'Fitness to win,' and perhaps in this Fitness to win may be found the surest security of the survival of commerce in war.
Japan did it without 'national insurance,' but her trade ran no great risks and in no way compared with British trade in importance. Also ' public opinion ' was less of a factor. She cannot therefore be accepted as a criterion. Arguments against national insurance are easily found, but the matter is not to be settled by nicely balanced pros and cons. It is broad generalities that are at issue. And these really whittle down to one thing: to whether the Navy is to be given a free hand to do as it thinks best or whether it is to be hampered in its operations by popular fancy raised to fever heat by mercantile losses. If the naval system of 'earth stopping ' be correct, national insurance will be a very small burden: if it be wrong, national insurance becomes a duty. Eight or wrong, it is an insurance against Parliament interfering with naval strategy; that is to say an insurance against certain disaster.
