NATIONAL DEFENCE.
The interest taken in the Report of the Defence Commission continues to be very great. Lieutenant-General Shaw Kennedy has sent to the Daily News a copy of a letter on the report which he addressed to Major Jervois, the Secretary of the Commission. We extract the following passages :— "As to the works proposed by the report, 'I think that part very ably done, and that every work proposed should be made, the most important being pushed on most rapidly. But in the practical part there is one most serious defect; that of the defence of London not being provided for. If a work is made at Shooter's Hill, it is manifest that the utmost advantages would be obtained by connecting it by a few works with Wandsworth, or the Thames in that vicinity. This would render the whole of London on the south of the Thames secure for ever from attack, so that an enemy coming from the coast of Kent or Sussex would have to march higher up than Windsor before he durst attempt the passage of the Thames. If, then, the Ministers and Legislature are so much afraid of military works near London that they are determined not to have any on the north of the Thames, after putting the south side in perfect security, a line of defence might be deter- mined upon for the security of the north side, proceeding from Wandsworth to Hammersmith on the left bank of the river and continued by Worm- wood Scrubs, Hampstead, Highgate, the river Lea, and to below Woolwich, leaving that north line to be strengthened by temporary works, should in- vasion actually take place. But even in this case it would be contrary to all reason and propriety not to have some good and permanent works on the commanding points of that northern line of defence, which would be con- nected by temporary ones in the event of attack ; and also some permanent works opposite to Woolwich, to be connected with the north line for the de- fence of London. The line proposed in the Cornhill Hagazine is on the same principle, but is too extensive as a field of battle—it measures sixty miles. Separating the defences of London and Woolwich I consider imprac- ticable and contrary to all principle. I think that the opinion in favour of defending London gains ground every day ; the principle is sound, and should be adhered to. But I deny that any plan will be effectual until there is permanently in the country a force of 300,000 men, of volunteer rifles and local militia jointly, in addition to the fully-disciplined troops. I have no doubt whatever that to superficial thinkers, the weak part of my plan is, that of proposing that the local militia should be embodied and drilled for only one week in the year. They do not see the full scope of the proposed measure. It is highly constitutional— imposes a very small sacrifice on those who are balloted—is very cheap—insures permanently sufficient garrisons for all the works—will support the Rifle Volunteer system, because the volunteers will be exempt from the ballot—would insure a force of 300,000 men for the defence of the country, whether the volunteer system decreased or increased ; and as to drill and discipline, it is perfectly efficient for this purpose; for the zabinet would have the power, judging from the actual position of the country at the time, to call out the local militia for any length of time for drill and discipline that it considered necessary for the security of the country As to the discipline of the Volunteer Rifle Corps, if they proceed as they are doing at, present, their state of discipline will probably render them efficient for any duty in the field."
Previous page
