GARRISON GUNNERS.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 792, 15 April 1910, Page 6

GARRISON GUNNERS.

EFFICIENCY CHALLENGE SHIELD. "WON BY PETONE NAVALS. The results of the 1909-10 competition for the Efficiency Challenge Shield presented by the Government for the encouragement of efficiency in garrison artillery companies of New Zealand have been announced in a circular memorandum by Captain G; S. Richardson, Chief Instructor of Artillery. 3?or the fifth consecutive training season the shield"has been won by the Petono N avals." As a matter of fact this crack company has possessed the trophy ever since its first year of competition. The company had} the misfortune this year to be "docked" 15 points for being an officer ehort. The results are as follow;:— . ■ ' Marks ■ per V .- v cent. 1. No. 2 Company, Wellington (Petono" Narvals) .._ 91.1 2. No.. 1 Company, Wellington. (Wellington Navak) „ 88.4 3. No. 1 Company, Canterbury 57.9 i. No. 2 Company,' Otago 86.8 5. No.' 2 Company, Auckland 86.5 6. No. 1 Company, Otago 85.7 7. No. 2. Company, Canterbury S4 8. No. 1 Company, Westport 52.7 9. No. 1 Company, Auckland 81.1 10. No. 3 Company; Auckland '.: 76 In the- assessment of marks under the several topics, the honours for officers go to No. 2 Company at Auckland; the Petone men take first place for gunnery of the_ n.co.'s and men, range-finding, signalling, attendance in camp, and number passed in semaphore signalling; No. 2 Company, Qtago, heads the list for gun-la-ying; NoL 2 Company, Auckland, for trumpeters; No. 1 Company, Canterbury, for fort-manning; No. 1 Company, Westport, for discipline. -. The chief reasons (states the circular) for variation, in the standard of efficiency of companies ax«:-(l) Faulty ; internal organisation; (2) irregular attendance; (3) change of personnel every year. There is Practically no difference in the quality of the personnel-, all companies may be considered equal in this respect, but there is a great difference in their efficiency, due largely to the way officers commanding companies organise their commands for training. The training in some companies is not prozressive, and therefore not thorough. The following points should be specially noted by officers commanding companies in arranging lo . r traumng during the present year:— (1) .thorough training of recruits, strict aisciplme and smartness to be a special leature of their training, and no drill in the ranks till passed all recruit drills (including gunnery, musketry, and semaphore, signalling by the.officer commanding division or adjutant). : (2) Organisation of company- into sections,, each under an officer who should personally instruct his own details, and be encouraged to act on his own initiative m. methods of training, and held responsible for the attendance and efficiency of the section in all respects. , (3) Eecruiting should be carried out in the early winter months, and cease about the end of September; individual training can then be completed before 'the con> mencement of the oamp. (i) When recruits are enroHed it should be clearjy explained to them what will be expected of them in order to avoid enrolling men whose employment does not permit to attend camp. The attendances at morning parades were most unsatisfactory in some companies.