Page 25
A
5
posts. It should only be adopted where no electrical communication exists, or where such communication has temporarily broken down. To provide for such a contingency, a small party of infantry signallers should be available with their units to man signal-stations if required; otherwise, when the telephone lines are complete, infantry signalling parties should only be required in connection with the operations of a movable column.
With regard to artillery signallers, A.O. 195 of December 1896 has laid down that they are in future to be trained in semaphore signalling only, and that their duties in war will be-
(1.) To provide a means of communication by day for purely artillery orders and instructions in the event of electrical communication not being available; and
(2.) To communicate by day in certain cases with examining vessels, &c. The Colonial Defence Committee propose to deal with the latter duty in a separate Memorandum. Meanwhile, it appears doubtful whether it will be necessary to train men of the St. Lucia Company, R.A., as signallers, as recommended by the Local Committee.
15. Page 36, paragraph 15.-The Colonial Defence Committee desire to call the attention of the Admiralty and War Office to the fact that only one small, old, slow, steam-launch is available at St. Lucia. This has been told off as "examining vessel," but from the above description it appears little suited for this purpose. Moreover, when so employed, it would not be available for duties in connection with the military defence of the coaling station.
These duties, as laid down in the Defence Scheme, include " general patrolling." The Colonial Defence Committee are not aware of the precise meaning attached to this term. They do not, however, consider that any patrolling by a steam-launch could be of real assistance in the defence of the coaling station, and would call attention to paragraph 4 of their Remarks, dated April 1894, on draft Harbour Regulations for Port Castries.
16. Page 37, paragraph 16.—The Local Defence Committee state that they still consider that the landing place of the submarine cable should be brought into Toc Bay, within the line of defence, because in its present position in the Grand Cul-de-Sac, it could easily be cut by a boat's crew landing at night, or by disaffected natives.
The Colonial Defence Committee discussed this subject in their Remarks dated the 9th July, 1895, on the Report of the Local Defence Committee of February 1895. They did not recommend the removal of the cable owing to its liability to damage by ships anchoring if brought into the Bay of Castries, and they considered that the entrance to Cul-de-Sac Bay had the advantage of deep water, well covered by fire from the Morne.
It does not appear to them that the additional reasons now given for its removal are sufficient to justify a reversal of their former opinion. They observe that the Defence Scheme (p. 102) provides for a detachment at Ciceron to be under arms all night. This detachment should be able to cope with any boat's crew attempting to destroy the cable at its landing- place, and a sentry might be posted there to keep off natives.
CHAPTER III.
17. Page 41. Action by Staff and Departments. A specific reference should be made under this heading to the notification that will be sent to the Governor instructing him to put the Defence Scheme partially or wholly into force. The notification will be in the form communicated in Lord Knutsford's Circular despatch, dated the 2nd July, 1891, and it is of vital importance that the simple code laid down in the Circular should be under- stood and acted on immediately on its receipt.
The Defence Scheme should also lay down the action to be taken on receipt of the above notification, in accordance with clause 2, section 189 of the Army Act, with regard to making the forces in the Colony tempo- rarily subject to that Act as if they were on active service.
Page 25
[214]
C
Page 25