3,55 
 A31R62 
 
CORNELL 
 
 UNIVERSITY 
 
 LIBRARY 
 
Cornell University Library 
 HE355.A31 R62 
 
 Good roads : 
 
 olin 
 
 3 1924 030 106 821 
 
Cornell University 
 Library 
 
 The original of tiiis book is in 
 tine Cornell University Library. 
 
 There are no known copyright restrictions in 
 the United States on the use of the text. 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924030106821 
 
G^OOD RO^D© 
 
 HEARINGS 
 
 BEFORE THE 
 
 JOINT COMMITTEE ON FJIDERAL AID 
 
 IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF 
 
 POST ROADS 
 
 JANUARY 21, FEBRUARY 10, 11, 18, 1913 
 
 PART I 
 
 Printed for the use of the Committee 
 
 WASHINGTON 
 .( iVEKNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 
 1913 
 
(>00D ROADS. 
 
 TUESDAY, JANTJABY 21, 1913. 
 
 Joint Committee on 
 Federal Aid in Construction of Post Roads, 
 
 Washington, D. 0. 
 The joint committee met in room 201, Senate Office Building, 
 Washington, D. C, at 8 o'clock p. m. 
 
 Present: Senators Jonathan Bourne, jr. (chairman), Asle J. 
 Gronna, Claude A. Swanson; Representatives Dorsey W. Shaclde- 
 ford, Gordon Lee, and Martin B. Madden. 
 
 After an introductory statement by the chairman explaining the 
 appointment and purpose of the joint committee, Mr. Alfred Noble, 
 of New York, was called. 
 
 STATEMENT OF ALFRED NOBLE. 
 
 The Chairman. Mr. Noble, will you kindly state your age, resi- 
 dence, and business? 
 
 Mr. Noble. My name is Alfred Noble ; residence. New York ; I am 
 68 years old and am a civil engineer. 
 
 The Chairman. You are a member, are you not, of the American 
 Association for Highway Improvement 
 
 Mr. Noble. I am. 
 
 The Chairman. Will you kindly state for the information of the 
 committee what the object of that organization is ? 
 
 Mr. Noble. It is to promote the construction of good roads in any 
 way that it is feasible for the association to do — in any way it can, 
 in suggesting legislation or otherwise. 
 
 The Chairman. How long has the association been in existence \ 
 
 Mr. Noble. I think two years. 
 
 The Chairman. Have you, in the course of your experience with 
 I'eference to river and harbor improvements and other large engi- 
 neering enterprises, come into close contact with the question of 
 public-road improvement in such a way as to cause you to form any 
 opinion as to whether or not the improvement of the public roads 
 should rest entirely with the local units of government? 
 
 Mr. Noble. I can not say, Mr. Chairman, that my experience as 
 an engineer has been in that direction particularly. ■ Being a civil 
 engineer, perhaps I have a better idea of the difficulties and hazards 
 of the good-roads movement on that account. 
 
 The Chairman. Have you come to any conclusion in your own 
 mind as to a concrete plan by the adoption of which the Federal 
 Government could stimulate good-road building in the United States? 
 
 Mr. Noble. Perhaps I can answer that by saying I have examined 
 
 5 
 
6 GOOD KOADS. 
 
 tile bill pending before this committee and am very favorably im- 
 jjressed by its provisions in several ways. 
 
 The Chairman. The purpose of the meeting to-night was not to 
 discuss any particular bill that is before the committee. I understand 
 that more than 30 road bills have been introduced m Congress, but 
 we want to take up the question from the broadest possible view- 
 point and learn whether it is desirable, in your opinion and^in the 
 opinion of the other gentlemen associated with you, to have Federal 
 iiid extended to the good-roads movement, to what extent and on 
 what basis? 
 
 Mr. Noble. I believe it is advisable as the matter now stands for 
 Federal aid to be extended and that it should be extended in such a 
 way as to be in the nature of cooperation with the States, perhaps 
 with smaller units and with a view generally of giving the State 
 authorities the advantage of cooperation with intelligent manage- 
 ment, such as the Bureau of Highways of the United States can 
 give it. I think that is a strong point in favor of national aid. 
 
 The Chairman. Do you think national aid should be limited to 
 the construction of post roads? 
 
 Mr. Nobles. That, I fancy, Mr. Chairman, is a question of law 
 rather than of engineering. I think it should be extended to the 
 roads the improvement of which will be of the greate:-t benefit to the 
 communities through which they jsass. 
 
 The Chairman. Plow is that to be determined? By the local 
 interests in these communities? 
 
 Mr. Noble. I should think so. 
 
 The Chairman. Should the assistance be for construction or main- 
 tenance, or both? 
 
 Mr. Noble. Both; and I regard niainlenance as of far more impor- 
 tance, as matters now stand, than construction. I think the matter 
 of maintenance is being overlooked in a great many States, and that 
 great disapjaointment will be felt bj' the public within a few years 
 if more attention is not paid at the outset to the provision for suitable 
 maintenance. 
 
 The Chairman. TTow would you make a distinction as to which 
 roads shall and which shall not receive Federal aid. 
 
 Mr. Noble. I believe that will have to be largely left to the local 
 authorities, they being most familiar with the needs of the com- 
 munity. Those are simply general views, Mr. Chairman. 
 
 The Chairman. Should the Government in any way assume juris- 
 diction over the roads in their construction or their maintenance ? 
 
 Mr. Noble. I should hope that it might be practicable to work 
 out a scheme for joint control, proportioned somewhat upon the 
 general financial interests 'in the road. If I Avere going to suggest 
 what seems to me an ideal method, it might be a provision for the 
 maintenance of some one section of the road by the State authorities 
 and another section of the road by the Federal authorities, but I fear 
 that would not be practicable to work out. Tt Avould be very valuable, 
 I think, as an object lesson, if it could be. 
 
 The Chairman. You think it is desirable but not practicable? 
 
 Mr. Noble. I am afraid not. I have not been able to work out any 
 scheme in my own mind that would accomplish that. The thought I 
 have in my own mind, Mr. Chairman, is the instruction that will be 
 afforded to the road management in different sections having the 
 
GOOD EOADS. 7 
 
 benefit of the information in regard to the construction and main- 
 tenance of public roads possessed by the Federal bureau. 
 
 The Chairman. And that from an engineering standpoint? 
 
 Mr. Noble. Strictly. 
 
 The Chairman. And from the standpoint of administration? 
 
 Mr. Noble. Yes. 
 
 The Chairman. To what extent do you think the Government 
 should exercise control over construction and maintenance of roads 
 upon which it expends money ? 
 
 Mr. Noble. I should think that it ought to extend to the approval 
 of plans, to the verification of accounts, as far as that may be prac- 
 ticable, the awarding of contracts for projects thus approved, and I 
 hope it might extend to a general agreement for concurrent action 
 between what I might call the two interests, state and national. 
 _ The Chairman. According to your idea there would be two en- 
 tities, the State as a unit and the Federal Government? 
 
 Mr. Noble. Yes. 
 
 The Chairman. The States would deal with the road districts 
 and the localities. 
 
 Mr. Noble. It seems to me that is preferable. 
 
 The Chairman. You have not determined in your own mind how 
 far the Federal representatives would participate in either the ex- 
 penditure of money or the maintenance of roads ? 
 
 Mr. Noble. The matter of administration would have to be worked 
 out a little farther than I have worked it out in my own mind. The 
 Federal representative at any rate ought to have the power of veto 
 on the expenditures of Federal money if he saw cause to exercise it, 
 either by reason of defect of plan or in the method of administration. 
 
 The Chairman. To carry out such a supervision, would it not re- 
 quire a large addition to the Federal bureau ? 
 
 Mr. Noble. I should think the Federal bureau ought to be enlarged 
 enough to have efficient inspection and examination of the work as it 
 goes on. I hardly think it would be practicable to go very much 
 furthei'. 
 
 The Chairman. Would you advocate raising Federal road funds 
 by a special tax? 
 
 Mr. Noble. I could not answer that, Mr. Chairman. I do not 
 know whether that could be worked out. 
 
 The Chairman. Have you any idea as to what would be an equi- 
 table and practicable plan of apportionment of Federal aid among 
 the different States? 
 
 Mr. Noble. I should think that something like an equal division 
 would be about the only practicable basis. 
 
 The Chairjian. There is such a basis then, in road mileage, area, 
 and population in the 48 different States ? 
 
 Mr. Noble. You mean the division of the fund between the differ- 
 ent States? 
 
 The Chairman. Yes. 
 
 Mr. Noble. Account would have to be taken, not only of the mile- 
 age and population, but of the needs of the several sections. I 
 should think a division of the country into sections and a division of 
 the fund with some relation to traffic needs, and mileage of roads, 
 and so forth, would have to be worked out. 
 
8 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 The Chaieman. Under a plan of equitable apportionment of Fed- 
 eral aid rendered to the different States, what would be the factors 
 you would take into consideration? I understood you to say mile- 
 age of roads, for one. 
 
 Mr. Noble. Mileage of roads for one, volume of traffic for an- 
 other, and, of course, the population to be benefited would be another 
 factor. 
 
 The Chairman. Acreage or mileage in a State, the square mile- 
 age? 
 
 Mr. Noble. Yes ; I think those are all elements. 
 
 The Chairman. Would it be practicable to determine, without 
 enormous expense to the Government and the creation of a great 
 bureau, what the volume of traffic is? 
 
 Mr. Noble. I should not think it would be practicable to go into 
 the minutia of that to any great extent. I think it would have to 
 be determined upon pretty broad lines. 
 
 The Chairman. In arriving at your method of apportionment be- 
 tween the States, what allowance would you give to area, miles of 
 road, and population ? Would you give them each an equal value ? 
 
 Mr. Noble. I do not think that I want to answer that question, 
 Mr. Chairman, without a great deal more study than I have given it. 
 
 The Chairman. In your opinion, if the Government enter upon a 
 policy of Federal aid, would the tendency be in the several States 
 and localities to shift their proportion of the road burden upon the 
 Federal Government ? 
 
 Mr. Noble. That might be so; but I think that care should be 
 taken always to see that the State should bear something like an 
 equal proportion of that burden. 
 
 The Chaiebian. You think that would be a sufficient check? 
 
 Mr. Noble. I believe it would. I should think it would. 
 
 The Chairman. Of course, any Congress can change the action of 
 any preceding Congress as to whatever aid might be rendered. 
 
 Mr. Noble. That is true ; and when the Congress no longer extends 
 aid its representatives Avill no longer have control. 
 
 The Chairman. How is that? That the Federal Government 
 would have the control? 
 
 Mr. Noble. I say, when the Congress no longer extends aid to the 
 State the department of the Government having charge of the 
 bureau of highAvays probably would not continue to have active par- 
 ticipation in the control of the highways of the State. 
 
 The Chairman. Do you predicate your position on the assump- 
 tion that the Federal Government is to have control of those high- 
 ways to the construction or maintenance of which the Federal Gov- 
 ernment has made any financial contribution? 
 
 Mr. Noble. Probably only to the extent of extending aid or with- 
 holding it, depending upon how the work is administered in the 
 several communities. I think that would be rather effective control. 
 
 Mr. Shackijsford. In the case of joint control between Federal 
 and State authorities, if they did not agree, how would it be deter- 
 mined ? 
 
 Mr. Noble. I presume that if the arrangements were not satis- 
 factory to the representatives of the Federal Government, the Fed- 
 eral Government would not participate. 
 
GOOD EOADS. 9 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. And the desire of the State and the local people 
 to have the participation on the part of the Government would 
 undoubtedly cause them to yield ? 
 
 Mr. Noble. I think so; always depending upon the intelligence 
 of the parties. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. It would, in effect, result in giving supreme 
 control to the Government wherever it participated, would it not ? 
 
 Mr. Noble. So far as the Federal aid is concerned. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. I say, the disposition of the States and the 
 people locally to get the extra fund, would in most cases cause them 
 to yield to the Federal authority in any point of disagreement, with 
 the result that the Federal authorities would, in fact, control. 
 
 Mr. Noble. I do not see any reason why the State authorities 
 could not proceed, if they wished, on any basis not satisfactory to 
 the Federal bureau, at the sole expense of the State ; but the consider- 
 ation you speak of will, of course, be a strong incentive to joint 
 action. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. It will give the Federal bureau large persua- 
 sive powers, to say the least? 
 
 Mr. Noble. I think that is so. 
 
 Senator Swanson. It would be largely dependent upon who is 
 anxious to build the road, the Federal or the local authorities, as 
 to who would yield. 
 
 Mr. Noble. I should say, Senator, that the Federal authorities 
 would be in position to demand and probably secure satisfactory 
 highway construction. I should not think it would go very much 
 further than that. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. Is it your opinion that this movement for 
 good roads will result in State-highway improvement being estab- 
 lished by the various States and legislation for the improvement 
 of the roads much more advanced than we now have. 
 
 Mr. Noble. I should think so. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. What would you think of the probability of 
 these State highway commissions equipping themselves with bureaus 
 of competent engineers to give instruction in road building? 
 
 Mr. Noble. I should hope it would result in that. It would tend 
 that way very powerfully. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. As to the use of roads, is it your opinion that 
 highways Avill serve as successful competitors to railroads in long 
 transportation lines, or as long-distance mail routes? 
 
 Mr. Noble. I do not see my way clear to answer yes to that propo- 
 sition. T think it ought to tend to develop districts that are hardly 
 within reach of the railroads. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. What I had in mind was two thoughts in con- 
 nection with road building, one to build some long cross-continent 
 or so-called ocean-to-ocean highways, and another thought, proba- 
 bly the most useful service the roads could perform would be lead- 
 ing from railroad points into the country, and serving the people 
 who have not the facilities to carry the mail, carry the people, and 
 to carry the farm products back and forth to the railroad stations 
 and to the markets generally. In your opinion, which of these would 
 he the most desirable? 
 
10 GOOD BO ADS. 
 
 Mr. Noble. I think that depends so much upon the condition of 
 each case that a general answer is impracticable. I think the matter 
 should be left generally to the determination of the local authorities 
 as to what roads should be improved, with the general thought that 
 the money ought to be expended in such a way as to benefit to the 
 greatest extent the community through which the road passes. That 
 might result sometimes in the construction of trunk lines, and other 
 times it might result in the development of branch lines, but what- 
 ever will do the community most good should be the controlling con- 
 sideration. 
 
 Mr. Shacklet-oed. You are not prepared to say now whether you 
 think a highway would successfully compete with a railroad as a 
 long-distance transportation line, or as a long-distance mail route? 
 
 Mr. Noble. I do not see how it can be expected to so compete. 
 
 Mr. SHACKLEroRD. If you were to build certain roads, as we sug- 
 gest, the money to do that would be taken out of the Treasury of the 
 State and of the Federal Government which has been raised by 
 taxation on all of the people. What do you think of building some 
 of the roads for some of the people by taxing all of the people to 
 get the fimds? 
 
 Mr. Noble. I do not know how any public improvement can be 
 carried out that does not really involve that same condition. Some 
 people are benefited more by harbor improvements than others. I do 
 not think the burdens are ever equally distributed. 
 
 Mr. Shacklefokd. They could not be equally distributed. 
 
 Mr. Madden. I really do not know whether I understood Mr. 
 Noble to say that he thought that the Federal Government ought to 
 be empowered to inaugurate road building within the State or 
 whether he intended that it should be left entirely with the State. 
 
 Mr. Noble. It seems to me the initiation ought to be left with the 
 State, that the proposition to improve any particular road ought to 
 emanate from the State, and that it ought to be approved by the 
 national representative before national aid was extended. 
 
 Mr. M'ADDEx. Do you believe that the State should have exclusive 
 jurisdiction over the character of a road that would he built to which 
 Federal aid would be granted? 
 
 Mr. Noble. I do not. I think that the Federal authorities ought 
 to have an equal voice and I think that Federal aid should not be 
 extended unless, in the view of the Federal representative, the 
 method of construction was proper. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Do you believe that there ought to be more thnn one 
 class of roads to which the Federal Government should grant aid? 
 
 Mr. Noble. I should say yes without being able to discuss that 
 matter in detail. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Have you given enough thought to the matter to 
 justify an expression of opinion as to what the cost per mile of road 
 would be at the minimum to which the Government should give aid ? 
 
 Mr. Noble. No; I am not prepared to answer that. 
 
 Mr. INIadden. Have you given this matter sufficient thought to 
 lead you to believe that your conclusion that the Government of the 
 United States should contribute 50 per cent is a just conclusion? 
 
 Mr. Noble. I think that it is a practical conclusion, Mr. Madden. 
 
 Mr. Madden. What makes you believe it is practicable? 
 
GOOD KOADS. 11 
 
 Mr. Noble. Because it seems to me that the idea of an equal 
 division will meet with approval. It would become practicable to 
 meet the State authorities on that basis. 
 
 Mr. Madden. If the Government should contribute one-half of the 
 cost then your judgment is that the Government should take half of 
 the control? 
 
 Mr. Noble. As long as Federal aid is continued. During the 
 period of construction I think they should have the authority to 
 supervise the accounts or to examine the accounts to satisfy them- 
 selves that the money is being properly expended and withhold any 
 further Federal aid if those conditions are not met. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Is it your judgment that the Federal Government 
 should grant aid toward the maintenance of roads, once the roads 
 were maintained up to a fixed standard of efficiency? In other 
 words, would you recommend a contribution out of the Federal 
 Treasury of any money toward the maintenance of highways within 
 the various States as a going proposition rather than at the end of a 
 given period when the roads have been maintained? 
 
 Mr. Noble. As long as the provisions were apparently adequate 
 for the maintenance of roads it seems to me the Government might 
 safely particii:)ate as a going proposition. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Would not that involve a large expenditure for a 
 managing and inspecting force at the capital of the Nation, audit- 
 ing and all that ? 
 
 Mr. Noble. I do not know what that expense would be. I do not 
 think, on the whole, any money is saved by the withholding of such 
 funds as would be necessary for inspection and examination. I 
 think that is a very important part of the proposition, that more 
 money can be lost by failure to do those things than it is likely to 
 be expended in doing them. More money is lost by inadequate 
 supervision than by over supervision every day. 
 
 Mr. Madden. The State being the political entity of which the Na- 
 tion is made up, would you think that force requisite to lay down all 
 the engineering pieces of road building and management, and in- 
 spection should be at the expense of the State rather than at the 
 expense of the Federal Government ? 
 
 Mr. Noble. Perhaps it will answer your question if I should say 
 that I think the function of the Federal representatives should be 
 rather in the way of approving methods and of sufficient inspection 
 to be sure that satisfactory results are being obtained. I should an- 
 ticipate that the details would be more largely in the hands of the 
 State representatives ; daily details, so to speak. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Did I understand you right if I understood you to 
 say that you believed that roads within the State should be, in a 
 measure, constructed by the States themselves and in a measure by 
 the Federal Government, so that roads constructed by the Federal 
 Government could be used as samples upon which the State could 
 base its method of construction? 
 
 Mr. Noble. I do not think that I actually said that, but I think 
 the Federal supervision ought to accomplish about that. I think 
 that the roads that are built under specifications approved by the 
 United States representatives and under such examination as it 
 would be feasible to give them, ought to result in the type of roads, 
 whatever the class may be, that you refer to. 
 
12 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 Mr. Madden. I really thought that T understood you to say that 
 the Government ought to build part of the roads and the State 
 should build a part. 
 
 Mr. Noble. I suggested the desirability of that as an abstract idea, 
 if I might say so. It would seem to me a very desirable proposition 
 if some of this work could be done entirely by the Federal people 
 and some by the States for the purpose of furnishing an object les- 
 son, but I was careful to say I did not see clearly how that could be 
 carried out. I should expect as a general proposition that Federal 
 supervision might, under certain conditions, possibly be the more 
 efficient. There are States where State supervision now is excellent, 
 and there are also States where the results are not very good. I 
 have recently passed over some of the State highways of New York 
 State, and there conditions are rather bad and the roads are not being 
 well maintained in certain sections. 
 
 Mr. Madden. If the Federal Government should lay down a foun- 
 dation in the way of a general statute, to which all States would be 
 required to conform before it contributed to any fund for road 
 building anywhere, what would you think of a scheme like that? 
 
 Mr. Noble. I should think that as things now stand the art of road 
 building, being of recent development very largely, a great deal of 
 discretion ought to be left to the Bureau of Public Roads, or what- 
 ever the Federal representative happens to be, and it should not be 
 tied down by any specific enactment. 
 
 Mr. Madden. You mean it ought to be left discretionary with the 
 bureau of the Federal Government to say whether the Federal Gov- 
 ernment should expend money for the improvement of roads ? 
 
 ]\Ir. Noble. I think that some executive bureau has to be author- 
 ized to say that. I do not quite see how you can do otherwise. For 
 instance. State authorities will propose to improve a certain high- 
 way. I do not see how that can come before Congress. I think 
 that has to be left in the hands of the proper bureau to determine 
 whether Federal aid shall be extended in that case or not. 
 
 Mr. ^Iadden. Then you would not make it general, would you? 
 
 Mr. Noble. I would leave that with the Bureau of Public Eoads. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Would not that be placing a great deal of power in 
 the hands of some bureau chief? 
 
 Mr. Noble. Yes: I think that is so. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Would it not be a power beyond which Congress 
 ought not extend the right to a bureau chief? 
 
 Mr. Noble. I do not see any alternative to that, Mr. Madden. 
 
 Mr. Lee. What do you think of this plan that the Government 
 specify, say, three or four classes of roads, sort of a general specifi- 
 cation, first a macadam, second chirt and gravel, third a dirt road, 
 and then let the counties or States select whichever class they wanted 
 to build. What do you think of that sort of a proposition?" 
 
 Mr. Noble. I do not think that I am able to answer that question, 
 Mr. Lee. ^ ' 
 
 Mr. liEE. Before you answer that finally, take, for instance, mv 
 State of Georgia. There it would be impossible for south Georgia, 
 almost, to build a macadam road at any reasonable price because 
 they are several hundred miles from stone. On the other hand 
 take my section of the State, north Georgia, we would not want to' 
 build anything else but a macadam or a chert road, because we have 
 
GOOD EOADS. 13 
 
 the material. Now, would it not be a good idea for the Government 
 to specify two or three grades of road and let the counties or States' 
 adopt their proposition. 
 
 Mr. Noble. Without being able to answer that question definitely, 
 Mr. Lee, I believe in the broad principle that the type of road to be 
 specified should be determined by the State authorities, subject, as far 
 as Federal cooperation is concerned, to the judgment of the Govern- 
 ment experts in the proper bureau ; I think that a general policy of 
 that land ought to cover such cases as you mention. I realize that 
 where there is no stone you can not very well have macadam roads. 
 
 Mr. Lee. Without great expense. 
 
 Mr. Noble. That is an evident proposition. 
 
 Senator Swanson. Is there not a great diversity as to the nature 
 of roads in all sections of this country ? 
 
 Mr. Noble. Yes. 
 
 Senator Swanson. And you would need a very much heavier 
 macadam road nearer the city where there is a great deal of travel 
 than where the travel was much lighter? 
 
 Mr. Noble. Yes. 
 
 Senator Swanson. Do you think it would be better to leave it to 
 the State and Federal authorities to jointly determine as to the 
 character of the road to be built for a certain section? 
 
 Mr. Noble. I think so, Senator. 
 
 Senator Swanson. As I understand you, you think the initiation 
 ought to be left with the local authorities? 
 
 Mr. Noble. It seems so to me. 
 
 Senator Swanson. You think the local authorities have sufficient 
 knowledge of the situation to make the initiation of the kind of road 
 that will suit their need and they are willing to pay for? 
 
 Mr. Noble. Yes. I think the expert advice of the Bureau of 
 Public Roads, disinterested advice, if I may say so, will be quite 
 influential in cases of that kind, but I do think the project ought to 
 be initiated by the local authorities, and cooperation given if, m the 
 judgment of the Federal authorities the project is a proper one. 
 
 Senator Swanson. And if they both do not enter into the project 
 the money would be retained in the Federal and State Treasury? 
 
 Mr. Noble. Yes. 
 
 Senator Swanson. You think if a project was a good one that 
 Federal aid should be granted? 
 
 Mr. Noble. I think, on the one hand, that account should be taken 
 whether the road was needed, and on the other hand that the con- 
 struction was good and suitable. 
 
 Mr. Shacklefoed. There would be no room under that for Federal 
 favoritism ? 
 
 Mr. Noble. I do not see how that proposition can be met except 
 by the integrity of your representative, and I do not know that I 
 have seen such a project where favoritism was not conceivable. 
 
 Mr. Shacklefoed. There was some complaint that the rural routes 
 were established more favorable to some sections of the State than 
 in others. Do you think oiScialdom has reformed since that day? 
 
 Mr. Noble. I think some provision should be made by which the 
 funds could be distributed with some reference to geographical and 
 traffic needs. 
 
14 GOOD KOADS. 
 
 Mr. SHACKi.EroED. Being an unpopular Congressman back in Mis- 
 souri, would there not be some charge that Mr. Eucker or some other 
 member of my delegation who is more popular than I would secure 
 more f'ederal aid than would be secured by the people of my district, 
 if it should be left to a particular functionary to parcel this out ? 
 
 Mr. Noble. If a road was asked for, as proposed by State au- 
 thorities, I believe the responsibility would be on them. 
 
 Senator Swanson. Your proposition was that you thought it 
 should be prorated among the States by some basis of fair division ? 
 
 Mr. Noble. I think so. 
 
 Senator Swanso>< . And that subdivision could extend still further 
 by congressional districts, if desired? 
 
 Mr. Noble. Whatever the State authorities might decide, per- 
 haps, and I should hope, as a general proposition, that the Federal 
 representatives could deal with the State authorities, rather than 
 with the county or township authorities. I should think too much 
 subdivision would be unfortunate. 
 
 Senator Swanson. Is not population a pretty good index as to the 
 traffic on a road, the population along a line of road ? 
 
 Mr. Noble. It is one of the elements, surely. 
 
 Senator Swanson. It is an element that will show the use of a 
 road more than any other element we could get hold of. 
 
 Mr. Noble. I am not sure about that, whether that would be abso- 
 lutely true or not. The amount of traffic produced and the distance 
 it had to travel and all those things would be very important con- 
 siderations, it seems to me. Broadly, perhaps, you are right. The 
 population is the most important element. I would not want to say 
 further than that without a careful study of the conditions. 
 
