Governments it might be possible to absorb the colonial naval brigades into the proposed Imperial Naval Reserve. It would probably result in increased efficiency and also be more economical if the British Admiralty took over the floating defences of the colonies.

As regards Canada and Newfoundland, there is the possibility that our naval reserve men might, after we had trained them, be attracted by the high pay offered in the American Navy. Canadians and Newfoundlanders enlist in the American Navy to a considerable extent at present. They would be less likely to serve under a foreign flag if they were able by joining the Imperial Naval Reserve to earn a retaining fee of 10l. The Dominion Government might devote to the encouragement of the naval reserve the bounties now given to fishermen.

A special advantage may be noticed in connection with the establishment of a body of reserve men in Australia. They would not only be on the spot, ready to man the reserve ships of the Australian squadron and any merchant cruisers that might be taken up in war time, but they could also furnish drafts for all stations west of the Horn and east of Suez, thus obviating the necessity of sending crews from England and relieving the strain on the home base. This advantage would not only be felt in time of war. If reserve men were regularly employed as suggested in ships on colonial stations, whether in North America or Australia, the number of continuous service men required would be less and the expenditure on the transport of relief crews smaller.

After the experience gained in Canada and Australia during the past few months, the estimate given in the Naval Annual for 1896 that in the near future 5,000, and ultimately 10,000 or even 15,000, men could be raised in the colonies does not seem to be exaggerated. Taking all sources of supply into consideration, in three years we might have 40,000 men, whether seamen or stokers, in the naval reserve, distributed as follows:

In ten years the force might be increased to 75,000 men, thus. distributed:

To give an efficient training to such a force is the great practical difficulty in the way. We have already more men in the permanent force than are sufficient for the peace requirements of the fleet, and the difficulty of providing useful employment for the surplus is already

being felt. No further increase in the permanent force should be sanctioned. The tendency should rather be towards a reduction as the naval reserve increases in numbers and efficiency. In the meanwhile we shall be obliged to increase the number of ships in commission for training purposes. The existing reserve is certainly not sufficiently trained. It could not be proposed that we should depend more largely on a reserve than we do now, unless there were to be an alteration in the system of training.

The writer fully recognises that the policy advocated in this article is unpopular with the bulk of the naval service. A navaľ officer naturally would rather man his ship with bluejackets than with partially trained naval reserve men. 'Few if any naval officers have had practical experience in working with reserve men,' writes an old naval officer who has had that experience. In the navy to-day officers work with made and trained ship's companies, every individual having been trained from boyhood. In the old wars, officers had to make and train their own ship's companies, and their worth, and the worth of their ships, depended entirely on their capacity to make raw men efficient.' In a squadron of modern battle ships, which will be the first to come in contact with the enemy, it may be desirable that the proportion of reserve men should be small, but even in a modern battle ship there are many stations where a high degree of training is not required. It would be foolish indeed to under-estimate the value of technical knowledge, but, given a sufficient number of bluejackets for special ratings, it should be easier now to turn comparatively untrained men into an efficient crew than it was in the days of Nelson. To deliver a series of broadsides from a battery of Q.F. guns would require far less general training and far less excellence in each individual man than was necessary in the crews who fought the 18- and 32-pounders of a hundred years ago.

A reserve man [says the officer from whom we have already quoted] could never be as good an all-round man as the seaman-gunner and the torpedo-man, and he would not need to be, but it is surprising how quickly he can be trained to efficiency as to the armament of a ship. The drafting of 25 per cent. of reserve men to a cruiser would not lessen her efficiency. Three months after joining it would be impossible to tell (if the reserve men had been in fairly good hands) that they were not continuous service men. There would be no falling off in smartness, but perhaps the reverse by the importation of new blood. In many respects the reserve man is a point or two ahead of the continuous service man. My experience of merchant seamen is that once he recognises that you have no interest in robbing him, and that it gives you no pleasure to see him ill-treated, he does his work with real good-will. Native Australians are rather more intelligent than the average of seafarers, but bend thoroughly well to discipline.

In conclusion, we may briefly summarise the policy advocated in the preceding pages. There is no question concerning the defence of the Empire of more importance at the present moment than the problem of manning the navy in time of war. Our existing resources

are insufficient. The policy of maintaining the personnel of the navy in peace at war strength is too costly and too wasteful of our national resources. Rather we should address ourselves to the task of building up a powerful reserve. As a first step, and before adding to the numbers, the conditions of enrolment must be altered so as to secure greater efficiency. Of the three sources of supply the fishing population alone can be relied upon to yield at once a substantial body of recruits. The colonies, which are not at present in a position to make a serious money contribution to the naval defence of the Empire, could furnish good men for a naval reserve. The mercantile marine, which ought to be a valuable support to the navy in war, has been almost exhausted as a source of supply. The large and continually increasing proportion of foreigners in British merchant ships constitutes a grave national danger, only to be removed by measures dealing more comprehensively and more thoroughly with the present deplorable state of things than those partial remedies proposed by Sir Edward Reed's Committee. Shipowners, in the acute competition with the often subsidised foreigner, cannot be expected to show a preference for British seamen. No remedy is possible without substantial assistance from the State.

