CAB9-1_PT1 — Page 122

Printed for the use of the Colonial Office. April 1892.

CONFIDENTIAL.

53-R

Scheme of Defence.

GIBRALTAR. 1891.

17

Page 122

Remarks by Colonial Defence Committee.

THE Colonial Defence Committee have considered the Scheme of Defence of Gibraltar, dated the 24th September, 1891. As explained by the General Officer Commanding, it was thought advisable to entirely recast the earlier scheme, which had been pronounced inadequate and unsatisfactory.

The present scheme marks a great advance upon its predecessor in every respect, and gives evidence of the care and ability which have been brought to bear upon it. The Local Committee, acting under the instructions of the General Officer Commanding, have successfully dealt with most of the questions involved, and, subject to the suggestions which follow, the Colonial Defence Committee consider that the present scheme may be accepted as fully meeting the requirements of the fortress.

The Colonial Defence Committee have not received the Report of the Civil Committee appointed to deal with the treatment of the civil population and with the question of the coaling of mercantile steamers in war. They assume that the Report of this Committee will also lay down the arrangements required in regard to food supply, the extinction of fires, and the lighting of the fortress-matters which are not disposed of in the scheme under

consideration.

In regard to the latter, the Colonial Defence Committee submit the following remarks, viz. :—

1. The general assumption as to the probable nature of attack, as laid down in pp. 2 and 3, appears to be justifiable. The Colonial Defence Committee regard the mounting of howitzers and medium guns to command the bay and their effective employment by Spain as a remote contingency, on account of the reprisals to which the Spanish Government would render itself liable. The Local Committee state, however (p. 2), that the rendering of the coaling of unarmoured steamers "difficult, if not impossible,

is the sum total

of the injury which would be inflicted on England and English interests." This paragraph appears open to misinterpretation. As regards difficulty and risk in coaling under fire, armour-clads would be able to count upon little more immunity than unarmoured vessels. It is only as a coaling station and a pro- tected anchorage that Gibraltar would be of value to the Empire in war. coaling could be prevented, or if ships at anchor were liable to be constantly under fire, the fortress of Gibraltar would cease to exercise any influence upon naval operations.

If

2. Apart, however, from the question of danger to coaling arising from fire, it is evident, as pointed out by the Senior Naval Officer, that during war

[282]

Page 122

Page 122

":

10

1