 Senator Swanson. Did you ever study the proposition of Federal 
 aid, one-half by mileage of the road and one-half by population? 
 Could you suggest any other plan of division ? 
 
 Mr. Noble. No ; I could not ; and that may be because I have not 
 given the matter the careful study your question seems to imply. 
 
 Senator Swanson. Do you know how much money is spent on the 
 public roads in the United States to-day? 
 
 Mr. Noble. No; I do not. I haven't those figures in mind. 
 
 Senator Swanson. A great deal is wasted by not having the proper 
 instruction and knowledge as to the wise expenditure, is there not ? 
 
 JNIr. Noble. There is no doubt about that. 
 
 The Chairman. How would you correct that, if a waste exists? 
 "What improvement in method would you suggest by which you could 
 minimize the possibility of a waste? 
 
 Mr. Noble. I think, Mr. Chairman, that is minimized to a very 
 large extent in those States where they have efficient highway super- 
 vision and I should suppose it might be eliminated by Federal co- 
 operation. I should think that would be one of the most useful 
 and desirable results of cooperation. 
 
 The Chairman. Would you kindly favor the committee, in your 
 own way, with any views or suggestions that you might have bearing 
 on this subject that you care to make that have not already been 
 covered ? 
 
 Mr. Noble. Nothing occurs to me that you have not covered by 
 your inquiries. 
 
GOOD KOADS. 15 
 
 Mr. Madden. I would like to ask one more question of Mr. Noble, 
 in line with your suggestion that you favor an apportionment of the 
 Federal fund among the various States. Suppose that a State had 
 entered upon the policy of building a large number of highways and 
 had committed itself to the expenditure of a large sum, say $50,000,- 
 000, and that another State had made no calculation for any expendi- 
 ture of road construction, and still another State had decided to 
 spend $10,000,000, another one $20,000,000, another one $15,000,000, 
 and so on. How would you credit these States with the enterprise 
 upon which they had begun in the distribution of the fund to be used 
 out of the Federal Treasury among the various States in making its 
 distribution ? 
 
 Mr. Noble. If you should distribute Federal aid in accordance 
 with the conditions that the chairman mentioned at the beginning 
 of this examination, I do not see that the amount of money that the 
 State had previously expended would come in as an element. 
 
 Mr. Madden. I am taking into account what a State was about to 
 expend on a plan it had inaugurated to extend its road improve- 
 ments. I am taking the proposition de novo and I began by various 
 States, enumerating them along the line of expenditure from $50,000,- 
 000 down to nothing. 
 
 Mr. Noble. I do not see how you can go very much further than 
 to consider the conditions to which I have already referred in the 
 matter of distribution. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Then, according to your plan, I conclude that if it 
 should be adopted that a State which had sufficient enterprise to 
 enter upon the project for the expenditure of $50,000,000 for build- 
 ing good roads this year the veto power of the Federal Government 
 in the distribution of the fund among the various States would en- 
 able it to prevent the State that wanted to spend $50,000,000 from 
 spending anything like the sum it had started out to do. 
 
 Mr. Noble. A concrete example, for instance, is the State of New 
 York, which has already expended $50,000 ,00() and is about to spend 
 that much more. I do not imagine the action of the State in spend- 
 ing that $50,000,000 is going to be greatly influenced by the expendi-- 
 ture of $25,000,000 by Congress throughout the country at large. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Excuse me right there, but I want to interrupt you. 
 That is a good place to ask another question. If they knew that they 
 could get $25,000,000 from the Federal Treasury, do you think it 
 would have any influence upon the question of whether they would 
 (fo on and spend their own $50,000,000 or not, without reference to 
 whether they got the $25,000,000 from the Federal Treasury? 
 
 Mr. Noble. Well, I do not know. I think not, in New York. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Would it anywhere, 
 
 Mr. Noble. I doubt it. I think if they went into such an expendi- 
 ture as that, they would go ahead and expend that money, but they 
 would receive, I think, thankfully any additional sum the Federal 
 Government should provide. However, if a State were about to in- 
 augurate a system of highway improvement, they might be influenced 
 by the amount of Federal aid they should get. I do not know but 
 
 what that would be so. ,,,111 
 
 Mr. Madden. Then the question arises as to how they would make 
 
 the distribution. 
 
16 GOOD KOADS. 
 
 Mr. Noble. With regard to the apportionment of traffic and all the 
 conditions to which I have referred, I do not think you can go much 
 further. 
 
 Mr. Madden. I do not think you can go that far. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. Should any system of Federal aid that might be 
 inaugurated here provide for giving some support to the maintenance 
 of the roads in those States that have already built good roads ? 
 
 Mr. Noble. I should think that the need for cooperation in the mat- 
 ter of maintenance is very much greater in most cases than coopera- 
 tion in construction, as the matter now stands. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. I agree with you on that, but if we were to en- 
 act legislation here that would be fair we should not exclude from 
 Federal aid those roads that have already been constructed, should 
 we ? Assuming that we are doing this for post roads, and that is what 
 we are considering now, we carry the mails over the roads that are 
 already constructed in some States that have built very good roads. 
 Would it not be fair to make the provision broad enough to render aid 
 to the States for the roads they have constructed as well as those that 
 are to be constructed ? In other words, would it be fair to let the peo- 
 ple of a given State take their own money and build themselves a sys- 
 tem of roads and then be taxed to build for some more baclcward 
 States a road that should be built by the State itself. New York State 
 has spent $50,000,000. Are we going to tax the State of New York to 
 build some road for my State, which has been backward, without tak- 
 ing into consideration the roads that have been constructed in a 
 scheme for contribution for maintenance? 
 
 Mr. Noble. I think I prefer to give first rather an indirect answer 
 to that question. You referred to New York. I think the need of 
 a fund for the maintenance of the roads of New York is going to be 
 one of the most urgent ones in the near future connected with the 
 highways of that State, and I should hope that Federal cooperation 
 might result in great benefit to the people of the State of New York 
 in that way. 
 
 The Chairman. On behalf of the committee, I want to thank you 
 \'ery much for giving us the benefit of your suggestions. 
 
 STATEMENT OF W, W. FINLEY. 
 
 The Chairman. Kindly state your age, your residence, and occu- 
 pation. 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. I am 59 years of age; president of the Southern 
 Railway Co.; I live in the city of Washington; my headquarters 
 iire in the city of Washington. 
 
 The Chairman. You are a member of the American Association 
 for Highway Improvements, are you not ? 
 , Mr. FiNLEY. Yes. 
 
 The Chairman. One of the officers? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. I am vice president of the association. 
 
 The Chairman. You are aware that a joint committee has been 
 appointed by Congress for the purpose of studying and reporting 
 to Congress a bill for Federal aid to good roads? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. Yes, sir ; I am apprised of that. 
 
 The Chairman. In your study of the question that you have given 
 to the subject of good roads, will you favor the committee with what- 
 
GOOD EOADS. 17 
 
 ever conclusions you have come to with reference to the matter, in 
 your own way, and what aid you thinlc the Federal Government 
 should render, and how far it should go, and what concrete plan, 
 if any, you have formed in your own mind. 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. I can not say, Mr. Chairman, that I have thought 
 the question out to a conclusion. My occupation naturally puts me 
 in a position to observe the condition of roads, the dependence of 
 traffic on roads, or, as you might call them, highways. As I look 
 upon transportation, I divide it into three elements — water transpor- 
 tation, rail transportation, and highway transportation. I have real- 
 ized very strongly and very clearly the backwardness of the element 
 of highway transportation. I have felt that it is the principal thing 
 now standing in the way of the complete development of our agri- 
 cultural sections. We talk about methods of improving farm culture, 
 and the railroads, the Government, and many others are contributing 
 to that, in money and effort, but by reason of the highway situation, 
 the farmer whom we induce to produce large crops, or crops he has 
 not heretofore produced, is in many cases without ways for projoerly 
 marketing them. 
 
 We may suggest to him where he may find a market for what he 
 has produced, but there is a great lack of facilities in many sections 
 for his reaching the railroad station or some place from which he 
 can get his produce to market. I have felt for some time there 
 ought to be some more intelligent method for developing the country 
 highways. There has been a slow development in that direction. 
 We find along our railroad, for instance, very much more develop- 
 ment in some localities than in others. Some counties have taken 
 hold of the question very much more vigorously and compi'ehensively 
 than other counties. At the same time, there seems to be a general 
 movement toward improvement, and I have thought that there ought 
 to be some way for expediting the movement. 
 
 While my first thought in the matter was that it could best be 
 done by the smaller subdivisions, such as counties, and mainly the 
 counties, I have reached the conclusion that there will have to be a 
 more comprehensive method of development than that, otherwise it 
 is going to be very slow and very unsatisfactory. I have hoped that 
 some way could be fouiid for better cooperation including the Fed- 
 eral Government ; I do not mean to the extent of having the counties 
 and States lay down on the Federal Government, for I believe that 
 in order to get road development 3'ou will have to maintain a local 
 interest. 
 
 The Chairman. You wish to utilize the Federal Government as 
 a vitalizer for a locality ? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. Yes; and to cooperate in some substantial way. I 
 believe you will find a very large percentage of the traffic of every 
 locality "^moving over a relatively small road mileage, and in every 
 locality there is an amount of main road which could be developed 
 that would be a help to the general situation. I have had the thought 
 that the Federal Government might in this case cooperate. I have 
 always felt concerning road development that if all the money that 
 has been spent on good roads through road taxes and otherwise had 
 been effectively spent we would have had a better system of high- 
 ways. We have not conserved our means for improving the roads; 
 
 79558— PT 1—13 2 
 
18 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 in fact, we have had practically little business management. I have 
 argued that the county could well afTord to have an engineer who 
 would undertake the construction of the main highways in a sub- 
 stantial way and look for materials within the county f 9r constructmg 
 less substantially and maintaining the roads over which the lighter 
 traffic of a county might move; in other words, develop a highway 
 system as a railroad company develops a railroad. 
 
 The Chairman. The difficulty is with the enormous_ amount of 
 roads in this country. It is more difficult than you find it with your 
 railroad systems. 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. I appreciate that, but I was speaking in the sense of 
 the principle of developing roads. For instance, the railroads have 
 main lines over which a large part of the traffic moves, and there are 
 branch lines feeding them with lighter service. One has to be main- 
 tained on a higher basis than the other. On one we have trains of 
 higher speed and a greater densit}' of traffic. I have felt that if the 
 counties should have engineers they could avail themselves of all the 
 materials in the county good for road building, using the best of them 
 for the development of the main highways, and with split-log drags 
 and lighter material could construct and maintain the rural roads 
 over which the traffic was very much lighter. 
 
 I do not want to make a speech on this subject, but would like to 
 say this: I have felt as to main highways, where probably 75 per 
 cent of the traffic of the locality may move, and which may not be 
 more than 25 or 30 per cent of the road mileage, the Federal Govern- 
 ment might well cooperate in the improvement of such a highway 
 and in the maintenance of it. 
 
 The Chairman. How are you going to make the line of demarca- 
 tion as to the mileage that shall receive the Federal cooperation and 
 that which shall not, where you get 75 per cent of the traffic ? Who 
 will make that designation? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEv. That will have to originate in a local sense, because I 
 do not think that the Federal Government could originate the propo- 
 sition. I do not believe it could go into that feature without losing 
 a great deal of time and incurring a large expense, but I think, after 
 the situation has been developed by the State or some other political 
 subdivision, the Federal Government might well take up the ques- 
 tion for the purpose of determining its degree of cooperation. 
 
 The Chairman. Have you determined in your own mind what 
 unit shall be established with which the Federal Government shall 
 deal, if it deals at all? 
 
 Mr.FiNLET. The State, in the first instance, I should think— the 
 State in turn dealing with its lesser units. 
 
 The CHAiE:\rAN. Your mind approaches the good-road question, as 
 I understand you, v.ith the desire for improved transportation facili- 
 ties and an increased transportation activity. Is that rio-ht ? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. Yes, sir. I want to get the'highway, whfch 1 regard 
 as one of the essential elements of transportation, "developed in con- 
 nection with rail and river transportation'. I would like to see a 
 system of intelligent development of that, because I thinlf that is the 
 trouble from which we are suffering. 
 
 The Chairman. If a plan could be worked out that is practicable 
 (and I think we will all concede that this is highly desirable) is it 
 
GOOD EOADS. 19 
 
 possible that highway improvement would take the place of rail 
 feeders and electric lines to any extent ? 
 
 Mr.- FiNLEY. Permit me to answer that in this way: T have main- 
 tained — and I recall in the case of western North Carolina, which is 
 a mountainous region through which our railroads run — with parties 
 who have suggested that we run branch lines into certain localities 
 from the main line, that that was not the real way to solve the ques- 
 tion; that the solution was in the improvement of their highways 
 into the shipping places. 
 
 The Chaieman. Instead of building branch lines? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. Instead of building branch lines, because they can get 
 a more extensive highway system than they could a railway system 
 under those circumstances. Branch lines built by railroads, as a rule, 
 are not remunerative, and I do not believe the public would get as 
 satisfactory service under those circumstances as they would from the 
 development of their highway system. 
 
 The Chairman. If a practicable plan were developed and worked 
 out and enacted, satisfying the railroads generally as being practi- 
 cable, would the representatives of the railroads cooperate to the 
 extent of very low rates in hauling material? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. We do that now, where it is hauled at the expense of 
 or for account of the State or county. 
 
 The Chairman. Do you think that the railroad representatives 
 would evei- reach the point of making financial contributions to the 
 general fund for the highway improvement that would develop their 
 particular lines? 
 
 ]Mr. FiNLEY. I do no think they could do that properly. 
 
 The Chairman. That you do not think would be practicable? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. I do not think wc could use the capital of the railroads 
 for that purpose, because there is such a responsibility always on 
 them for developing their own facilities. 
 
 The Chairman. If you were going to put a certain amount into 
 the building of branch lines, and you concluded that you would get 
 the same results by the construction of certain highways, Avould you 
 not be justified in putting into highway improvement 25 per cent of 
 the amount you would have to put in to build a branch line? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. I do not think we could issue securities covering that 
 kind of an investment; we could not borrow money on that basis. 
 
 The Chair:iian. Could you not charge it up to operating expenses? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. "We could not do that. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. Considering the lari;-,' amount of money they 
 had to pay in taxes, would they not in that way contribute to the 
 road building? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. Yes ; we do. 
 
 The Chairman. Do not the railroads, to a certain extent, make 
 contributions for road building? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. I do not know the extent. Howc\ er. I do not see any 
 proper way for the railroad to make that kind of an expenditure. 
 We cooperate in every way we can. We run good-roads trains and 
 do everything we can to advance public interest in good roads, and 
 when material is hauled for the county or State, we make special 
 rates on it. as far as the law will permit us to do so. 
 
 The Chairman. Do you think that is general in the railroad world? 
 For instance, take the 250,000 miles of railroads in the United States, 
 
20 GOOD ROADS. 
 
 do you think they ha\T leached the stage of development you have, 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. I do not like to say. I can state for our own system 
 that we have tried to be broad about it and we do what we can. 1 
 will be glad to answer any further questions as far as I may be able 
 to do so intelligently. 
 
 The Chairman. Do you think it is practicable to work out any 
 general plan to which the States, as units, must conform, other than 
 the conditions that might be attached to such Federal aid as might be 
 rendered by the Government ? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. I have heard your examination of Mr. Noble on this 
 question. I have not determined the units upon which the develop- 
 ment might be made or the cooperation of the Government secured. 
 I think it all ought to be done upon the basis of the material interests 
 involved. I think that that will have to be left to the discretion of 
 some governmental agency. As I understand you do in connection 
 with river improvements, t do not believe you can determine the par- 
 ticular developments to be undertaken by act of Congress. 
 
 The question is very much more complex than that of river de- 
 velopment. 
 
 The Chairman. The designation of roads would have to be left to 
 the local or State interests ? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. Yes; I think it should originate with the State. I 
 think also there should be some study of the question by the Federal 
 Government; I mean some test of the soundness of the judgment of 
 the State, by reason of the fact that the Federal Government is asked 
 for cooperation. 
 
 The Chairjian. How can you do that practically without building 
 up ;i very large bureau in the Federal Government in order to get 
 the espionage or to insure that conditions imjDOsed by the Federal 
 Government are being carried out ? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. It is very hard to say in advance what the organiza- 
 tion should be for that purpose. I do not believe that it would be 
 necessary to have as large an organization as one might theoretically 
 deem to be necessary. I believe a system of general inspection, re- 
 lieved of the details of original development, could be made to work 
 satisfactorily. Excuse me for referring to the railroads. We have 
 an organization for our roadway work. In that organization we 
 have not a great number of men outside of the men Avho actually do 
 the work on the track; we have the men who supervise and on 
 whose judgment we rely for recommendation. They are not numer- 
 ous, considering the territory involved. We have a superintendent 
 who operates — say a division of some 300 miles, more in some 
 instances; he has a roadmaster under him. We have also an engi- 
 neer of maintenance of way. We find as a rule we can reach con- 
 clusions intelligently on their recommendations. 
 
 The Chairjian. But cxery day every mile of your track is passed 
 dvei' by some one directly inspecting it 't 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. Not so frequently by the superintendent. 
 
 The Chairman. No; l)ut he has the means of information that will 
 come right to him. 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. Yes. I will admit there are difficulties, but I am try- 
 ing to show that there is a, character of supervision that can be given 
 by the Federal Government Avhich would not call for so large a 
 
GOOD EOADS. 21 
 
 force as one might imagine in considering the subject academically. 
 I think it could be systematized in a way in which it could be 
 handled satisfactorily. Of course I do not mean to say, without 
 knowledge of the present force of the Government in respect to good 
 roads, that it could be done with the present force. 
 
 The Chairman. Suppose you had 1,100,000 miles of road, which 
 I understahd is the present mileage now utilized by the rural routes ; 
 how are you going to have an espionage over that mileage without 
 an enormous bureau? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. I suggested that Government cooperation might be 
 given in connection with roads representing some 25 or 30 per cent 
 of road mileage in localities, but over which probably 85 or 90 per 
 cent of the traffic would move. I do not believe that the Government 
 should go into cooperation with the States as to every mile of road 
 in the States. 
 
 The Chairman. You do not think the Government should have 
 the right to make a designation of certain roads and say that it will 
 cooperate in the construction and maintenance of these roads (a cer- 
 tain mileage in each State) , but what it does it must do in a general 
 way. 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. But I think it will have to determine definitely 
 with the State the extent to which the Government is going to give 
 its cooperation ; that will necessarily have to be based on some road, 
 and that road will have to be determined by the material interests of 
 the locality. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. Do you keep in mind the only purpose for 
 which we can make Federal expenditures is to construct and main- 
 tain post roads? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. Yes ; I realize that. While not using that term I had 
 it in mind. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. In your railroad organizations you have your 
 section boss. Could not the Postmaster General, or some other func- 
 tionary here, rely to some extent for a report of condition of roads 
 upon the rural carrier or traveling inspector ? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. I must say that when Mr. Noble was asked that ques- 
 tion that thought passed through my mind. I do not see why the 
 Government could not have a report from the rural carriers. 
 
 The Chairman. Suppose the rural carriers reported the road was 
 not in good condition, and the local representatives said that it was. 
 In that case an inspector would have to come in and determine. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. The roadmaster, so to speak, would go in there. 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. And if he was not satisfied with that then the 
 superintendent would come in. That would only be in cases where 
 there were controversies. 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. That is it. I do not mean to say the Government 
 should always await such a report as that. There would have to be 
 some kind of scouting done for the purpose of finding out the condi- 
 tion of the roads. . , T , ,, T,- 
 
 The Chairman. Do you not think this would be the condition: 
 That the rural carrier traveling the road would be one of the most 
 critical men who would report the condition if it should be out of 
 order ? 
 
22 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. As I sa,y, that thought passed through my mind; 1 
 am answering that particular question offhand, so to speak. 
 
 Mr. Shacklefoed. I presume that is the only way it can be an- 
 swered, for this is a new question. 
 
 Mr. Maddex. As a man of large interests and experience, what 
 would you think of a plan under which the Federal Government laid 
 down a code of general principles to which every State would be 
 required to conform before the State could participate in any con- 
 tribution from the Federal Treasury? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. I do not know what you mean by '' general princi- 
 ples " exactly. I think the Federal Government would have to estab- 
 lish a basis for its cooperation, a general basis. 
 
 Mr. Madden. That is the code of principles I speak of. 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. As to the particular roads that may be necessary, 1 
 think that will have to be left to joint determination by the Federal 
 Government and the States. I should think, however, the Govern- 
 ment would have to lay down some general principles upon which its 
 financial cooperation will be given to the States. 
 
 Mr. Madden. The Congress of the United States within the last 
 year passed a resolution providing for the election of the United 
 States Senators by the people of the States, when that is ratified by 
 the States. No State in the Union is required to vote for that reso- 
 lution within any given period of time, but it has from now until 
 eternity to vote for it if it wants to come within the provisions of 
 this resolution. Suppose that now the Congress of the United States 
 should enact a law under which it would say that it would contribute 
 to the construction and maintenance of roads throughout the United 
 States to a given percentage of the total cost of any road built along 
 this line and that every State in the Union could come within the 
 provisions of that condition whenever it pleased — if one State wanted 
 to come in to-day it could do so and get the benefit of the condition 
 imposed, and if it did not want to come in until to-morrow it could 
 stay out, if it did not want to come in until 10 years from to-morrow 
 it could come in then, but whenever it chose to come in it could do so, 
 and the Government in the meantime would only be required to pay 
 the percentage of the cost it laid down as a fundamental principle 
 of roads actually built by the States that came in under the provi- 
 sions of the law enacted. What would you think about some such 
 scheme as that ? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. Weir, that is a pretty long question, Mr. Madden. 
 It is a very pertinent one. It strikes me that the Government should 
 lay down the principles upon which it will cooperate, make a specific 
 annual appropriation for the benefit of good roads, establish some 
 imit upon which to distribute the appropriations among the States, 
 and so apportion it, safeguarding the situation as far as possible to 
 prevent any State availing itself unduly of the appropriation, with 
 notice to other States not exercising the privilege of participation 
 that unless they are prepared to make the development the money 
 will be distributed among States where highway improvement is 
 going on. 
 
 Mr. Madden. The assumption, however, upon which I base my 
 question is that the Government, having once begun on a policy, 
 would deny that policy forever and say there would be no injustice 
 done to the States that did not conform to the plans laid down as 
 
GOOD EOADS. 23 
 
 long as it did not expend any local money for the construction of 
 roads. 
 
 The Chairjian. And its proportional amount would revert to the 
 li-easury as soon as they did not comply with the conditions. 
 
 Mr. Fi^jLEY. Kealizing the importance of the matter, I should 
 think it might be a part of the Government's policy to encourage the 
 States to enter upon the improvements. 
 
 Mr. Madden. What do you mean by encouragement? Do you 
 mean that they ought to start out on a propaganda to induce the 
 States ? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. Yes ; I should say a jpropaganda to interest them and 
 to advise them of the cooperation of the Government with them. 1 
 should think the Government should seek to encouarge the State 
 which might be slow in that kind of development. I do not think 
 the attitude of the Government under those circumstances should 
 be passive, because I think the Government has a tremendous interest 
 in this question. I am not arguing this from any State's rights point 
 of view of any national point of view. I think this question involves 
 the commerce of the country just as much as that carried by railroad 
 and by boats. Commerce starts with the highAvay and it must move 
 over the country highways. 
 
 Mr. Madden. As a man who has a great interest to conserve, would 
 you favor any cooperation on the part of the Federal Government in 
 the construction of roads except upon a plan which would in itself 
 leave no opportunity whatever for the expenditure of money in a 
 given locality and perhaps ultimately result in a public scandal? 
 
 Mr. Fix LEY. I think the whole question will have to be very care- 
 fully considered. I think it is an economic question and that the 
 Government should deal with it in that way and safeguard it from 
 scandal. I think it is a question which, by reason of its comprehen- 
 siveness, Avill have to be dealt with broadly and in a most practical 
 way. 
 
 Mr. Shacklefoed. And possibly any beginning in that way should 
 be modest enough to leave room for extension ? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. I think so. I do not think it is a question to be 
 settled in a day. I think the cooperation on the part of the Govern- 
 ment ought to start in a way that admits of careful development. 
 
 Mr. Shacklefoed. The first legislation might well be modest 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. I think so. I do not think you ought to put the 
 matter within the zone of possible abuse. 
 
 Mr. Shacklefoed. Do you agree with Mr. Noble that maintenance 
 is probably a greater question than that of construction? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. We will have to construct before maintenance becomes 
 necessary. I think there has been a woeful lack of maintenance. I 
 live in the country myself, in Virginia, and I saw a very good road 
 there deteriorating until maintenance was undertaken. 
 
 Mr. Shacklefoed. I think I see that all over the country. 
 Mr. FiNLEY. Yes. I think it is an extremely important matter. 
 I consider it just as important as maintaining a railroad. 
 
 Mr. Shacklefoed. If you took your section men off of your rail- 
 road for as long intervals as they cease work on the county roads 
 it would not be safe to run a train over them, would it? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. Yes. The roads are subjected to the same deteriorat- 
 ing influences, and one will go to pieces just as quickly as the other. 
 
24 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 Senator Swanson. Do you not think if the Federal Government 
 would make a specific appropriation and divide it among the btates, 
 and say to a State, " If you will furnish a half of million dollars we 
 will furnish an equal amount for road construction," that that would 
 have an immense stimulus upon the construction of roads in each 
 State that had this sum to aid them and add force and vigor to it? 
 
 Mr. FiNLvEY. I think it would be a very great stimulus. I speak 
 of it as a stimulus, as I have no other way of determining whether 
 a 50 per cent division is a fair proportion to be assumed by the 
 Government. 
 
 Senator Swanson. Do you not think that the States are good 
 judges as to their needs when they will furnish half the money — as 
 to the character of the roads they want? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. I think so, but at the same time I think the Govern- 
 ment should not be deprived of an opportunity of testing the judg- 
 ment of the local people. 
 
 Senator Swanson. The test would be to require the approval of 
 the Federal Government? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. Yes. 
 
 Senator Swanson. You think that joint action of the Federal Gov- 
 ernment and the State in the selection of roads would give a guar- 
 antee as good as could be obtained that the road would be wisely 
 selected and the money wisely spent ? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. I think so. I think that is the most practical way 
 to proceed. 
 
