I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether his attention has been drawn to the many acts of heroism in the saving of human life performed by the crews of lifeboats and fishing smacks on various parts of the coast during the disastrous gales of the present winter; whether, among other notable rescues, his attention has been specially directed to that of the crew of the brig Content, of Grimsby, in the North Sea, on Sunday, 13th December, by James Nunn and John Day, the skipper and third hand respectively of the Lowestoft smack Prima Donna; and whether, having regard to the exceptional courage and seamanship shown by these men, he will advise Her Majesty to create an order of a degree corresponding to that of the Victoria Cross, in order to suitably reward such gallant deeds; and whether he will have a record of this and other special acts of bravery of a similar nature prepared and placed within the public reach?

Yes, Sir; my attention has been drawn to many acts of heroism performed by the crews of lifeboats, fishing smacks and others, in saving life at sea during the gales of the present winter. I have approved the grant of medals and other suitable rewards in many instances, and the particular case of rescue to which the hon. Member refers is at the present moment under consideration. So far back as 1866 Her Majesty instituted a decoration (styled the Albert Medal) for rewarding gallantry in saving life at sea. This decoration consists of two classes, and is (like the Victoria Cross) reserved for cases of very exceptional gallantry. It has since its institution been conferred upon 59 persons, among them being the coxswain of a lifeboat and three masters of fishing smacks. Notices of all rewards granted by the Board of Trade are sent to the Press and published in the Board of Trade Journal. Each grant of the Albert Medal is, in addition, gazetted with a full account of the services for which it is conferred, and a record of each case is also kept at the Board of Trade, as required by the Warrant creating the decoration. Under these circumstances, I think the hon. Member will agree that it is not necessary for me to suggest to Her Majesty the creation of a new decoration in order to reward cases of gallantry in saving life at sea.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade, in view of the statements made by him to the House on the 14th July last, that the estimated surplus from the Patent Office for 1891 was £116,500; that the country ought not to look upon the Patent Office as a permanent source of income; and that it should be considered whether a reduction might not be made in the fees on patents charged in the interval between four and eight years, so as to extend the cheap protection now given for four years to a longer period: What steps have been taken, or arrangements made, to give effect to those statements, and when the promised reduction will come into operation?

I think the hon. Member has accurately quoted my observations of last year, but the first sentence might give rise to an erroneous impression. The estimate of the large surplus referred to was made without taking into consideration additional expenditure proposed to be incurred by the practical rebuilding of the Patent Office, and accelerating certain publications connected with the Department. I need not say if those matters had been considered the surplus would have been a very different matter. In pursuance of the promise given last Session I considered the matter very carefully last autumn, and placed myself in communication with the Treasury in regard to it. It rests with the Treasury to decide whether the scale of fees should be adopted as recommended by the Board of Trade. I am sorry to say I have not yet been able to come to any definite arrangement with my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, therefore I cannot at the moment state when the reduction of fees will begin; but I hope no long time will elapse before something is done in the matter.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman if it has been represented to the Chancellor of the Exchequer that the reduction of fees would be followed by a large increase in the application for patents, and therefore an increase of revenue; and I would also ask whether, with the expenditure referred to, there would not still be a very considerable surplus left, by which the reduction might be effected?

I do not doubt there would be a surplus, but nothing approaching £116,000. The whole matter is under the consideration of my right hon. Friend.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for War whether it is the duty of officers commanding Volunteer regiments to maintain their battalion as near as possible at their authorised numerical strength?

Undoubtedly it is the duty of a Commanding Officer to use all available means to render the corps he commands as efficient as possible in regard to numbers, as well as in all other respects.

I beg to ask the Postmaster General would he have any difficulty in giving a Return showing the subsidies paid by the Post Office Department to the different Irish Railways, the mileage run in each case, the nature of the service afforded, and the populations and valuations of the various towns and districts served by each Company subsidised?

The payments made to Irish Railway Companies for the conveyance of mails will be found on page 92 of the last Estimates for Revenue Departments. The contracts with the principal Railway Companies include the running of one or more mail trains, the speed of which is settled by agreement with the Post Office, and also the right to send bags of mails by other trains. To give a Return of the total mileage so run by such trains would be difficult, and as a Department we do not possess information as to the populations and valuations of the towns and districts served by the Companies.

