Page 202
174
Appendix No. 4.
CEYLON. Ostenburgh Point.
2 10-inch 18-ton R.M.L. guns, in casemated battery, with shields Armament (2 10-inch 18-ton
R.M.L.)
*
Total
Regent's Battery.
2 10-inch 18-ton R.M.L. guns,
£
15,474
7,864
23,338
I would place two 10-inch 18-ton guns in a casemated battery on Ostenburgh Point, and two 10-inch 18-ton guns in Regent's battery.
I would reconstruct the Ridge battery, as the armament (two 7-inch 6-ton guns) as it now is, is liable, if the battery fell into the hands of an enemy, to be turned on to the fort, and the fire of these guns not being required on the approaches to the harbour, may be used to more advantage in the defence of the inner harbour, and in some degree com- manding the approaches on the land side in the direction of Puget's wharf.
I propose to place them, en barbette, on traversing platforms on the right flank of the present battery, but on a lower land where there is a suitable site, which is not open to the objection above-stated.
en barbette..
Armament
Total
Ridge Battery.
Reconstruction of battery for
2 7-inch 6-ton R.M.L.
guns, en barbette
Armament from Ridge bat-
tery..
Total
£
6,726
7,170
13,896
£
3,000
Nil.
3,000
Belfry Hill Battery.
Reconstruction of battery for 2 7-inch 61-ton R.M.L. guns, en barbette Armament from Regent's bat-
tery
Total
•
£
It will also be necessary to reconstruct Belfry Hill battery, with a view to the better defence of the inner harbour-the two 7-inch 6-ton guns to be removed from Regent's battery may be placed here, en barbette, where they would afford a most 3,000 efficient fire on the harbour generally, and on the approaches from Fort Frederick.
Nil.
3,000
East end of Ridge, Brownrigg's Battery.
The two 64-pounders at present in Belfry Hill battery may be removed to the east-end of Ridge, and placed, en barbette, near the site of old Brownrigg's Tower, to 2,000 command the approaches from the direction of Chapel Hill.
Emplacements for 2 61-prs... Armament from Belfry Hill
£
Nil.
Total
2,000
Ditch and Barrier Wall.
£
Probable cost..
•
The foregoing, I think, will be sufficient as regards artillery defence, but it seems necessary to construct an obstacle on the land side or gorge of the fort, the objection being 5,000 that it is difficult to do so effectively, and that any such barrier would be too extended, and
could not be defended by so limited a garrison as that proposed.
Regent's Battery and Half Moon. Scarping cliff in front and on left flank of battery on being dismantled. Probable cost.
Fort Ostenburgh.
Additional barracks, say, for
200 men
Stores, &c.
Total
I have shown on sketch* such a line of works, which has already been submitted to
the War Office, but disapproved of for the reasons above given.
I have no better suggestion to offer to meet the special conditions of the project.
It is understood that the Half Moon battery on the sea-face of Fort Ostenburgh has been condemned as unsafe, too exposed, and untenable, if opposed by a heavy fire.
I propose to dismantle the battery (the 9-inch gun will be available for the armament of Flagstaff battery at Fort Frederick), and to scarp the face of the cliff to protect the Regent's battery from assault in front and on left flank, to which it is at present 200 exposed.
£
20,000 5,000
25,000
Forts Frederick and Ostenburgh.
Proposed Garrison.
Artillery, 1 battery; gun lascars, small detachment; Royal Engineers, ditto;
infantry, a wing of a regiment; mounted men, few; natives trained to submarine mining, 50.
Fort Frederick,
£
Barracks for 400 men
The existing barrack accommodation at Fort Ostenburgh being very limited, it will be necessary to construct barracks for two companies of infantry, and sufficient stores for the immediate wants of the garrison.
Such is the project in which I have already said I do not concur.
The defence would, however, be more effective if Fort Frederick be maintained and garrisoned by at least 300 men, or, say, for both forts a garrison of one battery of artillery, a wing of an infantry regiment, a detachment of Royal Engineers (with a native con- tingent for submarine mining purposes), some gun lascars, and a few mounted men for orderly duty.
I think it would be more desirable, and certainly more convenient, to keep the infantry force together at Fort Frederick, with a portion of the artillery and gun lascars.
The remainder of the artillery and gun lascars, and the detachment of Royal Engineers, with the trained natives, to be at Fort Ostenburgh or in its vicinity.
In the event of hostilities arising or expected, such additional force as was thought necessary at Fort Ostenburgh could be encamped there temporarily.
With this understanding, and allowing for the existing accommodation for troops at 40,000 both forts, I would propose to construct barracks at Fort Frederick of a permanent character,
and suited to the requirements of the station for 400 men.
There is, as before stated, an excellent site available. There would be great difficulty
* Not p.inted.
Page 202
Page 202
Page 202
Page 202