 Senator Swanson. And you think the initiation should be left 
 with the State authorities with regard to their applications, and that 
 they should be approved by the Federal Government ? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. By all means. I do not think you ought to destroy 
 in any way local initiation. If you do I think it will be a setback 
 for the good-road movement. 
 
 Mr. Shacklefoed. In that connection, if a single governmental 
 functionary had power to veto one proposition and accept another, 
 would not that necessarily result in considerable abuse? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. I think, Mr. Shackleford, you will have to approach 
 the question with more confidence. I do not believe that we should 
 allow it to go off on that point. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. Why not let us assume that the State govern- 
 ments are all right, but why should so much veto power be limited 
 to one man ? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. I think anybody who furnishes money to any enter- 
 prise ought to have some opportunity to look into it and determine 
 its soundness. I am simply talking of princiijle. I think it holds 
 in respect to this matter as well as in other similar matters. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. What element would enter into determining 
 whether it was a sound proposition or not, from the standpoint of 
 the Federal Government? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. I think that would have to be determined from the 
 principles of cooperation laid down by the Government in the first 
 instance. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. Assuming that we are only building post roads 
 for the transportation of mail, what element would enter into the 
 functions of the Government agents as to whether one road would 
 be built or not ? 
 
GOOD EOADS. 25 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. I assume, without having the benefit of absolute 
 knowledge on the question, that the post-roads service is determined 
 by the principles of service to the people in the area in which it is 
 performed. I suppose these post roads are indicative of the situa- 
 tions m localities. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. Then it would be fair to assume that wherever 
 the mail is carried, traffic would be carried also ? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. Not in the same degree. I think the service is rela- 
 tive. 
 
 Mr. Shacklefoed. Would the Federal Government's part of the 
 service be relative? For instance, here is a road tJiat extends out 
 from Koanoke, Va., to the north; here is one to the south, another to 
 the east, and another to the west. On each of these roads the Govern- 
 ment carries mail. Now, from the standpoint of the Government, 
 what class would determine which one of these was more desirable 
 than another? We will assume that each one is 20 miles long. 
 Now, just put that in concrete form and assume that there are four 
 roads running out of Eoanoke, which are each 20 miles long and one 
 carrier takes mail over each route. The Government is going to de- 
 termine between these four which is the most desirable to construct 
 as a post road. How would they arrive at the determination of that 
 and how would they select one of those as against another. 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. I should think one thing would be the relative popu- 
 lation involved. 
 
 Senator Geonna. Would not the amount of traffic have something 
 to do with that? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. The amount of traffic and the productive capacity of 
 the area. 
 
 Senator Swanson. The fact that you would require the local au- 
 thorities to furnish one-half of the money would be a balance wheel — • 
 if you might use such an expression — if they were willing to pay 
 that much toward the construction of the road, would it not ? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. I think so. 
 
 Senator Swanson. Well, in the case mentioned by Mr. Shackle- 
 ford, if there were four roads out of Roanoke and the Government 
 could not take but 20 miles and improve to that extent, it could give 5 
 miles to each route the first year and satisfy all four to that extent, 
 could it not? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. I do not think I would make that kind of a distribu- 
 tion. Although the route might be but a small percentage of the 
 mileage of the post routes in that locality, I should determine it upon 
 the basis of the business carried over the route. 
 
 Senator Swanson. There should be in the application passed on 
 by the Federal authorities a general designation of the character of 
 the road that the Federal authorities will aid ? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. Yes. 
 
 Senator Swanson. One of general interest and one where certain 
 conditions and requirements are to show that it is one of general 
 interest in order to obtain Federal money. 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. Yes. 
 
 Mr. Shacklefoed. Would you put that in a Federal statute ? 
 
 Senator Swanson. You could or could not. 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. You might have one route serving 70 per cent of the 
 population of that locality. 
 
26 GOOD KOADS. 
 
 Senator Swanson. The main object, as I understand from you, for 
 Federal aid is to aid the traffic of the country. 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. Yes ; in other words, for the Government to cooperate 
 to the extent of furnishing service along highways just as the rail- 
 road does. We do not seek the sparsely settled countries where there 
 are no prospects of development. We build the railroad where we 
 think it stands in the best relation to future development. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. Havn't you and Jim Hill and some others built 
 your roads into sparsely populated country and built up great civili- 
 zation ? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. Yes. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. Something was said about population a while 
 ago. Louisiana and Mississippi have about an equal population and 
 about equal area, but Indiana has 2,300 mail routes and Mississippi 
 has about 500. If you gave to the people of Mississippi an oppor- 
 tunity to come under some automatic general plan, as suggested by 
 Mr. Madden, might they not put themselves within a Federal statute 
 and increase the mileage of good roads in their State and thereby in- 
 crease very largely the number of mail routes and also the number of 
 transportation routes as well? 
 
 Mr. P^NLEY. I do not loiow whether I understand your question. 
 I do not want to be understood as suggesting that there should be a 
 minimum population to be prescribed by the Government. If you 
 have 50 people to the square mile in one State and only 30 in another 
 I think the State of lesser population should have the same consid- 
 eration in the principle of cooperation as the other State in the de- 
 velopment of its good roads. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. What I was getting at is this: Suppose that 
 the Federal Government were not to provide for the distribution of 
 money among people, but among miles of road that would come up to 
 a specified standard or something equally good ? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. I do not think it ought to be done that way. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. What is your objection to that? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. I think that would be an academic way of getting at 
 it. I think the material interests of each State should be considered. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. Is. not that one ? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. That is one element. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. If the local people will have enough interest to 
 provide the road, is it not^ in the language of Senator Swanson. a 
 guarantee that there is a demand for the road ? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. That may be. I think Congress ought to be careful 
 in legislating upon this subject to protect what you might call the 
 potential interests of the States. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. Would it not be better protected by some self- 
 operating plan than by leaving it to some public functionary, who 
 might gix& to Senator Swanson, who is very influential, a large area 
 of road and might deny to a humble man like I am my part and 
 carry it over into some other State? You do not do that in your 
 business. Would it not be very dangerous to leave all of that to one 
 functionary, with his liability to play favorites ? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. I am not considering it from that point of view. 
 
 Senator Swanson. You do not advocate a law m.aking it payable 
 to individuals, but for the roads and needs of the State ? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. That is exactly what I mean. 
 
GOOD EOADS. 27 
 
 Senator Swanson. The division is not made between Senator 
 Swanson and Mr. Shackleford? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. Oh, no. 
 
 Senator Swanson. I mean in any law you suggest for Federal aid 
 I understand your idea was that the money should be first paid for 
 the roads of most general interest in the communities where about 
 75 per cent of the people pass over them ? 
 
 Mr. Shacklefoed. As determined by the great public functionary 
 whom I might hold up an appropriation from if he did not accept 
 my recommendation. 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. He would have to be careful. 
 
 The Chaieman. In improving our present roads or aiding in the 
 construction of new roads, which is the stronger feature? In other 
 words, an improved transportation facility or an increased transpor- 
 tation facility? Which of the two appeals stronger to your mind? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. I would have increased transportation facilities. 
 The question of maintenance is very important. I believe you could 
 make a law covering maintenance as well as construction, and I 
 think the Government could intelligently determine as between the 
 two from time to time, but in my own opinion what we are suffering 
 from now, on the whole, is the lack of good roads. 
 
 The Chaieman. And it is additional transportation facilities we 
 need? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. Additional transportation facilities. 
 
 The Chairman. And additional incentive to the development of 
 our Federal resources; that appeals to you fundamentally? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. I think with the cooperation of the United States 
 Government you will get the maintenance also. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Do you agree with Mr. Noble that the Federal Gov- 
 ernhaent ought to contribute 50 per cent of the cost ? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. I said, when Senator Swanson asked me a question 
 along that line, that I thought it would be a great stimulus and that 
 I had no other way of measuring it at the moment, 
 
 Mr. Madden. That is your opinion now ? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. I really have not thought it out, but I think that basis 
 would be a great stimulus, and I think the Government could afford 
 to proceed on that basis. 
 
 The Chairman. You really think we ought to go that far? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. Well, yes. I should say certainly, to start the propo- 
 sition. 
 
 The Chaieman. How far, in dollars, of annual aid do you think 
 the Government should go? How many millions? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. That I can not say definitely. As I said to Mr. 
 Shackleford a few moments ago, I think the Government should pro- 
 ceed in a conser^^ative way. I think it would be unfortunate for the 
 Government to go headlong into the matter or in any way that would 
 open the matter to abuse and condemnation of the system. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Have you any idea of how much money is expended 
 on the construction of. public highways annually? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. I do not recall at the moment. 1 secured some figures 
 for some addresses I have made, but I can not state them at this time. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Can you say approximately? 
 
 Senator Swanson. About $150,000,000. 
 
28 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. I looked up some figures with regard to our taxes and 
 found that in our last fiscal year our taxes specifically paid for road 
 improvements were a little over $300,000. 
 
 Mr. SHACKUsroED. That is what I meant a little while ago when I 
 suggested to the Senator the railroads are all contributing very 
 largely. 
 
 Mr. F1XIJ5Y. Yes. That does not include the amount of general 
 county taxes assigned to road improvements, but special road taxes. 
 
 Mr. SHACKLEroED. "While we are on that question, do you think of 
 any items out of which we might raise a special road fund, as, for 
 instance, an automobile tax? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. Well, I have not thought about that. I know that 
 State taxes on automobiles are pretty heavy now and I think they 
 may increase from year to year. Pardon me for making a voluntary 
 statement. I heard Mr. Madden ask Mr. Noble a question and I 
 would like to answer it for our railroad. Speaking for our railroad, 
 I do not care where the good roads are built just so long as they are 
 built to meet the real necessities of the situations. I mean by that 
 I do not care whether under those circumstances they parallel our 
 road from one end to the other. I do not regard them as factors in 
 long-distance transportation and I welcome them in connection with 
 the development of the areas surrounding our system. 
 
 iNIr. Madden. If we assume that $150,000,000 are being expended 
 annually now in the construction of roads, would it be fair to as- 
 sume — of course, it would only be a guess — that that would be 
 doubled if the Federal Government contributed half of the amount ? 
 
 Senator Savanson. That amount is spent for maintenance and not 
 for construction. 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. Of course I could not say as to the degree in which 
 it might be further increased, but I think the stimulus would be very 
 great and we would have much greater development than we have 
 had in the past. 
 
 Mr. Madden. I am only asking that in order to get some idea of 
 what the Government would have to contribute, whether $75,000,000 
 of $175,000,000 or $276,000,000. 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. I do not think I would go into such large figures as 
 that to start with. 
 
 ^Ir. Madden. If they are spending $150,000,000 now, and we con- 
 tribute 50 per cent of that amount, that would be $75,000,000. 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. I am not suggesting that the Government should 
 share in all road construction. 
 
 Mr. SHACKLEroED. Do you think it is fair to take the money that 
 is raised on taxes from all of the people and put it on the roads for 
 some of the people? Do you think the people who pay the taxes, or 
 the people generally should participate in the benefits that follow? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. We talk about the high cost of living — nothing would 
 put farm products into consumption in a larger measure than good 
 roads, and I believe it is in the interest of the people at large that 
 this money should be expended. 
 
 The Chaieman. Assuming that we can only assist and aid post 
 roads, and that there are 1,100,000 miles of post roads now in ex- 
 istence we can not say that we will take out 100,000 of that 1,100,000 
 miles, to which we will render Federal aid. We have to render it 
 
GOOD EOADS. 29 
 
 proportionately on some basis of distribution to the whole number of 
 the States who are to participate. 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. In so far as any particular locality is concerned, it 
 will have to be done under a plan of cooperation with the local people. 
 The Chairman. But, so far as the Federal Government is con- 
 cerned, the appropriation would have to be general in its nature and 
 apply to all and subject to designation made by the States in ac- 
 cordance with the conditions attached by the Federal Government. 
 Mr. FiNLEY. That is right. 
 
 Senator Swanson. It is estimated that about $150,000,000 is the 
 amount expended each year in the United States in maintaining 
 public roads. How much of that do you thing is wasted by being 
 improperly expended ? 
 
 Mr. FiNLBY. I think a very large portion of it. 
 The Chairman. Due to what? 
 Mr. FiNLEY. Due to lack of management. 
 The Chairman. How are j'ou going to remedy that ? 
 Mr. FiNLEY. I have suggested publicly on various occasions that 
 it would be to the interest of every county to have a highway engineer 
 who would acquaint himself with the condition of the roads, the ma- 
 terial available for roads, and who Imew something about the build- 
 ing of roads. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. Do you not think that many of the States will 
 remedy the conditions this year? 
 Mr. FiNLEY. Yes. 
 
 The Chairman. How can the Federal .Government rectify that? 
 Could the Government not make the condition that each State should 
 elect a highway engineer before any governmental aid is given to the 
 State? 
 
 Mr. Finley: I could not say as to that specific feature. It should 
 be provided that there shall be proper management and supervision. 
 I think that is very important. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Let me ask you right there, where roads are built 
 under the direction of a township as a unit, as they are in a number 
 of States, and money is raised for the construction of the roads 
 within the township, from taxation from the abutting property own- 
 ers, what influence do you think an engineer would have in forcing 
 the people to tax themselves within the township for the proper 
 building and maintenance of a road ? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. You mean within the towns? 
 
 Mr. Madden. No; the township. For example, a township is 6 
 miles square and any money spent on the road or road construction 
 is raised by the people within the township on the abutting property. 
 If these people did not want to tax themselves no engineer could 
 force them to. 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. No. My reference to the engineer was responsive to 
 the question, as I understood it, whether I thought money was wasted. 
 I said that as to the money available, there ought to be management 
 in the expenditure of it. ^ -, -, ^ 
 
 The Chairman. You do not think the Federal Government can 
 audit accounts or anything of that kind in the way of expenditures? 
 You have to depend on the personnel of the State units and then- 
 integrity, do you not? 
 
30 GOOD BOADS. 
 
 Mr. Fiiv'LEY. Well, I suppose largely, but my ti'aining is such that 
 I should al-n-ays want to audit accounts that reflected the expenditure 
 of money that I was distributing. 
 
 Mr. Shackdefoed. The auditing of some accounts would not be of 
 any benefit unless you audited them all. 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. Well, you could test them from time to time. 
 
 The Chaikman. You are now getting into enormous operations. 
 
 Mr. E'iNLEY. I am speaking somewhat academically on this point. 
 The solution of the matter will have to be worked out, but I have no 
 doubt that when you get to the practical features the idea tliat some 
 have of an enormous organziation will disappear. 
 
 The Chairman. You think it would? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. I think it would. 
 
 The Chaiema>;. When you work it down? 
 
 Mr. FiNLBY. Yes. We have some pretty big problems to handle, 
 and there are some not advised about them who think that it takes 
 an enormous force to handle them in all of their phases. I have 
 heard people say, " How does one man do this or that ? " It is all a 
 question of organization, and not a very large one, outside of those 
 who are working out the details. 
 
 The Chaikmax. You are dealing with one person, however^ and 
 here there are 49 — the 48 States and the Federal Government. 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. That is the difficulty, and I will say that the manage- 
 ment of one particular railroad sinks into comparative insignificance 
 compared with what you are considering here. While it is a large 
 question for the Government, its interests and resources are greater 
 than those of any one railway, and I can only say that I hope the Fed- 
 eral Government will find some way of cooperating reasonably in 
 this matter. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Of course, it would be very much more effective for 
 you to direct how the organization of your railroad could cooperate 
 in all its various branches than it would be for anybody in the Federal 
 Government to direct how it would cooperate in all its various 
 branches with all the State connections, with all the politics that are 
 mixed up in it? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. Yes. sir. It is a much more difficult proposition, but 
 I think the difficulty can be overcome. That is my general view. 
 
 The Chairman. Would you care to express an opinion how far 
 you think the Federal Government should go in the way of an 
 appropriation? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. As I said, I have no particular way of knowing it. 
 I know of one suggestion involving an appropriation of $25,000,000. 
 I have heard suggestions made of $50,000,000 and of greater amounts. 
 I thmk that $25,000,000 is a reasonable amount to start with. 
 
 The Chairman. As a large taxpayer, you would not consider that 
 too large an amount? 
 
 ]\Ir. FiNLEY. No ; I do not think so. I think the importance of the 
 matter overshadows such an amount of money. I think it is one of 
 the most pressing economic problems we have before us. 
 
 Senator Swanson. Have you ever made an estimate as to the cost 
 per ton per mile over any roads along the line of the Southern 
 Railway ? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. We have, but I do not recall it sufficiently clearly to 
 be able to say specifically. Speaking generally, I only wish I could 
 get the same rate per ton per mile for the railroad, or even half of it 
 
GOOD EOADS. 31 
 
 Senator Swanson. Have you the statistics on that? 
 f f^u^^-^" ^ ^^""'^ ^"^7 gotten them from the good roads depart- 
 ment ot the Government from time to time. We had a superintend- 
 ent once who made the remark that if he could do a certain thing 
 he would be ashamed to take the money from the public. If I could 
 get the same rate per ton per mile on the railroad as it is costing on 
 the highways I would be ashamed to take the money. 
 
 Senator Geonna. I believe the average in the United States is 23 
 cents per ton per mile. 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. I think it is ; and we do not average 1 cent per ton per 
 mile. 
 
 Senator Swanson. Do you see any chance of having road develop- 
 ment, such as this country should have, if the taxes for this road con- 
 struction and maintenance are to be paid entirely by the abutting 
 landowners — entirely by the local people ? 
 
 Mr. Fin LEY. I do not think you will get any comprehensive devel- 
 opment. I think it would be very slow, indeed. 
 
 Senator Swanson. Does it prove to vou, then, that where the Fed- 
 eral Government paid half of the construction and the taxpayers 
 paid all to that extent that the city people would be as much inter- 
 ested as the country people? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. I think so. 
 . Senator Swanson. And by having Federal aid to that extent the 
 large cities are building up the rural districts ? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. I think so. The cities have a great deal. We must 
 look after the country fellow at the present time. The city man is 
 getting along all right. 
 
 Senator Swanson. You never heard of any objection in those 
 States where they have State aid for money paid out of the taxes by 
 the city people for rural service? You never heard any objection 
 from the city people? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. I have never heard any from the city people. 
 
 Senator Swanson. You live in Virginia where we appropriate for 
 the convict road force $300,000 out of the State funds. You have 
 heard no complaint from the cities about that? 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. No. I have been living in the country the last year. 
 I know there are convicts at work in my immediate vicinity. 
 
 The Ciiaieman. Is there any further information or suggestion 
 that you can give us. 
 
 Mr. FiNLEY. No. I think of nothing more. 
 
 The Chairman. I want to thank you on behalf of the committee. 
 
 At the conclusion of Mr. Finley's testimony he was requested by the 
 committee to prepare and submit further suggestions as to a plan of 
 cooperation by the Federal Government in road improvement within 
 the States. In compliance with this request he submitted the follow- 
 ing as the result of his more mature consideration : 
 
 It is generally agreed, I believe, that, with the exception of a few roads so 
 situated with respect to military posts, national cemeteries, etc., that they 
 properly come under the head of military roads, the only country highways in 
 the construction and maintenance of which the Federal Government may con- 
 stitutionally participate are post roads — those used for the carriage of the 
 mails In star-route and rural-delivery service. It is reasonable, therefore, that 
 in apportioning among the States any money that may be appropriated by Con- 
 gress for the construction and maintenance of post roads, the mileage of such 
 roads in each State shall be one of the factors to be considered in deciding upon 
 a basis for apportionment. 
 
32 GOOD KOADS. 
 
 In my opinion. Congress may also seek to promote the general welfare by 
 such a modification of an apportionment based on mileage of post roads as will 
 tend to result In the improvement of those roads over which traflBc is heaviest. 
 Many factors contribute to differences in traffic density. One of these, and 
 perhaps the only one that it is practicable to take into consideration without 
 making a detailed investigation, is population. 
 
 Considering, therefore, on the one hand, the benefits to the Government in 
 the improvement of post roads and, on the other hand, the promotion of the 
 general welfare through benefiting the largest number of people, I am unable to 
 suggest a method of apportionment that would be more equitable than that of 
 apportioning such amounts as may be appropriated by Congress first in the 
 ratio which the mileage of star routes and rural-delivery routes of each State 
 shall bear to the total mileage of such routes in the United States, and, secondly, 
 in the ratio that the population of each State shall bear to the total population 
 of the United States as shown by the last census. 
 
 As I said, in substance, in the hearing before the joint committee, I believe 
 that it will be to the advantage of the Government to embark on the policy of 
 Federal aid conservatively and, as I may say, feel its way. The amount gener- 
 ally discussed at the hearing — $25,000,000 — would seem to be adequate for the 
 Initial appropriation. Without giving an excessive amount to any one State 
 under the system of apportionment suggested it would give enough to each 
 State to enable the general policy to be tested in a substantial way under the 
 varying conditions of the several States. 
 
 In determining the proportion that Federal expenditures in each State should 
 bear to the local expenditures, I believe it will be wise to make the proportion 
 such as will leave a considerable amount of the cost of road improvement to be 
 defrayed by the States or their civil subdivisions and yet large enough to be of 
 substantial benefit and so to stimulate local expenditures as to insure vigorous 
 prosecution of the work. In my opinion, the provision that one-half of the cost 
 shall be defrayed from the Federal appropriation would accomplisli these 
 results. 
 
 While appreciating the very great importance of road maintenance the present 
 need for road improvement is so grent that I venture to suggest that, for the 
 immediate future, at leaf?t, not more than 10 per cent of the amount allotted to 
 any State shall be used for maintenance. 
 
 As bearing on the point raised in the hearing that there might be favoritism 
 shown in the selection of the specific roads to be improve'! within a given State, 
 I suggest, on further reflection, that so far as the Federal Government is con- 
 cerned, it should deal only with the State and not with any subdivision and 
 that responsibility for the selection of the roads to be improved should be made 
 to rest on some officer or officers of the State government. Then, if the selection 
 made shall not be pleasing to the people of the State they will have it in their 
 power to replace the officer or officers who may be resiiousible. In my opinion, 
 the director of the office of public roads, after satisfying liimself that a road 
 recommended for improvement by State authority is a post road, within the 
 meaning of the law. should not go into the question of the relative desirability 
 of improving it. He should, however, have absolute and final authority to pass 
 on the plans of the proposed improvement before authorizing tlie expenditure 
 of any amount of the Federal appropriation on it. 
 
 In the interest of simplifying the dealings of the Federal Government witli 
 the States in this matter, it must be apparent that uniform organization and 
 legislation in all of the States would be desirable. I take the liberty of sug- 
 gesting, therefore, that the director of the office of public roads be authorized 
 to submit to the governor of each State the draft of a uniform law containing 
 such provisions as would tend to simplify cooperation between the State and 
 Federal Government and to bring about economy in administration and effi- 
 ciency of supervision. 
 
 The present lack of a greater mileage of improved country highways in the 
 United States is, I believe, largely the result of inadequate supervision of tlie 
 expenditures of money and labor that have been made on them. I believe, 
 therefore, that in the administration of any legislation that may be enacted 
 by Congress too much care can not be taken to insure intelligent supervision 
 of all work to which the Federal Government may contribute. It may be well 
 to provide by law that before Federal aid shall be given to any project the 
 Director <.f tlie Office of Public Roads shall be satisfied that all parts of the 
 work will he carried out under adequate and competent supervision. Tb's would 
 
GOOD EOADS. 33 
 
 greatly lessen the amount of supervision and inspection that would have to be 
 •done directly by the OfHce of Public Roads. With competent supervision over 
 each project a single inspector from .the Office of Public Roads should, I believe, 
 be able to exercise such general supervision as might be required as to the 
 projects in a large extent of territory. 
 
 I think that, in line with the suggestion made during the hearing before the 
 joint committee the mail carriers using roads that had been improved might 
 be required to report ou their condition at stated intervals — say, quarterly — 
 those reports to be forwarded through the proper channel to the Director of 
 the Office of Public Roads, who, when a report indicated that maintenance on 
 any road had fallen below standard, could direct the inspector in whose terri- 
 tory it might be to make an inspection and send in a report to the Office of 
 Public Roads, sending a duplicate copy to the proper officer of the State. 
 
 In addition to being satisfied that work is being done properly, I believe that 
 the Federal Government should be advised as to the expenditure of all money 
 contributed in aid of road improvement within tlie States. I take the liberty 
 of suggesting, therefore, that .'inch legislation as may be enacted should contain 
 a provision for the auditing of all accounts by details made from the office of 
 the proper auditor of the United States Treasury Department. I believe that 
 by properly systematizing this work it could be done by relatively a small 
 organization. 
 
 STATEMENT OF MR. GEORGE W. COOLEY, 
 
 The Chairman. Kindly state your name, age, residence, and occu- 
 pation. 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. Age, 68; engineer of the Highway Commission of 
 the State of Minnesota. 
 
 The Chairman. Will you, in your own way, make such sugges- 
 tions as you think would be of importance to us in the study of the 
 subject of Federal aid to good roads? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. Mr. Chairman, during the past 5 or 10 years I have 
 looked on this matter from the standpoint of my own State — Minne- 
 sota. It has occurred to me that a national organization could be 
 founded on about the same line as our State organization. For in- 
 stance, we have a highway commission appointed by the governor, 
 consisting of three members. That commission is nonpartisan and 
 a nonpaid commission. The commission at the present time has the 
 distribution of a fund of about $340,000 a year. 
 
 The Chairman. How is that fund raised ? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. By a tax levy of a quarter of a mill, in addition to 
 which we have 5 per cent on the sales of Government lands and 
 the interest on our internal improvement land fund, which gives us 
 this year for distribution about $350,000. The State authorizes the 
 distribution of that money among the different counties, of which 
 we have 86, on a basis to be determined practically by the members 
 of the highway commission. The law requires we shall take into 
 consideration the area of the county, the population, the facilities for 
 construction of highways, and the amount generally expended by 
 the counties. It is an arbitrary division, and we experimented one 
 time — about five years ago — with a division of the funds on a specific 
 basis ; that is, based partly on the road mileage, partly on the valua- 
 tion, partly on the population, and then an arbitrary factor of neces- 
 sity. We found that after we had figured that oiit very carefully, 
 it came to just about the amount that we had figxired on as giving 
 to the counties, without reference to these specific factors. 
 
 The Chaiejian. On what basis of distribution — simply acreage 
 and population? 
 
 79558— FT 1—13 3 
 
34 GOOD BOADS. 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. Acreage, population, road mileage, etc. 
 
 The Chairman. Those were the factors ? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. Those were the principal factors. 
 
