before orders can be passed. These proposals, which had Lord Kitchener's concurrence, were accepted by the Secretary of State, who affirmed in the face of the solemn declaration of the opinion of His Majesty's Government set forth in paragraph 15 of the despatch of 31st May, already quoted, that they were in accordance with the provisions of that despatch, and in some respects "were in exact fulfilment of his wishes." "We were very glad," says Lord Curzon, "to make this discovery." Mr Brodrick had laid down in paragraphs 15 and 25 of his despatch, that in future the Commander-inChief should be the sole expert adviser of the Government on purely military questions. He has now agreed that the new Supply Member may be consulted on all military questions without distinction, and states that this is quite in accordance with his previous order. No wonder that the Government of India received this intimation with joyful astonishment. Their rejoicing, however, was premature.

But it would be a mistake to suppose that these concessions on the part of the Secretary of State, even if they were thoroughly carried out, do more than diminish the danger involved in his scheme as it stood. The change in the Constitution of the Government of India effected by it is not less vital. In the first place, it is evident from the action which has driven Lord Curzon to resign that Mr Brodrick has

hardly understood the Governor-General's wishes. He is determined that the Military Supply Member shall not possess the standing and reputation which alone would give weight to his advice. Lord Curzon may have the Second Military Adviser on his Council, but he shall be a man more versed in the supply of stores and drafting of contracts than in war and military affairs. The ship is to have a pilot, but the pilot is to know more of the highroads. than of the sea.

Secondly, the essence of that change is the new position given to the Commander-inChief. As a Member of Council in charge of the Army Department, he will deal with the cases that come up from Army Headquarters and prepare them for the Council. He will make proposals as Commander-in-Chief (to instruct the native troops, for example, in hutting and carpentering), and as the Government of India he will be able to pass them. Secretary in the Army Department does his duty and submits the case to the Viceroy, the matter may remain unknown to the GovernorGeneral - in - Council until it appears in Army Orders. If the Secretary discharges his duty, his relations with the Commander-in-Chief as member in charge will be strained. And if the proposal is negatived by the Governor-Generalin-Council, there will be the same complaint of dual control

Unless the

as before. Moreover, the new Supply Member, who is to advise the Governor-General-inCouncil on military matters, will not see the papers unless the Viceroy marks them to him. He will not see them in the course of business as the Military Member saw them. If the Commander-in-Chief rebelled against the criticism of the Military Member, he will still more keenly resent a call made by the Viceroy for the opinion of the new Supply Member, whose position and prestige as a soldier Mr Brodrick has done his best to destroy.

On the other hand, Lord Kitchener has not got all he wants. Lord Lansdowne is quite proud of "our absolute refusal to listen to Lord Kitchener's proposal to put an end to the Military Member of Council." The cry of dual control will shortly be raised again, as the Military Member under his new name will certainly be accused of needless criticism and unwarranted interference with the head of the army. Nevertheless, Lord Kitchener has made a great step in advance. Instead of submitting his schemes to the head of a department, over whom he had no power, he will submit them to himself as the Member in charge of the Army Department. He will be both author and critic, and will be in a much stronger position to force his views on the Council. From the Financial Department alone can resistance be looked for to military pro

posals which will eat up the revenues. Even with the safeguards hitherto existing there has been a growing tendency to treat India as a great outwork of the Empire, to subordinate her real interests to that view, and to make the Indian people pay the whole cost. "Whether the system thus modified," said Lord Curzon, "will be in any way superior to that with which we have been hitherto familiar, and whether it will possess any permanent vitality, the future alone will show. We have seen so many schemes for military organisation rise and fall during recent years (hard this on Mr Brodrick) that prophecy is dangerous. The new scheme is not of our creation. All we have been in a position to do is to effect the removal of some of its most apparent anomalies, and to place its various parts in more scientific relation to each other."-(Speech at Simla, July 20.)

We had hoped that the matter would have been arranged so as to enable Lord Curzon to remain in India until next April, and to see his many large schemes of reform brought to greater if not to full maturity. The difference of opinion, however, between the Viceroy and the Secretary of State was irreconcilable, although both men thought for a time that a modus vivendi had been found. It was hardly to have been expected that Lord Curzon would have endured the slight put upon him and his Council by the decision of the

To the superficial mind no two things can appear more unlike than the sailing ship of the line and the armoured battleship. They differ widely in all that appeals to the eyein general appearance, in structure, in motive power, and in the material of which they are built.

But to the thoughtful seaman who regards both the wooden sailing - ship and the steel steam-ship as an instrument of war, these are differences of detail. In his view they are alike in the fundamental fact that each is a floating gun-carriage, and that each is not only a ship but a machine, differing in kind, it may be, but still a machine, -the sailing-ship equally with the steamer. The modern warvessel is as much a ship as was

VOL. CLXXVIII.-NO. MLXXX.

the wooden two-decker, and the Victory was as much a machine as is the modern Edward VII. From the point of view of their care, maintenance, and management, the difference between. the old machine and the new one lies in the source whence the motive power is derived, and in the mechanism by means of which that power communicates motion to the ship. The wind has yielded to steam as the motive power. The mechanism has changed from the masts, yards, rigging, and sails of the past to the engines and propellers of the present; it is of a different kind but is equally complicated. The network of ropes and blocks aloft has been replaced by the labyrinth of pipes and valves below, but no great

21

difference exists in the extent and scope of the knowledge required to deal with these two widely unlike mechanisms. Each requires to be kept in order. The marling-spike may have made way for the file; knotting and splicing may have given place to making joints and packing glands; but the time, care, and attention required to keep the machines efficient are the same whether they are sails or engines. Again, each has to be worked. Reefing topsails in a gale of wind on a dark night may seem a very different operation from driving an engine, but the skill and knowledge required are not unequal in degree, although they are totally different in kind, and can only be acquired at the expense of an equal amount of time, care, and attention. Whether with sails or steam, the skill and knowledge principally needed are of a practical order, and can only be acquired by actual contact and use. The best and most competent seamen and engineers have supplemented their practical experience by an exact knowledge of principles, but the great majority of steamers as of sailing-ships have been worked efficiently by men with little beyond practical experience. It is not to be expected that the ordinary practice will ever be otherwise.

If the resemblance in aim or intention between the mechanisms of the sailing-ship and the steamer is fundamentally so close, the knowledge of its working possessed by the officers of the sailing navy may

indicate in amount and extent the needs of the officers of the steam navy in this direction. The naval officers of the past were satisfied to possess a sufficient knowledge of the ship, her armament and equipment, to ensure using her to the best advantage. They concerned themselves with her working and management rather than with her construction. They did not pretend to be proficient in knotting and splicing or in sail-making, but their knowledge was sufficient to enable them to supervise the work, and to see that it was properly done by the boatswain and the able seamen whose business it was. It is true that a few individual officers were skilful in these matters, but they were exceptions, and such of these as were in the front rank were not held to be so for that reason. Precisely the same amount of knowledge is necessary to naval officers if they are to use the modern ship to the best advantage. They require to concern themselves with the working and management of every part of her rather than with construction and design. It is no more their business now to be skilled mechanics and rival the engine-room artificers, than it was in the past to emulate the boatswain and the able seamen, who were the skilled mechanics of the sailing navy. Their business is a higher one. Their raison d'être is war.

The ship of war is something more than an ordinary ship. She is primarily an instrument of war, and as such is a means