May I ask the right hon. Gentleman will he give us a few of the particulars, say, the sums allowed to each of the four Provinces—to the Great Western, the Midland, the Great Southern and Western, and the Dublin, Wicklow, and Wexford Companies. If he will give us the amount paid for each, then we will figure out the mileage and populations for ourselves?

Of course, the railways run through more than one Province; and there are the rates of speed and various considerations to be taken into account. I do not see my way to giving such a Return.

The right hon. Gentleman knows what we require, he knows the object with which we ask for the Return. We want to see whether the Counties of Wicklow and Wexford could not be better served. I shall put a further question, and shall continue questions on the subject.

I beg to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether any agreement has yet been arrived at with the Government of British Columbia in respect of the scheme of colonisation recommended by the Select Committee on Colonisation which sat last Session; and whether Her Majesty's Government contemplate bringing in a Bill to carry it into effect?

The arrangements to which my hon. Friend alludes, and which Her Majesty's Government are prepared to carry out, were communicated to the Representatives of British Columbia on 10th June last, but no reply has, up to the present, been received.

I beg to ask the Postmaster General whether he is prepared to establish telegraphic stations in the villages of Mountshanon and Whitegate, County Galway; and whether he can establish direct postal communication between Woodford and Whitegate, considering that the additional cost would be so small, as a rural messenger runs daily half the journey between these two centres?

Inquiry was made in 1884 and 1885 as to the feasibility of establishing telegraph offices at Mountshanon and Whitegate, but it appeared that the expense would be very considerable, and that, on the other hand, the revenue would be insignificant. I shall, however, be glad to have further inquiry made, and to let the hon. Member know the result. As regards direct postal communication between Woodford and Whitegate, applications have been several times considered, but it has always been found that the necessary expense would be quite disproportionate to the postal advantage to be secured.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether he is aware that, in the printed form of agreement to be signed by a contractor, for the construction of Scottish piers and other works, under "The Pier and Harbour Orders Confirmation (No. 1) Act, 1891," there are clauses to the effect (Clauses 7 and 8) that arbitration (if necessary) is to be conducted under the English Arbitration Act of 1889, and that agreements are to be interpreted and disputes decided by the Law of England, and the contractors are obliged to submit themselves to the jurisdiction of the High Court of Justice in England; whether this form of agreement is issued under the authority of the Board of Trade; whether it is with the sanction of Her Majesty's Government that this new extension of the jurisdiction of the English Courts in Scotland is being introduced, and Scotchmen, who tender for works to be done in Scotland, are asked as a condition of their tender being accepted to forgo their right of being tried in their own country and by their own Laws; and whether the Board of Trade will take care that no similar clauses are inserted in the conditions of tender for works in Scotland in future?

No particular form of agreement is authorised or even mentioned in the Pier and Harbour Orders made by the Board of Trade and confirmed by the Pier and Harbour Orders Confirmation (No. 1) Act, 1891. I am not aware of, and consequently have not authorised, the form to which the hon. Member refers; and I can only surmise that it is a matter between the undertakers of the Order and their contractor, with which the Board of Trade have nothing whatever to do.

Will the right hon. Gentleman undertake that in future contracts undertaken with the approval of the engineers of the Board of Trade such supervision shall be exercised that no such clause shall be inserted?

I do not think I have the power to do that. I think it is a matter between the undertakers of the piers and their contractors.

I will endeavour to put a further question on the subject, failing a satisfactory answer to which I shall be obliged to call attention to the subject in another manner.

I beg to ask the Secretary to the Treasury whether he will lay upon the Table of the House a copy of the Circular which is being sent by the Stationery Office to all contractors?

The question was practically answered yesterday, when I said I would lay on the Table a Return giving the information.

I beg to ask the Postmaster General whether it is true, as stated in the Scottish newspapers, that it has been determined to place the Glasgow Post Office under the control of the Edinburgh Post Office establishment, in many matters concerning which Glasgow has for years past communicated direct with London; whether he is aware that the system of direct communication with London was adopted in consequence of numerous complaints as to the delay occasioned by the reference to Edinburgh of questions which had to be decided in London; and if he would be so good as to explain the exact nature of any changes proposed?

had also notice of the following question: To ask the Postmaster General whether any steps have been taken towards carrying on the postal administration of Glasgow through the postal authorities of Edinburgh; and, if so, what is the character and scope of the change?

on the same subject, had notice to ask the Postmaster General whether any arrangement has recently been made for subordinating business transacted at Glasgow Post Office to the Post Office staff at Edinburgh; if so, the nature and extent of the new arrangement, and the reasons for making the same?

