East, whose supplies to England are likely to decrease in the same proportion as she absorbs the raw products of her own Colonial Empire. A further factor likely to benefit Germany will, he thinks, consist in the retaliatory tariffs as they become part of England's protective system against the existing tariff schedules of other countries. The almost inevitable consequence of these measures will be to bring down the tariff rates generally, which will give Germany her opportunity for more effective competition. If the interest of Germany lies, as he believes it does, in the maintenance of the British Empire, no less is England concerned in the preservation of Germany. Germany has become one of England's most valuable clients, and one fact alone will indicate this: that her sales to Germany exceed in volume her exports to India, as is shown by the following tabulated statement: Germany imports on an enormous scale manufactured and semimanufactured articles from England, consisting chiefly of woollen and cotton goods, machinery and ships, and her purchases of yarns alone amounted in 1907 to 250 million marks. Specifically English branches of trade, to instance the shipbuilding and fishing industries, and essentially German manufactures, as aniline dyes, pianos, and toys, equipoise each other; in the case of the fishing trade, Germany is unable to provide more than one-third of her requirements, and her consumption is yearly increasing. A close examination into facts of this nature inclines him to believe that herein possibly lies the basis for a regulation of trade exchange to suit the peculiar adaptabilities of the respective countries. The growing demand in Germany for English articles of luxury, in place of French, is another expanding trade with Germany, which has become so marked as to influence German life very considerably. Professor Schulze-Gaevernitz admits the fact which English economists always dwell on, that Germany is a larger exporter to England than she is an importer from England; against this, however, he says that in her trade relations with the British Colonies the ratio is exactly reversed, and that Germany takes from these Colonies produce amounting to 32 million pounds, whereas her export trade does not exceed 12 millions; and again, in the case of India, Germany ranks after England as her next best customer. Germany, in fact, is the largest buyer in the world of British Colonial produce, and summarising her trade with the British Empire, the balance of trade is against her, as this formula will explain. TABLE IV. GERMANY AND THE UNITED STATES IMPORTS AND EXPORTS TO THE Germany's Imports from the British Empire exceed . 7.9 million £ 87.9 million £ These facts, says the author, argue the futility of a conflict on commercial grounds with Germany. There is another aspect that bears on the Anglo-German problem. The development of the Colonies has absorbed large sums of British capital, most of the Colonial loans have been raised in the English money market, and in some cases Great Britain's credit has been pledged as a guarantee, in which connexion Australia's great indebtedness to England is a case in point. The Colonies are faced with the payment of interest on their indebtedness and with the recurring extinction of their liabilities, while the only guarantee they have of being able to discharge these engagements lies in the certainty of their export trade of home produce to the great industrial States. England's trade balances with her Colonies are on the whole insignificant, which is accounted for by the fact that the Colonies have always preferred British goods either for reasons of sentiment or similarity of tastes, besides, of course, preferential tariffs. It follows as a logical conclusion, says Professor SchulzeGaevernitz, even though some tariff reformers may dispute this point, that, if the credit and solvency of these Colonial States is to be maintained, they are and will be compelled to encourage their exports of produce to industrial States outside England, even though England should in future be able to absorb greater quantities of Colonial raw products than she has done in the past. Germany, in fact, is first among these outside industrial countries as a buyer of Colonial materials. The margin between her purchases from the British Colonies and her sales to them is actually sufficient to cover the service on their loans as it becomes due to England. This applies even with greater force to India, whose remittances to England include the service of her loans, pensions, business and plantation profits, and who has besides a debit balance in her trade with England. It is not too much to aver that it is the purchasing power of Europe, and mainly that of Germany, which carries the Indian budget and the Indian currency. Professor Schulze-Gaevernitz contends that it is no exaggeration to submit that Germany, who is an industrial State, has great powers of absorption, and, being practically without Colonies herself, is peculiarly suited to supplement Great Britain; and in this wider relationship she would become a potent factor in the maintenance of the British Empire. The foregoing should bear out the contentions, says the writer, that it needs only to dispel the fears that fill the political imagination for the economic problem to regulate itself, and for both countries to know how much greater is their community of interests than their differences. This will be the occasion for the faiths of Hume and Adam Smith to find their consummation. They both upheld the view that those neighbours need each other most who are evenly matched in wealth and manhood. It was Hume who exclaimed: 'I frankly dare to profess that, as a British subject, I welcome the industrial prosperity of Germany, Spain, Italy, and even of France.' At this period he might have reversed the conclusion, and said ' of France, and even of Germany.' Adam Smith added the following: 'If a nation aspires to greater prosperity by fostering foreign markets, her task is rendered easy if she enjoys as neighbours a wealthy, industrious, and com mercial people. The well-being of Germany cannot fail to bring advantages to England.' Professor Schulze-Gaevernitz sums up his argument with the exclamation: Germany, constitute thyself strong in time of peace!' Englishmen may not be prepared to accept his analysis of the situation without criticism, but it is only right that they should at least be made acquainted with his views, the views of a thoughtful and not unfriendly German. If he really reflects the spirit of the German nation sincerely, the solution of the Anglo-German problem should surely lie in the application of his maxim to both countries. C. S. GOLDMAN. The Editor of THE NINETEENTH CENTURY cannot undertake to return unaccepted MSS. NOTHING could be more characteristic of the mental attitude of the Western world than the self-complacency with which we look upon Asia. It would seem as if the prosperity of young Europe, in comparison with old Mother Asia, has so turned our heads that we firmly believe ourselves to be the only elect people of God, to whom the monopoly of authority has been given over all the earth. We alone, we think, have the right to be mighty and free, and the rest of humanity must be subject to us and never taste of the golden fruits of liberty. Such thoughts arise in us as we read in the daily press the doubtful and pessimistic views with which the awaking of Persia and Turkey is regarded. What! so is the cry-Turks and Persians want a constitution and a Parliament? Orientals pur-sang presume to wish to partake of the liberty enjoyed by Western nations? In the ancient stronghold of Asiatic despotism and fossilised autocracy, Dame Libertas would hold her triumphant entry? Impossible. This can never be. Such and similar remarks are heard on various sides. The following pages may serve to show the error of this view. We in Europe have become accustomed to look upon Asiatics as VOL. LXV-No. 385 361 BB |