Surveying & Built Environment Vol. 22 Issue 1 (December 2012)

SBE
26
Reconstructing The Early History of the Gin Drinker’s Line from Archival Sources
reservoirs and conduits are being
constructed in the neighbourhood
of Hong Kong in connection with
the Shing Mun Valley water supply
scheme, and lend themselves for
incorporation in the defensive line.” 26
In the report, the cost-effectiveness of
the line became the main argument for
its construction. In fact, as discussed
below, the willingness of the British
decision-makers to replace manpower
with fortifications was the main reason
for its construction.
In March 1935, Major General
Frederick Barron, the Inspector of
Fixed Defences of the War Office,
was sent to Hong Kong to inspect
the proposed site of the Line. 27 When
Barron arrived at Hong Kong, he noted
that “platoon localities in two sectors
have already been dug during the winter
months, using military labour.” 28
After inspection, Barron recommended
the War Office to sanction the
project. Six months later, the Chief
of Imperial General Staff (CIGS)
General Sir Archibald Montgomery-
Massingberd submitted a report to the
Defence Requirement Committee to
secure a budget of £3,861,000 for the
improvement of Hong Kong defences.
The Line was surprisingly cheap
compared to other installations. For
example, an additional 9.2-inch gun
cost £186,000, a new barracks for an
infantry battalion £362,500, and the
annual upkeep of an Indian infantry
battalion was £78,000. However, the
construction of the Gin Drinker’s
Line cost only £168,000. Thus, it was
hardly surprising that the War Office
welcomed the project.
dESIGN ANd lAYouT
fRoM THE doCuMENTS
Overall Planning
The design of the Gin Drinker’s
Line was done by the Hong Kong
garrison led by Major General Arthur
Bartholomew. Although the actual
proposal sent by Bartholomew to
the War Office has yet to be found,
General Frederick Barron submitted
a review of Bartholomew’s proposal,
which contains much detail about the
design and layout of the Gin Drinker’s
Line. According to Barron’s Report,
the defence of the Leased Territory
contained three phases:
1. Prevention of a landing within
its boundaries
2. Development of delaying action
from either the frontier or the
point of landing back to the final
defensive position covering the
vital areas
3. The defence of the final
defensive position 29
As it was impossible to defend all
26 Ibid., 9.
27 “Mock Battle at Hong Kong,” 20/3/1935, The Straits Times; “10,000 Men in Secret Battle,” 9/4/1935,
The Straits Times; “British Defences in Far East,” 18/4/1935, The Straits Times.
28 WO 106/111, 19.
29 “Report on the Defences of Hong Kong,” 4/1935, WO 106/111, 16.