are in the habit of reading up whatever subject is to the fore. Such hasty cramming tends to produce an intellectual pâte de foie gras: and the better the intentions the worse the result.
Compare, for instance, the anti-Belleville agitation of a few years ago. With the introduction of Bellevilles there were the troubles incidental to any new departure—they may fairly be compared to the losses that our commerce would sustain in war. The judgment of the Navy was set aside, and a tribunal, practically civilian, appointed to re-judge the matter. In the result the Navy was fitted with five alternatives of which three failed at once and the other two burn far more coal, cannot be repaired upon board ship if damaged in action; and are generally un-equal to the discarded boilers of naval choice. For this travesty of efficiency Members of Parliament, perfectly well intentioned, were mainly responsible. In due course the Navy may reassert itself and the Belleville type be returned to—but what has happened in the meantime?
The danger is acute that were we involved in a commerce war, a similar display of lay as against professional judgment would be witnessed, with results more deplorable than it is possible to estimate.
Right or wrong, the scheme for defence of commerce must be left to the Navy alone, and the naval plan of a vigorous offensive, of 'stopping earths,' of acting as the Eomans against the Illyrians, as the
