ously elaborated. Only so
can a programme of peace be made effective.

Such a programme will consist of three elements. The first is the
freedom of the seas; the second is a joint imperialism; the third is
the promotion of an economic internationalism.

The freedom of the seas is necessary because without it the other
elements cannot be supplied. No division or joint use of colonies will
promote peace unless each nation is assured of continuous access to
such colonies. A promise of the products and the profits of the
backward countries will not satisfy a nation if it believes that at the
first outbreak of war it will be deprived not only of colonial but also
of all commercial rights.

{247}

In recent decades the problem of the freedom of the seas has grown in
significance as access to the oceans has become more important and the
nations increasingly interdependent. To-day trans-oceanic colonies are
worthless, commerce is insecure and a satisfactory economic life at
home difficult without such access. In peace the vessels of all
nations may travel anywhere, but in war a belligerent's merchant
vessels may be seized and confiscated and her shores blockaded. She
may even be deprived of the right to import goods through neighbouring
neutral countries.

In the advocacy of the freedom of the seas the United States has taken
a leading part, while England has pursued a policy of obstruction. In
this respect England has been a menace to the world's peace. She has
stood fairly consistently against a modernisation of naval law; has
insisted on the right of capture of merchant vessels and the right to
blockade, and in the present war has reverted, under grave provocation
it is true, to the most rigorous maritime repression. It is by means
of our influence on England that we can take the first step towards
creating a better international system.

If we are to become friends with England, the price must be the freedom
of the seas. It may seem incongruous to suggest as a condition of
friendship that our friend weaken herself, but as will later be
indicated such a surrender of rights by Great Britain might in the end
redound to her security and greater strength. The reason is obvious.
The insecurity of each nation is the weakness of all. So long as a
nation is insecure it will arm. So long as one nation arms all must
arm. Moreover, England is peculiarly vulnerable. The British Empire
is threatened whenever any n