The Sun.
London, England, 1860-06-14 00:00:00

NATIONAL DEFENCES.

It will be remembered that a royal commission
was issued last August to inquire into " the present
state, condition, and sufficiency of the fortifications
existing for the defence of the United Kingdom,
and to examine into all works at present in pro-
gress for the improvement thereof, and to consider
the most effectual means for rendering the same
complete, especially all such works of defence as
are intended for the protection of the royal arsenals
and dockyards, in case of any hostile attack being
made by foreign enemies, both by sea and land."
The report of the commissioners, dated February
7, 1860, was published yesterday.
In the outset of the report the commissioners
state their opinion that a fleet alone is insufficient
for the defence of the United Kingdom. The in-
troduction of steam and other causes have operated
to our disadvantage. (The importance of an effi-
cient channel fleet, however, is fully recognised.)
The consequent necessity for protecting dockyards
is therefore laid down. The difficulty of prevent-
ing the landing of an enemy is admitted, and the
commissioners proceed to consider the means of de-
fence against an enemy when landed. Our regular
army is and must always be small, and the volun•
teers could not at first be able to meet the regularly
disciplined soldiers of continental armies on any-
thing like equal terms.

" Having carefully weighed the foregoing consi-
derations (say the commissioners), we are led to the
opinion that neither our fleet, our standing army,
nor our volunteer forces, nor even the three com-
bined, can be relied on as sufficient in theriaselves
for the security of the kingdom against foreign in-
vasion. We therefore proceed to consider that part
of our instructions which directs our attention espe-
cially to fortifications. The objects proposedto be
obtained by fortifying any place are, to enable a
small body of troops to resist a superior force which
may attack it, or to euable partially-trained bodies
of men to contend successfully with those more
perfectly disciplined than themselves. There seems
no reason to doubt that such troops as may be got
together from the disembodied or less perfectly
{rained portion of the militia, with local or other
volunteers, would, with an admixture of regular
soldiers, be able to defend our dockyards against
very superior numbers, when fortified with due re-
gard to these principles."
The commissioners indicate that either an in-
crease of the army or fortifications is absolutely
necessary, and they compare the cost of the two :
" A large permanent increase to the regular army,
'taking into account pay, clothing, provisions, bar-
racks, pensions, and all other expenses, would in-
volve an annual charge to the country which may
be calculated at from £60,000 to £70,000 per one
thousand men. This sum would be irrespective of
the expenses of raising the men, which we take at
£ll a man, and of the necessary increase to barrack
accommodation, which on the present scale would
amount to at least £lOO a man ; making a first
charge of £lll,OOO per one thousand men, and an
annual charge of £60,000 to £70,000.
" We do not express an opinion as to the perma-
nent increase to the army which would be neces-
sary under the circumstances supposed. It would,
however, cost upon this calculation about eight
millions at the outset, and nearly four millions an-
nually afterwards, to double the number of regular
troops now at home—viz., about 66,000 men, ex-
traordinary increase if the aid of fortifications were
to be rejected.
"The same eight millions expended in fortifica-
tions would be far more effectual for the defence of

the dockyards than any such increase of the regular
army, would incidentally provide barrack accom-
modation for some thousands of men, and would
entail no future annual charge, beyond a small sum
for maintenance, and the expense of embodying the
substitutes for regular troops, whether volunteers,
fencibles, or militia, for three weeks' training;
which could not much exceed one-twentieth of the
cost of an equal regular force."
It is laid down that we cannot fortify the whole
assailable portion of the coast—and that fortifica-
tions should be restricted to vital points. The royal
dockyards are said to be vital points.
" Woolwich, which is at present our only great
depot for munitions of war, whether for land or sea
service, and the place in which these stores are pro-
duced, must also be considered a vital point. It is
difficult to over-estimate the consequences of the loss
or even of a temporary suspension of the operations
of that great arsenal, as at present constituted, dur-
ing a state of war. It would be felt throughout the
empire. Lastly, we consider the harbour of Portland,
from its situation and capabilities; that of Dover,
from the position which it occupies; and that of
Cork, the naval station of Ireland, to be points re-
quiring more or less special consideration with
respect to fortifications for their protection."
As to the defence of London, the commissioners
say—

" The defence of London has not been brought
under our consideration, and it is therefore only
necessary to point out that it does not materially
affect the conclusions we have arrived at with regard
to the fortification of the dockyards. If Loudon were
placed in such a state of defence as to render an
attack on it improbable by an enemy established on
shore, even in such force as to be able to hold in
check any army that could be brought against him,
an invader's attention would then be turned to the
dockyards and arsenals, as by the destruction of
these he might hope to annihilate the naval power
of the country, and deprive it of further resist-
ance. If, on the other hand, London cannot
be rendered capable of resistance after the
defeat of the army in the field, the dockyards
and arsenals, if fortified, become places of refuge
from which the defence of the country can
be protracted, or means of resistance organised ;
and unless these are capable of resistance,
onr naval means fall within the capital, and the
whole power of the nation is practically in abey-
ance. Indeed the fortification of the dockyards and
arsenals by land would aid materially in the de-
fence of London itself ; for whilst by means of the
system proposed the vital points of the empire
would be protected against either capture or bom-
bardment, the fortifications by land would sat the
manoeuvring army free to operate against the
enemy."
There are some works of defence now in pro-
gress.

