amount spent on new naval construction by England, France and Russia, as compared with Germany, was as follows:
| England | France | Russia | Germany | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1909 | £11,076,551 | £ 4,517,766 | £ 1,758,487 | £10,177,062 |
| 1910 | £14,755,289 | £ 4,977,682 | £ 1,424,013 | £11,392,856 |
| 1911 | £15,148,171 | £ 5,876,659 | £ 3,216,396 | £11,710,859 |
| 1912 | £16,132,558 | £ 7,114,876 | £ 6,897,580 | £11,491,187 |
| 1913 | £16,883,875 | £ 8,893,064 | £12,082,516 | £11,010,883 |
| 1914 | £18,676,080 | £11,772,862 | £13,098,613 | £10,316,264 |
These figures can not be too carefully studied by those who have been led to think that Germany pounced upon a defenceless and unsuspecting Europe like a cat upon a mouse. If it be thought worth while to consider also the period of a few years preceding 1909, one finds that England's superiority in battleships alone was 112 per cent in 1901, and her superiority rose to nearly 200 per cent in 1904; in which year England spent £42,431,000 on her navy, and Germany £11,659,000. Taking the comparative statistics of naval expenditure from 1900, in which year England spent £32,055,000 on her navy, and Germany spent £7,472,000, down to 1914 it is absolutely impossible to make the figures show that Germany enforced upon the other nations of Europe an unwilling competition in naval armament.
[24]
