The Breckenridge news. (Cloverport, Ky.) 1876-1955, 1897-04-21
The British Food Supply.

The debate in the House OF Commons
on the food supply Of Great Britain was
wonderfully forcible reminder Of the
completely and interdependence Of mod
ern civilization. II was pointed out and
not denied that the visible supply in the
British Islands of subsistence for their
inhabitants never exceeded their require
ments for three weeks, and often fell be-
low their requirements for single week
That is TO say that II the islands were
cut off from communication with the
rest OF the world for a single fortnight
there would be very extensive distress,
which in fortnight more would amount
to an actual famine. An effective
blockade" OF the British coasts would
mean the starvation of the British peo-
pie.
II is not to be wondered at that this
condition would excite alarm in England.
The wonder is rather that the alarm
should be spasmodic only, and not chron-
ic. For England is in truth exposed as
well as protected by her isolation. A
nation which imports two-thirds OF its
food supply is, in sense, under heavier
bonds to keep the peace than any one of
the Continental nations, which could at
least sustain its inhabitants for more
than a month If it should be cut off from
the rest OF the world.
The alarmists OF the House of Com
mons proposed that national granaries be
erected for the storage OF food, so that
she might be more free to choose her
own foreign policy, even II that policy
involved risk Of war. More specifically,
the proposition was that she might be
more free to quarrel with Russia, for it
was upon that point that the debate
turned. Even il Russia could not block
ade British ports, she could prevent the
expectation OF breadstuffs from her wn
ports, and it was assumed by those who
favored the suggestion of Government
food msg'zines that that action on her
part would very seriously cripple the
United Kingdom, while those who op-
posed it labored to show that Russian
embargo would not have such result.
Indeed, the recent course of trade has
given some countenance TO the sugges-
ton. The statistics of 1896 are not yet
accessible to us. But whereas in 1894
the import of wheat from the United
States was 2,4OO,OOO,OOO pounds, against
1,600,000,000 from Russia, in 1895 the i'm
port from America increased but 300,-
600, 1000 pounds, while the increase from
Russia was almost half as much again as |
in the previous year, the import from
Argentina, the next most important |
source OF supply, actually diminishing.
Sir Charles Dixie pointed out, however,
that in average years the import from
Russia was declining also, and that Great
Britain drew and would continue to draw
half her food supply from the United
States. While she could count on sup
plies from the United States and her own
dependencies, which altogether contrib
ute about half as much as the United
States, he thought that England would
be independent of Russia" or, in other
words, could afford to quarrel with her.
In any case, it is clear that the safety
Of Great Britain lies, not in providing
storehouses, but in keeping open her
AS Mr.. Balfour said
in closing the debate, the real reliance of
the nation is upon its navy. That is the
fact. When Americans read that there
are now under construction over 100
British war vessels they need to remem-
Der that it is matter literally OF "bread
and butter"-that is to say, of life and
ieath-for Great Britain to keep up
navy that will enable her to convey her
and to make absolutely
impossible any blockade of her coasts.
Thousands suffer from Catarrh or cold |