§ VISCOUNT EMLYNwished to ask the indulgence of the House whilst he called attention to a matter arising out of a Question put to the President of the Local Government Board to-day. He did not wish to allude to the Bill of the right hon. Gentleman which was down on the Paper; but he desired to draw attention to the action of the Government at the present time apart from that measure. Under an Act of Parliament—the 7 & 8 Vict.—the Government had power—or were, he thought, obliged—to appoint a General Superintendent for turnpike roads in South Wales; and his contention was that under the provisions of that Act the Government were compelled to make such an appointment, and that until the Act, or a section of it, was repealed, they could not remove a General Superintendent from his office unless they appointed someone else to act in his place. The right hon. Gentleman the President of the Local Government Board had informed him to-day—though rather vaguely—in reply to a Question, that the General Superintendent's Office had ceased to exist, that the gentleman was no longer continued in his office. He (Viscount Emlyn) would read the section of the Act of Parliament upon which he founded his Question; and he would ask the right hon. Gentleman to take the opinion of the Law Officers of the Crown upon it, and see whether his contention was correct, and, if it was, to appoint someone to carry out the duties which now no one could properly carry out, the Government not having given the county power to appoint anyone in the place of the Superintendent. The section to which he referred of the 7 & 8 Vict., c. 91, said—
It shall be lawful for one of Her Majesty's Principal Secretaries of State, in any writing under his hand, to appoint a fit and proper person, or two fit and proper persons if required, to superintend the management, maintenance, and repairs of all the turnpike roads within the said counties; and from time to time the discretion of the said Principal Secretary of State shall move such person from such office, and appoint another in his stead,646 He contended that unless the Government appointed "someone else in his stead," they were not justified in removing the officer who alone could perform the duties. He would not argue the point, which was a legal one, but would merely submit to the right hon. Gentleman, who could refer the matter to the Law Officers of the Crown, that he was bound to continue the Superintendent in his office, or appoint someone in his place, at any rate until he had passed an Act to enable him to follow a different course.
§ MR. DODSONsaid, he did not concur in the interpretation which the noble Lord had placed on the clause he had cited from the Act of Parliament—namely, that—
It shall be lawful for one of Her Majesty's Principal Secretaries of State to appoint a fit and proper person," &c.The words, "It shall be lawful," were sometimes obligatory and sometimes permissive, according to the nature of the Act in which they were found; and if the noble Lord would give a little further consideration to this Act, he believed he would perceive that in the present instance they were not intended to be obligatory upon the Secretary of State. The Government having advanced money in the Welsh counties, a Superintendent was appointed for the double purpose of superintending the efficiency of the roads and their expenditure, in order to maintain the productiveness of the tolls and provide the Government with security for the debt. He was also to guard against any further debt being incurred calculated to impair that security. The debt having been paid off, the reason for the appointment ceased both with regard to the finance and the superintendence of the roads. The noble Lord said that the Act made no provision for the discharge of the duties of Superintendent. Although he agreed with him that the present was not the time for entering into a discussion of the Bill which had been introduced, he would point out that the County Boards had power, by the 74th section of the Act, to appoint clerks, treasurers, and any officers they might require, and power, under the 95th section, to pay them out of the tolls. But there appeared to be no power for the Boards to appoint a General Superintendent, or Superintendents, and obtain payment out of the 647 county rates to make good a deficiency of tolls without such an officer. The Bill which he had introduced, however, gave power to the County Boards to appoint such Superintendents, if they wished, jointly or separately, and to obtain assistance out of the county rates. That Bill had been delayed principally at the wish of the noble Lord himself. He was only waiting until the noble Lord and other hon. Gentlemen came to an agreement upon it, and as soon as their wishes with regard to it were ascertained he should be quite ready to proceed. But no practical inconvenience would result from this delay, inasmuch as the Estimates for the year had been framed by the late Superintendent before his term of office expired.
§ MR. SCLATER-BOOTHsaid, he had understood his noble Friend to ask two questions—first, as to whether the Government were not under an obligation to appoint a Superintendent in place of the gentleman who had been dismissed; and, secondly, as to whether the Government had power to dismiss the late Superintendent under the section of the Act to which ho called attention? It appeared to him (Mr. Sclater-Booth) that the section referred to did not contain the power of dismissal; and he could not but regard it as great neglect on the part of the Local Government Board to remove this Superintendent of the Roads in the six counties without providing an entirely new system. The Superintendent who had been dismissed would seem to have been the key-stone of the system; and he regretted that a change should have been made which might lead to a complete break-down of the road management in the district concerned.