320 
GOLD MEDAL PRIZE ESSAY, 1897 . 
I. INTRODUCTION. 
There can be little doubt that the subject of this essay has been 
opportunely chosen. During the last few years great changes have 
taken place in the conduct of Coast Artillery practice, and methods 
have been arrived at which, though necessarily far from perfect, have 
been of infinite advantage in creating in officers and men a greater 
knowledge of and interest in their work, and in fostering a spirit of 
emulation among companies. It seems, however, to be generally felt 
that the time has arrived when still more definite improvements may 
be considered. There are great difficulties in the way of changes 
which may affect a large number of units and individuals serving under 
the very varied conditions which obtain in this branch of the regiment. 
The endeavour will therefore be made in this paper to suggest such 
improvements only as may be generally applicable to all cases, details 
being omitted unless of wide application. 
The heading of the subject enforces in the first place the considera¬ 
tion of the question “ What are the requirements of actual warfare ? ” 
And this entails some enquiry into the circumstances attending war, 
so far as they concern Coast Artillery. This enquiry unfortunately is 
connected with matters of rather wide scope, on which very diverse 
views are held. The truth of the following passages is exemplified 
almost daily :— 
* <e Coast Defence may be treated from many points of view . . . 
yet the great principles of warfare by sea and land remain unchanged 
and unchangeable. . . . Fixed data, unquestioned deductions from 
real experience, are generally unattainable and the human mind, 
craving certitude, readily invests its individual promptings with the 
sanction of authority. . . Principles are thus effectually obscured, 
and matters of secondary importance become the first objects of dis¬ 
cussion, while policy drifts or is allowed to be dragged in the train of 
mere subordinate detail. . . Coast Defence appears to be peculiarly 
liable to danger of this nature. . . Standing on the border where 
sea and land meet it has a dual aspect—naval and military—by which 
a confusion of ideas is apt to be engendered. Moreover the war record 
of Coast Defences has been little studied, and is intimately bound up 
with those great lessons of naval history which are only now beginning 
to be rightly understood.” 
Too broad a view therefore cannot be taken. But space will not 
admit of a full treatment of the question, so that it will be necessary 
to quote and apply the conclusions of those who are generally regarded 
as authorities, or whose views have received authoritative sanction. 
Reference is invited to their writings for the full arguments by which 
these conclusions are supported. 
* “ Coast Defence in relation to War,” Major Sir G. S. Clarke, k.c.m.g,, r.e. “ Pro¬ 
ceedings of R.A. Institution,” Yol. xxi., No. 11. 
