New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1912-09-02
Writer Tells Why Armed Clash
Could Not Produce Result
England Would Be
Fighting For.
COTTON IS A BIG FACTOR
ANY Bombardment of the At
lantic Seaboard Would in the
End Be Paid For by
London Insurance
Companies.


London. Sept. "A remarkable re-
port is current in Berlin financial cir
cles, where II is stated that ncgotia-
tions are in progress in London for the
formation Of syndicate OF Anglo
French hnanciers with view TO cOun-
tcring the Panama Canal difficulty
by tho construction Of second canal
through Nicaragua. Little credcncc is
attached To tho report in authorita-
tive circles in Berlin, but considerable
curiosity is manifested as 10 the man.
ncr in which the story originated.
Tho Daily Mail" gives prominence
to an article by Norman Angel en-
titled WHY Not Fight" The writer
argues that il Germany had done
England less harm than America has
done there would have been by this
time an AnSlo-German war, but he
says. "Wc have not gone To war with
the United States. we shall not go 10
war and are not even thinking Of war.
and this not because blood Is thicker
than water. for when the blood was n
good deal thicker. when American
really was English blood. which now
il Is not. we went To war. not once,
but twice. and fought with Germans
against Americans. 50 il is not for
that reason that we submit to affronts
from America. which. If committed
by Germany. would make war incvita-
Bile. The reason why we shall not go
TO war is because war would be in
effective.
I'VE could not impose our will by
war. America H. not only imprcgnable
SO far as q military force is concerned,
but is quite obviously impregnablc.
We could. IT IL true. destroy her navy.
bombard her ports. blockade her coasts
and by so doing create position far
more onerous Tor us than for her. She
would be embarrassed. we should
starve--Lancashire from lack of cotton.
and other parts Of our population from
the high prices Of food. Our finances
would be chaotic from the havoc which
this state OF war would make with the
British millions sunk I'm American in
vestments, while America. as self
contained continent. would be much
less seriously hit.
"She does not depend upon foreign
food or foreign money. She has al
ready secured foreign trade which.
however, Is but a drop In the bucket
COMPARED with her internal trade. She
can far better afford TO be- locked in
than we can afford TO be locked out.
Her navy serves no earthly purpose
connected with any vital function Of
her national life. BY bombarding her
coast towns we could do some damage
to property which IL mainly ours and
which. in the end. our insurance com
panies would have to pay for. but be-
stick. II We landed armies they would
be swallowed mp in the very spaces Of
the continent
Ralph Norman Angel Lane. who writes
Under the pen name Norman Angel
has been managing director Of the Paris
edition OF THE Daily Mall since its es-
tablshment in 1905. lie had previously
been Paris correspondent for various
American papers and had served as editor
Of The Daily Messenger in Paris. He
attracted considerable attention last year
az the author Of THE Great Illusion Il
work having for it's keynote the fallacy
and uselessness of war. Mr.. Lane con-
tended that war between two great powers
was no longer possible because OF the ter
rible consequences OF bringing commerce
10 a standstill