COLONIAL"COAST DEFENCES."

Timaru Herald, Volume LVIII, Issue 1661, 15 January 1895, Page 4

COLONIAL" COAST DEFENCES."

In the National Review Admiral Colomb, writing on Imperial ; Defence, endeavours to dispel the confused notions which are current as to the meaning of frontier. Aland frontier is unmistakable, and remains the same m peace and war. A sea frontier is' less understood. In war the frontier of a naval Power is the coast-line of her foe. The land. frontier is fixed andlocal. The sea frontier is variable ; it. may bd any coast-line that is not British. Land defences may therefore be localised' and be still Imperial. To localise naval de-. fence is to that extent to withdraw from the defence of the Empire. So may the Admiral's argument be paraphrased.. Thus he applies it : — " When any of the Colonies or India proceed to the spending of money on what is called Cjoast Defence, they are simply, doing that which, if the King- of Saxony were to do, we should think him mad or silly. Tiuy are erecting ioiavsoeson the boundaries of Saxony, and localising troops for the defence of Dresden, which ought to be the Russian frontier." Colonel Howard Vincent tells us how the Colonies maintain 77,000 troops, of which Canada maintains 38,000, Australasia 32,000, and South Africa 7000.: But he -does not. point out that Canada's troops, and those, at the Cape, are on the frontiers of the Empire which. they may have to defend, while those of ' Australasia are localised m the interior of the Empire, and cannot be used locally till it breaks up. The £126,000' which Australasia uses to maintain a fleet m her owii waters is the' King of Saxony withdrawing troops from the German frontier to localise them at Dresden.. In any real war pressure, the Imperial Government would be compelled to give up the subsidy and withdraw the Australasian fleet to such frontier passes as the enemy might threaten to force. It might be Diego-Suarez, it might be New Caledonia, it might be Saigon, or it might be Vladivostock. So with the 32,000 troops maintained by Australasia. If they are localised m peace time, but under the orders of the Imperial Government m war, they undoubtedly form part of the Imperial Defence. But if they are localised and under the orders of the local government m war> they are not only not part of the, Imperial Defence, but are rio defence of any kind. 'They are no defence for Australia i£ the imperial Defence is complete, because then Australia cannot be attacked. They are no "defence for Australia if the. Imperial Defenceis so incomplete' as to allow her to be attacked, because tlieiv their numbers are altogether too small!" A light cruiser at each colonial port or a light sea-faced battery is all. that is needful to guard against a surprise Alabama attack. The Admiral concludes that " some of the Colonies are giving their money and their energies for 1 hat which i 3 notmeat; and that the same money handed over to the Imperial authority, so long as it kept the Imperial forces at a certain standard, will be much more wisely spent."