I will answer the group of questions on this subject together with a question of which I have had private notice from the hon. Member for the Central Division of Glasgow (Mr. Baird). I am aware of the feeling which prompts these Questions, especially as I belong myself to the West of Scotland; but there is a certain misapprehension involved. It is intended that for all postal, that is public purposes, the Glasgow Post Office shall remain as heretofore. The Postmaster will still be Surveyor of the Glasgow District as well as Postmaster of Glasgow, and there will be no diminution of his powers. The only change that has been made is one affecting internal administration, in which the public have no concern. For example, any question regarding accounts has of late been referred from Glasgow to London, from London to Edinburgh, where the accounts for Scotland are kept, back to London, and again back to Glasgow. By sending such questions to the Surveyor General for Scotland, and, if necessary, through him to London, there will be simplification and greater despatch. Moreover, as between Glasgow and London, owing to the Postmaster being also Surveyor, there will be one stage less than at other places in Scotland.

I beg to ask the Chief Secretary to the Lord Lieutenant of Ireland whether, in view of the fact that Lord Ashbrook's tenants have repeatedly offered to accept any fair or reasonable terms, he will refuse to lend the forces of the Crown to assist Lord Ashbrook to carry out evictions on that portion of his estate near Shannon Bridge, in the King's County?

No, Sir; I can give no such undertaking as the hon. Member asks. The protection of the police must be given to those who have a right to it, if it be asked.

I beg to ask the First Commissioner of Works whether any steps have been taken to carry out the successful design for the completion of the South Kensington Museum?

During the Autumn Mr. Aston Webb, the successful architect, has been at work on the plans, making such alterations in the details of arrangements as have been suggested by the Science and Art Department and the Office of Works. Some time will be required for completion of working drawings, and for certain preliminary works necessary to clear the site, and. to provide for the work of the Science and Art Department proceeding without interruption during the progress of the works, and in these circumstances it is not proposed to do more this year than carry out these preliminary works.

I beg to ask the First Commissioner of Works whether one of the rooms in the Library can be lighted with candles?

In reply to my hon. Friend, I may say there are lamps in the rooms if hon. Members choose to have them lighted.

I am quite aware of that; but what I mean is, will the electric light be removed from one of the rooms? The glare from this light is so intense that many Members cannot stand it?

I am afraid there will not be universal assent to that.

I beg to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the vacant Special Commissionership for Income Tax has yet been filled up; and, if so, who has been appointed?

The vacancy was caused by the retirement of Mr. Daniel O'Connell. My right hon. Friend the First Lord of the Treasury has appointed in his place Mr. Walter Gyles, a member of the Irish Bar.

I beg to ask the Attorney General for Ireland whether his attention has been called to the street betting which goes on in Belfast apparently unchecked by the police, and whether he will take steps to insure greater vigilance in its suppression?

As I am Member for the City of Belfast, which the hon. and gallant Member is not, and as the question contains a serious allegation against the police and the habits of the population of Belfast, perhaps I may be allowed to ask if the Government are in possession of any specific information that Belfast differs in this respect from any other great city?

My attention has only been called to this matter by the Question being put on the Paper. I have referred the matter to the police for their Report. In answer to the hon. Member opposite, I may say that up to the present no Report on the subject from the police has reached me.

I beg to ask the Lord Advocate whether, in appointing a gentleman for the now vacant Procurator Fiscalship for the Western District of Ross and Cromarty, he will take care that the gentleman appointed shall be able to speak the Gaelic language, and also shall, according to repeated promises from his predecessors, be prohibited from holding other offices in conjunction with his fiscalship; and whether such a stipulation has been carried out in the case of the Fiscal recently appointed for Lewis; and, if not, will he explain on what grounds?

I cannot give any undertaking that a knowledge of the Gaelic language will be regarded as essential in appointing to the vacant office referred to, as there are, in my opinion, other qualifications of more importance. I am not aware of any promises made by my predecessor in regard to such appointments; but on several occasions, and once in answer to the hon. Member, it was stated that the question of restricting the holders from private practice is always considered, and in recent cases they have been so restricted. While this restriction is imposed it is usual to insert in the Commission liberty to hold such offices of a public nature as the Sheriff may approve, and this was done in the case referred to in the latter part of the question.

