In addition to the probability of the fleet proving inadequate to the large responsibilities to be faced, it is pretty certain that, in the event of the food-supplies of the United Kingdom being seriously threatened, the British tax-payer would insist on the whole strength of his navy being concentrated for their protection. At present, however, the colonists do not seem to concern themselves about this.

There are two directions in which men's thoughts are moving in the Colonies in connection with this question. Among some there is a tendency to consider the complications and risk of being dragged into war entailed by the Imperial connection too high a price to pay for the gratuitous support and protection afforded by the mother-country. Another and more high-spirited feeling is also working against the continuance of the existing relations. Men in the Colonies, who have minds above greed alone, and can speak their minds without having the fear of ignorant constituents before their eyes, feel the irksomeness and humiliation of their present position. They cannot tolerate that their otherwise. free countries should continue, vis-à-vis of the outside world, to be in the position of mere dependants, living under the protection of a wealthy patron. Such men desire accordingly either to come forward and take up the full citizenship of the Empire, or to sever the connection altogether, and stand boldly before the world in their own right and by their own strength. Many men, and not a few of considerable political eminence, have spoken openly of separation, as we all know-unless, as perhaps we ought, we except Lord Carrington, whose high office in New South Wales appears to have prevented his knowing what was notorious to every one else, and was openly canvassed in the press and in Parliament. Now, however much the idea of separation is to be deprecated by patriotic Britons in all parts of the world, it has to be remembered that the time is past for disputing the right of the great groups to sever their political connection with the mother-country, if in their wisdom, or unwisdom, they should definitely and solemnly elect to do so. The whole case to the contrary was given away when the Colonies were granted responsible government, and with it the absolute ownership of their land, freed from its share in the public debt, and the complete control of their finances and tariffs without any reservation of any sort or kind calculated to maintain the political union inviolate. In fact, the policy which found public expression in the speeches of the apostles of the old Manchester School determined the policy of British government in those days. The Colonies were repeatedly told they were free to go, not without a hint that the sooner they availed themselves of that freedom the better. Responsible government was conceded as a stepping-stone to independence, which was officially regarded as their natural destiny.

Now, however, a large numerical majority of the people on both sides the sea, and almost all the leaders of opinion and far-seeing and responsible members of the community throughout the Empire, recog nise that separation would be a mistake. But there is, in consequence of the fatal errors of policy committed by a former generation of British statesmen and publicists, an alarming amount of leeway to be made up.

The question of the maintenance of the imperial connection anywhere is an open one; and it is this uncertainty as to the future that paralyses community of action. If it be practically an open question whether or not the Colonies will one by one cut themselves adrift as and whenever it suits their individual convenience to do so, it is the height of folly for the United Kingdom to continue to do everything for them, and treat them in all respects in a manner only reasonably compatible with a sense of their permanent union with itself. On the other hand, the Colonies naturally desire to prolong the present happy state of things; while in some cases, perhaps, they would in any circumstance hesitate to take an irretrievable step in the direction of a closer union on a permanent footing, not having quite made up their minds what they would best like to do ultimately, when the present halcyon days come to an end for them.

Until the question is fairly faced-as it will have to be faced before very long-no great progress can be made. It behoves both sides, therefore, to consider what the effect of separation would be. Without going over the whole ground, it is easy to show upon the one case of naval and military defence that the interests of both the mother-country and the Colonies alike are bound up in the maintenance of political unity. Both alike are equally interested in keeping open and protecting from interference the great trade-routes of the world in time of war as well as in peace. As it has been well put, "Above all questions of free trade or of fair trade is the paramount question of safe trade."

To the United Kingdom the safety of its food-supplies and the routes for what is a necessity second only to the supply of food-the supply of the raw materials that support its mills-is of absolutely vital moment; and it is the possession of naval bases in every sea that largely contributes to this safety. If Australia, for example, were independent, and an alien though friendly nation, her ports, dockyards, and coaling-stations would be open to the ships of Her Majesty's navy when engaged in war, only on precisely the same terms as to those of the enemy. While, if Australia were at war with another Power, France, for instance-Britain being neutral-this country would be powerless, while maintaining her neutrality, to prevent the blockade of Australian ports, whereby our supplies of wool would be cut off from that quarter. The case, in fact, might reproduce the results that followed in our centres of industry from the blockade of the cotton ports in the American civil war.