 The Chairman. Did you allow an equal amount for each ? 
 
 Mr. CodLEY. No. I have forgotten now just what percentage we 
 allowed to each, but I think we gave the greater factor to the road 
 mileage. I have forgotten just exactly what the factors were. That 
 division we make is made every year, the money is set aside at a 
 certain time of the year, and each county, in order to avail itself of 
 it, must put up just as much money; that is, if we give to a county 
 $7,500 or $4,000, that county must during the year spend the same 
 amount on what are called or designated State roads. 
 
 The Chairman. Who designates them ? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. The county commissioners of each county have the 
 right to designate any road as a State road. 
 
 The Chairman. Subject to your approval? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. No, sir; not under the present law, but we are trying 
 to change the law and make it subject to the approval of the highway 
 commission. At present we have about 79,000 miles of road, of 
 which about half, I think, are post roadsj and of that 79,000 miles, 
 I think, we have about from 8 to 10 per cent that are improved. We 
 require that all money expended on State roads shall be met by an 
 equal amount of the county funds, and that the counties bind them- 
 selves to keep them in good condition wherever State money is 
 expended. 
 
 The Chairman. Subject to whose determination? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. Subjeet to the determination of the highway commis- 
 sion. 
 
 The Chairman. How do the counties bind themselves to do that ? 
 
 Mr.- CooLEY. By resolutions of the county board. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Then, what if they failed to do it? 
 
 Mr. CoonEY. If they fail to do it, we remember that at the next 
 allotment and give them a reduced amount. That is one factor we 
 are using now in the distribution of this fund,' the care which the 
 counties take of their roads, and we receive quite frequently reports 
 from the rural carriers, and whenever there is a complaint made that 
 is sure to reach us through the postmaster of the office through which 
 he serves. In that way we have a pretty general oversight over all 
 of our road matters, and it has occurred to me that a national com- 
 mission might be organized somewhat on the same basis. 
 
 The Chairman. Is it your idea that there ought to be a national 
 commission ? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. That is my idea ; yes, sir. 
 
 The Chairman. How would you say the national commission 
 should be made up ? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. Well, in my own way I figured out that it should con- 
 sist of the Secretary of Agriculture, the Director of the Office of Pub- 
 lic Eoads, at least one engineer, and two other citizens. 
 
 The Chairman. These men ought to be under pay? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. Well, I suppose some of them could not serve without 
 pay. The duties of the engineer of a commission of that kind would 
 be somewhat onerous, and I should judge he would have to be paid, 
 and I should judge the two civilian members of the board would have 
 to be compensated for their services. 
 
GOOD ROADS. 35 
 
 The Chairman. Do you think the commission ought to have a 
 sufficient force to inspect the roads to which the Government con- 
 tributed ? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. Not to make a thorough inspection. I think that 
 might very safely be left to the highway commissions of the different 
 States. Of course we have more information than the national com- 
 mission would have; for instance, I have in my employ now about 
 5.0 engineers, giving one to every two counties in the State approxi- 
 mately — some have three and some one. 
 
 The Chairman. You have 50 engineers for an expenditure of 
 $300,000 a year? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. No, sir. We expend with our force now somewhere 
 in the neighborhood of $2,500,000. 
 
 The Chairman. I thought you said your commission had jurisdic- 
 tion over only $350,000. 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. We have the jurisdiction over the expenditure of 
 all the money. The counties spend somewhere in the neighborhood 
 of one million and a quarter each year outside of the State roads. 
 
 The Chairman. You have jurisdiction over them? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. I have jurisdiction over them, so far as drawing the 
 plans and specifications and acceptance of the work is concerned. 
 
 The Chairman. And you have 50 engineers for an expenditure 
 of two million and a half, all told ? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. Yes, sir. 
 
 The Chairman. If the Federal Government expends $250,000,000, 
 how many men would it require ? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. Possibly one for each State. That is a matter which 
 is difficult to determine just now. It depends largely on the high- 
 way commissions in the different States. We are furnishing that 
 work now, and we might be, to a certain extent, agents of the Gov- 
 ernment's commission. 
 
 The Chairman. Would you recommend that State commissions 
 be made special agents of the Federal Government? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. To a certain extent; yes, sir. I think that the State 
 commissions should submit to the national commission a proposition 
 for the location of certain roads on which national money should 
 be expended. I do not think it would be advisable to expend the 
 national fund over all the roads in the county or in a State. 
 
 The Chairman. I understand under your system the counties 
 themselves designate what roads they will improve ? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. The counties have heretofore designated what roads 
 should be improved; yes, sir. We have just passed an amendment 
 to the Constitution, authorizing the legislature to levy a tax of a 
 mill, which will give a fund in 1914 of about a million and a third, 
 somewhere in the neighborhood of $1,300,000. The allotment to 
 some of the counties then will be more than some of these counties 
 can raise, so we propose to modify our requirements by allowing 
 some counties, under certain conditons, to expend only 20, 30, 40, 
 and up to 50 per cent, the State paying the balance. At the present 
 time and during the years 1911 and 1912 the State paid 50 per 
 cent. Before that they paid one-third. 
 
 Mr. Madden. What is your idea as to the total cost oi construc- 
 tion and maintenance that should be paid by the Federal Govern- 
 ment? 
 
36 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. I have always had an idea that about 50 per cent 
 would be right, and that is the idea that the people m the Western 
 States generally have. During the past 10 or 15 years, while we 
 have been conducting quite an extensive propaganda, the people 
 have been gradually led up to the idea that the Government would 
 some day contribute about 50 per cent of the cost of the road. 
 
 Mr. Madden. What led them to think 50 per cent was a proper 
 ratio? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. I could not say as to that. 
 
 Mr. Madden. How does it happen everybody agrees on 50 per 
 cent ? 
 
 Mr. Coolet. It has been generally talked of, and that is all. We 
 have not anvthing to base it on, and you might as well call it 30, 
 40, or 50. ■ 
 
 Mr. Lee. What character of roads are you building? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. Building earth roads, mostly. Where we improve, 
 we improve with gravel, and occasionally with macadam. Now we 
 are going into the concrete business. We are building three roads 
 of concrete now, and we have plans made ready to build in the 
 spring six more roads, aggregating, possibly, 120 miles. 
 
 Mr. Madden. What does it cost to build the roads? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. Building a dirt road depends, of course, on the 
 amount of earth removed. It would cost from $500 to $1,000. Our 
 gravel roads cost from $500 to $2,000, depending on the distance 
 we have to haul the material. Our macadam roads cost from $5,000 
 to $6,000 a mile. 
 
 Mr. Madden. How do you keep them in repair? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. We have adopted a system there of what we call 
 road patrols. We hire a man for about $50 or $55 a month, and 
 give him a section of 5, 7, 8, or 10 miles of road, and keep him on 
 the job all the time during the open season, with a wheelbarrow and 
 a kit of tools. We require towns and counties to provide a team 
 and wagon whenever necessary to haul gravel and haul a drag, or 
 anything of that kind. AVhen the season closed last fall we had 
 about 40 of those men under pay, and they were doing excellent 
 work. 
 
 The Chairman. They were given from 5 to 10 miles each, and I 
 understood you to say you had 79,000 miles of road. 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. Yes ; but they are not all improved roads. 
 
 The Chairman. Ten per cent of the 79,000 miles is improved ? 
 
 Mr. CooLET. Yes. 
 
 The Chairman. This only applies to improved roads ? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. Only applies to improved roads and they must be 
 post roads. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. How many miles of improved roads have you ? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. We figure about 10 per cent, which would amount to 
 about 8,000 miles. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Ten miles to a man would be 400 miles. 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. Yes; they would not begin to cover the mileage of 
 the improved roads. 
 
 Senator Swanson. Did you go abroad and spend some months 
 there last summer for the Minnesota Commission ? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. I did about three vears ago. 
 
uuuju koaus. 37 
 
 Senator Swanson. Could you tell us what your impressions were 
 as to the difference in method of construction here and abroad and 
 to what extent their system could be applied successfully here? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. I discovered one thing that I never knew before, and 
 that is that their roads, as a rule, are no better than ours in construc- 
 *^T' j^^ ^^^ value of the European roads depends largely on their 
 splendid system of maintenance. They are always maintaining their 
 roads, or keepmg them up, and it was there that I took hold of this 
 system of road patrols. In the Scandinavian countries, where I 
 thmk they have the most substantial roads in the world, the roads 
 are mamtamed there to a large extent by the abutting property hold- 
 ers, who work out their taxes, not exactly as we work them out here. 
 We generally get 15 or 20 per cent of the value, but they work them 
 out on a contract basis. The roads are nearly all of stone, either 
 stone or gravel, and they break the stone at odd times on the farm, 
 the old man, the old woman, and the boy, who can not do anything 
 else, and they haul it and deliver it in piles along the road, and that 
 is paid for on inspection by a certificate from the county engineer, 
 and with that they pay their taxes ; in that way they work out their 
 taxes on the road the same as we do, but they do' it on" a practical basis 
 and they get the full benefit of it. The roads are always in good 
 condition, but, of course, they have been building them for a long time. 
 That, I think, is the secret of the good condition of the European 
 roads — the question of maintenance. I do not think any proposition 
 should be considered at all that did not involve a comprehensive 
 system of maintenance. 
 
 Mr. Shacklefoed. I want to ask you about the maintenance of 
 your earth roads. How many times a year do you drag one of those 
 dirt roads? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. We have no particular system. That is left to the 
 towns and counties, and they do it when thej'^ get a chance and when 
 the roads are in a suitable condition, generally after a rain. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. Are many of them kept in good condition ? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. There are a few. A good many of our cities, like 
 Crookston, Mankato, and one or two others, have adopted a plan 
 whereby they contribute, through the boards of trade and commercial 
 clubs, sufficient money to drag the roads after a heavy rain on the 
 main thoroughfares leading to those cities. They do that for their 
 own benefit. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. In doing that, what sort of a road do they 
 maintain ? 
 
 Mr. Cooley. a common dirt road. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. In what condition is it ? 
 
 Mr. Cooley. In fairly good condition. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. In condition for travel at all times ? 
 
 Mr. Cooley. Yes. If it is neglected right after a rain it gets 
 pretty muddy, but as a rule they maintain them in pretty good shape. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. What do you say of the possibilities of keep- 
 ing an earth road sufficiently dragged to make it a good road all the 
 time? 
 
 Mr. Cooley. It depends on what you call a good road. We have 
 taken a piece of road in the Red River country, where we have what 
 
38 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 we call a black gumbo, a very soft and sticky soil, and I built a 
 small road up there several years ago and rounded it up and made a 
 split-log drag, all made of square timbers. I left those drags with 
 the superintendent of the agricultural experiment station at Crook- 
 ston. He maintained that road, a section of about three-quarters of 
 a mile, in good condition for four or five years— until he' died — in such 
 condition that it never was criticized as being in bad shape. 
 
 Mr. Shacklefoed. Was it ever impassable because of mud ? 
 
 Mr. CooLET. Never impassable. The main point in the dragging 
 is to allow the water to run off before it soaks into the road, and we 
 did that at an expense of about $5 per mile per year, and the Crooks- 
 ton Commercial Club is conducting the same operation on the roads 
 leading into their city at a cost of $6 per mile per year. 
 
 Mr. Shacklefoed! Suppose you spend $25 or $30 per mile per 
 year; what sort of a road could you maintain for that? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. Well, you could not maintain a much better road, if 
 it was a common earth road, with $25 per mile per year, than you 
 could with $5 or $6 per mile per year, because it is simply a matter 
 of dragging after a rain that tends to keep it in good shape. But 
 you could utilize some of that money in cutting away weeds and mak- 
 ing permanent improvements. 
 
 Mr. Madden. As an experienced roadman, would yovi think it wise, 
 just, or economical for the Federal Government to cooperate in the 
 building and maintenance of such a road as you describe ? 
 
 Mr. CooLET. Well, I do not know. That question of maintenance 
 seems to me ought to be brought down to the people. I am inclined 
 to think they ought to be called on to maintain their own roads. I 
 do not believe the Government should go into that for the reason it 
 would require too cumbersome a commission. It would be difficult to 
 satisfy a Government commission that the money had been properly 
 expended. I think that the Government's etforts should be confined 
 entireh' to questions of construction, leaving the question of main- 
 tenance to the counties or State. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Would you consider it good construction to put the 
 kind of a road you ha^-e described into passable shape? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. Yes : as a matter of construction I think it would. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Such character of construction as would justify Fed- 
 eral aid? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. Yes, sir; because all of our roads that are graveled 
 or macadamized must pass through the state of common-earth roads 
 first. First they must be graded down, widened out, and put in 
 shape, and I do not know but what that is proper for Government 
 assistance. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Would not that be part of the construction work? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. It would be construction work. 
 
 Mr. Madden. I mean putting the road into the kind of shape you 
 suggest now without building a road on the foundation that you have 
 already prepared. Would you consider that road construction? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. Yes. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Or just pre))aration for road construction? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. It would be road construction, the same as grading 
 the roadbed for a railroad before the rails are put on. 
 
GOOD KOADS. 39 
 
 Mr. Madden. If the road was-maintainecl in that condition for any 
 considerable period of time would you still consider it road con- 
 struction ? 
 
 Mr. CooL,EY. No, sir ; not after the road was first built. But if we 
 want to build a macadam road or a concrete road or a gravel road we 
 must first build the roadbed. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Yes; but would not that come in at the same time? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. The construction would ; yes, sir. It would all be 
 done at once. 
 
 Senator Geonna. The condition of a dirt road depends largely 
 upon the system of drainage, does it not ? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. Depends very largely upon the system of drainage; 
 yes, sir. 
 
 Senator Swanson. What would be your idea as to Federal aid, the 
 conditions under which it should be given, and so forth ? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. Well, I think, as I said before, that it should be about 
 50 per cent, and it should be expended on certain previously desig- 
 nated roads. I outlined a plan of roads comprising about 2 per cent 
 of our total mileage, about 1,600 miles, and submitted that to our 
 commission for their consideration at the last meeting, and we ap- 
 proved it as a proposition, to be submitted to a national commission 
 m case one was appointed, as proper subjects for State aid. 
 
 Senator Swanson. What would it take to put that 1,600 miles of 
 road in good condition? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. Well, it could be graded and bridged, I suppose, for 
 somewhere in the neighborhood of $1,500 a mile, perhaps $1,000, 
 but not surfaced with gravel, except in some cases where the gravel 
 is handy. 
 
 Senator Swanson. In that 1,600 miles some is of such a character 
 that you would not insist on it being surfaced ? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. No. The material is good enough for an ordinary 
 road in some portions of it. Some of it could be surfaced and 
 graveled at a cost of from $500 per mile up. 
 
 Mr. Madden. How high the cost depends on whether you put on 
 3 inches or 12 inches. 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. Our standard is 6 inches of gravel, 16 feet wide. 
 
 Senator Swanson. Are those 1,600 miles the main traveled roads 
 of the State? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. They are the main traveled roads now, and in one or 
 two cases are gradually becoming so. 
 
 Senator Swanson. If the Federal Government was to give you 
 to improve that 1,600 miles of road, bridge it, and macadamize it, 
 half a million dollars a year, and you would furnish a like amount, 
 how long would it be before that road would be in good condition? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. We could not put up any such amount. Of course, 
 1,600 miles, at $1,000 a mile, would be $1,600,000. 
 
 Senator Swanson. You would not expect to do it in one year. In 
 three years, with Federal aid, based on the Federal Government 
 furnishino' half, and you would furnish half, those 1,600 miles of 
 road woufd be in splendid condition. 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. I would not say splendid condition, but m good 
 traveling condition. 
 
40 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 Senator Swanson. You think it would give a very good and 
 splendid development there for the rural sections ? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. I think so. 
 
 The Chairman. What would the people on the other 77,000 miles 
 have to say, in the meantime, when nothing was being done on their 
 roads? 
 
 Mr. CooLBY. We have State roads distributed all over the State. 
 
 The- Chairman. You would take the 1,600 miles of the 79,000 
 and make your improvement on those, and then distribute all over 
 the State? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. That is the idea. 
 
 Senator Swanson. Out of those 1,600 miles you ,have already 
 designated there will be hardly a section in Minnesota that would 
 hardly be benefited. 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. They will all be benefited directly and indirectly. 
 I noticed our city people have never made any complaint on the 
 ground of their paying more money out than they get in, because 
 our cities comprise about 60 per cent of the valuation, and conse- 
 quently pay about 60 per cent of the taxes, and none of it is expended 
 inside of the cities or villages. 
 
 Senator Swanson. How much do your State and local authorities 
 furnish annually for that 1,600 miles of road ? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. Well, I could not tell you that. The work is done 
 in a haphazard sort of fashion. 
 
 Senator Savanson. On that 1,600 miles of road for the next 12 
 months, do you suppose the expenditure of labor, effort, money, and 
 improvements would amount to half a million dollars ? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. No, sir. 
 
 Senator Swanson. It would not amount to that? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. No, sir. 
 
 Senator Swanson. If the Federal Government was to give half a 
 million dollars to your State, and they would increase that amount, 
 do you think within three or four years these roads could be put into 
 good condition? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. I think so. 
 
 Mr. Shackleeord. You have a map here showing those roads? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. Yes, sir; I think I have. 
 
 Mr. Siiackleford. How would that provide for Rock County? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. That is away down in the southwest corner of the 
 State and would connect with the main system by laterals. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. "\'\1iat would your system do for Rock County? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. Nothing directly, but by laterals. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. What Avould it do for Nobles County? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. The same as for Rock, by lateral connections. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. "Wliat would it do for Faribault County? 
 
 Mr. Cooley. The same as for Rock and Nobles. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. What would it do for Fillmore County? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. The same as for Rock and Nobles. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. What would it do for Houston ? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. Same as for other southern counties. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. And while the people in these counties would 
 be taxed to raise the money, that money would be distributed among 
 the other counties in which you propose to build the roads? 
 
GOOD EOADS. 41 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. Yes, sir ; and several other counties the system would 
 not touch. You could not devise a system that would take them 
 all in. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. Would not that bring out the criticism of 
 taxing all the people for building a few fancy roads for some of 
 the people? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. I do not think so. 
 
 The Chairman. Has it caused any irritation among people who 
 are not getting those State roads? 
 
 Mr. CooLET. No, sir. 
 
 Senator Swanson. What is the condition in those counties where 
 the State has made no effort to build roads? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. Well, it is impossible to pass through all of the 
 counties. We have devised in this system four north-and-south 
 roads and three east-and-west roads. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. Some of these counties I have named have 
 good communities and good towns in them? 
 
 Mr. CooDEY. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. Madden. I understand you to say, in answer to a question by 
 Senator Swanson, that the designation of this 1,600 miles of road 
 did not have much eflfect on every citizen in the State ? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. Directly or indirectly. 
 
 Mr. Madden. What about these counties that it does not touch. 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. We have, in addition to these roads here, a system 
 of State roads running into these counties and feeding these main 
 roads. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. Who builds these feeder roads? 
 
 Mr. Coou5Y. They are built partly by the State and partly by 
 the communities. The State pays one-half of any work done on 
 the State roads. Here is a photograph of our State map and these 
 medium black lines are the roads designated as main roads. 
 
 Senator Gronna. Are the railroads satisfied with your system of 
 building roads? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. Yes, sir. They are so well satisfied they give us a 
 free haul on 600 cars of broken stone, hauled an average of 100 
 
 miles. 
 
 Senator Swanson. Of course there would be objection to any 
 place you would locate a road. Does the system you devised there 
 produce general satisfaction in your State? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. I think so. Senator. I was just going to call the 
 attention of the committee to the fact that while these 1,600 miles 
 can not serve all portions of the State we have another system out- 
 side of that that serves every one of these counties. These medium 
 black lines represent State roads and there is a system running all 
 
 the way through. _ . , ,-, , i j. -r. j 
 
 Senator Swanson. If an appropriation should be made tor l^ed-- 
 eral aid and the amount that would come to Minnesota would be 
 half a million dollars, what would be your idea as to the wisest, 
 best, and most efficient way to administer that and get results? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. The amount is larger than we could use. 
 
 Senator Swanson. Suppose you could use that amount? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. The best way I think that money could be used would 
 be to" arrange with the highway commission for the establishment 
 
42 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 of a system upon which to expend the money first. Then I thinii 
 the national commission, or whoever had charge of the Govern- 
 ment expenditures in connection with the State highway commis- 
 sions of the different States or the State highway commission of 
 our State, should decide on a general plan and specifications for 
 the construction of roads; that is, jointly, having a joint interest 
 in the matter, and they should establish certain conditions, the 
 grade line and surfacing, so as to best accommodate the travel and 
 suit the interests involved. Then I think the State should let all 
 contracts for doing that work, subject, of course, to the a_pproval of 
 the Federal commission, and I think the Federal commission need 
 not be burdened with the continuous inspection of that work. I do 
 not think there is any need for continual inspection by the Govern- 
 ment, because we have 40 or 50 assistant engineers and our men are 
 familiar with the country ; they know best what to devise in the 
 matter of construction and they can be intrusted with that, and if 
 not, we will have to drop them out. 
 
 Senator Swanson. You think the proper plan would be for the 
 initiation to be with the State, with the approval of the Federal 
 authorities ? 
 Mr. CooLEY. Yes. 
 
 The Chairman. Do you try to work out any general plan to build 
 roads for the whole number of counties in your State ? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. We haven't quite reached that. We have not a well- 
 defined plan or the cost. 
 
 The Chairman. Can a plan be evolved, and is one applicable to 
 your whole State? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. I think it would have to be modified to suit existing 
 conditions, as, for instance, we have 10,000 square miles of country 
 that is practically undeveloped, and we have certain men in certain 
 portions of this country who go to market only twice a year — once 
 on snowshoes and once in a canoe. This map will show there are 
 very few State roads in there. This is the territory in through here 
 [pointing at map]. That country is gradually developing, and we 
 are encouraging the opening up of new roads wherever we can. 
 
 The Chairman. The plan is to improve your present road system 
 rather than to add new roads up in here? [Pointing.] 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. We have seldom had new roads. The proposition is, 
 the State owns about 2,000,000 acres of land and there, will be a 
 proposition presented to the present legislature asking for an appro- 
 priation to open up and develop new territory by cutting new roads 
 through. That means new earth roads. 
 
 The CiiAiRiMAN. Then the way the good-roads matter appears to 
 you it IS better to improve the transportation facilities you already 
 have than to extend the present system? 
 
 Mr. CooLEY. Rather than to extend the present system, except it 
 may be that in this undeveloped portion of the State we are to assist 
 in the development and the opening of the country. 
 
 The Chairman. Before we adjourn I should like to sav to you 
 gentlemen who are present that we will be very glad to receive any 
 written statements you may care to submit bearing on this question 
 and I would ask you to send them in as soon as possible and address 
 them to me, so that they will all get into the committee's hands 
 
GOOD KOADS. 43 
 
 STATEMENT OF HOKACE ATKISSON. 
 
 At the request of Senator Overman I will direct that the following 
 discussion of the constitutional problems involved be inserted in the 
 record : 
 
 THE EXPRESS POWER OF CONGRESS UNDER THE CONSTITUTION TO CONSTRUCT 
 
 POST ROADS. 
 
 [By Horace Atklsson, of the Washington City Bar.l 
 
 From tlie early history of national road building in the United States, and 
 the debates in Congress as to the power of the General Government under the 
 Constitution to construct roads from one State to another, as well as from the 
 writings of the few authors who have undertaken to explain the meaning of 
 this feature of the Constitution, it appears that the whole question hinged upon 
 the implied power given to Congress to constrrct roads and canals and improve 
 harbors and watercourses for the general welfare and for the common defense; 
 and that the express power to establish post offices and post roads received little, 
 if any, attention in the controversy. 
 
 Roads were then considered merely as internal improvements, and the ques- 
 tion of their construction was therefore placed on the same footing as the im- 
 provement of rivers and harbors. The question of their use for the convenient 
 transportation of malls hardly entered into the discussion at all. 
 
 This question of internal improvements had arisen before the adoption of the 
 Constitution in 1787, negotiations having taken place between different States in 
 regard to undertakings of this sort, such as the construction of roads and 
 canals and the improvement of rivers and harbors which would be to their 
 mutual advantage. In the Federalist, No. 14, Madisoti himself pointed out 
 how greatly the Union would be strengthened in the future in this way. 
 
 In 1806, during Jefferson's administration, a bill was passed for the construc- 
 tion of a national road from Cumberland in Maryland to a point in the State 
 of Ohio; but a bill for the preservation of this road was vetoed by Monroe in 
 1821 as being unconstitutional, although he recommended an amendment to 
 the Constitution giving Congress the power to make improvements for great 
 national purposes. 
 
 Jefferson, Madison, and Monroe favored internal improvements, but denied 
 that the Constitution gave Congress the express power to make them, although 
 Madison, in his message of December 3, 1816, spoke expressly of the " existing 
 powers " of Congress which needed only " enlargement." On March 14, 1818, a 
 resolution was passed by the House of Representatives that Congress had the 
 power to appropriate money for the construction of roads and canals and for the 
 improvement of watercourses. 
 
 In opposition to this power of Congress there was much "quibbling over words 
 and legal technicalities " and much " reasoning in circles." For example, in 
 his message of 1823, vetoing the appropriation for the improvement of the 
 Cumberland Road, Monroe contended that the "building of the Cumberland 
 Road had been originally commenced and so far executed under the power 
 vested in Congress to make appropriations for the public welfare." Under this 
 he claimed that. " while Congress could not make the roads, it could appropriate 
 money in aid of their construction." Clay declared it absolutely inadmissible 
 to appeal to this particular right, because "the appropriation of money is a 
 result and not a cause." 
 
 Another contention raised by those in opposition to this power of Congress 
 was that it would be taking jurisdiction by the Federal Government over a large 
 extent of territory belonging to the States in violation of the rights of those 
 States There was much needless debate on this phase of the question ; and 
 much undue importance was attached to it, for the reason that even those who 
 were most strongly inclined to the view that Congress had such power 
 to make internal improvements, at the same time conceded that it must be done 
 witTthe consent of the State, just as the consent of the State is necessary to 
 the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, and docks. However, Clay, m 1818, 
 contended that the States and the Federal Government had concurrent rights 
 of eminent domain, which entitled them to make roads and even to seize private 
 prop^rtv fo7 such purposes, provided an equivalent was paid therefor. In 
 
44 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 making this contention, he relied on the fifth amendment to the Constitution: 
 "Private property shall not be taken without just compensation." In this 
 view he was supported by Mr. Cushman, of New York, and j\Ir. Lowndes, of 
 South Carolina, the latter claiming, however, that only an emergency would 
 justify such an act and that the necessity should be determined by the Govern- 
 ment itself. 
 