I beg to ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether his attention has been called to the action of the Justices of Dronfield, in Derbyshire, in dismissing a summons against certain gamekeepers of the Duke of Rutland, obtained by Mr. Harrison, although it was admitted that these gamekeepers had hindered that gentleman from walking along a high road on a moor, on the ground that a grouse drive was proceeding, and that, on his refusing to withdraw, he was held back by three of the gamekeepers for 18 minutes; whether his attention has been also called to the fact that three policemen were present during this assault, and refused to give Mr. Harrison any pro- tection, or to interfere with the action of the gamekeepers; whether he is aware that the defence of these gamekeepers, submitted by their solicitor to the Justices, was that it was a barefaced attempt on the part of Mr. Harrison to interfere with the legitimate sport of gentlemen, and that the summons ought to be dismissed in order to show complainant that he could not be permitted to behave in a manner which had become intolerable; and what action he proposes to take in the matter?

I have received a Report of the case referred to by the hon. Member. This Report contains several particulars not mentioned in the Question. The events occurred on 8th October, and the summons was taken out on 2nd November. The summons having been heard, the magistrates dismissed it, solely on the ground that the assault complained of was of a slight and trifling nature, and came within Section 16 of "The Summary Jurisdiction Act, 1879." An application to the High Court for a mandamus was refused on 13th January. I am informed that the complainant has now commenced an action for damages against the gamekeepers; and, under these circumstances, it would be improper for me to express an opinion or to take action in the matter until the litigation has closed.

I would ask the right hon. Gentleman whether it is intended to take any action in this matter in regard to the policemen who witnessed this "trifling assault" for some twenty minutes?

From the Report supplied to me there appears to be some doubt as to the nature of the alleged assault; and until that doubt is cleared up by further inquiry, I do not propose to take any action.

I beg to ask the President of the Board of Trade whether the Board of Trade have, since last Session, ordered any further Returns of the hours of railway servants, which would show whether the Railway Companies have made any substantial changes in the hours of duty since December, 1890?

I quite agree with the suggestion contained in the Question, that we ought to obtain some later information in the form supplied for 1890. I believe the changes have been considerable. I have not yet been able to settle the precise month which should be taken. Of course, I desire to take as late a month as possible, so that we may have the most recent information. I hope the Return may be ordered in a few days.

I beg to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether any steps have been taken to carry out the provisions of "The Coinage Act, 1891"?

An Order in Council for the purpose of carrying out the provisions of the Act is now ready, and will be submitted for approval at the next Council. We shall then be prepared to proceed at once with the issue of a Proclamation to announce that light gold will be received at the Bank of England. The sum of £400,000 has been issued and invested in accordance with the provisions of the Act.

I beg to ask the First Lord of the Treasury whether, looking at the urgency of the Irish Education Bill, Which should be disposed of at the end of the financial year, now at six weeks' distance, he will cause this Bill to be brought in after the introductory stage of the Irish Local Government Bill is disposed of on Thursday?

I am afraid it will be impossible to dispose of the Bill before the end of the financial year. At one time I did hope it would be possible; but, considering the amount of business to be got through, I cannot hold out any hope that, even if the Bill were brought in at once, we could pass it within the time, having in view the very important questions raised by the Bill. As the House knows, it does not merely deal with the question of assisted education, but with other questions, such as a modified form of compulsion, and its provisions cannot be expected to pass without a certain amount of discussion. The money with which the Bill deals will partly accrue during the coming year, and will, in part, be money which has accrued in the current year. Proposals will be made for dealing with the money of the current year up to the end of March, and a Supplementary Estimate will be presented in time for the money to be disposed of. The Bill dealing with the general, the permanent allocation of the funds, will be brought forward at a later date.

How soon may we expect to have the Bill in our hands?

The hon. Gentleman is quite right in seeking early information as to the Bill. It will require consideration in Ireland from all interested in education on every side of this much controverted subject. I hope it may be in the hands of Members in the course, say, of ten days at latest. Of course, if hon. Members would be willing to abstain from a First Reading discussion, it could be distributed in a very few days.

Is it contemplated to make any statement on introducing the Bill?

I will leave my right hon. Friend to answer that. He is not, at the moment, in the House.

Will the same plan be adopted in regard to the Scotch money—two items, two portions?

The two cases are different, the Scotch Bill is shorter and, I think, much less controversial; so I hope we may dispose of it within the financial year.

May we hope that the Supplementary Estimate will be circulated in such time as will allow full consideration of the proposals before the Vote is taken?

Certainly.