Page 204
Page 204
3. The system proposed is an elastic one.
on the needs of the armament, and would be :-
(a.) Forts as garrison artillery.
(b.) Movable armament.
(c.) Machine guns.
8
The actual allotment on mobilization will depend
(d.) Any sort of infantry work (e.g., cyclists) if required.
The nature of its employment
4. Thus the reorganization of the corps will be a special one. will depend upon the actual needs of the Colony, and, as pointed out by the Commandant, this should increase its popularity.
5. As regards the forts (3a), these should be selected by the Officer Commanding Royal Artillery so as to necessitate training with only one or two natures of guns, thus simplifying it, and giving more time for training with movable armament, machine guns, or musketry. 1 am of opinion that the reduced training in forts, proposed by the Commandant will still be sufficient to make the corps a valuable reserve for the garrison artillery of the fortress.
T. W. G. BRYAN, Major, R.G.A.,
C.R.A., South China.
(Signed)
Hong Kong, May 30, 1903.
To Chief Staff Officer.
Enclosure 3 in No. 1.
Minute by the General Officer Commanding.
I UNDERSTOOD from a conversation with your Excellency that you had received a report from the Colonial Defence Committee as well as myself, and so I do not forward that received by
me.
As soon as I had read the report, I communicated with Major Pritchard, Commanding the Hong Kong Volunteers, and, after considerable discussion, I arrived at the decision that although we all agreed (Major Pritchard, the past and present C.R.A., Colonel Johnson, C.M.G., and Major Bryan and myself) that garrison artillery is the unit which requires strengthening in this fortress, yet we are all prepared to admit that the arduous work connected with guns in the fixed armament would not be so popular and attractive to the class of men of whom the Volunteers are composed as the lighter work connected with movable armament or machine guns. We all recognized this when the change was recommended to your Excellency, but we had in view efficiency rather than force of numbers. The Volunteers accepted their share of the change with great loyalty, and I am strongly averse to going back if it can be avoided. At the same time the views of the Colonial Defence Committee would not only have to be gravely considered, but also we recognize that there is so much to our knowledge absolutely sound in those views that we have endeavoured to suggest a course by which possibly the views expressed by the Colonial Defence Committee can be made to coincide with the views entertained by us here on the spot, and that is, that all should be required to put in a modified course of fixed armament work, supple- mented with movable armament or machine gun work, and also a course of musketry training. The views held by Major Pritchard and Major Bryan, the present C.R.A., are attached.
If your Excellency concurs, I would ask you to forward the whole correspondence to be laid before the Colonial Defence Committee for their opinion, as I am anxious to recommend no fresh change in the composition of the Corps until the matter has received the fullest consideration, so that whatever is decided upon should be final.
(Signed)
W. J. GASCOIGNE, Major-General,
Commanding in South China.
j
{
1
C
Τ
Я
F
Hong Kong, June 2, 1903.
His Excellency the Governor of Hong Kong,
&c.
&c.
&c.
No. 2.
Telegram from Colonial Office to Governor.—(Sent August 6, 1903.)
REFERRING to your Confidential despatch, 25th June, Pritchard appears to have misunder- Colonial Defence Committee stood enclosure in my Confidential despatch, 17th April. recommended one company garrison artillery to man movable not fixed armament, and one company infantry specially trained to machine guns. Please obtain further reports on this proposal.
Page 204
Page 204
Page 204