T. A. BRASSEY.

1896

TOTAL ABSTINENCE

AND THE TEMPERANCE MOVEMENT

THERE is a sound of thoroughness and even latent generosity in the term 'total abstinence.' It suggests the complete enjoyment associated with a 'whole holiday.' We think of one who is 'every inch' a man, and has the courage of his convictions. We are encouraged in the admiration of those who act up to their principles, and despise a proposal which is 'neither one thing nor the other.' Whatever it may be to astronomers, we look with imperfect interest at an eclipse which is only 'partial.' It was a happy change in the language of its advocates when they began to talk of 'total abstinence' instead of 'teetotalism,' which has a timid, stammering, and insignificant sound.

Though now suggesting an exclusively alcoholic flavour, it is plain that this term covers a large field.

At certain seasons, indeed, or for a while, every man wholly refrains from something which is allowable. He sits down to his meals instead of nibbling at his food all day. Civilised life is regulated by time-tables which are intended to formulate our actions and to prevent business from encroaching upon relaxation. After a temporary way we are all 'total abstainers' from one thing or another. The Sabbath itself was marked by a law of complete prohibition, though it lasted only for a day.

Every right-minded man, however, recognises the desirability of permanent abstinence from what he believes to be radically wrong. He admits no via media in the following of righteousness, corresponding to that of 'temperance' in the use of alcohol. He may pardon a weak offender, but he would not allow that a strong man may disregard the extreme rigour of, say, the Ninth Commandment, since he can be trusted not to indulge himself in perjury to excess.'

But though the number of universally accepted moral laws may be few, we witness in these days the wide-spread and growing erection of some which are held by their framers to be as essentially imperative as the Ten Commandments themselves, inasmuch as they are assumed to rest, not upon convenience or expediency, but upon facts, the

ignorance or disregard of which is fatal to the development and wellbeing of our nature.

Such is the attitude of those who believe that the' use' of alcohol or flesh-meat is radically prejudicial to human life. There are some, indeed, who admit the employment of stimulants' under medical advice, but the genuine 'total abstainer' looks on alcohol as always essentially injurious, and those are unjust to him who resent his assertion that the 'temperate' man does more harm to society than the drunkard.' His contention is perfectly logical. If he really believes alcohol to be irremediably poisonous when present in beverages, any recognition of their use which fails in displaying its evil effect is a bar to that revelation of its nature which he desires to be made and acknowledged, and in the end does more harm to the good cause than the most obvious intemperance, which is an effective object lesson in support of his teaching.

Much the same line is taken by the thoroughgoing vegetarian who traces disease and premature decay to the eating of flesh-meat. He cannot, indeed, point to revolting spectacles of gluttony as the exclusive result of its consumption, since it is possible for a man to sicken himself by eating too much permissible food-such as jam. Thus he points to the health and strength of those who have adopted his diet without injury to themselves. He not only ransacks history and the literature of science, but quotes the current testimony of simplefeeding races in support of his faith. He claims to prove by the analysis of grain, fruit, leaf, kernel, nut, and root that these viands provide all things needed for the building and repair of the human body. If, by the chemistry of nature, a sheep can be made out of grass, and so much corn and water be changed into a horse, he pleads for such a bloodless construction and preservation of man as raises him above the 'carnivora.' Indeed, the vegetarian looks on the Lord Mayor, so long as he eats the flesh of animals, as no better than the pedigree-cousin of a cannibal.

Both he and the total abstainer rely chiefly upon the testimony of science.' Without our admitting, however, the soundness of its apprehension or use by them, it is remarkable that, in their anxiety to support their claims, some in both parties appeal also to the Bible. One points to a sentence in the first chapter of Genesis, where 'seed' and 'fruit' are announced to be given to man for meat,' and some try to prove that the wines of Scripture were unfermented, and therefore not intoxicating. They had much better all have the courage of their convictions and boldly affirm that teetotalism' or 'vegetarianism' can be proved to be vitally true, and therefore worthy of acceptance, by reason of our present knowledge, and that they decline to place any reliance upon what the Scriptures have to say about human diet. They are wise in doing this, since their case is weakened in the minds of thoughtful men by forced