Again, if for Australia we put Canada, the same results would follow, with the difference that for "wool" we must now read "food." Canada is more and more becoming, and likely to become, the granary of the United Kingdom, so that our food-supplies from that source increase in importance every year. Or, to complete the circle, let us suppose South Africa independent. We are at war, and South Africa is neutral. Result our enemy's fleet can do that which it cannot do now-coal at the Cape, and steam on to the attack of India or Australia.

To the Colonies, the first and most palpable result of separation would be felt on the financial side. They depend for their development on the public and private loans obtained in such abundance from England; and the golden stream, if it did not dry up, would promptly cease

to flow so smoothly, on such easy terms, to countries no longer under the British flag. Cheap money" is to these young communities as the breath of their nostrils. They are deeply anxious now to obtain the right of having their public stocks placed on the list of investments sanctioned for trust funds, in order to raise the price of their stocks, and so enable them to obtain money still more cheaply. Obviously, the effect of separation would be to lower these stocks and their credit, public and private, very materially; and this is a contingency their politicians and public men have no desire to face.

Just at the time when facilities for borrowing were thus seriously checked, they would at once have to set to work and undertake expenses beyond any they have ever dreamt of to provide for their security against foreign aggression. They would have to set up a complete naval equipment-ships, guns, dockyards, arsenals, an Admiralty Department, and a force of officers and seamen; some would have to materially increase their military forces, horse, foot, and artillery; and they would have to set up a Foreign Office, with a staff of diplomatic representatives and Consular officers in all the civilised and half-civilised countries with which they have any dealings, political or commercial.

Much of this seems scarcely to have suggested itself to the run of politicians and writers in the Colonies. They have thought something of the question of defending these shores from foreign enemies, but have for the most part altogether failed to get a real grasp of what that means. They think that, as they already provide for the land-defence of their own coasts, the only addition they would have to make would be at most the establishment of a naval squadron of their own for their own waters, to replace the ships of the Imperial navy now stationed there. This is a very superficial view indeed. The cardinal fact of imperial defence is that the safety of each part depends upon the aggregate strength of the whole force of the Empire. It is not alone the few ships on the Australian station (to keep to the same country for illustration) that render Australia safe from attack. It is also the ships in European waters, in North Pacific waters, and elsewhere throughout the world, that, by closing up the hostile ports of issue at the commencement of a war would prevent the despatch of an expedition in force too great to be resisted by the squadron of local defence. Moreover, it is not the fear of that squadron or of Australia's land-defences that would make a foreign Power hesitate on occasion to attack her, but the knowledge that the whole power of the British Empire is behind her.

The effect of this is found in peace as well as in war. Suppose Australia independent, and having her representatives in the capitals of Europe, with what sort of voice could they speak? What force lying behind them would give a sanction to their remonstrances or their threats? For passive defence, but little; for effective action in the offensive operations of defence, none at all. No; it is the power to back a word with a blow that gives effectiveness to words; or, where the case does not go to such lengths, it is the authority and prestige of a great, powerful, and historic nation, having a place among the Powers of the world, that cause the voice of its ambassadors to be listened to with respect, and

their words to carry weight and influence. Of all this, in peace and war, the colonies have now the incalculable advantage, though they scarcely recognise it. They would find out the difference all too soon and too surely if they threw away their birthright, and found themselves ranking in the world with the groups of republics in South America.

And if the power of the United Kingdom, strengthened at present only by the vague and shadowy reserve of unapplied force, afforded by her outlying colonies and dependencies, is so great as it is now, what would not the might of the Empire become if all its scattered resources were welded into one homogeneous whole? Under a complete federation for defence with an imperial navy, and each part doing its share of landdefence and co-operating with the navy, in pursuance of an ordered and uniform system, the effective power of the Empire for defence would be multiplied in a ratio out of all proportion to the mere sum of the forces of its several parts. It would be able to defy attack, and would form a League of Peace capable of enforcing its will so long as its will meant peace-upon the world.

