3
Page 357
sub-paragraphs (e) and (f) on p. 17, which propose army signallers for com- municating between Stony Hill and head-quarters and between Newcastle and head-quarters.
15. Pages 39 to 42, Revised Table (C).-The references A to E under the various columns of this Table require some further explanation.
16. Page 46, Table (K).-In the column of Remarks, it is observed that two 7-pr. R.M.L. guns are detailed to a steam-launch. This is presumably the 'Firefly," which is told off in the Traffic Regulations to the examination of ships. Reference to the armament of this launch does not appear elsewhere in the Scheme, nor can it be traced in the Distribution Tables that any men have been told off to work these guns. The Admiralty and War Office have approved of a recommendation of the Joint Naval and Military Committee on Defence, contained in their Report No. XII, dated the 6th July, 1894, that examination vessels should not be armed. Other arrangements should, therefore, be made to utilise these two 7-pr. guns if required.
CHAPTER IV.
17. Page 52, paragraph 4.-The reference to the Chief Staff Officer at head-quarters should apparently now be to the D.A.A.G. (A).
18. Page 52, paragraph 6.—See paragraph 11 of these Remarks.
19. Pages 53 and 55.-The orders for the Section Commanders, Eastern and Western Forts, should contain clear instructions, based on the revised Traffic Regulations (p. 67), as to opening fire on vessels attempting to cross the examination line without permission, and the Section Commander, Eastern Forts, as to making the mines active.
20. Page 53.-In distributing engineers to the Western Forts section, it must be borne in mind that a few men will be required for working electric lights.
21. Page 55, paragraph 4.-See paragraph 15 of these Remarks. 22. Page 55, paragraph 6.—See paragraph 11 of these Remarks.
CHAPTER VI.
CC
23. Page 67, paragraph 1.-In the Defence Scheme, revised to January 1894, it was stated that the civil authorities were being consulted
on the modifications required in existing Regulations with reference to examination of vessels for arms, explosives, armed parties," &c.
The present revision does not show the result of this consultation. The whole of paragraph 1 might probably now be omitted, as the examination of vessels is to be carried out in accordance with arrangements made by the Senior Naval Officer at Port Royal.
24. Page 67, paragraph 2.-The revised paragraph is concurred in, subject to the minor modifications suggested by the Colonial Defence Committee in paragraphs 2 and 3 of their Remarks, dated the 14th October, 1895, on the Report of the Local Joint Naval and Military Committee of July 1895.
25. Page 67, paragraph 3.-This paragraph may now be omitted for the same reason as that given above for the omission of paragraph 1.
26. Page 67, paragraph 4.-The words "or his" should be substituted for "and Harbour-master's," in the second line of this paragraph, and “ &c.” should be omitted.
27. Page 67, paragraph 5.—It is not apparent that provision has yet been made against the danger which would result from a vessel containing dynamite that might be at Kingston before war regulations were put in force.
28. Page 67, paragraph 6.-The advisability of the light at Fort Augusta being taken out of the control of the Board of Works was stated, in the Scheme revised to January 1894, to be under civil consideration. The present revision does not show that any decision has been arrived at in this matter.
Page 357
Page 357
טיין
h
1: