CAB7-4 — Page 163

Page 163

135

84

is

n

41

it

1,

f

а

In the two latter cases measures must be taken for the land defence of the port and town, though, in the former case, it may not be considered necessary.

Recapitulated thus:-

1. Defences existing remodelled to deny harbour to an enemy

2. Defence constituting fairly secure port of refuge

3. Defence constituting port of refuge, and still farther secure from shell-fire

£

44,270

186,470

203,720

A possible objection to No. 3 is that Barkly Island is low, and may, perhaps, prove unhealthy; otherwise the defence afforded by it is the better.

C. H. NUGENT, Colonel, R.E., and

D.D.W., Fortifications.

e

DO! (1)

S

y

0

(Signed)

December 14, 1880.

(Signed)

T. L. GALLWEY, Inspector-General

of Fortifications.

December 28, 1880.

e

CD 12

ន

Appendix No. 4.

MAURITUS.

e

1

J

-

t

Sir,

Page 163

ADEN AND PERIM.

No. 50.

Colonial Office to Royal Commission on the Defence of British Possessions and Commerce Abroad.

Downing Street, December 6, 1881.

I AM directed by the Earl of Kimberley to transmit to you, to be laid before the Royal Com- mission on the Defence of British Possessions and Commerce Abroad, a copy of a letter from the India Office requesting his Lordship's opinion as to the extent of the assistance which Her Majesty's Government will be prepared to afford the Government of India in defraying the cost of the additional defences which may be considered requisite to the security of Aden.

As the question of the apportionment of the cost of defences is one which engages the attention of the Royal Commissioners, Lord Kimberley would suggest that they should communicate direct with the Secretary of State for India with reference to the accompanying correspondence.

I am to add that a copy of this letter will be transmitted to the India Office for the information of the Marquis of Hartington.

I am, &c.

(Signed)

R. H. MEADE.

Sir,

Inclosure 1 in No. 50.

India Office to Colonial Office.

India Office, November 26, 1881. I AM directed by the Secretary of State for India in Council to forward, for the information of the Secretary of State for the Colonies, copy of a military letter from the Government of India of the 8th July, 1881, relative to the coast defences of India, and a copy of the papers noted in the margin* in relation to the share of the cost of the new defensive works at Aden which should be borne by the Imperial Government, and I am desired to request that the Marquis of Hartington may be favoured with the opinion of Lord Kimberley as to the extent of the assistance which Her Majesty's Government will be prepared to afford the Government of India in defraying the cost of the additional defences which may he considered requisite to the security of Aden.

I have, &c.

(Signed)

ALLEN JOHNSON, Colonel,

Military Secretary.

Inclosure 2 in No. 50.

The Governor-General of India in Council to the Marquis of Hartington.

My Lord Marquis,

Simla, July 8, 1881. WE have the honour to submit herewith the Reports on, and proposals for, the defences of the principal harbours of India, drawn up by the Special Committee appointed in 1877.

2. This subject of the coast defences of India has occupied the attention of the Government of India for many years past. In 1859 it was deemed advisable to erect protective works on the Hooghly, and a small battery was constructed below Diamond Harbour. This has long since fallen * To War Office, 5th October, 1881 (No. 783 W). War Office, 20th October, 1881 (No. 7,964). To War Office, 24th October, 1881 (No. 860 W). War Office, 22nd November, 1881 (No. 8,836). Telegram to Viceroy, 24th November, 1881.

Page 163

ADEN

AND PERIM.

Page 163

Page 163