"During the last two years, more especially,
plans of fortification, involving an ultimate expen-
diture of about a million and a half sterling, hare
lx.,en sanctioned by Parliament for works of con-
siderable extent at Portsmouth, Plymouth, Pem-
broke and Portland; and contracts have accord-
ingly been entered into for the construction of those
defences, which are now in active progress, and to
which we will more particularly refer when con-
sidering the defence of each of these places."
The commissioners do not recommend stationary
flo-ting batteries, but moveable fitiating batteries
are approvcd of.

The following is laid down as the principle on
which the proposed chfensive works should be

C()fl

tructed :

" The nature of the wells which we propose for
defence against a naval attack will of ne2.essity
vary a_:..E,‘er,ling to]the locality. We have proposed
°Pan batteries, secured against a coup-de-main by a
tower or defensible barrack in their rear, wherever
they "could be made to answer the object desired ;
but where the sites were so circumscribed as not to
afford sufficient space for the requisite amount of
fire, and in cases where groat expense must be in-
curred in constructing foundations on shoals, it is
absolutely necessary that sea batteries should be
casemated, so as to obtain by tiers of guns as nearly
as possible the same effect that is produced by open
batteries extended over a considerable length of
shore.

. i."Tee works should be so designed as to be de-
'ended by a small body of men against a coup
(illeavne ab
vicianp;birut that they should at the same time
ties of resistance that will enable them
to withstand attack likely to be brought against
them.
lilt4asntlyaiis vie.‘v they should be provided
with reNdFo
would be
ithcir gorge, by means of which
an enemy
work if he Should
ld )3
prevented from holding the
succeed in obtaining partial pos-
session of it. a
heavy
ramparts should be capa-
ble of affordinm
fire of artillery and 11111:3-
11etry thisebrecti;ovnysanoaver which an enemy must
make approach
should be provided for the bomb-proof cover
the In situations
where the ditches can be ;
butvvith water, no re-
vetment need be constructedwherever this is
not the case, they should eithocrh escarps and
eonntersearps or detached walls oaPve
in either case they should be fiankcduliZohribryy;aratnild-
lery and musketry."
The next question is the cost.

" The amouni, of our special estimate is •
£10,390,000; of which sum £1,885,000 is for the
purchase of land, £7,005,000 for the fortifications
ire recommend for erection, £500,000 for the arma-
ment of works, as shown below (sec. 39), and
£1,000,000 for floating defences. To this must be
added £1,460,000 for works aircadysanetioncd and

" It is to be observed that the above sum includes
the provision of barrack accommodation, for the
most part bomb-proof, for about 30,000 men, with
all the space and conveniences provided for troops
under ordinary arrangements ; and for neatly
double that number when the works are fully gar-
risoned for defence. This accommodation must have
been equally provided under any other system of
defence, and is already urgently required in many
of the places it is proposed to fortify.
" Judging from works for which contracts are
already undertaken, those which your commis-
sioners recommend may very well be executed in
three years; but it would be desirable to allow
three years and a quarter for the completion of the
whole, in order that contractors may have the bene-
fit of the months from April to June, inclusive, in
the fourth year. The payments would therefore
extend over four years, and the reserves, which
may be taken at 5 per cent. on the entire estimate,
would not be paid until after the completion of the
contracts.

" It is probable the land would be paid for, two-
thirds
in the first, and one in the second year. As
regards the works themselves, the expenditure on
their account will no doubt be less in the first year
than in either of the other two, both because of
unforeseen delays which might take place in par-
Ititular instances-, and on account of the nature of
the work that would be performed at the outset,
which, consisting chiefly of excavations, is less ex-
pensive than the building part of the fortifications.
" The entire expenditure may be apportioned as
follows :

Ist year :
For works proposed ... Land £1,250,000. { Works 1,300,000
For works already sanctioned 500,000
For floating defences
For armaments

2d year :
For works proposed.. ~ Land 635,000
Works 2,361,009
For works already sanctioned 760,000
For floating defences
125,000
For armaments

3d year :
For works proposed . 2,361,000
For works already sanctioned .. .. 200,000
For armaments 125,000

