427
PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE
C.O.
Reference :-
885/5
ALLY WITHOUT PERMISSION OF THE BE REPRODUCED PHOTOGRAPHIC- COPYRIGHT PHOTOGRAPH-NOT TO
5 PUBLIC RECORD OFFICE, LONDON
As regards the supply of coal to our own fleet, it is evident that, subject to conditions of defence, the more numerous and scattered the ports are at which coal can be obtained, the botter. Distinguished naval officers have called our attention to a large number of ports in your Majesty's dominions at which, in their opinion, it is desirable that supplies of coal should be kept for the use of your Majesty's ships.
With regard to the permanent defence of the more important sea-ports and coaling stations of your Majesty's Colonial possessions, we may observe that there is an impression in the minds of many that the navy ought to afford permanent protection to all of them. The Royal Navy is not maintained for the purpose of affording direct local protection to sea-ports or harbours, but for the object of blockading the ports of an enemy, of destroying his trade, attacking his possessions, dealing with his ships at sea, and we may add of preventing an attack in great force against any special place. It is by the efficient performance of these duties that our commerce and Colonies will be best protected. Our sea-ports must rely for their immediate defence on local means, The more remote parts of your Majesty's leaving your Majesty's navy free to act at sea. dominions may in some cases be most effectually protected by the action of the fleet at a distance from the point to which protection is afforded.
Assuming, then, that direct local protection cannot, for these reasons, be given by naval means, and must be secured by local and permanent works, adequate garrisons wil be required which, when at a distance from home, or near the coasts of powerful States, must be maintained during peace at a strength which shall always afford a reasonable guarantee for security.
Assistance in the provision of garrisons must be looked for from local forces raised in the Colonies, and we are glad to know that some of the Colonies are willing to undertake the entire local defence of their principal ports. But even with such assistance, the difficulty and expense of providing adequate garrisons has impressed upon us the necessity of limiting the fortified ports and positions abroad to the least number consistent with the object in view, viz., the provision of adequate bases for the support of the operations of the navy, sufficiently protected against attack in such force as may reasonably be expected.
We have taken evidence as to the possibility of reinforcing your Majesty's navy with fast We stated in ships from the mercantile marine, and to the part these ships may play during war. our first Report that there were, in April, 1881, twenty-three British steamers in existence with an average ocean-going speed of 14 knots and upwards, and thirty more building, or in contemplation, in the United Kingdom. We also stated, on the authority of Mr. Barnaby, that "no power possesses a merchant-steamer with an average ocean-going speed of 14 knots except Eugland.". But we are now informed that since that date a considerable number of ships with a speed exceeding 14 knots have been or will shortly be acquired by foreign countries, France alone possessing fifteen.
It has
We have also taken evidence as to the practicability of preventing the transfer of fast British steamers to a foreign Power, and of utilizing them as auxiliaries to your Majesty's navy. been suggested that this end might be secured by means of a subsidy to be paid by your Majesty's Government to the owners of these ships. Upon mature consideration we are opposed to the plan of a regular subsidy, but there is no doubt that these vessels may perform important duties in time of war. Although incapable of meeting an enemy's regular cruizers, they would be effective against ships of a like nature employed against our commerce, and would be invaluable as look-out ships as a means for conveying communications between the Colonies and the United Kingdom, or carrying instructions to your Majesty's ships on distant stations, especially in the event of communication by telegraph being suspended. We think it would be well to encourage the owners of these ships to comply with such regulations as the Admiralty may lay down as to construction and otherwise so as to enable them to receive moderate armaments, and we think We believe that armaments suitable for them should be provided and stored in different ports. that a preference given to such ships in time of peace, coupled with a more exclusive employment in time of war for the transport of troops and Government stores, would go far to insure the objects aimed at.
We have called attention to some of the various duties which in time of war will be required of your Majesty's fleet in order to protect the interests of the Colonial dependencies of the Empire, and to afford a reasonable hope that the commerce of England could still be carried on under the British flag. How far the navy is equal to the discharge of these duties is a grave and pressing question, which can only be answered by a careful inquiry into the relative strength of our navy as compared with the navies of foreign nations. The comparison must be made upon data which are constantly fluctuating, and with reference to the exertions made by other nations. It requires also a more careful examination and estimate of the relative fighting-power of each ship than can be made by any other body than the Department specially charged with the administration of the navy.
Our insular position, happily, has freed us from the necessity of entering into the baneful com- petition in large standing armies to which nations on the continent have been subject, but the efforts which they are making to increase their strength at sea do undoubtedly, in our opinion, call for a corresponding effort on the part of this country to increase the fighting-power of the navy. Wo are deeply impressed by the Returns furnished by the Admiralty, and to these, as well as to the other evidence, we invite the particular attention of your Majesty's Government, feeling bound to express our opinion that, looking to the action of other countries, the strength of the navy should be increased with as little delay as possible.
