H.—l9.

18

The comparatively low percentage of marks for gunnery is due to the fact of the company manning B.L. guns this year for the first time, and also to several absentees. The D.R.F. specialists are good. There are no signallers in this company, consequently 100 marks were lost through neglect to have trained men in this subject. The gun-layers are good, but only eleven men qualified. Deductions for discipline up to 2 per cent, have been made for various reasons. No. 8 Company, N.Z.G.A.V. This company did not obtain sufficient marks to be graded. The low marks for attendance are due chiefly to the company not parading more than once a day — i.e., in the evenings—morning parades being only occasionally held. Only forty-three gunners were examined in gunnery out of a total of sixty-seven available, thus the reason for low marks in gunnery. Only seven men qualified in D.R.F. There are eight signallers in the corps, but as signalling was only taken up recently the men had not time to qualify in all the subjects. Only six men qualified as gun-layers, or 7 per cent, of the whole corps — i.e., 3 per cent, below the number allowed by regulations. Two trumpeters passed a satisfactory examination. The fort-manning was fairy good. The practice was bad—third class. 'No. 9 Company, N.Z.G.A.V. This company did not obtain sufficient marks to be graded. Its attendance marks are not good, for the same reason as given in No. 8 Company. There is a large percentage of recruits in the company, consequently the marks for gunnery are low. There are no qualified signallers in the corps, and only four D.R.F. specialists qualified. As in the case of No. 8 Company, there are too few gun-layers in the company, only eight being examined, six of whom qualified, or 8 per cent.— i.e., 2 per cent, below the number required by regulations. The trumpeters are not efficient. Most of the officers and men being inexperienced, the marks for fort-manning are lower than in any other company.

Return showing Results of Examination of New Zealand Garrison Artillery Volunteers for the New Zealand Garrison Artillery Challenge Shield, 1905-6.

Report on New Zealand Field Artillery Challenge Shield Competition for General Efficiency, 1905-6. Wellington, New Zealand, 2nd April, 1906. The whole of the field batteries were examined this year, in accordance with the new conditions laid down in "Instructions for Practice, 1905-6." Of the six field batteries in the colony, two qualified for A, three for B, and one for C grade of efficiency. Attendance. The attendance was much better than in former years, B and D Batteries having a particularly good record. Throughout the colony, both in Garrison and Field Artillery Volunteers, where the attendance has been good the general efficiency has been relatively good.

Company. Station. © © fl o3 •9 fl 5 I. _J (0 a a a O _ a _ a _ _ a a M _ a la a bfi '_ _ a '>. a a _ w rH © _ ft a a s _ a '3 a a a "S o ED ... L __ _£ _ _ a a _ _ Ph _ ,s '_ „ a _ rH _ a o _ ° - .3 __ Is u o <_ a o '■§ » _.2 si w _ _ _ O -*-J © El o u _ O _ u _ Per Cent. 1. (A.N.A.V.) Auckland 2. (D.N.A.V.) Dunedin .. 94 86 81-75 52 89 19 94 515-75 83-18 1 82-18 1st A 3 3. (P.C.N.A.V.) .. Dunedin .. 86 87-2 86-4 51-96 84 17 95 507-56 81-86 0-1 81-76 2nd A 4 4. (W.N.A.V.) Wellington 93-79 87-6 98-63 83 89-97 12 90 554-99 89-51 1 88-51 1st A 2 5. (L.N.A.V.). Lyttelton 85 73-8 92-1 39 90 7 97 483-9 78-49 Nil 78-49 2nd A 5 6. (P.N.A.V.) Wellington 98-88 90-79 94-47 96-42 92-4 16 96 584-96 94-35 1 93-35 2nd A 1 7. (N Battery) Lyttelton 86 78-4 75-3 Nil 78-6 18 85 416-4 67-16 2 66-16 1st B 6 8. (Ponsonby) Auckland 66-27 47-21 51-55 38-77 28-61 7 80 319-41 50-15 1 49-15 3rd Nil 7 9. (Devonport Coast Guards) Auckland 71-15 60-83 26-75 Nil 31-73 G 75 266-46 45-39 1 44-39 3rd Nil 8