4th year:—
For works proposed .. 983,000
For armaments 125,000

£3,675,000

4,381,000

2,686,000

1,108,000

Total

" With respect to works of land defence which
mutually support one another, such as those with
which it is proposed to surround Portsmouth, Ply-
mouth, and Chatham, we conceive that the follow-
ing principles should be adhered to :-
1. That each work should have its principal
salients and flanks partially armed, even dur-
ing peace; a very few guns will suffice for this
purpose.
2. That there should be in reserve in each work,
but not mounted, unless the perishable car-
riages and platforms will be under cover, as
many more guns and carriages as will extend
the protection of the flanks and faces to what
we would term a war armament, as distin-
guished from a siege armament.
3. Lastly, that there be a general reserve, in
some convenient central depot in each position,
of a further number of guns and carriages suf-
ficient to complete the armament of any one of
the fronts of attack to its maximum or siege
establishment, together with the proper pro-
portion of every description of store to effect
repairs and replace casualties.
" The magazine accommodation, the provision of
store-room, and the conveniences for filling shells
and fixing fuzes, should be calculated generally for
the siege armament.
"We subjoin a concise statement, in tabular
form, of the number of guns, amount of barrack ac-
commodation, and probable expenses of all the im-
portant work they recommend, togetheri with simi-
lar information respecting the works in progress.

• 1 4!
g mm
rs
841 '
▪ p 4 mqa
tc,791 '4 ;1714

Station,

P:1
PORTSMOUTII AND ISLE OF WIGHT. Guns. Men. £
Recommended by Royal Commission 967 7320 2,400,000
In works in progress 2BO 1500 400,000

Total
PLYMOUTH.
Recommended by Royal Commission
In works in progress

Total
PEMBROKE.
Recommended by Royal Commission
In works in progress

Total
PORTLAND.
Recommended by Royal Commission
In works in progress

Total
THAMES.
Recommended by Royal Commission
MEDWAY AND SHEERNESS.
Recommended by Royal Commission
CHATMAM.
Recommended by Royal Commission
Woor.wicir.
Recommended by Royal Commission 150 1500 700,000
DavER.
Recommended by Royal Commission .. 30 300 170,000
In works in progress

Total
CORK.
Recommended by Royal Commission

Total Guns and Barracks
Armaments of Works recommended by Royal Com-
mission
Floating Defences
Tota Estimate of Expense £11,850,000

The commissioners reserve for a subsequent re-
port the question of an internal arsenal. Their-re-
commendations aro unanimous, and they submit
them to her Majesty " with a firm conviction that
their adoption will place the power of this country
for self-defence on a par with its other elements of
greatness and strength ; will give security to its
industry and commerce ; afford a guarantee to the
maintenance of peace, and add a new glory to your
Majesty's reign."
The report is signed by " Harry D, Jones, Major-
General ; D. A. Cameron, Major-General ; George
Elliott, Rear-Admiral; F. Abbott, Major-General;
A. Cooper Key, Captain R.N. ; J. H. Lefroy, Colo-
nel R.A. ; Jas. Fergusson. Wm. Drummond Jer-
vois, Major R.E., and Assist. 1.G.F., Secretary."

(I,i'om the Daily News.)
The long:expecfed Report of the Commission ap-
pointed to consider the .Defences of the United
Kingdom was issued yesterday. It bean date the
7. th of February, 1860, and has consequently been
in the possession of the Government four months,
almost from the meeting of Parliament. The Com-
mission, it will .be remembered, was appointed in
August last year, in accordance with a promisemade by Lord Palmerston in the House of Commons
and to satisfy the requirements of honourable
members who objected to the, desultory manner ;n
which the public money had usually been voted for
works of toz f ificn Lion.rno Commissioners were
Major-General Sir Harry Jones, of the Royal Engi-
neers; Major-General Sir Duncan Alexander Came-
ron, late of the 42d Highlanders; Rear-Admiral
; Major-Geheral Sir Frederick Abbott, of the
Indian Army; Captain Astley Cooper Key, IL N.;;
Colonel J. H. Lefroy, of the Royal Artillery, and M.
James Fergusson, a civilian, and author of a new
system of fortification. These gentlemen have
visited the existing works of defence, have examined
the plans of those in course of construction, have
called professional and scientific witnesses before
them, and, on a view of the whole, they 113\V pro-
pose a scheme involving an expenditure of at leas!
£12,000,000 sterling. Before we examine their
recommendations, let us in justice state that their
commission, notwithstanding' the largeness of cer-
tain of its phrases, did not embrace the general
defence of the country. They were appointed as a
Fortification Commission," and to fortification
their report is confined.

The Commissioners begin their report with the
unpleasant statement that the fleet is not to be
entirely relied on for the defence of our shores, nor
would be even if we were willing and able to main-
tain it on the seal* of that which we had at the be-
ginning of the century, which the Commissioners
say would be a waste of public money. This is a
very important statement, and it is very explicitly
made, The Commissioners say plainly, " Since the
application of steam to the propulsion of vessels we
can no longer rely upon being able to prevent the
landing of a hostile force in the country." We•give
reoen pu
oi n t
e ar s s
prominence to this statement, not as by any means
a, absolute n d final, unanimous as the
u In subscribing it, but in order