitals ; in New Zealand's adop- 
tion of conscription ; in the common Austrahan remark 
that Mr. Hughes could have carried out conscription if 
he had not bothered about a referendum. 
It must be remembered that the characteristic spirit 
of democracy, at once its inspiration and its besetting 
danger, is idealism. The classical example i§ the be- 
haviour of the Lancashire cotton operatives in the 
American Civil War. As soon as Lincoln's proclamation 
made it clear that the real issue was slavery, the cotton 
operatives came out for him with a unanimity and a 
resoluteness that faced a cotton famine and prevented 
our Government from going in on the wrong side and so 
making the greatest blunder since George III. and Lord 
North. In the words of a recent American writer, this 
story of the men who, while being starved to death, 
could not be induced to desert the cause of the slaves 
is among the most moving stories in history : " These 
humble creatures saved us." 
This idealism comes out very markedly when an appeal 
is being made to a mass of men. An appeal to their 
material interests does not carry you far, for the simple 
reason that their material interests soon begin to diverge 
in all manner of ways ; whereas the one thing they have 
in common is their humaneness (so to speak), and the 
expression of that is the sense of justice and fair play. 
Again the masses are impatient of technical detail, of 
legal obstacles, and qii constitutional difticulties ; they 
take the broad view, that is an idealist view. For- 
tunately in most cases the broad ground is the moral 
ground. Thus at the outbreak of this war, what turned 
public opinion among the masses was the case of Bilgium, 
involving the faith of treaties and the existence of small 
