Germany's Challenge of British Sea Power.—Great Britain and Russia are not the only nations that appreciate the value of suprem acy upon the sea. Germany's eagerness in this respect was one of the causes of the Great War. Cramped and overcrowded con ditions in Germany because of the rapid growth of population and the limitations of the frontiers led the whole country to agree with the far-seeing Bismarck when he said, "The future of Germany lies upon the sea." A great merchant marine was rapidly built, and a large navy to protect it. At the same time an attempt was made to obtain colonies and to foster foreign trade. Such activities aroused British jealousy. The English know that the strength of their empire de pends upon the protection of the lines of communication between the island center and the great dependencies in all parts of the world. If any other power or combination of powers should overcome the British navy, the Empire would crumble to pieces. The fear that Germany might in time be strong enough to bring about such a result was one reason why England gave up her hostility to Russia at the beginning of the present century and joined with that country and France to form the Triple Entente as a balance to the Triple Alliance of Germany, Austria, and Italy.
In the past the great nations of the world have divided the land among themselves. To-day they are also taking the sea under their dominion. Thus methods of using the sea are beginning to play a large part in'the political discussions of many countries. Japan, for example, as well as Russia, England, and Germany is keenly desir ous to gain wealth and influence from the sea. This is natural in view of her island character. The example of all these countries and the need of abundant ships during the Great War has led the United States to build not merely a strong navy, but a great merchant marine. Otherwise we should have been in danger of losing much of our influence.
The Ownership of Minerals as a Political Problem.—In some countries such as England the owner of a piece of land is supposed to own everything from the surface down to the center of the earth. In other places, such as many of our Western States, he owns the soil, the water, the stones, and all the rights that are needed for agri culture, house-building, or other ordinary pursuits, but does not own the minerals that are extracted by mining. They belong to anyone who discovers their presence and files the proper claims. In still other regions such as Argentina, Italy, Germany, and Mexico, the minerals belong to the state, and can be mined only on proper pay ment to the government.
Many thoughtful people think that in our own country this last system should be followed, since they believe it is not right that a man should make millions simply because he happens to be able to file a claim to a mineral deposit, while another who works harder and with much more intelligence makes only a fair living. Hence the
Government has withdrawn large areas of mineral lands, that is, it has said that for the present they shall not be granted to individuals. In I, both this country and England there has been much agitation for the nationalization of the coal mines. The supporters of this idea say that minerals like coal and petroleum are so important and so easily exhausted that the State ought to guard them. Others say that government ownership would be unjust and would cause the mines to be worked inefficiently and wastefully. Some people take a middle ground and say that the best plan is that the government should own the mines, but should allow private companies to operate them on the payment of a royalty or percentage of the profit. These differing views cause the ownership of minerals to be an important political question not only in the United States, but in England and else where.
Why Black England Wants Free Trade and Green England Protection.—The soil and minerals of England have given rise to one of the chief political problems, a problem which has agi tated the country for a century and is not yet settled. "Black Eng land" is the smoky industrial and mining section located chiefly 1 A in the uplands of the center, but running from Cardiff in South Wales to Yorkshire in the north. There minerals are the chief source of wealth. "Green England" is the agricultural plain of the east and south where the soil is the chief source of livelihood. The greatest need of the manufacturing and mining population is an abundance of cheap food. Therefore Black England is eager for free trade, so that it may import food without paying duties. On the other hand, the farmers and landowners of Green England see the matter quite differently. They cannot compete with the wheat of the great plains in countries like Canada, Argentina, and Russia. If they could impose a duty on imports of food, however, the price of agricultural products would rise, and the owners and tillers of farms would prosper. Hence the slogan of Green England has been "Pro tection and Prosperity." Thus the contrast between the minerals of Black England and the soil of Green England has often led to a main line of cleavage between the two chief British political parties. The consequent tariff problem can never be solved to everyone's satisfaction, for the minerals and the soil will always lead to diver sity of interests and hence to differences in politics. Since manu facturing and mining, however, employ many more people then agriculture, free trade is likely to continue as it has for several gen erations.