Page 169
Page 169
Page 169
removal to St. Helena of the naval station at Ascension, as recommended in 1882 by the Royal Commission, and they were of opinion that the garrison of St. Helena should consist of 310 Royal Marines, 26 Royal Engineers, and 300 local Militia.
4. The Cabinet decided in January 1888 that the naval establishment at Ascension should be moved to St. Helena, and, in July of the same year, by the direction of a Committee of the Cabinet, the Colonial (Oversea) Defence Committee considered "whether all the objects now aimed at by defending Sierra Leone and St. Helena could not be attained by defending Ascension and abandoning the defences of Sierra Leone and St. Helena."
After hearing expert opinion the Colonial (Oversea) Defence Committee answered the question referred to them in the negative.
The recommendations of the Colonial (Oversea) Defence Committee regarding the garrison of the Colony were not carried into effect, and the Cabinet's decision as to the transfer of the naval establishment from Ascension to St. Helena appears to have been cancelled in the autumn of 1888. At the same time it was decided by a Committee of the Cabinet that the white troops to be retained in St. Helena should be limited to 23 Royal Artillery and 6 Royal Engineers, being the number required as caretakers in order to insure proper care being taken of the guns and works, and that a local Militia should be raised.
5. No immediate steps were taken to withdraw the garrison pending the raising of a local defence force. The Admiralty were, however, asked to arrange for taking up the necessary ships to proceed to St. Helena with reinforcements for the garrison on an emergency arising. While agreeing to do so the Lords Commissioners stated that they were unable to guarantee the safe conduct of transports to St. Helena on the outbreak of war.
6. A prolonged correspondence took place between the Colonial Office and War Office regarding the formation of a local Militia. It became clear that a local Militia force could not be established except by resorting to compulsory service: that it would have to be maintained at the expense of the Imperial Government; and that the force would have to be paid on so liberal a scale that no one would wish to leave the Island in order to avoid service. In the circumstances no decision was arrived at, and the question was finally dropped in the latter part of the year 1892. In the meanwhile the Regular Garrison remained at a strength of 203 of all ranks, viz., Royal Artillery, 87; Royal Engineers, 6; and Infantry, 110.
7. The Colonial (Oversea) Defence Committee pointed out in 1894 that, since the project for forming a local Militia had failed, the total establishment of the garrison of St. Helena was only 214 of all ranks; and in view of the distinct declaration of the Admiralty that they could not undertake to ensure the safe arrival of reinforcements on the outbreak of war, the Committee recommended that the authorised infantry reinforcements (two companies) should be added to the peace garrison.
8. A Rifle Association was formed at St. Helena in 1897, and in the following year the Regular Garrison was increased to 756 of all ranks, a local Volunteer Corps of fifty men being raised at the same time.
9. During the South African War, 1899-1902, the garrison of the Island was temporarily increased by two battalions of Militia to provide the necessary guards for the Boer prisoners of war. On the conclusion of the war it was again reduced to the strength fixed in 1898, viz., 726 of all ranks, including four companies of the West India Regiment.
10. In 1903, in consequence of the riotous couduct of the men of the West India Regiment, the four companies of this regiment were replaced by two companies of British infantry.
11. In November 1904 the Army Council raised the question of the necessity of the retention of St. Helena as a fortified station. The Admiralty considered "that there should be a permanent though not necessarily a large garrison" in the Island, and suggested that a garrison should be provided which would be capable of manning two of the existing 6-inch guns at Ladder Hill and two 6-pr. guns at the cable landing place. At their 63rd Meeting on the 23rd February, 1905, the Committee of Imperial Defence recommended that the Army Council should provide for manning of the armament contemplated by the Admiralty, and that the Regular infantry should be withdrawn.
12. The Army Council again raised the question of the responsibility for the defence of St. Helena in June 1905. A discussion took place between the Admiralty and War Office. The War Office suggested that the Admiralty should assume responsibility for the provision and maintenance of the persouuel and armament for the defence of Jamestown, which the Admiralty refused to do. Finally the question was discussed by the Committee of Imperial Defence at their 83rd Meeting in February 1906, when the general opinion of the Committee was against the retention of a military garrison in St. Helena in time of peace. The Admiralty representatives dissented, however, from this conclusion and Lord Tweedmouth and Mr. Haldane agreed to confer on the matter.
13. At the 84th Meeting of the Committee of Imperial Defence in February 1906, Mr. Haldane announced that the War Office and Admiraly had arrived at an agreement on the question. The War Office undertook to maintain caretakers in time of peace and to provide a garrison which could be sent to St. Helena, from the Cape or elsewhere, in case of emergency. The garrison was accordingly withdrawn.
14. The Governor of St. Helena pointed out in June 1906 that owing to the removal of the garrison the existing Defence Scheme for the Colony was useless. The Colonial Office referred the question to the Colonial (Oversea) Defence Committee, and that Committee stated in January 1907 that they were reluctant to draw up a Memorandum embodying their views, which appeared to be opposed to the policy which they understood to have been adopted by His Majesty's Government. The Committee suggested, however, that the Colonial Office should approach the Admiralty with a view to ascertaining whether they would take into consideration
}
Page 169
Page 169