 Some rather vague ideas on the subject seemed to prevail in Congress, if one 
 may judge from a vote taken on March 14, 1818. By 90 to 75 votes It was de- 
 cided that Congress could appropriate money for the construction of roads and 
 canals; by 84 to 82 that it had not the right to construct post and military 
 roads; and by 83 to to 81 that it could construct canals for military purposes. 
 
 In the inaugural address of President John Quincy Adams, on the 4th of 
 March, 1825, he alluded to this question, and his opinion seemed to be in favor 
 of the constitutional right and of the policy and wisdom of the liberal applica- 
 tion of the national resources to the internal improvement of the country. He 
 intimated that speculative scruples on this subject would probably be soothed by 
 the practical blessings resulting from the application of the power, and the 
 extent and limitations of the General Government in relation to this important 
 interest settled and acknowledged to the satisfaction of all. Says Chancellor 
 Kent, Vol. I, page 268 ; " This declaration may be considered as withdrawing the 
 influence of the official authority of the President from the side on which it 
 has hitherto pressed, and adding it to the support of the preponderating opin- 
 ion in favor of the competency of the power claimed by Congress." 
 
 Three bills for Government subscription to the Maysville Turnpike Road 
 were passed and vetoed by President Jackson in 1830 ; but it soon appeared 
 that he laid claim only to the right to decide in each particular case whether 
 or not the matter was properly a national undertaking, and whether the use of 
 Federal resources was expedient. (Niles Register, XL, 106.) 
 
 President Jackson, in 1830, declared himself to be of the opinion that Con- 
 gress did not possess th^ power to construct roads and canals, or appropriate 
 money for improvements of a local character ; but he admitted that the right 
 to make appropriations for such as were of a national character had been so 
 generally acted upon and so long acquiesced in as to justify the exercise of it on 
 the ground of continued usage. He objected, upon that distinction, to the 
 bills authorizing subscription to the Maysville and Rockville Road Cos. 
 as not being within the legitimate powers of Congress, those roads being con- 
 fined within the boundaries of a single State, Kentucky. 
 
 During all this time the constitutional question did not progress an inch, but 
 one internal improvement after another was undertalcen, and the system was 
 constantly pushed further and further. The same objections that were raised 
 to the construction of roads by the Federal Government were raised against 
 the improvement of rivers and harbors and to the same extent. In 1846 Presi- 
 dent Polk vetoed a bill for the improvement of rivers and harbors on the ground 
 that it was unconstitutional. In 1847, the House of Representatives resolved 
 by a large majority that the General Government has the power to improve 
 harbors and rivers for the advantage of commerce and for the common defense. 
 
 Still we hear little or no mention of the undoubted power of Congress to con- 
 struct post roads by force of the express power given to it in Article I, section 
 8, of the Constitution : " Congress shall have power to establish post offices and 
 post roads." 
 
 Upon the construction of this clause of the Constitution two opposite opinions 
 have been expressed. One maintains that the power to establish post offices 
 and post roads can intend no more than the power to direct where post offices 
 shall be kept and on what roads the mails shall be carried. Or, as it has been 
 on other occasions expressed, the power to establish post roads i& a power to 
 designate or point out what roads shall be mall roads, and the right of passage 
 or way along them when so designated. 
 
 The other maintains that, although those modes of exercising the power are 
 perfectly constitutional, yet they are not the whole of the power and do not 
 exhaust it. On the contrary, the power comprehends the right to make or con- 
 struct any roads which Congress may deem proper for the conveyance of the 
 mail and to keep them in due repair for sucli purpose. 
 
 There appears to be only one instance in which this much-mooted question 
 reached the courts and received judicial interpretation. This was tha case of 
 Dickey v. The Turnpike Road Co., reported in Seventh Dana, page 113 
 et seq., wherein the Kentucky court of appeals decided that the power 
 gi-sen to Congress by the Constitution to establish post roads enabled them to 
 
GOOD EOADS. 45 
 
 make, repair, keep open, and Improve post roads when tliey sliould deem the 
 exercise of the power expedient. In commenting on this celebrated case. Chan- 
 cellor Kent concludes with this sentenca : " This important decision was well 
 supported by sound reasoning." 
 
 To contend that this article confers on Congress the power only to designate 
 or point out some road over which the mails shall be caried is hardly consistent 
 with the powers it exercises in other cases. From the same clause the words 
 '• to establish post offices " ha^e apparently been assumed by Congress to give 
 It the power to purchase buildini;s. or to purchase land and erect thereon struc- 
 tures to be used as post offices. From its express power to lay and collect taxes, 
 duties, etc., it erects customhouses ; from that " to raise and support armies, 
 etc.," it purchases the land and erects the buildings thereon for a military 
 academy; and a naval academy lilcewise from its simple express power "to 
 provide and maintain a navy." Other instances ad infinitum mi,ght be cited. 
 What is the difference, save in the application, between constructing a house and 
 constructing a road? 
 
 No word could possibl.v have been chosen that would have t,'iven more ex- 
 plicit power to Congi-ess than this word " establish." 
 
 In his Commentaries on the Constitution, Mr. Story says: "Establish," 
 according to Johnson and Webster, " means to settle firmly, to confirm, to fix, to 
 form, to found, to build firmly, to erect p._^rmanently. This is also the popular 
 and generally accepted meaning of the word. There is no such known sense of 
 the word establish as to direct, designate, or point out. Again, in legislative 
 acts, in State papers, in the Constitution itself, the word is found with the 
 same general sense now insiste<i on — to create, to form, to make, to construct, 
 to settle, to build up with a view to permanence. To construe the word in 
 any of the instances used in the Constitution as to desii,'uate or point out would 
 be absolutely absurd. For example, to establish justice, to establish the Consti- 
 tution, to establish courts, to establish naturalization and bankruptcy laws." 
 
 The opponents of this power of Congress to build post roads have laid great 
 stress upon the fact that Congress has never undertaken to make any roads, 
 but has merely designated those roads over which the mails should pass. Is 
 this position tenable? Does the statute of limitations run against the Govern- 
 ment? Does the Government lose a right by nonuser? 
 
 However, Congress has never designated any roads over which mail shall be 
 carried. It has always been satisfied to name the points between which mail 
 shall be carried, and until this day of railroads and its contracts with them has 
 never designated or pointed out over which of two or more roads the mail shall 
 he carried. All roads and all canals and other watercourses over which the 
 mails are carried have by congressional enactment been made post roads, but 
 this designation has always followed previous choice of thoseroutes by the mail 
 service 
 
 In the grants and concessions made by the Government to the Mobile & Ohio 
 Railroad, the Illinois Central, and the various Pacific railroads, by means of 
 which those roads were constructed. Congress certainly designated those roads 
 as mail roads. But if surveying a line through the wilderness, leveling hills 
 and filling valleys, placing ties and laying steel rails do not constitute con- 
 struction, it would indeed be diflacult to define the word, and in these mstances 
 designation certainly preceded construction. 
 
 Further it is not admitted that Congress has not exercised this very power 
 with reference to this object. In addition to the Cumberland road, above 
 referred to Congress, on April 21, 1806, authorized the construction of a road 
 from Athens on the frontier of Georgia to New Orleans, and a road or roads 
 through the territory lately ceded by the Indians to the United States from the 
 Mississippi to the Ohio and the former Indian boundary line established by the 
 treaty of Greenville; also a road from Nashville in Tennessee to Natchez m 
 Mississippi. (For a number of other instances see S. Doc. 300, 24th Cong., 
 
 1st SGSS ) 
 
 To quote again from the language of Mr. Story : " This question as to the 
 right to lay out and construct post roads is wholly distinct from that more gen- 
 eral power to lay out and make canals and military and other roads. This 
 latter power may not exist at all, even if the former should be unquestionable. 
 It turns upon a question of implied power. The other turns upon the true inter- 
 pretation of words of exi)ress grant. Nobody doubts that the words ' establish 
 nost' roads' may without violating their received meaning in other cases, be 
 Construed' so as to include the power to lay out and construct roads. The ques- 
 tion is wliether that is the true sense of the words as used in the Constitution. 
 
46 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 And here, if ever, the rule of interpretation, which requires us to look at the 
 nature of the instrument and the objects of the power as a national power in 
 order to expound its meaning, must come into operation." 
 
 In accord with this view would appear to be that of Hon. John Randolph 
 Tucker, who, in his work on the Constitution, says : 
 
 " The establishment of post offices may include the power to create them if 
 necessary and proper to carry out that power. The same construction applies 
 to the words 'post roads.' It may involve the construction of roads if neces- 
 sary and proper for postal purposes. The practice of the Government under the 
 confederation and under the Constitution has been to designate, and thus give 
 legal sanction and status to, the roads of the States as the postal roads of the 
 Government. If there were no roads, they being necessary to the transmission 
 of mail matter, to make a road under such circumstances would be a fair exer- 
 cise of power. The fair construction of the whole clause therefore is that as 
 the mails can only be carried on roads upon the land, the power to establish 
 post roads was intended to grant the power to make them, if there were none 
 already made, where roads were necessary for postal purposes." 
 
 No consideration is here given to the question of expediency or to the great 
 commercial, political, and military advantages which would accrue to the whole 
 country and to all of its people from the construction or aid of these roads by 
 the Federal Government. That phase of the question has been too ably dealt 
 with for a long time past by speakers and writers in and out of Congress to 
 call for more than passing notice here, and the opinion in favor of such im- 
 provements seems almost unanimous. Neither has any stress been laid upon 
 the implied powers of Congress or that clause which gives it the power " to 
 make all laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into execution 
 the foregoing powers, etc." 
 
 It is contended that Congress has the power to aid in the construction, to 
 construct, to improve, to repair, and to keep open such roads as may be neces- 
 sary and convenient for the transmission of mails. The grounds for such con- 
 tention are the wjrds of express grant in the Constitution itself; the judicial 
 sanction which that view of the question has received in the only case on the 
 subject which has ever reached the courts ; the unanimous opinion of the stand- 
 ard-law writers on the subject; and the precedents set by the contracts hereto- 
 fore entered into between the Government and various railroads by which those 
 roads received material assistance in their construction and were in turn 
 designated as post roads. 
 
 VIEWS OF HIGHWAY COMMISSIOXEES AND OTHERS. 
 
 For the purpose of securing the views of a considerable number 
 of men who are specially qualified to speak upon the subject of 
 highway improvement, the chairman sent a circular letter to 
 all the State highway commissioners and others who have been 
 connected extensively with highway improvement. These letters 
 were very general in character and were designed to secure the gen- 
 eral views of' these gentlemen. 
 
 The following is a copy of the circular letter : 
 
 COTSTGKESS OF THE UnITED StATES, 
 
 Joint Committee on Federal Aid 
 IN THE Construction or Post Roads, 
 Washington, D. C, December 21, 1912. 
 My Dear Sir: The last session of Congress created a joint com- 
 mittee to investigate the question of Federal aid to road improve- 
 ment in the various States. The joint committee now has that mat- 
 ter under consideration and we would be very glad to receive in- 
 formation from you regarding it. We would like your views: 
 
 (1) As to' a general plan upon'which this Federal aid should be 
 given. 
 
 (2) To what extent the plan should require the State or local 
 authorities to contribute to the amount of money appropriated • and 
 
GOOD KOADS. 47 
 
 to what extent you think your State or local authorities would be 
 '«'"/ing to cooperate with the Federal Government? 
 
 (3) On what character of roads should the amount appropriated 
 by the Federal Government be used? 
 
 (4) Should the amount appropriated be limited to construction 
 or maintenance, or be given jointly for construction and mainten- 
 ance? 
 
 (5) To what extent, if aid is given, should there be Federal super- 
 vision 5 
 
 (6) Submit a detailed plan workable for Federal and State co- 
 operation in construction and maintenance. 
 
 We will appreciate it if you will send us a carefully prepared state- 
 ment containing your views. Hoping to hear from you very soon, 
 I am, 
 
 Yours, very truly, Jonathan Bourne, Jr., 
 
 Chairman. 
 The replies received are here presented, in the alphabetic order 
 of the States in which the Avriters reside : 
 
 ARIZONA. 
 
 LAMAE COBB, STATE ENGINEER, PHOENIX, ARIZ. 
 
 (1) As to a genral plan upon which this Federal aid should be 
 given. 
 
 A national highway commission of engineers, about nine in num- 
 ber, should be created to administer any Federal aid law. 
 
 In the selection of these commissioners the States of the Union 
 should be subdivided into as many districts as there are members 
 and one member appointed from each district. The districts should 
 be of about the same size, considering population and area, as the 
 controlling factors in so determining. The boundaries may be de- 
 fined in the law or the appointing power be directed to so district the 
 Union. 
 
 This commission should be directed to act in conjunction with the 
 highway departments or State engineers in the various States of the 
 Union in the selection of national highways, upon which Federal 
 aid is to be expended. And they should be directed to select such 
 State units, as will coordinate into a national highway system. No 
 State should receive aid until it has established a highway depart- 
 ment. 
 
 The portion that each State should receive from an appropriation 
 by Congress should be specified in the act, at least up to 75 per cent 
 of the total. The balance could be carried as a general fund and ex- 
 pended wherever the commission should select. In making this ap- 
 portionment the same factors, as suggested for the creation of com- 
 missioners' districts, should be the controlling ones, viz, population 
 and area. 
 
 The law should be general in its provisions, giving the commission 
 the greatest latitude in the disbursement of the funds, but making the 
 apportionment fixed, to insure fair treatment to all States. The 
 details as to the exact procedure in the selection of national high- 
 ways, approval of plans, estimates, etc., should be left entirely to tht 
 commission to work out. It is sufficient that they be compelled to 
 
48 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 reach an agreement with the State highway authorities before the 
 expenditure, in any amount, can be made, except in the case of main- 
 tenance. 
 
 The present Office of Public Roads should be placed under the 
 commission. 
 
 (2) To what extent the plan should require the State or local 
 authorities to contribute to the amount of money appropriated, and 
 to what extent you think your State or local authorities would be 
 willing to cooperate with the Federal Government? 
 
 The States should contribute 50 per cent of the cost of construc- 
 tion. I believe Arizona would cooperate to the fullest extent. 
 
 (3) On what character of roads should the amount appropriated 
 by the Federal Government be used? 
 
 Only on main through routes outside of incorporated cities and 
 towns. 
 
 (4) Should the amount appropriated be limited to construction or 
 maintenance or be given jointly for construction and maintenance? 
 
 For construction only, but the commission should be so empowered 
 that it can compel maintenance. If maintenance is neglected in any 
 State the commission should have funds at their disposal to imme- 
 diately make the necessary expenditures. This is of prime import- 
 ance, as such neglect may be due to lack of appropriation by the 
 State legislature, which could not be remedied before great damage 
 had been done. Further aid could be withheld to insure the return 
 of the amount expended. 
 
 (5) To what extent, if aid is given should there be Federal super- 
 vision ? 
 
 Soth of construction and maintenance. 
 
 (6) Submit a detailed plan workable for Federal and State co- 
 operation in construction and maintenance. 
 
 This is covered by my answer to question (1). 
 
 In conclusion, I beg to say should Congress decide to enter upon 
 the construction of national highways, jointly with all the States, 
 it should be borne in mind that the first appropriation will be small 
 as compared to what will inevitably follow, therefore an organiza- 
 tion to administer a Federal aid law should be provided that would 
 meet the requirements both of the present and the future, and in my 
 humble opinion only through the medium of a commission selected 
 from the various sections of the country can such a result be obtained. 
 
 COLOEADO. 
 
 J. E. YOUNfiQTJIST, SURVEYOR 31 ORGAN COUNTY, FORT MORGAN, COLO. 
 
 In regard to questions (1) and (2) will say that I think the Gov- 
 ernment should appropriate a certain amount in or for each State, 
 said appropriation to be distributed by the State highway commis- 
 sion of each State. In case there is no State highway commission in 
 certain States, then the amount should be left, or may be left with 
 some State official who is familiar with conditions throughout the 
 State he represents. (We have a State highway commission in our 
 State and the members are quite familiar with all the through roads.) 
 
GOOD ROADS. 49 
 
 (3) I think the amount appropriated by the Government should 
 be used on all through roads throughout the State. 
 
 (4) Will say that the amount appropriated ought to be used for 
 both construction and maintenance. 
 
 (5) I think it would be a good idea for the Federal engineer or 
 supervisor to confer with the State highway commission, or if there 
 be no highway commission, confer with the State official who has or 
 will have charge of the amount appropriated, and they could confer 
 with the various county officials. 
 
 L. K. DIETEEICH, LYONS, COLO. 
 
 (1) Create an educational system on construction and maintenance 
 of roads, bridges, culverts, etc. Employ none but those who can 
 pass the required examinations, the same as on railroads. Test all 
 materials required, bringing them up to a certain' standard. Do 
 away with all contract work after you have the organization of road 
 work complete, say 10 or 15 years. Build up the system in such 
 a way that young men would make it a study, giving them the bene- 
 fits of the construction profits, and make it an honorable and high- 
 class profession. 
 
 (2) The State and Federal authorities should contribute only 
 where expensive work would be required. 
 
 (3) On post roads, national roads, and national bridges. 
 
 (4) The amount appropriated should include maintenance as well 
 as construction, provided, however, favorable localities to the project 
 would maintain the roads in time to come. 
 
 (5) Federal supervision should be given in construction and main- 
 tenance throughout. 
 
 (6) First, there should be a law or laws devoid of all red tape, 
 creating a system that would be what the construction of the Panama 
 Canal and other projects of the Government demonstrate. How- 
 ever, I would not advise placing the roads under any other depart- 
 ment. Make it exclusive. 
 
 C. W. BEACH, CIVIL ENGINEER, LAS ANIMAS. 
 
 (1) Federal aid should be given in connection with State and 
 
 local aid. 
 
 (2) State and local authorities should contribute 66 per cent or 75 
 per cent of total cost. I think our local authorities would be willing 
 to contribute 33^ per cent. State 33^ per cent, and if Federal Gov- 
 ernment would contribute 33^ per cent the plan would result in many 
 new roads being built. 
 
 (3) In this country money should be spent on good macadam roads, 
 on through routes, leaving local authorities to construct and maintain 
 br&Tioli. Iiugs 
 
 (4) Amount appropriated jointly for construction and mainte- 
 nance, as roads soon go to pieces unless properly maintained, and local 
 authorities are not yet educated to properly maintaining country 
 roads. 
 
 79558— PT 1—13- 
 
50 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 (6) Federal supervision should be limited to approval of plans, 
 routes, and final acceptance of completed work, leaving details and 
 letting of contracts and supervision of work to local authorities. 
 
 (6) Any general plan embodying above suggestions. I_ think 
 Federal aid should be limited to a few well-defined national routes, 
 which will accommodate interstate travel. 
 
 CONNECTICUT. 
 JAMES H. MAODONALD, STATE HIGHWAY COMMISSIONER, HAETFOED. 
 
 One member of your committee, Representative Shackleford, has 
 reached out toward that which, in my judgment, is a very essential 
 and necessary thing to do and will meet with the most popular 
 favor — perhaps not in the higher walks of life or from the tourist's 
 point of view, but in the opinion of the great mass of toilers — the 
 farmers — these men who have made this great country of ours what 
 it is to-day. In dividing this money and sending it out all over the 
 country where it will do the most good our first duty, it would seem 
 to me, should be to take care of the roads that will enable the farmer 
 to have good highways from their farms to their nearest and best 
 market place; but immediately we are confronted with the vastness 
 of the undertaking and the numerous interests the United States 
 Government has under its fostering care demanding attention and 
 requiring funds. However, no matter how great or how small the 
 national ajDpropriation may be we can not lose sight of the great 
 arteries, the trunk lines into which these feeder roads ultimately will 
 discharge the travel. 
 
 To meet popular approval a bill will have to be drawn, in my 
 judgment, that will not deny either the trunk lines or the tributary 
 roads their proportion of whatever appropriation is made by the 
 United States Government; nor, in my judgment, can a bill be 
 drawn to receive popular support that will specialize or restrict in 
 any way the distribution of Federal aid for highway construction 
 upon any one particular class of trunk lines. In other words, a bill 
 to meet popular approval should call for a division of the money 
 upon two or three classes of roads, as follows : 
 
 Class No. 1. — The great firteries nimiing throngli and into other States, but 
 not distorted, nor in obedience to any political arrangement, but embracing as 
 far as possible, in a direct course, the principal cities east and west and north 
 and south; having as many of these direct trunk lines as the committee may 
 consider wise under a general plan carefully thought out before commencing to- 
 extend Federal aid, or as the exigencies of the case may suggest and money 
 can be had to extend the work. 
 
 Glass No. 2. — The intertown roads — commonly called main highways con- 
 necting a town with adjoining towns— running through the several States and 
 having a direct connection with tlaese main trunks. 
 
 Class No. 3. — The side, or feeder, roads leading into the intertown roads, 
 and they, in turn, leading into the great trunk lines. 
 
 This would take care of the great trunk lines carrying the great 
 burden of business as well as the pleasure traffic; and also would 
 provide for the question of the rural free delivery roads; also con- 
 nect the farms with their nearest and best market places. 
 
OOOD EOADS. 51 
 
 This plan Avould comprehend the States taking up the question of 
 an appropriation for trunk lines exclusively,- to be married to that 
 which would be contributed by the National Government, but no 
 contribution to be required from the townships through which these 
 trunk lines pass nor from the individual abutting owner — making it 
 purely a trunk lines appropriation on the part of the State and the 
 National Government. One-third or possibly one-half of the amount 
 appropriated should be devoted to this class of roads. 
 
 For the improvement of the second class of roads — the intertown 
 highways — the National Government should contribute one-half of 
 the amount, the State one-fourth, and the county or township one- 
 fourth. 
 
 The third class of roads would involve more the question of re- 
 pairs, in reducing grades, putting in a proper system of drainage, 
 straightening the road, giving additional width and relieving miry 
 conditions. This class of roads would receive a certain amount per 
 mile, to be named in the bill; one-half to be given by the United 
 States Government, one-fourth by the State government, and one- 
 fourth by the township through which the roads run. 
 
 Here in Connecticut we have a very peculiar condition of aifairs; 
 that is, in regard to the conduct of the work and the distribution of 
 the money. We commenced operations some 18 years ago. We had 
 a small appropriation of $75,000 for the entire State. This was to 
 be divided among the several towns in pro rata amounts on the basis 
 of one- third State, one-third county, and one-third town, but no 
 town was to receive in any one year more than $3,000. This law was 
 amended so that the money appropriated by the State was to be 
 divided in accordance with the grand list — or grand levy — of the 
 several towns. In other words, the county provision was eliminated 
 so that the distribution was direct to the towns and the appropriation 
 was made between the State and the town in which the work was 
 done. Under this arrangement the smaller towns were given a larger 
 share of the money. That is to say, the towns financially strong were 
 given one-half up to a maximum amount of $3,000, Avhile the poor 
 towns were given three-fourths of the appropriation up to $3,000. 
 The basis of award was the financial strength of the town and not 
 its mileage of roads. This would be more in accord with Eepre- 
 sentative Shackleford's idea. This plan has worked so successfully 
 that while Connecticut has the largest mileage of roads per area in 
 the United States — the area being 5,004 square miles and the roads 
 aggregating 15,000 miles, with a grand list of a little over $900,000,- 
 000 — through the influence of this arrangement and the division of 
 the money along the lines suggested in the first part of this com- 
 munication that two years ago we secured an appropriation of 
 $4,500,000. 
 
 Now, if this can be done in Connecticut under this plan of helpful- 
 iie.ss, why not adopt a similar plan for the entire country? 
 
 The State now has a system of 14 trunk lines upon which we are 
 at work. These trunk lines, with their ramifications, extend into and 
 out from 132 towns out of the total of 168 towns in the State and 
 drain a population of 850,000. So that the general plan to be thought 
 out, in my judgment, should comprehend something along similar 
 lines. 
 
52 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 We now appropriate a special fund for trunk lines — the great 
 arteries— and ask nothing in return for the construction of these 
 roads or their upkeep from the abutting owners or the towns through 
 which they run. The construction of the roads is accomplished by- 
 bonding. 'For this upkeep there is a specific appropriation added to 
 the money secured from licensing automobiles. The patrol system 
 for the care of these roads has been adopted by the State. 
 
 In addition to the trunk-line system we have a general appropria- 
 tion for intertown roads leading on to these trunk lines, and that 
 appropriation is shared in by the towns on the basis that any town 
 having a grand levy of $1,250,000 or less receives seven-eighths of 
 the expense of the construction from the State, and any town having 
 a grand levy of more than $1,250,000 receives three-fourths of the 
 expense. In other words, the financially strong towns do not receive 
 as much as the towns that are weak. It is the under dog in the fight. 
 
 My own impression is that the upkeep of the trunk lines — in reply 
 to your fourth question — should be provided for the same as the con- 
 struction. There should be no tax for maintenance of the trunk 
 lines. On the intertown roads I believe practically the same distri- 
 bution of money should be made as for their construction. 
 
 In so far as Federal super vision is concerned, I think there should be 
 a man appointed by the Government who would be the Federal agent 
 in each State. He should not be given charge or control of the work in 
 any State where the Avork is now under the charge of a commission 
 or commissioner, but he should see to it that the work is performed 
 as outlined under the specification which should be provided by the 
 department. (In fact, there should be no specification drawn that 
 did not require the sanction of the Federal Government through its 
 officials in charge of said work before an appropriation is made.) 
 Specifications should be standardized, whether for a graded road, a 
 stone road, or bithulithic treatment — in fact, for everything, whether 
 running a road scraper on a road or the highest attainment to which 
 the science of road building has gone. Federal supervisors should 
 see that the specifications governing the contract are carried out by 
 visiting the sections from time to time and notify the officials in 
 charge of the work of any omissions on the part of the contractors. 
 However, these are suggestions of details only. 
 
 I have given you this information as briefly as I could with the 
 limited time at my disposal. 
 
 To sum up briefly : 
 
 I should have the approiDriation divided between the trunk-line 
 roads and the intertown roads, or among the trunk lines, intertown 
 connecting roads, and the feeder roads. 
 
 I would have the basis of award the wealth of the town when it 
 comes to a division of the second class, or intertown roads, as arranged 
 for under the Connecticut plan. 
 
