CAB11-57-1 — Page 27

Page 27

(call &

x

SECRET.

Page 27

Printed for the use of the Colonial Office. July 10, 1895.

9B

[No 113R]

HONG KONG.

HONG KONG.

No. 18.

Defence Scheme revised to May 1894.

Remarks by the Colonial Defence Committee.

IN discussing this Scheme the Colonial Defence Committee had the advantage of a personal explanation from General Digby Barker of his views as to the various matters dealt with.

The Scheme has been worked out with a most praiseworthy attention to detail, but differs from that of 1889 in some most important particulars.

Both Schemes concur in accepting the defences of the North Front, supplemented by a small mobile force as sufficient protection against attack on the harbour. As regards this section of the defence, both Schemes are practically identical.

In the treatment of the remainder of the coast-line from Mount Davis to Sywan Hill, a difference of principle is manifest.

The Scheme of 1889 did not contemplate any resistance to the actual disembarkation of an enemy, but proposed to deny him passage over the gaps in the hills that encircle the city of Victoria on the land side.

The present Scheme, on the other hand, makes arrangements for opposing

landings anywhere except at the extreme south of the island.

2. Briefly stated, the principal advantages claimed for this are:-

(i.) The field of fire of both artillery and infantry is free from the likeli- hood of being obscured by fog.

(ii.) The position of the guns at lower levels increases the efficiency of their fire.

(iii.) The reservoirs and shore ends of the cables are better protected than before.

(iv.) Landing places are brought under gun fire.

With regard to (i), this is per se an undoubted advantage, but it is difficult to understand that the previous positions of the guns should have been selected on the three successive occasions on which the land defences have been con- sidered, viz., the Reports submitted to the Earl of Carnarvon's Commission, and in the Schemes of 1887 and 1889, if the fog seriously interfered with the defence. This appears to be the main point on which the whole question of the necessity for the new disposition depends, and the Colonial Defence Committee would like to have before them, when considering the next revise of the Defence Scheme, as ample a record as possible of observations affecting this question.

(ii.) This was met in the former Scheme by recommendations as to the special construction of the gun carriages to be supplied. In any case, however, it seems questionable if guns or howitzers are required for the defence of the higher passes of Victoria Gap and Wanchai Gap. Infantry fire and machine- gun fire would apparently suffice to hold them, considering the difficulty of these hill approaches and the ease with which they could be obstructed.

(iii.) The reservoirs were not protected in the former Scheme so strongly as in the present one. Of the three reservoirs, it is understood that the one at Aberdeen is not of importance for general purposes, on account of the difficulty in transporting to other parts of the island the water from it, while the other

[390]

Page 27

3 0

20

Page 27

Page 27