DEFENCE OF THE COLONY.

Temuka Leader, Issue 1249, 7 October 1884, Page 2

DEFENCE OF THE COLONY.

His Excellency the Governor delivered, a lecture last Saturday evening on tho above subiect at the annual meeting of the New 'Zealand Institute, Wellington, After some prefatory remarks he proceeded to say that the commerce of New Zealand was worth 15 millions sterling annually, and that of Australasia 100 millions. If our vessels were subject to be captured this would be stopped, which would result in disaster to the colonies and in starvation to England. Defences should therefore be regarded from an Imperial as well as an Australasian point of view, and it was to defend this that the British Government maintained its naval squadrons. He then enumerated the several stations along the route from England to New Zealand, and said it was a remarkable fact that in almost all the British possessions there was plenty of coal. It was to have these coaling and repairing depots to maintain war vessels, and to prove this be instanced the Alabama, which owing to being unable to enter port for repairs became unserviceable and was sunk by the

Keersage. Considering the question from an Australasian point of view, he said that all ships coming to these colonies via the Cape of Good Hope or Red Sea must pass very near to King George’s Sound, where hostile warships might cut off all commercial communication. Also the Derwent, on which is the town of Hobart, is another point from widen an attack might b» directed ; and ti.e defence of an anchorage in Torres Straits and a harbor in Fiji was necessary. In view of the opening of the Panama Canal the defence of New Zealand became more, important, as it was an advance shield of the Australian Colonies, and it was as important to all Australia that New Zealand should be defended as for herself. It would be well if all the colonies combined for the purposes of defence, and so far, st least, New Zealand was concerned in the question of Federation. There was very little danger of an expedition being sent against the colonies whilst England held naval supremacy, and as the existence of the British Empire depended on the strength of her navy, she was bound to maintain it as long as possible. The danger was that in case of war when the bulk of our navy was engaged at the scene of action, the enemy’s cruisers might rush in and attack us if our ports were undefended, capture our vessels and perhaps fire into our towns, and obtain payment of money. He then referred to the expense the other colonies had gone to to defend themselves, and said the more they were defended, and this colony left undefended, the greater was our danger of being attacked. Owing to her extensive seaboard New Zealand required protection, and the chief cities should be defended by land batteries, submarine mines, and other local defences. It was impossible to defend all the harbors of New Zealand, bnt Auckland, Wellington, Lyttelton, Port Chalmers and the Bluff ought to be defended. The minor ports should be defended by the local naval forces acting as auxiliaries to Her Majesty’s cruisers. He considered a few of the 8-inch breech-load-ing guns, which would pierce seven inches of iron at 3000 yards distance, ought to form part of the defence. These should be mounted on disappearing carriages, where gun and gunners are protected from the fire of the enemy. He described submarine mines as follows; — They may be divided into three classes, viz., mechanical mines, observations mines, and electro-contact mines. The first explode when struck, but as they may be dangerous to friends as well as foes they should be employed with great caution. With the second, also called dormant mines, each mine or set of mines must be fired when a vessel passes over it. The position of the enemy’s vessel over the mine must therefore be accurately determined, and a careful watch kept, both by day and night. The eleotrocontact mine has a small float above it, called a circuit closer, which indicates through a cable when contact is made with a passing ship. The mine can be discharged under a hostile vessel, whilst a friendly one is allowed to passover. In arranging a field of submarine mines, the passage of friendly vessels should be hindered as little as possible. If it extends across an entrance, say from 1000 to 1800 yards from the observing station could be guarded with dormant mines, which would afford an open channel for traffic, while the rest of the field could be guarded with electro-contact and mechanical mines. With regard to the position of the field of submarine mines, great depth of water is unsuitable, and so is a broken, rocky bottom, and tumultuous tide rips, strong tides, and exposure to the unbroken foice of ocean waves, will dissarrange the electric contact and in time damage the cables. It must be borne in mine that submarine mines can be removed or rendered harmless by deliberate action of any enemy working, with boats, counter-mining, dragging them, or cutting the cables by which they are fired, and must therefore be protected by the fire of artillery on the boats and on the enemy’s vessel covering their action. Ho then referred to the defences required at each port, but space does not permit of giving a fuller report of his views. A vote of thanks proposed by Mr Travers and seconded by the hon. the Premier was carried by acclamation.