We are aware that stress has been laid upon the greatly superior capacity for ship-building which this country possesses as compared with other countries; also that we are the chief manufacturers of compound armour-plates, and should in this way be able to add to our naval force more quickly than other nations. But this superiority would avail us little at the outbreak
of war, however much it may tell in our favour as a reserve power to maintain the efficiency of our armaments and defence during the coutinuance of hostilities. Further, the manufacturing power of the country might be heavily taxed during war to produce fast ships of large coal- carrying power for commercial purposes and especially for the supply of food to this country.
II. THE DEFENCES OF THE AUSTRALIAN COLONIES.
We now submit a Report upon the defences of the Australian Colonies; but with regard to New Zealand we regret that we can only present a summary of Colonel Scratchley's Report, the Colonial Government not being prepared to nominate a representative to give evidence before us. Looking, however, to the additional risks to commerce in the Australian seas arising from the coal and supplies which may be obtained by an enemy in the ports of New Zealand, if left undefended, it is most desirable that whatever steps are requisite for the protection of these ports should be taken without delay.
In dealing with this important branch of the matters referred to us, we have had the advan- tage of the able and exhaustive Reports of Sir W. D. Jervois on the defence of the several Australian Colonies (Western Australia alone excepted), which in the main have been approved and partly acted upon by the different Colonial Governments.
The general principle upon which Sir W. D. Jervois based his plan of the defences of the Australian Colonies has been clearly stated by him in his further Report on Colonial Defences of the 29th November, 1879, namely
**
That whilst the Imperial Navy undertakes the protection of the British mercantile marine generally, and of the highways of communication between the several parts of the Empire, the Australian Colonies themselves provide, at their own cost, the local forces, forts, batteries, and other appliances requisite for the protection of their principal ports. Each harbour so protected will become a focus of refuge and action, when required, for British men-of-war, and at the same time will be secured against the attack of such cruizers as may not have been intercepted by Her Majesty's ships."
We think this principle is, upon the whole, sound, and that the above statement fairly represents at the present time the relative position and duties of the Imperial and Colonial Governments. We are, however, of opinion that these great Colonies may not unreasonably be called upon to assist, in some degree, in the naval defence of the Empire; nor are we prepared to say that, in certain exceptional but possible cases which as yet have not arisen, and which we only suggest out of extreme caution, this country may not be fairly called upon to contribute in some measure to the expense of defending a harbour, if it should be thought desirable that one should be specially selected for coaling, repairing, and refitting your Majesty's ships.
Before making our special recommendations with respect to the defence of the Australian ports, we think it may be convenient to present in a summarized form the evidence which we have received as to the defence of each individual Colony :-
New South Wales.
Sir W. Jervois reported in November, 1879, that provision had been made by the Colonial Legislature for a sum of 160,0001. for carrying out completely his recommendations with respect to works, armaments, and torpedoes for the defence of Port Jackson, Botany Bay, and Newcastle. Of this sum, 56,2381. had been expended at the date of his Report. Steps were being taken for the completion of the works; the armaments had been supplied with the exception of four heavy guns for Port Jackson; a large store of submarine mines had been provided, and the submarine mining system was in all respects complete. Of the four guns mentioned above, two, which are to be 10-in. guns of 25 tons, were ordered from Elawick in April, 1880.
Colonel Scratchley, reporting on the 30th September, 1881, states that "the defence works should be nearly completed during next year; " and adds that "the defences when completed will place Port Jackson in the position of a fortified naval arsenal and depôt, in which a squadron could be refitted in time of war, provided the necessary supplies of warlike stores are kept there." The whole of the land forces of the Colony are commanded by an officer with the local rank of colonel, who formerly held a commission in the regular ariny.
The permanent artillery comprise well-trained batteries, commanded by an officer formerly in the Royal Artillery. The officers have nearly all served in the regular army. Pro- motion is subject to the same examination as in the regular service, but there is no examination Some of the non- on first appointment, care being however, taken to appoint qualified men. commissioned officers are men who have served in the regular army, and such are preferred if of The men are enlisted for five good character. They receive uniform and rations, and pay. years, and receive uniform, rations, and pay. By the local Military and Naval Defence Act the permanent artillery are, with certain exceptions, subjected to the provisions of the Imperial Mutiny Act. They are drilled similarly to the Royal Artillery, to whom they are stated to be in all respects equal, and have a prescribed amount of practice annually with the heavy guns. Their numbers are subject to variation; but the total expense of the force, for the year 1879, was 37,8101. There was once a small permanent infantry force of 175 men on the same footing as the artillery, but it was disbanded some years ago.