CAB7-4 — Page 484

Page 484

Page 484

Appendix No. 4.

VANCOUVER ISLAND.

Barrack for 600 men, 80,000%.

3,6007,

456

It will therefore be necessary to provide 1,200 Imperial troops.

No dependence, however, should be placed on the Marines, as in time of war they will be required on board ship, though in peace time they may perhaps be conveniently employed, as they may be detached from ships on the station, and relieved from time to time at short intervals, as may best suit the arrangements of the Admiral commanding on the station.

It will not, however, be necessary to provide barrack accommodation in peace time for the whole 1,200 men; in the event of war the garrison can, without much discomfort, be crowded into half the normal barrack space, so that barrack accommodation for 600 men will probably be sufficient. It will not be necessary to make these barracks bomb- proof, but the roofs should be splinter-proof, and the buildings protected by shot-proof

traverses.

The cost of such barracks would be 80,000%.

October 8, 1880.

(For Inspector-General of Fortifications),

(Signed) C. H. NUGENT, Colonel, R.E., and D.D.W.,

Fortifications.

P.S. The defensive measures recommended herein will render the harbour of Esqui- malt a port of refuge in which ships may lie in security, and not much less offensive sea power will suffice to deny it to an enemy.

Perhaps, for the latter purpose, the land defences and the barracks for 600 men may not be necessary, and the works on Beacon Hill and Macaulay Point may be abandoned, but the post at Signal Hill should be considerably strengthened.

This will leave Victoria at the mercy of the enemy, and cannot be recommended; it would be far better to retain both these batteries, and to reduce Beacon Hill, if such a course should recommend itself.

Perhaps, too, the defence of Nanaimo may be left to position guns only; this will reduce the cost of the entire scheme by 178,4007.

For the sake of comparison, the defensive measures are recapitulated as follows:-

FANNING ISLAND,

1. Defences existing, placing in order ..

2. Defences existing, revision for heavier guns

3. Defences to constitute port of refuge

4. Defences to constitute depôt denied to an enemy 5. Defence of Nanaimo

..

6. Defence of Nanaimo by position guns

December 14, 1880.

December 28, 1880.

£

..

2,500

16,000

263,272

85,372

60,204

7,200

(Signed)

C. H. NUGENT.

(Signed)

T. L. GALLWEY, Inspector-General of Fortifications.

FANNING ISLAND.

No. 131.

Précis of Correspondence at the Admiralty in reference to Fanning Island, North Pacific Ocean.

FOREIGN Office letter, July 31, 1857, forwards remarks from the Consul-General at the Sandwich Islands, giving particulars as to the resources of the island and its capacity for sheltering ships.

Foreign Office letter, September 7, 1857, informs the Admiralty that Lord Clarendon had autho- rized the Consul-General at the Sandwich Islands to permit a Mr. Henry English, who claims the island as his property, to hoist the British flag, the island not having been claimed by any other State.

The Naval Commander-in-chief in the Pacific (Sir T. Maitland), letter of the 24th May, 1861, informs the Admiralty that Honolulu (Sandwich Islands) papers of the 16th April mention that Her Majesty's ship "Alert" had taken possession of Fanning Island, but that the Commander-in-chief had received no intelligence of this from the Commander of the "Alert."

(Search has been made in Admiralty records for any subsequent communication from the Com- mander-in-chief, but none appears. The ship's log of the "Alert" has been consulted, and from it it seems that the "Alert" was anchored at Fanning Island between the afternoon of the 4th February, 1861, and the morning of the 12th February, 1861; but there is no reference of the formalities usually observed in taking possession of lands. A morning and evening gun was fired every day.)

Colonial Office letter, August 8, 1861 (to which Department was communicated the report of the "Alert" having taken possession of Fanning Island, as referred to in Sir T. Maitland's letter above quoted), informs the Admiralty that the Secretary of State, the Duke of Newcastle, was unaware of any intention to occupy the island, and requested the Admiralty to inform them what motives may have

Page 484

Page 484

Page 484