But, though federation as regards matters of actual relations, and especially for defence, is at once the most important and the most pressing part of the Federal problem, it is not quite the whole of it. There are other lines along which the movement might travel, many matters calling for joint action, all helping towards the attainment of national unity. The exigencies of space forbid more than a bare mention of these elements of unity, but their mere mention will be sufficiently suggestive. Under the head of "Communications" much could be written. Some steps have been taken by the governments of the United Kingdom and of both the Colonies and Dependencies towards common action in Postal matters, that may lead, it is hoped, to far more uniformity than at present exists in this respect. Here, and, in another branch of communications, Telegraphs, the goal to be aimed at is the recognition of the Empire as a solid unit. Every step in this direction is a step towards political federation which must make itself useful in other branches of administration as well.

Law is a thorny subject; but it is one in which an enormous amount of advantage would be gained by more concerted action between the various parts of the Empire. The principle of this is already recognised by the passage of statutes having the effect of extending the legal processes of each part of the Empire to other parts, and generally providing for the recognition throughout the Empire of legal rights and obligations in whatever part of it originating. The discussions of the Imperial Conference of 1887, and of the conferences held among themselves by the Colonies of the Australasian group, show how great need exists for concerted action in this direction; and few things would exercise a more practically binding effect than the extended recognition of the unity of the Empire by further advances along this line. Business men as well as lawyers will see at once the work that has to be done here in bankruptcy and commercial law, and the execution of process in these branches and in criminal cases, copyright, trade-marks, etc.

The status of the Home and Colonial Civil Services and of the

learned professions and others, and the reciprocal recognition throughout the Empire of these ranks and diplomas, would also lend themselves to similar treatment. Emigration and colonisation are now subjects of great difficulty. The replies sent in by the Colonial Governments to the questions submitted to them, the report of the Colonisation Committee, which has just been issued, and the evidence of Agents-General and other witnesses, all show that, as things stand, the attitude of the colonies renders impossible any attempt by the Home Government to plant our surplus population on the vast tracts of land lying unoccupied in the Colonies.

The question of tariffs attracts much attention just at present; and some persons see in it the means by which Britannic Confederation can best be achieved. It is one of the subjects to be specially treated in a separate paper. It will be sufficient here to point out that, however desirable it may be to promote the intercourse of trade within the Empire, there are at present formidable obstacles in the way of attempts to do this, whichever direction such attempts take. If it be sought to establish an Imperial Zollverein with free trade within the Empire, there is the obstacle of the colonial tariffs, which are almost universally protective; and the colonists show no disposition to relax these tariffs, which, apart from protecting their young industries against the competition of the cheaper production of the mother-country, are by all of them presently regarded as necessarily the chief source of revenue in countries too young in the accumulation of wealth to stand heavy direct taxation. If, on the other hand, it be proposed to keep up in the Colonies a tariff-wall against the goods of the United Kingdom, only raising it somewhat higher against outsiders, this, on the one side, would not benefit the United Kingdom, while, on the other hand, it would involve the imposition of import duties against foreign countries by the United Kingdom; and these, to be of any use by way of giving a preference to the Colonies, must be on their chief productions, food-stuffs, and the raw material of manufactures, to increase the cost of which is a course that does not at present, in the absence of any substantial countervailing advantage, commend itself to the people of this country. Community of trade interests would undoubtedly be most valuable in cementing the bonds of national unity. But there are lines of less resistance along which the movement to that end can just now more safely proceed.

Before concluding this, perhaps, too lengthy paper, it seems fitting to make some reference to the work of the Imperial Federation League, to which is due in so large a measure the position which the colonial question now occupies in the politics of the day, and the great change that has come over the public mind upon the future of the imperial relationship within the past few years. Formed in 1884, at a Conference held in London, and presided over by the Right Hon. W. E. Forster, this League has now assumed almost the proportions of a national, or-though the two words ought really to mean the same thing when applied as they are here -imperial, organisation. The Conference laid down in its resolutions three fundamental propositions, which are as follows :-(1) That, in order to secure the permanent unity of the Empire some form of Federation is