THE DEFENCES OF NEW ZEALAND

Timaru Herald, Volume XLII, Issue 3426, 21 September 1885, Page 3

THE DEFENCES OF NEW ZEALAND

(Br TBLEQBArn.) [kUO.M OUU OWN COItKESrONUKNT.] WBLLrNGTOX, August 20. An important report ha? just been lwoivei by the Dofcneo Oilico from Major Bodlininoi Admiral Scott's rccont leeturo m Dunedin m which it will bo remembered the g!ill»n Aduiirnl severely condemned tho vyatont o defenco undertttken by the colony, niul wnrmli advocated tho merits of the ItotohkiM pun Major JBodham remarks "thai the rhiof dangoi towns arc subject to is distttnf boitibartfrttrnK A vessel with ft einglo lung ninge gun could do str.iy any Now Zetland town now K-inc i'ortilied unless the latter wore nrmed with rimthti ordnance. Magazine guns nro only iicoessorii": and would not penetrate the bulworks of at ordinary Union Coy's st-enmrr at 8000 yimts Morchatit chips, however well armed, woulc not bo able to keep to sea unless ports of com municntion were thoroughly fortilied. Non Zealand forts cannot expect naval asjistiuid unless fortilied, because a mau-of-war m ai unfortified harbor would bo taken ut the greatest possiblo disadvantage, and irouh thereforo avoid it." Major Bodham observe that Admiral Scott shows lack of knowledge of tho elementary principles of gunnery or sub marina mining, wbero he shows that 7-inch am O'l-noundm 1 gum nro effectivoat 7000 yards whereas their ertromo raugo is 4000 yards But modern artillery will shoot accurately ti 8000 yards or further, and could dostroy i town at over 10,000 yards, ao that defence bj

machine guns, which tiro only effective at 3000 y;irds, must be useless. "The cheapest and most perfect svslem of submarine defences has been obtained for New Zealand, but different polls cannot be defended m tbo same way. Lyttelton and Wellington, for instance, could not be defended by mines alone, owing to the ocean wash, and a i mine on the Dunedin beach, would be almost of as much good as m the middle of the i Pacific. The machine guns ordered for New Zealand are m every way superior to those advocated by Admiral Scott, m energy, velocity, and mounting. No system of : defence is of any uso unless it combines heavy guns of new type and submarine mines. The main defence will be carried out by Volunteers, and the number of regular Artillery would only be just sufficient to keop tho guns and so forth m order. An artillery man is a trained mechanic as much as any tradesman, and such are needed for all purposes : nlao with tbo submarine mines trained men are necessary. There is no such, thing as " simplicity " m submarine mining. The simpler the mine is made the moro difficult it is to keep m order, and such a system as Admiral Scott advocates would require to bo taken up and relaid evory fortnight. Admiral Scott's figures are also fallacious. £9000 would only furnish mines for three- , quarters of a mile of defence, whereas three , mm.-.- to each cover that area are required. , Ihe cost given of the machine guns is only that of their coat m England ; nothing is allowed for mounting, &c. Major Bodliam , states that everything lias been ordered with i the advice of the War Office. lie concludes by denouncing Admiral Scott's remarks as a i slander on the English Government, and adds , that there is none of the alleged danger as to , " bursting " m the case of the guns ordered.