 I would have the trunk-line roads taken care of and constructed 
 under the same basis of award. 
 
 I would have Federal supervision in each State. 
 
 I would have this work done under the Office of Public Roads, 
 under the Secretary of Agriculture, for I believe this whole matter 
 will come closer to pulsing the hearts of the people through the 
 Agricultural Department than any other department. 
 
GOOD ROADS. 53 
 
 FLORIDA. 
 
 WILLIAM BI. COREY, OHAIEMAN BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF 
 GADSDEN COUNTY, QUINCY. 
 
 (1) I think the Government should cooperate with the several 
 States in building roads in order to get them established. 
 
 (2) The rural free delivery mileage in each State and county- 
 should be computed annually and a fixed sum appropriated per mile 
 by the United States Government for maintaining such roads, the 
 State and county to supplement the Government fund and appro- 
 priate as much additional as may be required to keep the road in a 
 good state of preservation. 
 
 (3) I think the work should be confined to public highways that 
 have rural free delivery routes established, these to be known as post 
 roads, as distinct from other county roads. 
 
 (4) I think there should be two funds, one known as construction, 
 the other as maintenance, the money to be used from each fund at 
 the outset in creating the road, and after a road has been established 
 further appropriations to come out of the maintenance fund, and the 
 construction account to be used for laying out new roads. 
 
 (5) I think that the Government supervision and inspection should 
 be exercised over all roads so constructed. The Government em- 
 ploys the best experts, is familiar with all kinds of modern road 
 machinery, and the cooperation and supervision of the Federal in- 
 spectors would be of great help to the State and county authorities. 
 
 (6) Above are my personal views, and will lay your communication 
 before my associates on the board of county commissioners. Will 
 then endeavor to prepare a statement with the aid of our county 
 road superintendent. 
 
 ILLINOIS. 
 
 A. N. JOPINSON, STAl'E HIGHWAY ENGINEER, SPRINGFIELD. 
 
 (1) It has been the general impression of those interested in high- 
 way work with whom I have come in contact in the past few years, 
 since Federal aid has been agitated, that the gravest danger would 
 be that such a plan would become a " pork barrel " proposition, for 
 there is no question but that much agitation on this subject has been 
 with this end in view. For this reason I know that in many conven- 
 tions there has been a hesitancy to give favorable expression to the 
 general idea of Federal aid until some definite plan, which would 
 clearly indicate how it would work out, had been formulated. I 
 am of the opinion that it would be necessary to have a well organ- 
 ized State highway department in each State, with whom the Gov- 
 ernment would deal directly; that Federal aid should be confined to 
 a certain definite system of roads, if granted at all ; that the main- 
 tenance of these roads should be at the expense of the Government 
 when once constructed; that the specifications for the construction 
 should be drawn up in consultation with the State Department, who 
 doubtless will be able to give valuable aid that would take into 
 account local conditions; that the Government give only general 
 
54 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 supervision to tlie work sufficient only to insure itself as to the general 
 value of the construction undertaken ; that the detailed supervision 
 could more cheaply be left to the State highway departments of the 
 various States. 
 
 (2) The proportion to be paid to the Federal Government should 
 be from one-third to one-half of the total cost. I believe the senti- 
 ment in this State is such as to provide for the State's share. 
 
 (3) The roads on which Federal aid should be granted should 
 be those important through routes constituting between 1 and 2 per 
 cent of the total mileage. It probably will be found that 1 per cent 
 will give a system of roads that would make a very comprehensive 
 scheme possible. 
 
 (4) The initial appropriation for construction should be as already 
 outlined. In order to have the maintenance, which is perhaps more 
 important even than first construction, carried on systematically and 
 uniformly it should be imder one control — that of the Government — ■ 
 and if to be under the control of the Government should be paid for 
 entirely at the expense of the Government. 
 
 (5) This has been answered above. 
 
 (6) The formation of a national bureau of highways under some 
 one of the existing departments. This bureau may be composed of 
 a commission with a chief engineer and such other assistants as seem 
 necessary. Doubtless there would be a division of the country and 
 resident division engineers appointed as the work progressed. 
 Within their territory the division engineers should have complete 
 supervision of both construction and maintenance. I think a mis- 
 take is made where the maintenance and construction departments 
 are separated. After the National Government, in consultation with 
 the various State departments, has decided upon the routes, general 
 specifications should be drawn up by the national commission and 
 these submitted to the various State departments who should be 
 asked to submit detailed specifications which, after final approval, 
 would be the specifications for specific sections of the roads to be con- 
 structed. The contracts would be let by the State highway depart- 
 ments and the supervision furnished by them, the Government to 
 have traveling inspectors to keep general watch of the work in prog- 
 ress of construction, the State highway departments to make specific 
 reports of progress, giving such data as the national department 
 would require for its information in checking up costs and methods 
 of construction. As fast as certain definite pieces of work are com- 
 pleted they should be gone over by Government inspectors, together 
 with the State department's representative, this inspector to have 
 authority to accept work on behalf of the Government when there 
 should be due to be paid into the State treasury, to be applied to the 
 cost of construction, such proportion of the cost as is to be borne by 
 the Government. The Government should provide for the upkeep 
 of the various pieces of road. At first, when only a few miles of de- 
 tached pieces of road have been constructed, it is evident that the 
 system of maintenance by the Government would doubtless be ex- 
 cessive in cost and somewhat cumbersome; but as more and more 
 road is built the efficiency of the maintenance department would in- 
 crease and should eventually be brought to a minimum. It is quite 
 possible that it would be wise, when there were but a few miles of 
 road to be maintained in a given community, to allow for arrano^e- 
 
GOOD EOADS. 55 
 
 ments to be made between the Government department and the 
 State department whereby the State department would, under in- 
 structions from the Government office, care for the maintenance of 
 the Government roads until there was a sufficient mileage to warrant 
 more detailed supervision by Government inspectors, but in any 
 event avoid on the part of the Government separating the construc- 
 tion and maintenance departments. 
 
 I realize that in the above brief outline only a few of the essential 
 points have been touched upon, but doubtless you will receive other 
 communications touching upon other points, so that your committee 
 will in- the end be in possession of fairly complete information, 
 whereas if each of us should wait until we had given the matter more 
 thorough study, so as to permit of a report iii further detail, there 
 would perhaps be little time left for your committee to give the mat- 
 ter the consideration it would desire. 
 
 HOMER J. TICE, MEMBER STATE LEGISLATURE, GREENVIEW. 
 
 I will not undertake to answer the questions in detail, but will 
 make one general suggestion in the line of my experience gained in 
 investigating this question in the State of Illinois. 
 
 I do not favor Federal aid for public-road construction, but do 
 favor the Federal Government aiding in maintaining post roads. 
 It occurs to_ me that any attempt to amalgamate Federal and State 
 aid will bring about a conflict of authority both in construction 
 and maintenance, not only as to authority but responsibility for 
 maintaining the highways after once builded. 
 
 I believe at the present time the proper position for the Federal 
 Government to occupy is to aid in the maintaining of post roads — 
 that is, rural-route roads. If so much per mile could be appro- 
 priated for the improving and maintaining of these post roads, con- 
 ditioned upon the State and county appropiiating a like sum, the 
 work to be done under the supervision of the State highway com- 
 mission, that the Federal Government would have gone as far as is 
 now practicable. 
 
 Furthermore, I would not make this Federal appropriation ap- 
 plicable to anj^ State not having a State highway commission under 
 which the funds appropriated may be expended. A State that is 
 not sufficiently interested in its highwa3's to establish a State high- 
 way department and have it in active operation is not worthy of 
 Federal aid. 
 
 For the Federal Government to build great tnmk lines of high- 
 ways might be all right as an example, but for practical purposes 
 the per cent of benefit would be very small compared with the amount 
 of outlay. 
 
 I happen to be a member of the joint legislative committee of 
 Illinois which has had this subject under consideration for the past 
 two years and will soon make their report to the Illinois General As- 
 sembly. We will also introduce a bill providing for a State high- 
 way department and a complete rewriting, recodifying, and amend- 
 ing of the Illinois road laws. 
 
 We provide in our bill that all State-aid roads shall be con- 
 structed by the State and counties participating in the State-aid 
 fund the State to pay 50 per cent and the countv 50 per cent of 
 
56 GOOD KOADS. 
 
 the cost; after a road is completed the State to have absolute 
 authority over all such roads and to maintain them at State expense. 
 
 While we would be very glad to have Federal aid, and it might 
 relieve our burden somewhat, yet I believe in the long run it would 
 be more satisfactory that the Federal authorities should not partici- 
 pate in any way in the constructing and maintaining of public high- 
 ways other than is herein suggested. 
 
 We have in Illinois 2,800 rural routes, covering about 50,000 miles 
 of our public highways. If the Federal Government should appro- 
 priate a certain sum per mile, or rather a certain sum for each route, 
 to be used where most needed, and particularly for the purpose of 
 draining the highways, a greater number of people would be bene- 
 fited and more permanent results obtained which would be of benefit 
 to every community in every State than through any other system. 
 
 INDIANA. 
 
 C. A. KENYON, PEESmENT INDIANA GOOD EOADS ASSOCIATION, INDIAN- 
 APOLIS. 
 
 Your question No. 1 is : "As to a general plan upon which this Fed- 
 eral aid should be given." 
 
 In my opinion (a) the Nation should have a national highway de- 
 partment; (b) there are a few great trunk limes that are of such vast 
 importance that I think the Nation should construct and maintain 
 without the aid of the States. Aside from these routes. Federal aid 
 to the extent of one-half the cost of construction and upkeep should 
 be granted, provided, however, that such aid should not be extended 
 to roads other than post and interstate roads. A comprehensive 
 definition of what shall constitute such roads, and a tribunal to de- 
 cide the question should be provided. Probably a limit of mileage 
 of such roads that should be built in each State (say not to exceed 
 2 per cent of the roads of the State) would prevent extravagance. 
 Experiences in the various States having highway commissions and 
 State aid indicate that it is not safe to depend exclusively upon local 
 authorities to maintain adequately roads built with the aid of State 
 money. Witness the collapse of the " Cumberland Road " after it 
 was turned over to the various States. 
 
 Your question No. 2 is : " To what extent the plan should require 
 the State or local authorities to contribute to the amount of money 
 appropriated ; and to what extent you think your State or local au- 
 thorities would be willing to cooperate with the Federal Govern- 
 ment " 
 
 Answer. In my opinion the Federal Government should make it a 
 condition precedent to granting State aid, that the State should pay 
 one-half the cost of construction and adequate maintenance, the na- 
 tional highway department to decide what is adequate maintenance, 
 otherwise an extended line of road might lose one-half its value by 
 conflicting State opinions of what is adequate maintenance. I am 
 satisfied that the people of my State would be willing to cooperate 
 with the Federal Government upon this plan. 
 
GOOD EOADS. 57 
 
 Your question No. 3 is : " On what character of roads should the 
 amount appropriated by the Federal Government be used ? " 
 
 Answer. On the class of roads Specified in my answer to your first 
 question. 
 
 _ Your question No. 4 is: "Should the amount appropriated be 
 limited to construction or maintenance, or be given jointly for con- 
 struction and maintenance ? " 
 
 Answer. The Federal Government should contribute to the con- 
 struction_ and maintenance. The construction should be by the Na- 
 tional Highway Department and the maintenance under it's super- 
 vision and according to its specifications. 
 
 Your question No. 5 is : " To what extent, if aid is given, should 
 there be Federal supervision ? " 
 
 Answer. See my answer to question No. 4. 
 
 Your question No. 6 is : " Submit a detailed plan workable for 
 Federal and State cooperation in construction and maintenance." 
 
 Answer. A national highway board, supported by the Federal 
 Government, divided into appropriate departments ; as, for example : 
 Construction and maintenance, which might include the study and 
 testing of materials, choice of materials for surfacing, methods of 
 construction adapted to various kinds and volume of traffic, the plac- 
 ing of railways and interurbans on public roads, cleaning, dust lay- 
 ing or prevention, methods of carrying out road work, lighting, etc. 
 Administration, or the collection and use of funds. Economics. 
 Public safety on national routes; the use of various vehicles; influ- 
 ence of weight and speed; conditions tO' be. fulfilled by horse, vehicle, 
 and driver ; rate of speed, etc. 
 
 A thousand and one problems that need uniform treatment for 
 national routes could be studied and solved with such a department 
 that would result in utter confusion if left to State determination. 
 
 In conclusion, in making provision for the selection of roads to be 
 first improved, I take it that the rule of the " Greatest good to the 
 greatest number " should prevail. 
 
 When a new railroad is first opened it carries mainly passengers, 
 but the palace car of to-day divides the road with the traffic train of 
 to-morrow, and so it will be with the roads. Railroad building in 
 this country is almost at a standstill. For further development we 
 must depend on the wagon road to a larger extent than heretofore, 
 In 1912 the products of the farms amounted to over $9,000,000,000. 
 Two thirds of this had to be transported over " wagon roads," at an 
 average cost of 23 cents per ton per mile, while the railroads trans- 
 port it for three-fourths of 1 cent a ton per mile, and with modern 
 highways it can be transported for from 5 cents to 10 cents per ton 
 per mile. Few factories can, to-day, live and compete that have to 
 haul their output from factory to railroad, yet the farmer has to do 
 this and the consumer pays the freight. Millions of tons of farm 
 and orchard products rot on the ground for lack of a means of mar- 
 keting the same. . . , ,1, • 
 
 The Federal Government can, in my opmion, do no greater thing 
 for the benefit of the people of this Nation than to build and main- 
 tain national roads, not only for the good they will do in themselves, 
 but as an incitement and guide for the States and counties to do 
 likewise. 
 
58 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 C. G. riSHEE, OF THE COAST-TO-COAST ROCK-HIGHWAY ASSOCIATION, 
 
 INDIANAPOLIS. 
 
 (1) A general plan should be arrived at by the Government of the 
 United States to build roads connecting the various States, so that 
 interstate travel may not only be possible, but a pleasure to our 
 citizens. 
 
 (2) The several companies that I am associated with pay taxes 
 in Indiana on more than $1,000,000 worth of property, and we would 
 be willing to stand an assessment for the construction of State roads, 
 providing these roads are made permanent. We consider only con- 
 crete roads as permanent. It seems to me that the General Govern- 
 ment should provide funds for 25 per cent of these connecting inter- 
 state highways, that the State Government should provide 25 per 
 cent, and that the local counties through which the roads pass should 
 provide 50 per cent. 
 
 (3) In my opinion it is not advisable for the United States Govern- 
 ment or our local State government to spend any more money in the 
 construction of gravel or loose-binder roads. 
 
 (4) I think all appropriations made for roads from this time on 
 should not consider the maintenance, but should very thoroughly 
 consider the installation of concrete roads, which will take care of 
 themselves for 15 or 20 years, and in 15 or 20 years from this date 
 there will be such a general demand for the maintenance of good 
 roads already built that it will not be necessary for the United States 
 Government to interfere. 
 
 (5) I think Federal supervision should be given to the building 
 of roads in the following manner : 
 
 A general set of specifications for the construction of concrete or 
 brick roads should be drawn, and no approval or assistance be given 
 in the construction of any other type of road. 
 
 I think that the Federal supervision, as well as the State super- 
 vision, should be made to see that these specifications are rigidly 
 enforced. 
 
 The writer has been for some time interested in the raising of funds 
 among the automobile manufacturers of the United States, of 
 $10,000,000, to apply for the construction of a coast-to-coast highway. 
 I am in receipt daily of several hundred letters from interested citi- 
 zens and communities, and you have no idea how much real demand 
 and necessity exists for interconnecting roads between our principal 
 cities and transcontinental roads. 
 
 Speaking purely from the standpoint of the automobile user, we 
 have at the present time more than 500,000 automobile owners in the 
 United States who are quite willing to pay a heavy tax for the use 
 of their automobiles, providing this money is properly spent on 
 roads. Between 250,000 and 350,000 automobiles will be built each 
 year for the next 15 or 20 years to come, to say nothing of the 100,000 
 to 150,000 motor-cycles ; then Ave have the building of between 30,000 
 and 60,000 trucks this coming year, and this is only the beginning in 
 the truck business. 
 
 You are no doubt aware of the economy in building roads that will 
 last, and of the economy in transporting merchandise over such 
 Toads. 
 
GOOD EOADS. 59 
 
 "We have received up to the present time subscriptions to our fund 
 of more than $1,500,000, and has every reason to believe that we will 
 succeed m raising $10,000,000 to be devoted to the building of a 
 transcontinental highway. 
 
 KANSAS. 
 
 CHARLES M'. BAK>;eS, TKESIDENT KANSAS STATE AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION, 
 
 TOPEKA. 
 
 (1) Any general plan which your committee adopts I am sure will 
 be a good plan for Federal aid. 
 
 (2) I think the State and local authorities should be required 
 to contribute an amount equal to that appropriated by the Gov- 
 ernment for the construction of the roads. 
 
 (3) In many of the States proper maintenance of dirt roads 
 would go a long ways toward meeting the requirements, yet I believe 
 that the ultimate road is gravel, grit, or shell. 
 
 (4) The amount appropriated, in my opinion, should be combined 
 in construction and mnintenance. This would avoid the possibility 
 of neglect and decay following construction. 
 
 (5) The failure of our road laws now is due to the fact that there 
 is no general supervision. 
 
 And, in conclusion, please permit me the suggestion that in ex- 
 change for the rural-free delivery system the benefited and inter- 
 ested persons might very properly be required to maintain, at least 
 partially, the post roads as they now exist. 
 
 JOHN C. NICHOLSON, SECRETARY AND TREASURER, THE 5IERIDIAN ROAD, 
 
 NEWTON. 
 
 (1) I favor national aid for national highways under a bonus 
 system. The road to be constructed and maintained under specifica- 
 tions furnished by the Government and only where the road to be 
 used is largely used for interstate traffic. 
 
 (2) The National Government to reimburse the State or the coun- 
 ties building the road not less than 10 per cent nor more than 25 per 
 cent of the actual cost of construction. 
 
 (3) Federal appropriation to be expended only on roads of a per- 
 manent character. 
 
 (4) Appropriation for maintenance as well as construction. 
 
 (6) No Federal supervision, only reimbursement on inspection. 
 (6) Kansas is prohibited from granting State aid and I do not 
 
 have a workable plan. 
 
 ,T. K. CODDING, WARDEN KANSAS STATE PENITENTIARY, LANSING. 
 
 I will not attempt to answer your letter fully, because, as warden 
 of the Kansas State Penitentiary, I am building roads with convict 
 labor and shall confine my suggestions to what the Federal Govern- 
 ment can do with that one subject. The United States Government 
 has in her Federal and military prisons at Leavenworth a couple of 
 
60 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 thousand prisoners. A great many of those could be practically 
 worked upon public roads from Fort Leavenworth to Fort Kiley. 
 This could be known as a military road and could be built and main- 
 tained by this class of labor. The men would be better by working 
 upon the roads, and the two forts would be in direct communication 
 and with a suitable military road. This road could be used by the 
 people of the State, and it could be an object lesson of what the Gov- 
 ernment could be doing with its prisoners. I think, if the Govern- 
 ment should take up the building of roads, it ought to be under the 
 military department, built by military engineers, and the roads thus 
 built be designated as Government roads, controlled and kept in 
 repair by Government money. These military roads might be a part 
 of the State system of roads. 
 
 C. r. OSBOEN, COUNTY ENGINEER, HOWARD. 
 
 There are 105 counties in Kansas and nearly 105 different road 
 problems. 
 
 Our part of the State, eastern and southeastern, contains the rough 
 counties. Our county has a difference of altitudes of nearly 500 feet. 
 It is largely pasture land, and we have only about 11,000 people, with 
 a total valuation of about $14,000,000. Our people consider the road 
 proposition largely a local matter. We are in the front ranks of the 
 counties in Kansas in roads and permanent bridges. We have over 
 400 stone and concrete bridges and culverts, all paid for, and no debt 
 on the county. While the " good-roads " leaders are advocating State 
 and Federal aid, our " people " take the opposite view. The good- 
 roads sentiment is strong with us, and we have no trouble in getting 
 all that we wish. 
 
 From my talks with people over the State (at our State conven- 
 tions, etc.), I find that the great majority of the people are not clam- 
 oring for State aid or control. They seem to still wish to hold the 
 road matters as a local proposition. But I also find that the great 
 majority would like to see the Federal Government assist in keeping 
 up their mail routes. We have only dirt roads, but for 10 months of 
 the year these are the best roads m America. We can handle the 
 greater part of the building of these roads up to the standard set for 
 this class of roads, but the maintenance of these roads is another 
 problem. The ideal manner of handling them is by constant use of 
 the drag, and with this a patrol system, whereby the person handling 
 the drag would keep in repair his section of road and never allow it 
 to become very bad. Now, if the Federal Government would allow 
 from $10 to $20 per mile for the upkeep of these mail routes annually, 
 according to the class of road, it would put us in good shape to care 
 for these roads. I take it that the Post OiRce Department already 
 has its inspectors, and these or the postmasters could certify the fact 
 that the townships or county has complied with the requirements set 
 by the department, upon which certificate the aid could be paid. 
 
 This matter of upkeep being taken off the hands of the townships, 
 they could then devote their energies and resources to building more 
 of these roads, which in a short time would result in all our roads 
 being kept up in a uniform manner. 
 
 We have the county-road system, under which the county cares for 
 the main and heavy traveled roads between market centers, and with 
 
GOOD EOADS. 61 
 
 the aid above suggested on mail routes the townships would be able to 
 care for all other township roads and give us uniformly well-kept 
 roads in all parts of the county. The incentive of this "reward" 
 from the Federal Government would have a wonderful effect in get- 
 ting all mail routes built and in condition to receive the reward. 
 
 I believe such a plan has already been suggested in a bill before the 
 last Congress, and I am very much in favor of this plan. It will be 
 in the nature of a reward for good service, will save time in mail 
 deliveries, will put the roads in better condition for the new feature 
 of parcels-post matter, and will give everybody a road to haul his 
 produce over. Incidentally it will accomplish what the " cross-coun- 
 try " enthusiasts wish ; will make it possible to cross the country at 
 any point instead of going to a main road miles away. 
 
 R. H. FAXON, INDUSTRIAL AND PUBLICITY COJtMISSIONER, WICHITA 
 
 (1) As one of the pioneers in good-roads work in this and adjoin- 
 ing States, I have always held in remarks T have made at public 
 gatherings, in the letters I have written, and the newspaper and 
 )nagazine publications I have inspired that Federal aid should come 
 only jointly with that from the State. I believe it absolutely essential 
 to the success of the undertalring, and I also believe it will maintain 
 that nice balance between the State and the Federal Government 
 that was intended in the beginning. I also do not believe that any 
 State should be the recipient of a favor or a right from the General 
 Government without sustaining an equal share in what was given. 
 I believe also such a course would inspire better roads and quicker 
 roads than otherwise. 
 
 (2) I have partly answered this in the above. I have said I think 
 there should be equal division between the State and General Gov- 
 ernment within the State traversed. The State of Kansas is now 
 prohibited under its constitution from extending any aid or super- 
 vising or constructing highways. The constitution of Kansas says : 
 
 The State shall never be a party in carrying on any works of internal 
 improvements. 
 
 Five years ago I began urging the amendment of the constitution 
 so as to exclude highways from the provisons of this section. It has 
 iaeen quite a struggle, but there is now such influence back of the 
 campaign that I think the amendment will be submitted at the next 
 general election. This will permit Kansas to take its place with 
 other States in road work and to meet halfway, when the time comes, 
 the Federal Government. 
 
 (3) Federal aid, when it comes, should be expended first m the 
 construction of at least one transcontinental liighway which should 
 run from Washington to the Pacific coast and traverse the country 
 midway between the North and the South. For instance, I have 
 always' personally felt that the old national road from Washington 
 to Indianapolis, thence to St. Louis, and thence following the Boones 
 Lick and old Santa Fe Trail to Santa Fe, and thence across to the 
 coast might be one of the early Federal roads established. Of 
 course ultimately there should be one from Chicago across the north- 
 ern pa'rt of the country to the coast, and, if the Rocky Mountains 
 
62 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 furnish no insurmountable difficulty, one through the central portion 
 of the country — for instance, from Denver west. 
 
 (4) The amount appropriated should be used, in the first instance, 
 for construction. The States, I think, might maintain these high- 
 ways, and perhaps an approximately equal division might be ar- 
 I'anged between the Government and the State as between construc- 
 tion and maintenance, figuring out from the experience and the 
 statistics in Europe what the maintenance of a permanent road 
 would be. 
 
 (5) There should be, of course, Federal supervision. In case of 
 Federal aid the scope of Mr. Page's office would be materially en- 
 larged, and it is possible that we would then have with the Panama 
 Canal, irrigation enterprises, good roads, etc., a department of public 
 works, in which event we would have a competent officer charged with 
 direct supervision over these matters, with a commissioner of public 
 roads and a score of skilled engineers. By nil means there should be 
 Federal supervision. 
 
 (6) I have practically answered this question above. My best 
 judgment is Federal construction in the beginning and a determina- 
 tion of the expense of maintenance so that the State may maintain 
 and thereby expend its one-half of the whole expense. As I have 
 suggested, the cost of maintenance may be computed to a nicety by 
 reference to the maintenance in France, for instance, where that ^ 
 feature is reduced to a perfect system. 
 
 ARTHTTR CAPPER, PUBLISHER TOPEKA CAPITA!,. TOPEKA. 
 
 (1) and (2) The money should be apportioned between the various 
 States according to the mileage of unimproved roads in each State. 
 It should be available only for such States as have a State highway 
 engineer or a highway commission of competent men who will co- 
 operate with the Government in seeing that it is properly expended. 
 The Government money should be used only in building permanent 
 roads of the type best adapted to the locality — according to plans 
 approved by State and Federal engineers. All roads should be up 
 to this standard. The road district or county where roads are to be 
 built should furnish one-fourth of the money, the State one-fourth, 
 and the Government one-half. The money should be made available 
 to the communities which first meet these conditions, thereby placing 
 a premium upon active interest in good roads. 
 
 (3) Eoads built should be rock, macadam, or of whatever material 
 the community can best furnish— this to be determined by State and 
 Federal engineers — to be within a certain maximum and minimum 
 cost per mile. 
 
 (4) Permanent construction. If the State and county are not 
 progressive enough to agree to maintain the road after it is built, it 
 would be a waste to build one. 
 
