Page 233
205
Page 233
119
CYPRUS.
to abandon; but, although it would command the anchorage as efficiently as the Old Town Battery, it Appendix No. 4. has the disadvantage that in doing so it would fire landward instead of seaward, and its fire might strike the Quarry Fort. I do not think, therefore, that the Old Town Battery should be abandoned. The Committee, by their remarks, appear to have overlooked the special object for which it was proposed, viz., to command the anchorage.
The summary of my observations on the sea defences, then, is to place works on the following spots, viz., Quarry Fort, Old Town Battery, Messanisi, and site A.
4. The Committee have made no proposals as to land defences. They observe that they concur generally with the proposals of the Inspector-General of Fortifications in the Memorandum dated the 25th May;* but I canno tdiscover that this Memorandum makes any distinct proposals for land defences beyond the suggestion that at least three detached self-defensible forts would be required.
5. With regard to the assistance which may be expected from local levies, I do not conceive that the remarks of the Committee as to the possibility of raising a local force have a practical bearing on the question now before the Royal Commission, since such raw levies, hastily raised from an unwarlike population, would be valueless against the trained forces of an European Power, supported by modern armaments. It appears sufficient to state that no local levies exist in Cyprus.
I have, &c.
(Signed)
ROBT. BIDDULPH.
Inclosure 2 in No. 69.
REPORT OF A COMMITTEE
Held on board Her Majesty's Ship “Superb" on the 30th November and 1st and 2nd December, 1881, by order of his Excellency Major-General Sir Robert Biddulph, K.C.M.G., C.B., High Commissioner and Commander-in-chief of the Island of Cyprus, and Vice-Admiral Sir Beauchamp Seymour, G.C.B., Commander-in-chief of the Mediterranean, in accordance with the instructions of his Lordship the Secretary of State for the Colonies (vide despatch of August 23, 1881).
Captain Thomas Le H. Ward, R.N., President. Colonel H. Dumaresq, R.E.,
Colonel F. Warren, R.A., C.M.G.,} Members.
A COPY of the Order directing the assembly of the Committee is attached, and the Report is, in consequence of the instructions contained therein, limited to the harbour of Famagusta.
1. Famagusta comes under the head of the second class mentioned in the letter of the Royal Com- missioners for Defence in their letter of the 26th July,† "a post highly desirable to be held as a port of refuge, where ships could be coaled and refitted."
2. The defences of such a post are ordered not to be of a large and expensive nature; but such works as are recommended, are to be self-defensible with limited garrisons.
3. The Committee consider that Famagusta comes under the heading of a depôt where vessels can take in coal and provisions, its use being denied an enemy.
4. The Committee assume that a harbour has been constructed, as shown in the drawing which accompanies the Report from the Inspector-General of Fortifications, dated the 25th May, 1881,* and proceed to examine the plan of defence therein shown.
5. This Report is ordered to embrace the following headings
(a.) On the measures necessary for the defence of the harbour.
(b.) An estimate of the cost of such defences.
(c) The garrisons required for such defences.
(d.) The assistance which could be afforded by local levies.
On the Measures necessary for the Defence of the Harbour.
6. The proposal made in the Report of the Inspector-General of Fortifications of the 25th May, 1881,* is considered in detail. In the defence of the harbour itself, the following works are therein proposed, viz. Quarry Fort, Oxonisi Fort, Varoshia Fort, and Old Town Battery, and these points having been visited by the Committee, they beg to submit the following:-
Quarry Fort. This fort is considered of primary importance, commanding, as it does, the only entrance to the harbour, and that at very close range. The position indicated is, however, open to objection, inasmuch as it is at least 500 yards inland. No apparent advantage is gained thereby. The features of the ground as shown in the map are not correct, and if the object desired to be gained is that the fort be seen into from a landward work further removed from the sea, this object is equally obtained by placing the Quarry Fort on the spot where the beacon now stands; vide the Admiralty Charts. The armament of the fort as proposed appears to be good; it consists of three 43-ton guns, three 26-ton guns, and six medium, and the Committee recommend its adoption. The position of this work, as now fixed upon, is shown in the accompanying drawings. It must, however, be clearly understood that this work, to be self-defensible, must be closed in on the rear, being from its position very open to boat attack. The proposed alteration in position has, however, not affected this question.
Oxonisi Fort.-This fort is unquestionably only second in importance to the above. Its position, as laid down, appears admirable, and should, in your Committee's opinion, be adhered to. The
* No. 71.
[1103
† No. 1 in Appendix No. 1, First Report.
‡ Not printed.
3 G
Page 233
Page 233
Page 233