 (5) The Federal engineers should, in conjunction with the State 
 highway engineers, draw up the specifications and let the contracts ; 
 work to be superintended by the State and county enoineers. Upon 
 completion the road should be inspected and passed on by the Federal 
 engineer before the money is paid. 
 
 (6) Money should be appropriated according to mileage in States, 
 and appropriations held by Government until State legislatures have 
 
GOOD ROADS. 63 
 
 appropriated one-half of the amount clue from the Government; 
 this money then to be accessible to the road districts in each State 
 which first raise the necessary one-fourth to build permanent roads 
 which meet the specifications laid down by the Federal engineers and 
 agreed to by the State highway engineer or commissioners as being 
 suitable to the topography and needs of the community in question. 
 
 It might be well to mention the fact that cross-State highways be- 
 tween the large cities will, if built before the county roads are con- 
 structed, do much to antagonize farmers against good roads. 
 
 W. B. HAERIS, RENO COtTNTY ENGINEER, HUTCHINSON. 
 
 (1) As to a general plan upon which this Federal aid should be 
 given. 
 
 Should the Federal Government decide to contribute to the im- 
 provement of roads or a system of roads, either local, State, or 
 National, the Government authorities should first outline approxi- 
 mately the location of such roads or system of roads. 
 
 Since these roads should be so located that they will carry the 
 heaviest traffic, that with least expenditure in improving tributary 
 roads they vrill serve the largest possible, most densely populated 
 and productive territory, and will provide for this territory the 
 easiest access to market; that they will connect with least lost dis- 
 tance the principal cities and towns, and will be most easily and 
 cheaply maintained, the final location should by all means be ap- 
 proved by the Federal authorities before the work of improving is 
 begun. 
 
 The first Federal aid should be given only to such roads as will 
 form part of such highways or system of highways. 
 
 (2) To what extent the plan should require the State or local au- 
 thorities to contribute to the amount of money appropriated ; and to 
 what extent you think your State or local authorities would be 
 willing to cooperate with the Federal Government. 
 
 The plan should require the local authorities in this State to con- 
 tribute 50 per cent of the amount of money appropriated, and I think 
 our local authorities would be willing to cooperate with the Federal 
 Government to that extent. 
 
 (3) On what character of roads should the amount appropriated 
 by the Federal Government be used ? 
 
 To prescribe any particular material or materials, and limit Fed- 
 eral aid to roads constructed of such material or materials only, will 
 either increase enormously the cost of road building in certain locali- 
 ties or will eliminate the roads in these localities as possibilities in 
 forming part of a system of State or National highways. 
 
 The absence of any local material for building what are known as 
 permanent roads, and the fact that such material would have to be 
 shipped in from abroad, would render the cost of such roads greater 
 than the results obtained would justify in such sections as western 
 Kansas, for instance, where the average rainfall is light, and where 
 earth and sand-clay roads can be built and maintained in good condi- 
 tion the entire year round. 
 
 (4) Should the amount appropriated be limited to construction or 
 maintenance, or be given jointly for construction and maintenance? 
 
 The amount appropriated should be given jointly for construction 
 and maintenance for a period of at least five years. 
 
64 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 Proper maintenaiice work, as it would be carried on by the Federal 
 Government, would be worth more in an educational way than the 
 work of first construction. 
 
 (5) To what extent, if aid is given, should there be Federal super- 
 vision ? 
 
 The Federal Government should not contribute to either construc- 
 tion or maintenance work until the plans for both construction and 
 maintenance have been approved by the Federal authorities, and 
 there should be Federal supervision to whatever extent is necessary 
 to guarantee that both construction and maintenance work will con- 
 form to the plans as approved. 
 
 (6) Submit a detailed plan workable for Federal and State co- 
 operation in construction and maintenance. 
 
 Since the State of Kansas can not contribute to road improvement 
 no plan can be workable for Federal and State cooperation in this 
 State. 
 
 KENTUCKY. 
 ROBERT C. TERRELL, COMMISSIONBE OE PUBLIC EOADS, FEANKFOKT. 
 
 As to a general plan upon which Federal aid should be furnished : 
 The Government should furnish a fair proportion — say one-half or 
 one-third of the money necessary to construct and maintain roads — 
 the local authorities furnishing the remainder, the Government re- 
 taining control or supervision of the roads. This money should be 
 used on the main thoroughfares joining county seats, thereby making 
 the roads both accessible for post and military purposes. The system 
 would not only be of benefit to the counties, but would also furnish 
 easy routes for troops moving east, west, north, and south. 
 
 The money appropriated by the Federal Government should be 
 subject to use either for construction or maintenance, or both, as may 
 be directed by the Federal engineers. 
 
 If Federal aid is available, the Government should have supervi- 
 sion of the location and construction, and post carriers should be 
 daily inspectors over their respective routes, reporting deficiencies, 
 as they occur, to the local authorities and making a general report 
 to the office of piiblic roads once each month. 
 
 As regards a plan for Federal and State cooperation in construc- 
 tion and maintenance is a problem that has confronted the Engi- 
 neering Association for many years, and the Federal engineers are 
 probably better prepared to offer suggestions along this line than 
 State departments, which deal solely with local affairs. 
 
 MAINE. 
 PARKEK L. IIAEDISON, ' '0M:MTSS10NEE, HIOHWAY DEPARTMENT AITGtrSTA. 
 
 (1) As to a general plan upon which this Federal aid should be 
 given. 
 
 It is my opinion that the plan of distribution of the fund should 
 be left entirely to the Federal Government. 
 
 (2) To Avhat extent the plan should require the State or local 
 authorities to contribute to the amount of money appropriated* 
 
GOOD EOADS. 65 
 
 and to what extent do you think your State or local authorities would 
 be willing to cooperate with the Federal Government? 
 
 The State should appropriate at least one-half the amount. It is 
 my opinion that the State should be allowed to raise their part of 
 the joint fund by any method which they see fit. And I think our 
 State Avould take advantage of that proposition, and the matter 
 has already been passed to the legislature of this State, which is now 
 in sossion, to ascertain the opinion of that body. 
 
 (3) On what character of roads should the amount to be ap- 
 propriated by the Federal Government be used? 
 
 These roads should be selected by the State highway department 
 and referred to the Federal authorities for their approval, and the 
 class of road required should be recommended by the highway board 
 The proportion of the various classes of roads to be built might 
 be based on road mileage, or area. 
 
 (4) Should the amount appropriated be limited to construction 
 or maintenance, or be giNen jointly for the construction and main- 
 tenance ? 
 
 I think both construction and maintenance should be considered. 
 In my judgment if provision could be made for a division of the 
 allotment, if considered advisable by the State and Federal authori- 
 ties, and a part used in the opening up, or construction of earth 
 or gravel roads in the country, and a part for permanent construc- 
 tion, would appear to afford the greatest immediate improvement. 
 
 (5' To what extent, if aid is given, should there be Federal 
 supervision? 
 
 Either construction or maintenance should have the approval of 
 the Federal authority, but I think this could be done by the local 
 authorities in all of the States which have highway departments. 
 States not having highway departments would naturally require more 
 supervision than those which have these organizations. 
 
 (6) Submit a detailed plan workable for Federal and State cooper- 
 ation in construction and maintenance. 
 
 This State of Maine has a highway department, which could make 
 plans and estimates of the proposed work, both in maintenance and 
 construction, and all such work should be approved by the Federal 
 Government before work is begun. It would appear to me that a 
 law similar to one which we now have might be advantageous for 
 doing the work or awarding the contracts. Provision is made in our 
 law whereby local town authorities can contract to do the work with- 
 out asking for bids, providing they will accept the estimates of cost 
 of construction made by the department. This plan works well where 
 local authorities are equipped for doing the work and expedites 
 matters. 
 
 MARYLAND. 
 
 O. E. WELLER, CHAIRMAN MARYLAND STATE ROADS COMMISSION, BALTIMORE. 
 
 (1) As to general plan upon which this Federal aid should be 
 
 ^^ Federal aid should be given only on roads that will be used by 
 interstate traffic. Generally speaking, from one to two roads running 
 east and west and fronj one to two roads running from north to south, 
 79558— PT 1—13 — -5 
 
66 GOOD i;OADS. 
 
 (2) To what extent the plan should require the State or Iwal 
 authorities to contribute to the amount of money appropriated, and 
 to what extent you think your State or local authorities would be 
 willing to cooperate with the Federal Government ? 
 
 Roads should be built entirely by the Federal Government, without 
 aid from State or counties. 
 
 (3) On what character of roads should the amount appropriated by 
 the Federal Government be used? 
 
 The main through highways that connect with main highways of 
 the adjoining States. 
 
 (4) Should the amount appropriated be limited to construction or 
 maintenance, or be given jointly for cotistruction and maintenance? 
 
 The amount appropriated should cover both coni^truction and main- 
 tenance. 
 
 (5) To what extent, if aid is given, should there be Federal super- 
 vision ? 
 
 Federal supervision should extend over the entire work. 
 
 (6) Submit a detailed plan workable for Federal and State cooper- 
 ation in construction and maintenance. 
 
 If the Federal Government, State, and county cooperated in build- 
 ing roads, say, one-third of the cost being paid by each, the general 
 supervision should be in the hands of the Federal Government, but 
 the direct charge of the work should be in the hands of the State 
 highway commission. This aid should only be given to those States 
 in which there is an established State highway commission to handle 
 such work. 
 
 MASSACHUSETTS. 
 
 WILLIAM D. SOHIEE, CHAIRMAN MASSACHtTSBTTS HIGHWAY COMMISSION, 
 
 BOSTON. 
 
 First of all, no opinion as to the advisability or feasibility of the 
 giving of Federal aid for roads should be expressed by my commis- 
 sion or inferred from anything herein contained. I am merely 
 attempting to answer the specific questions contained in your letter. 
 
 The policy of the Government must be determined by the Congress 
 and the President, the desires of this Commonwealth determined and 
 expressed by the legislature and the governor, or by our Members in 
 the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States. 
 
 Federal aid in road building, involving the actual construction or 
 maintenance of roads on any mileage approaching even a system of 
 main through roads would involve an expenditure of several hundreds 
 of millions of dollars. 
 
 To form an opinion of much value as to the best method of securing 
 good results from Federal aid, one should be thoroughly familiar 
 with the conditions, laws, etc., in all the States. I am only acquainted 
 with some of the laws and conditions in the New England States, 
 particularly with those in Massachusetts. I shall, therefore, attempt 
 only to outline a few of the principles which I believe to be essential 
 if any substantial and lasting benefit is to be secured bv " Federal 
 aid." 
 
 (1) As to a general plan upon which this Federal aid should be 
 given. 
 
GOOD KOADS. 67 
 
 In my judgment not one dollar of Federal aid should be given any- 
 where for roads unless it is required by law to be spent upon some 
 particular road or roads, selected by a competent Federal road or 
 engineering department in conference or agreement with some de- 
 partment of like character in each State. 
 
 The work to be done should be carefully planned, plans and speci- 
 fications prepared and approved by the Federal department and the 
 department in the State for the specific work to be done on that 
 particular piece of road. This could be done in the first instance 
 by either the Federal or State department engineers and approved 
 or modified by the other. 
 
 No money should be paid from the Federal Treasury except upon 
 the certificate of some competent engineer, approved by the Federal 
 department, specifying the amount of work done, the amount of 
 money due, also stating that the work was satisfactory and as required 
 by the plans and specifications. 
 
 Provision should be made for interim payments, with proper re- 
 serves, as is usual in most contracts. 
 
 (2) To what extent the plan should require the State or local 
 authorities to contribute to the amount of money appropriated ; and 
 to what extent you think your State or local authorities would be 
 willing to cooperate with the Federal Government ? 
 
 My belief is that the State or local authorities should be required 
 to contribute say from one-half to two thirds, or even three-quarters, 
 of the money to be expended. 
 
 The law should provide that the money to be raised locally could 
 be provided from any source. State, county, municipality, or by 
 individuals and corporations. 
 
 If, as is done in France, the necessities of the community and its 
 ability to contribute were to be taken into account, as would seem 
 fair in determining what proportion of the cost it ought to be called 
 upon to provide, the valuation of the county or municipality in 
 which the road was located, divided by the miles of road it had to 
 care for, might be used as a fair measure. The required contribution 
 being less and the " Federal aid " more when the valuation per mile 
 of road was small and vice versa as such valuation per mile increased. 
 Most important, some adequate provision should be made for the 
 maintenance of the road when completed. The expense could be 
 paid by the same parties and in the same proportions as the con- 
 struction, but the Federal department should have authority to 
 require the necessary repairs to be made, or, if they were not made, 
 to have them made, with some provision whereby the Government 
 could collect from each of the other contributing parties their pro- 
 portion of the expense. 
 
 I think in Massachusetts it is probable that the State and local 
 authorities would be willing to cooperate upon properly selected 
 roads and on reasonable terms, specifications, etc., assuming that 
 " Federal aid '' was available. She would take her share, although 
 her representatives might not believe in the policy. 
 
 (3). On what character of roads should the amount appropriated 
 by the Federal Government be used ? 
 
 There is such a tremendous number of miles of road in the country 
 that I believe any Federal aid should be given only upon main 
 through routes located outside of thickly settled village streets. In 
 
68 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 Massachusetts the incorporated municipalities touch eacli other, and 
 in the first instance have charge of all the roads. The municipality, 
 not the county, is the governmental and taxing unit generally in 
 New England. Therein it differs from any other places in the 
 country. 
 
 These roads should be selected by the Federal and local road boards 
 or engineers (see answer No. 1), the act merely specifying the char- 
 acter of the road to be selected, and, perhaps, the proportion of the 
 total roads that might be built in any particular State. 
 
 This proportion might be based upon population, or road mileage. 
 
 What would be fairer to many States, and would more nearly 
 represent the use of the road and its value to the community, would 
 be a proportion based upon the population per mile of road, the 
 amount of aid given, therefore, being increased with the increased 
 number of vehicles using the road, necessitating an" increased cost 
 for construction and maintenance. Roads through thickly settled 
 territory, involving expensive construction, should not be constructed 
 with " Federal aid," or the expense would be enormous, and the 
 mileage secured too small to be of any real Federal value. 
 
 Any general distribution of small sums per mile to be spent by 
 local authorities would result in a wasteful expenditure without any 
 expert supervision, and with no resulting lasting benefits to the 
 road or the community. Such a result would soon discredit the 
 whole good roads movement. 
 
 The Government, if it goes into a road improvement at all, should, 
 at the very least, set an example of excellent construction and proper 
 maintenance, under the direction and supervision of experienced and 
 skillful engineers and road superintendents. The value of a good 
 example so set and maintained would be many times that of the 
 dollars expended. 
 
 The communities will always have to build and maintain almost 
 all the roads, and provide the greater part of the money. Of much 
 more value to the country than any number of dollars spent for 
 " Federal aid " on any plan would be the instructing of the local 
 authorities and road men how to spend their money economically, 
 how to select and use proper materials, how to build and how to 
 maintain good roads. 
 
 Consequently the mileage to be improved must be limited so that 
 any work that is done will be of some real lasting value, providing 
 a road that is adequate for the traffic which will go over it, and one 
 that is economical, taking cost, interest, and maintenance into ac- 
 count. 
 
 In this Commonwealth our former standard State highways, with 
 macadam 15 feet in width, a gravel shoulder 3 feet wide on each 
 side, with necessary drainage, and a foundation where necessary, 
 have cost about $10,000 a mile to construct. The yearly cost of each 
 mile is about $1,000 for interest, sinking fund, and maintenance. 
 
 On our heavily traveled, main roads, with modern traffic, we need 
 at least 18 feet of width of metal, and the motor vehicles make 
 necessary some strong method of construction of bituminous mac- 
 adam, concrete, or the like. All our main through roads have to be 
 coated with some bituminous material to prevent their being rutted, 
 raveled, and quickly destroyed by motor vehicles. The cost in the 
 future will probably be $15,000 a mile. 
 
GOOD EOADS. 69 
 
 It '"'oiilcl seem to me that the roads should only be built where 
 they will be enough used by somebody to make the value received by 
 the community m the near future, at least, greater than the yearly 
 cost tor interest, maintenance, etc. 
 
 (4) Should the amount appropriated be limited to construction or 
 maintenance, or be given jointly for construction and maintenance? 
 
 Both construction and maintenance might be considered. Main- 
 tenance on roads selected as above outlined, when they are already 
 built and in proper condition, and construction when the selected 
 road required construction or reconstruction. 
 
 One suggestion (made by Mr. Lyon, of Xew York) was that the 
 Government might appropriate a certain amount per mile per ^ear, 
 proportioned on the mileage of through routes in each State, with 
 a limit of the mileage in each State of, say, not over two per cent 
 of its roads ; that this money should be expended, first, in shaping, 
 repairing, and making passable a reasonably good country dirt road 
 on the whole route, at a cost of, say, not 'over $50 a mile a year, 
 and the balance of the appropriation (he suggested $400 a mile a 
 year on 2 per cent of the roads, all to be on through routes) should 
 be spent in constructing, year by year, the most important and worst 
 sections on the route until the whole was constructed. 
 
 If the roads were selected by competent Government and local 
 road boards, or engineers, and not for political reasons, the expendi- 
 tures limited to through routes, and all work done, specified, and 
 supervised by the same experts or persons selected by them, some 
 such plan might be workable, and produce good results. 
 
 It surely would produce results if all the persons in charge were 
 competent, faithful, and did their full duty. 
 
 (5) To what extent, if aid is given, should there be Federal super- 
 vision ? 
 
 Not one dollar of the Government's money should, in my opinion, 
 be spent upon any road, or for any work, without Federal super- 
 vision, though in many cases the Government department, or engi- 
 neers, could select some local supervisor, or possibly take the certifi- 
 cate from a State or other engineer, who could act jointly with the 
 Federal officer, but enough Federal inspection would be necessary 
 to make sure proper results were being secured, and that certificates, 
 etc., were correct. 
 
 (6) Submit a detailed plan workable for Federal and State co- 
 operation in construction and maintenance. 
 
 Taking this State, where there has been a State highway com- 
 mission with an organized force of engineers actually engaged in 
 road construction for the past 20 years, the plan outlined in the an- 
 swer to your query No. 4, or almost any other plan, would be 
 workable. 
 
 Our engineers, after a given road was selected and agreed upon, 
 could furnish plans and prepare specifications for either construc- 
 tion or maintenance, the Federal department having adopted some 
 standard specification for different classes of work. When these 
 were approved by our board they could be sent to the Federal board, 
 or engineers, for approval or modification. The Federal authorities 
 could then agree to pay their proportion of the amount the Govern- 
 ment was to pay upon estimates made from time to time. 
 
70 GOOD ROADS. 
 
 These estimates should show the actual work done, but payment 
 should only be made for 85 per cent, a reserve being kept to insure 
 the completion of the contract. (We generally reserve 15 per cent 
 until 60 days after contract work is completed.) 
 
 Our commission could then advertise for bids and let the contract. 
 
 Our engineers could supervise the work, and the Federal inspec- 
 lor merely inspect sufficiently to be sure that our engineers did their 
 duty competently. 
 
 The payments could be made by both the Government and the 
 State, county, or town, based upon the engineers' estimate, the Fed- 
 eral inspector's approval being icquired before the Government made 
 any payments. 
 
 I am inclined to believe that as a prerequisite to receiving any Federal 
 aid, every State or Territory should be required to establish some 
 State highway board, with competent engineer, or secure a competent 
 State engineer who could do the work. Already a majority of States 
 have some such board or engineer. Such a requirement would in- 
 evitably lead to better and more economical methods of road con- 
 struction and maintenance, not only for the State itself but for all 
 the communities therein. It would soon prevent a great deal of ex- 
 travagant and wasteful expeditures which are now being made, and 
 would soon secure better roads. 
 
 Above all, do not let the Government either borrow or provide 
 money for roads without some adequate and proper provision for 
 their maintenance, lest in a year or two the roads have been destroyed 
 and most of the money expended lost. 
 
 I merely present these ideas for what they are worth, realizing 
 fully that if I knew the laws and conditions which exist in other 
 States as well as I know our own, they might be changed or modi- 
 fied, excepting as to the absolute necessity for proper work, planned 
 by experienced engineers, and built under suitable specifications, 
 with some adequate provision for the future maintenance of the 
 roads. 
 
 MISSISSIPPI. 
 
 HEUBERT GILLIS, EX OFriCIO CLERK, COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, 
 
 HATTIESBURG. 
 
 (1) As to the general plan upon which the Federal aid should be 
 given. 
 
 Where the people of any State or locality manifest a real healthy 
 interest in good, public highways, and evidence the same by raising 
 not less than $50,000 or $100,000 for the specific purpose of con- 
 structing and maintaining good roads, and really desire and need 
 Federal aid, then the Federal Government could profitably join in 
 the expenditures to the extent of, say 25 per cent or 10 per cent of the 
 amount necessaiy for the perfection of the work, and, in addition, 
 furnish an experienced road-construction man to cooperate with the 
 local engineer. 
 
 Tn localities greatly in need of highly imjiroved public thorough- 
 fares, where the required amount or necessary funds could not be 
 raised readily, or raised with probable detriment to the people, the 
 Federal Government might profitably say to such a locality, if the 
 people will agree to and come together with their labor and teams 
 
GOOD EOADS. 71 
 
 in sufficient strength and numbers to build, in not Loo long a time, a 
 specified number of miles of good road, then certain Federal aid, both 
 in funds and general supervision, will be forthcoming, proportioned, 
 of course, according to the number of miles built or to be built and 
 the perfection of the work. 
 
 Every county or good-roads district proposing to do, but not 
 financially able to do, to perfection, could be greatly helped and en- 
 couraged by Federal aid, and where the people are not financially 
 able to do at all, and really want good roads and willingly join 
 themselves in sufficient strength and numbers, the Federal Govern- 
 ment could greatly aid and encourage the building of good, public 
 highways. 
 
 (2) To what extent should the plan require State or local authori- 
 ties to contribute to the amount of money appropriated ; and to what 
 extent do you think your State or local authorities would be willing 
 to cooperate with the Federal Government? 
 
 The Federal Government should, in every instance, require some- 
 thing of the locality to be helped, and should help on a percentage 
 basis; say, furnish cooperative supervision throughout, and aid in 
 money to the extent of about 25 per cent or 10 per cent of the work 
 actually to be done to completion. 
 
 Local authorities would most likely prefer pecuniary aid or roads 
 built on a percentage basis and cooperative supervision on the part 
 of the Federal Government. 
 
 (3) On what character of roads should the amount appropriated 
 by the Federal Government be used? 
 
 On the main thoroughfares, or roads having to bear the burden 
 of travel, and more especially rural free delivery routes. 
 
 (4) Should the amount appropriated be limited to construction 
 or maintenance, or be given jointly for construction and mainte- 
 nance ? 
 
 All appropriations and aid otherwise should by all means be given 
 counties or good-road districts for proper laying out and construc- 
 tion of the most traveled roads. People once accustomed to good 
 roads seldom, if ever, refuse or neglect to maintain theiii. 
 
 (5) To what extent, if aid is given, should there be Federal super- 
 vision ? 
 
 Federal supervision should be given to the same extent that Fed- 
 eral aid is given, conditioned somewhat, however, on local condi- 
 tions and circumstances, and the healthiness of the sentiment in 
 favor of construction and maintenance of first-class public high- 
 ways. 
 
 (6) Submit a detailed plan workable for Federal and State coop- 
 eration in construction and maintenance. 
 
 If any county or good-roads district, or even an entire State, is 
 sufficiently interested in the building and keeping up of strictly 
 high-class roads, to expend, or be willing and ready to expend, an 
 appreciable amount, say not less than $50,000 or $100,000 m one 
 immediate locality, in the proper construction of the same, then the 
 Federal Government might profitably join the loCal authorities to the 
 extent of from 10 to 25 per cent of the cost and supervision m the 
 work of laying out and construction of the roads, under certain 
 understood and agreed-to stipulations favorable to the best interest 
 of the counties or good-road districts. 
 
72 GOOD KOADS. 
 
 Real facts and conditions locally could be reliably obtained from 
 rural-route carriers, good-road engineers, and experts in the employ 
 of the Federal Government, as well as from local road or highway 
 commissioners and other local authorities. 
 
 G. A. m'iLHENNY, SECEETARY ROAD COMMISSION, FOREST. 
 
 (1) For each State, county, or district where there is a bond issue 
 or direct tax levy in compliance with State laws, for the purpose 
 of building and maintaining a permanent highway, under direcfion 
 of a competent engineer and supervision of properly constituted 
 officers, the Federal Government should contribute an amount equal 
 to 20 per cent of the total estimate for construction and a propor- 
 tionate amount for maintenance of post roads. 
 
 The good-roads department should also furnish a consulting engi- 
 neer when requested to pass on specifications and advise means and 
 methods for upkeep of all roads so constructed. The 20 per cent 
 for construction should apply to roads now under construction, and 
 the 20 per cent for maintenance should apply to all permanently 
 constructed post roads. 
 
 Government aid should be given to post roads, whether built by 
 States, county, district, or j ointly . Roads built by subscription, where 
 there is no bond issue or tax levy for maintenance, should not receive 
 Government aid, because, as a rule, they are poorly built and 
 neglected. The roads and official acts of those in charge should 
 always be open to inspection by a Government representative, to 
 see that the funds have been properly expended. 
 
 The Government should be guaranteed good faith on the part of 
 the county or district and supplied with transcripts of all proceed- 
 ings, under oath, up to date of application for Government aid and at 
 any subsequent time on request of the proper United States official. 
 
 (2) Eighty per cent of the cost of construction and maintenance. 
 Chapters 145, 174, and 257, Laws of Mississippi, 1912, would cover 
 necessary legislation, and would permit the commissioners or super- 
 visors to cooperate with the Federal Government. It would, how- 
 ever, be optional with local officials as to whether national aid would 
 be asked or not. There could be an act passed, however, authoriz- 
 ing cooperation with the Federal Government. 
 
 (3) On post roads built and maintained by tax or bond issue under 
 proper supervision. 
 
 (4) Both. (See first answer.) 
 
 (5) Federal supervision should go far enough to see that the 
 appropriation is properly expended, and to see that the local appro- 
 priation is expended properly in proportion to Federal appropria- 
 tion as the work progresses. The Federal Government being now 
 jointly interested, should have at all times free access to all records 
 and given every facility for thorough inspection of work as well as 
 of all records and accounts. 
 
 Summary of conditions favorable to Government aid : Bond issue 
 by State, county, or district; laws compelling tax levies for main- 
 tenance ; properly prepared plans and specifications ; legally consti- 
 tuted commissioners or officials in charge ; feasible routes for United 
 States mail; when combined funds are adequate; when the State 
 Ifiws guarantee permanency. 
 
GOOD EOADS. 73 
 
 (6) I would suggest that where the State, county, or district elects 
 to issue bonds or provides a tax levy Jior the purpose of building 
 and maintaining a permanent highway on star routes or rural free- 
 delivery routes and the law under which it is proposed guarantees 
 permanency, and the officials in charge ask Federal aid, on properly 
 prepared forms, the Office of Good Roads should s'end a representa- 
 tive to look the route over, pass on the feasibility, the adequacy of 
 the combined appropriation to build and maintain, advise with 
 local authorities relative to road rules, and mode of travel looking 
 to the protection of the road. When plans and specifications and 
 contract form have been prepared by the engineer in charge, a 
 Federal representative should be present when adopted or a certi- 
 fied copy furnished the department. 
 
 When work is done by contract not more than 80 per cent of the 
 engineer's estimate of the work done should be paid as the work 
 progresses, the other 20 per cent reserved until final acceptance. 
 These estimates should be monthly, and the pay warrants covering 
 the 80 per cent of estimates should be drawn pro rata on the local and 
 Federal funds, applying strictly to the contract. Other expenses cov- 
 ering the month should be drawn in full pro rata on the two funds, 
 and in the final settlement the other 20 per cent could be drawn pro 
 lata on the two funds. 
 
 When possible a Federal representative should be present when 
 the route is adopted, when plans and specifications are adopted, when 
 contract is let, and on final acceptance of the road. A map in detail 
 showing roads receiving national aid should be filed by local author- 
 ities with national good roads department. 
 
 It is difficult to formulate a workable plan that will fit existing 
 laws in the different States. My idea would be for you to formulate 
 a plan along the lines suggested, submit the proposition to~ each 
 State, and the State could then, where necessary, so amend its laws 
 as to enable the districts, counties, or States to cooperate with the 
 Government. In the meantime I want to say that our people have 
 great respect for the opinion of a representative from the good roads 
 department, and one of the greatest works the department can do 
 is to send a representative into each county who can present the 
 Government proposition, look over the mail routes, and advise with 
 the people. That was done in this district, and had it not been 
 done the people would perhaps ne^'er have united on this proposi- 
 tion. The result is we have a bond issue of $75,000 on a little over 
 a $1,000,000 assessment. Two department men came in here and 
 started us off. Now we have the very valuable aid of Mr. J. T. 
 BuUen, from the department, as consulting engineer, although our 
 engineer in charge is a very competent man. We have used Mr. 
 BuUen along the lines above suggested. His presence has inspired 
 confidence, and the results have emboldened me to make the above 
 suggestions. 
 
 MISSOURI. 
 J. B. GRIGG, SEOEETAEY MISSOURI HIGHWAY ASSOCIATION, JEFFERSON CITY. 
 
 (1) We have no general plan to submit for Federal aid at the- 
 present time, as we have no State highway department to give ex- 
 
74 GOOD KOADS. 
 
 pression to plans which would be in any wajr State authority. Our 
 association is now endeavoring to mold public opinion in the direc- 
 tion of creating, by the incoming legislature, a State highway depart- 
 ment. If we are successful in our purpose, we will have our State 
 commissioner, when appointed, give the matter his attention and 
 submit his suggestions. 
 
 (2) My opinion is that one-third the cost of construction should 
 be furnished by Government aid and two-thirds by the State or local 
 authorities. 
 
 (3) Federal aid should be extended for the construction only of 
 permanent rock roads, built according to the latest approved methods 
 of construction. 
 
 (4) There should be the same division of cost for maintenance 
 as for construction. Construction without a provision for a fund 
 for maintenance is a waste of money. . 
 
 (5) There should be entire Federal supervision of the construc- 
 tion of roads by Government aid to insure uniform character of road- 
 bed and surfacing. Maintenance could be left to the supervision of 
 State authorities under advice from the Federal authority. 
 
 (6) For the same reason expressed in answer to question number 
 one we can not at this time submit a workable plan for Federal and 
 State cooperation in construction and maintenance. We are heartily 
 in favor of Federal aid to States in road construction, and we regret 
 that we are unable at the present time to authoritatively assist in 
 submitting plans to that end. Our people are very much alive to the 
 fact that they must do something to bring about a more systematic 
 plan of road building than has been in force, and we feel quite sure 
 that our incoming legislature will assist our efforts in harmonizing 
 and crystalizing public opinion to the end that we will have State 
 aid administered through a State highway department. 
 
 NEW HAMPSHIRE. 
 S. PERCY HOOKER, STATE SUPERINTENDENT OF HIGHWAYS, CONCORD. 
 
 (1) As to a general plan upon which this Federal aid should be 
 given : 
 
 Federal aid should be given in conjunction with and through the 
 various State highway departments. States not having such depart- 
 ments should be required to establish them prior to any such aid. It 
 should be distributed on the basis of the mileage of road within the' 
 State, the gross amount of such aid being determined for each State. 
 
 All roads Avithin a State should be classified into five classes : 
 
 1. Municipal or compact portion. 2. Through roads. 3. Second- 
 ary roads. 4. Subsidiary roads. 5. Local roads. 
 
 Classes 1 and 5 should receive no Federal aid and should not be 
 ■considered in the total State mileage. The classification of such roads 
 should take into account: (1) Population, (2) volume of local traffic, 
 (3) volume of through traffic. The latter to be determined by the 
 particular circumstances which will tend to make this road partic- 
 ularly needed as an adjunct to interstate and interurban traffic. A 
 system of units might be devised which would establish a mathe- 
 matical system by which the classes of roads might be determined. 
 
GOOD HOADS. 75 
 
 (2) To Mhat extent the. plan should require the State or local au- 
 thorities to contribute to the amount of money appropriated, and to 
 what extent you think your State or local authorities would be will- 
 ing to cooperate with the Federal Government ? 
 
 Federal aid should be contingent upon the contribution by the 
 State or local authorities of at least an equal amount. The Federal 
 Government should have nothing to do with the subcontribution of 
 a municipality, the State standing sponsor for a contribution of an 
 equal amount, though this could be raised or levied in such manner 
 as the State government should desire. 
 
 I think if the plan as eventually worked out was satisfactory the 
 State of New Mampshire would be glad to enter into the plan of 
 Federal aid. This, it will be understood, is simply a personal opin- 
 ion and should be not understood as expressing the views of the 
 legislature and governor. 
 
 (3) On what character of roads should the amount appropriated 
 by the Federal Government be used ? 
 
 The roads having been classified as contemplated before the State 
 governments should be allowed to choose M'hich class of roadway 
 should be improved and select the locations. 
 
 The mileage of these classes to be improved to be determined by the 
 gross amount available in State and Federal funds. (That is, the 
 State might select where they desired 30 miles in class 3, or 10 miles 
 in class 1.) 
 
 (4) Should the amount appropriated be limited to construction or 
 maintenance, or be given jointly for construction and maintenance? 
 
 The money should be devoted to both construction and mainte- 
 nance, such maintenance to be confined to the sections built by Fed- 
 eral aid. 
 
 A certain amount per mile might be set aside by the Federal Gov- 
 ernment for such maintenance, varying with the construction class. 
 
 A State government should be required to submit an estimate show- 
 ing the amount required for maintenance for the ensuing year on 
 each road constructed under Federal aid and should be required to 
 furnish the money in excess of the Federal aid for such maintenance. 
 
 The Federal (government should have the right, if the State de- 
 partment neglected any road built under the act, to repair, rebuild, 
 and properly maintain the same, the cost thereof to be charged to the 
 State and all moneys available for maintenance or construction with- 
 held with the amount of cost thereof. 
 
 The Federal Government always being able to recoup itself for 
 any expenditures made necessary by the laxity of the State govern- 
 ment. 
 
 (5) To what extent, if aid is given, should there be Federal super- 
 vision ? 
 
 Federal Government should have employees located with each 
 State highway department who should in conjunction with that de- 
 partment pas's upon plans, specifications, etc., and report upon the 
 actual carrying out of these plans. He should not be clothed with 
 any authority which would bring him into direct contact with the 
 contractor. 
 
 If in his judgment the State department was not carrying out the 
 views of the Federal Government he should in writing advise the 
 State officials and the Federal department and the latter should have 
 
76 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 the right to withhold any money available for such construction when 
 the practices used are not approved by it. 
 
 (6) Submit a detailed plan workable for Federal and State cooper- 
 ation in construction and maintenance. 
 
 A Federal Government should require the classifications of roads 
 as outlined above in each State and should adopt such means to ver- 
 ify the figures and classifications of the State departments as seemed 
 necessary. 
 
 The total amount available should be divided by the number of 
 miles in the classes entitled to State aid and the State department 
 should then be informed of the total amount available for Federal 
 aid. 
 
 The department should prepare specifications for varied characters 
 of road, the use of any one of which would be satisfactory to the 
 Government upon the class of road indicated. That is, on class 2, 
 they might draw specifications for paving, bituminous, or concrete 
 construction. For class 3, macadam, with or without a bituminous 
 surface application, subbase roads requiring a lesser amount of 
 crushed stone, etc. For class 4, gravel or screened gravel. With the 
 various classes different culverts might be required. 
 
 The State department should then advise the Federal Govern- 
 ment that the portion of money which was to be contributed by it 
 was available. 
 
 The State department should next advise the Federal as to the 
 location of the various roads which it desired to build under Federal 
 aid. It should indicate the type of road, within the classification, 
 which it desired to use upon this section of highway. The plans 
 should then be gone over by the Federal employee in the State de- 
 partment and passed upon by him. Contracts might be then let by 
 the State department subject to approval of the Federal employee. 
 All payments should be made primarily by the State government. 
 
 Upon the completion of any road it should be subject to Federal 
 inspection as to whether it had been built in accordance with the 
 plans and specifications elected, and if satisfactory should be ac- 
 cepted by the Federal Government, who shoiild thereupon remit to 
 the State department its proportion of such cost. 
 
 It seems to me that the essential part of Federal aid should be 
 that of advice to the State departments and a further seal of its 
 approval prior to its expending any money. It is essential that there 
 be no divided responsibility as to the carrying out of the plans of the 
 Federal Government and it seems that it would be unwise to allow its 
 employees "to have any direct supervision because of the added engi- 
 neering and supervision cost which would practically be in addition 
 to the necessary ones of the State department. 
 
 It is imperative that as large a per cent of the money as possible 
 go into the actual construction of a road rather than to the expense 
 of employees and the creation of a gigantic department which must 
 of necessity be unwieldy and the head of which can personally know 
 little about the execution except through reports from his sub- 
 ordinates. 
 
 I realize that with the extremely varying opinions as to methods 
 of Federal aid that very little attention can be given to a separate 
 plan. I presume that a workable plan might be settled upon which 
 
GOOD EOADS. 77 
 
 wa.s entirely different in character and did not contain a single idea 
 herein expressed, but I submit this as my present idea as to how it 
 might best be worked out. 
 
 NEW MEXICO. 
 EGBERT P. KRVIEN, SECRETARY STATE HIGHWAY CO:MMISSION, SAiS'TA YE. 
 
 I would suggest the following: That the Government should build 
 a portion of the post road and also a portion of some other State 
 road. In connection with this the State should build an equal por- 
 tion of the post road and an equal portion on some State road, the 
 Government to maintain the post road and the State to maintain its 
 State road. 
 
 I would suggest that these two roads be picked out for uniformity 
 in character as nearly as possible in order that we may determine 
 who gives the best care to the same at the least expense. 
 
 You must realize that the State does not have near the funds at 
 its disposal that the Government has for building roads and main- 
 taining them, and if a like amount was expended by each wii could 
 then determine the best results. 
 
 Regarding the submitting of a detailed plan workable for Federal 
 and State cooperation in construction and maintenance I think this 
 can only be done by a conference between one of your supervisors 
 and our State engineer. Mr. Burrell, of the Department of Agri- 
 culture, has been here lecturing on good roads, and I think he will 
 advise you from his department that our conditions are considerably 
 different from most of the conditions that he has been lecturing 
 about. Our roads are practically dry 360 days of the year, and there 
 is no possibility of caring for the same under the same plans and 
 conditions that the eastern and southern roads are taken care of, 
 where there seems to be plenty of rainfall. 
 
 The road business is comparatively new to some of the members 
 of our commission, the only practical man on this work being our 
 State engineer, who has really been connected with the Reclamation 
 Service and not with many good roads projects. 
 
 We are endeavoring to obtain the best results on a very small 
 amount of money which is permitted for use by the State. Our as- 
 sessments are small and our taxation must naturally correspond. 
 
 NEW YORK. 
 0. GORDON REEL, SUPERINTENDENT OF PIIGIIWAYS, ALBANY. 
 
 (1) Any plan of Federal aid to be successful must take cognizance 
 of the different steps of development of the highway systems of the 
 different States of the Union, the character of the mileage of each, 
 and the amount of funds locally available for construction and mam- 
 tenance. In some States highway improvement by the State has 
 made only a small beginning, while in others a considerable amount 
 of progress has been made. 
 
78 Goc 
 
 U I\\JJA.iJi3, 
 
 The State highway and county highway systems of the State of 
 New York contemplate an improved mileage of 12,000 miles and 
 form a network covering the entire State and touching bordering 
 States and Provinces at through traffic points, so any plan of Fed- 
 eral aid must, of necessity, be superimposed to a large extent on im- 
 provements already made or about to be made by this State, and any 
 attempt to confine Federal aid to our present unimproved highways, 
 or town roads, as we designate them, would result in a fantastic 
 layout. 
 
 Therefore any proposition of Federal aid for the State of New 
 York must of necessity be based upon the maintenance of roads now 
 improved and cooperation with the State in the improvement of the 
 portions now unimproved. 
 
 (2) In my opinion the most just and practical plan for the im- 
 provement of highways by means of Federal aid is a plan in which 
 the Federal Government and the several States join in furnishing 
 funds for such improvement, the State having charge of the actual 
 work of improvement, the Federal department of highways having 
 general supervision of the execution of plans previously agreed on 
 between itself and the State, the amount of such aid to each State 
 to be determined by a graduated scale of payments by the Federal 
 Government to the different States, the percentage of such scale be- 
 ing det examined by assessed valuation of each State (the poorer States 
 being entitled to a higher percentage and the more wealthy a lower) , 
 and the amount to be paid fixed by computing this percentage upon 
 the. amount raised by the State itself for the purpose of repair and 
 maintenance as a basis. This is along somewhat similar lines to the 
 preseiit plan under which the State of New York pays State aid to 
 the towns thereof. The percentage of State aid is as follows : 
 
 In towns having an assessed valuation of $5,000 or less per mile, 
 100 per cent ; $5,000 to $7,000 valuation per mile, 90 per cent ; $7,000 
 to $9,000 valuation per mile, 80 per cent; $9,000 to $11,000 valuation 
 per mile. 70 per cent; $11,000 to $13,000 valuation per mile. 60 per 
 cent; $13,000 to $25,000 valuation per mile, 50 per cent ; over $25,000, 
 one-tenth of 1 per cent of the assessed valuation. 
 
 In explanation of the actual working of the foregoing, suppose that 
 a town having a valuation of $5,000 to- $7,000 per mile raises by tax 
 $4^000 for highway purposes, by the table we find that its valuation 
 entitles the town to 90 per cent of State aid, consequently the State 
 donates to the town $3,600, making a total of $7,600 available for 
 highway purposes therein. 
 
 Federal aid should, in my opinion, be granted only to States hav- 
 ing State highway departments, organized under laws which create 
 such departments, as a fixed and permanent organization. 
 
 (3) Of necessity, in the State of New York the character of roads 
 to be benefited would be both improved and unimproved highways, 
 having in mind that ultimately the entire mileage will be an improved 
 mileage. In many other States existing conditions are exactly the re- 
 verse of this, and an entirely different character of improvement and 
 method of treatment must be adapted for a long period to come. Un- 
 der a " Federal aid " plan the Federal department of highways might 
 determine in each commonwealth the particular form in which Fed- 
 eral aid should be applied, thus securing, as I believe, in connection 
 with the State aid feature outlined in (2) the very best results pos- 
 
\ji\j\ju IuTaDS. 
 
 7» 
 
 sible for any given expenditure. Under this plan a given amount 
 of money is set aside by the Federal Government to add to that set 
 aside by the State, the amount thereof being in proportion to the 
 needs of the State and the manner of its expenditure being deter- 
 mined by taking into consideration both the character of highways 
 to be improved and the amount of funds available therefor. 
 
 (4) In my opinion Federal aid must necessarily be applied to both 
 construction and maintenance as, for example, presumably, the system 
 of highways eligible to receive Federal aid in the State of New York 
 will in the very near future all be improved highways of a high class. 
 In some of the other States a very large percentage of the mileage 
 which would naturally come within the scope of a " Federal aid " 
 plan must, for a long time, consist of earth roads, and some of these 
 extremely poor quality; consequently the Federal highway depart- 
 ment should be, in my opinion, allowed to exercise its discretion as 
 to the amount per mile to' be expended, both in determining the char- 
 acter and amount of improvement and the character and amount of 
 maintenance which should be applied to any road within the scope 
 of the " Federal aid " plan. 
 
 (5) The funds provided by the Federal Government should be 
 applied by the State department of highways under the general su- 
 pervision of the Federal Government to such an extent as would 
 satisfy the Federal Government that the money had been wisely 
 and economically applied. The character and place of expenditure 
 should be determined by agreement between the Federal and State au- 
 thorities as to whether the same should be applied to construction or 
 maintenance or both. 
 
 (6) As answered in (2) the States would receive Federal aid in 
 varying percentages, but each State would have a fixed percentage 
 applicable to the entire State. When Federal aid would be applied 
 to the improvement of any highway the amount would be determined 
 by this factor applied to the cost of the improvement and similarly 
 the amount to be applied in maintenance would be determined by 
 this same factor applied to the amount raised by the State locally. 
 
 The affairs of Federal aid should be administered by a Federal 
 highway department organized under laws giving it competent juris- 
 diction. Actual construction in the different States by a Federal 
 department of highways direct, unless such State has no organized 
 commission or department of highways, I should regard as unwork- 
 able, unwise, and doomed to failure from the beginning. Under a 
 "Federal aid" plan as outlined in (2) and (3), if sharing in the 
 expense of the repair and maintenance of Federal-aid roads the 
 Federal highway department may be given authority and control 
 sufficient to safeguard the monetary interests of the Federal Govern- 
 ment and to make certain that plans desired by the Federal highway 
 department are properly carried out at the same time utilizing the 
 local organization of the different State highway departments in the 
 execution of such plans. 
 
 WM. E. PETTY, ACTING DIVISION ENGINEEE, DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS, 
 
 WATEETOWN. 
 
 Several States, New York among them, are spending large sums 
 of money for highway construction, while others are doing but little 
 or nothing, so it seems but fair that Federal aid to any State or 
 
80 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 county should be based upon the money actually expended by that 
 State or county for permanent highway improvement, and should be 
 used only for such improvement, as the so-called temporary repairs 
 are a waste of money in this section. 
 
 The amount appropriated should, I believe, be used entirely for 
 construction, the local authorities to arrange for the maintenance. 
 
 The Federal supervision should be confined to apportioning the 
 funds appropriated, and to giving assistance when requested by the 
 local authorities in organizing and supervising local bureaus for con- 
 struction and maintenance work. 
 
 There should be a Federal employee in each district familiar with 
 construction and maintenance work, whose duty it would be to exam- 
 ine and inspect the construction and maintenance of the highways 
 and report to the Federal bureau head. Some provision should be 
 made for withholding the Federal aid if the local authorities wasted 
 their funds or did not keep the roads in good condition after con- 
 struction. 
 
 The proportion of the money appropriated by the Federal Govern- 
 ment to the amount appropriated by the local government would be 
 the principal factor in determining the extent of the Federal super- 
 vision, as it would not be desirable to use a large percentage of the 
 appropriation for supervision. 
 
 A Federal bureau at Washington, with subbureaus in each State 
 or district, these subbureaus to be in close touch with the State 
 department of highways, so that the Federal bureau would know at 
 all times the State's expenditures for permanent highways and their 
 condition. 
 
 A. C. EAPEI^JE. SUPERINTENDENT DUTCHESS COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF 
 HIGHWATS, POUGHKEEPSIE. 
 
 Your communication of 21st instant, in which you ask me to giro 
 my views on six questions, pertaining to " Federal aid in the con- 
 struction of post roads," is at hand. For the past five years I have 
 been connected with town road work, and have seen a large number 
 of State and county roads constructed, also repaired. From this 
 experience I have gathered that any Federal aid given through the 
 medium of State aid for this class of work would become involved 
 in an enormous additional expenditure for disbursement on account 
 of increased oiEcial staff, clerical aid, inspection, etc. In my opinion 
 the establishment of a Federal aid bureau, similar to our town high- 
 way bureau, working on a basis only to assist towns in bettering the 
 condition of rural free delivery routes, would be the ideal problem 
 for Federal aid, and let the State and county roads take care of 
 themselves. In aiding this class of roads you are reaching out to aid 
 a vastly greater number of people than would be possible by assisting 
 in building a speedway from coast to coast largely for the wealthy 
 automobile class. We have in this county miles and miles of roads 
 over which rural free delipery routes are operating that are very 
 much in need of repairs, viz, subbase of stone, improved drainage 
 concrete sluices, and dangerous curves. To my mind work of this 
 class performed with the Federal and State aids would be far-reach- 
 ing in its favorable impression with all classes and conditions of 
 mankind who travel these roads. In the State of New York there 
 
GOOD EOADS. 81 
 
 has not yet been perfected a road surface on State or county roads 
 that will withstand the traffic ; cases in our county are not only fre- 
 quent but general where roads completed last year have gone to 
 pieces on the surface and required repairs this year. The resurfac- 
 ing work done throughout this county this year on certain roads 
 was done in a manner that has created much dissatisfaction with 
 all users of the roads. For this reason I feel that to aid this class 
 of work would simply be assisting in a cause which is yet lacking in 
 standards and has not yet reached a strictly business basis. In other 
 words, to speak plainly and truthfully, politics and the best sort of 
 road work are not good mixers. 
 
 IKANK D. LYON, FOBMERLY DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF NEW YORK STATE, 
 
 ALBANY. 
 
 (1) As to a general plan upon which this Federal aid should be 
 given : 
 
 The first and most important step would seem to be the establish- 
 ment of a Federal highway department, the chief of such department 
 by law clothed with sufficient power and authority to cooperate with 
 and to offer to the various States such inducements as might be pro- 
 vided by law for perfecting an organization within any State for the 
 purpose of the repair, improvement, and maintenance of such public 
 highways as shall have been adopted as Federal highways by the 
 legislature of any State after having been approved by the Federal 
 department of highways. 
 
 Such department having been established by the Federal Govern- 
 ment, and a department also having been established within any State 
 desirous of obtaining Federal aid for the repair, improvement, and 
 maintenance of such designated Federal highways, then, in accord- 
 ance with an equitable plan inaugurated and provided for by proper 
 appropriations for Federal aid, Federal aid could then be granted to 
 the various States. 
 
 The construction and maintenance of Federal highways by the 
 United States Government at its expense can not be regarded as 
 Federal aid. Federal aid for the improvement, repair, and main- 
 tenance of a Federal highway would, be perfectly proper, but for a 
 Federal Government to undertake to inaugurate a system of construe-- 
 tion or building of such Federal roads and the maintenance of the 
 same at the sole expense of the United States Government could not 
 and should not be deemed wise or expedient under the guise of Fed- 
 eral aid. 
 
 (2) To what extent the plan should require the State or local 
 authorities to contribute to the amount of money appropriated, and 
 to what extent do you think your State or local authorities would be 
 willing to cooperate with the Federal Government? 
 
 New York State within the next two years will have completed the 
 construction of all of the main highways of the State which could 
 possibly be designated as Federal highways, and it would seem that 
 the Legislature of the State of New York would be willing to coop- 
 erate through its highway department with the Federal department 
 of highways to the extent of designating such main thoroughfares 
 as might be accepted and established as Federal highways by the 
 
 79558— PT 1—13 6 
 
82 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 Federal department in conjunction with the legislature of the State. 
 This possibly will involve from 800 to 1,000 miles of mam thorough- 
 fares in New York State upon which Federal aid could be granted 
 to the extent of an average sum of $400 or $500 per mile per year, 
 which sum could only be used for maintenance or additional improve- 
 ment of any Federal highway already constructed within New York 
 State ; or, in case such approved Federal highway is not constructed, 
 the average sum per mile per year could be used to aid in construc- 
 tion. In either event the money i)aid by the Federal Government 
 either for maintenance or construction should be in accordance with 
 rules and regulations prescribed by the Federal Government or in 
 accordance with plans submitted to and approved by the Federal 
 Government. 
 
 It would not seem proper that Federal aid should be granted to 
 any State not having a regular department regularly organized for 
 the proper conduct of the work of repair, improvement, and main- 
 tenance of its public thoroughfares. 
 
 I would call particular attention to the words that I am using in 
 description, namely, " improvement, repair, and mnintenance." I 
 have been very careful to avoid the word construction and to make 
 this term broad and comprehensive in character. 
 
 Federal aid should only be granted to a State having a regular 
 department, and when such Federal aid is granted it should be on 
 the basis of an average amount per mile per 3'ear equal to but not 
 more than the average amount per mile per year granted to the 
 State of New York. 
 
 A State granted Federal aid should be required to contribute to 
 the amount of money appropriated in accordance with its ability to 
 pay. In other words, the rich States, such as New York and Penn- 
 sylvania, should be required by law to appropriate at least an amount 
 of money per mile per jear equal to the amount of Federal aid, and 
 the poorer States, with a low assessed valuation per mile, should be 
 called upon to appropriate an amount per mile per year varying in 
 accordance with the assessed valuation of the State per mile, this 
 contribution to be at the rate of 100 per cent, 90 per cent, 80 per cent, 
 70 per cent, 60 per cent, 50 per cent of the amount of Federal aid 
 per mile per year. 
 
 Experience in the conduct of highway work within the State of 
 New York has demonstrated the fact that by its system of repair, 
 improvement, and maintenance of its public thoroughfares (and this 
 relates particularly to the town highway system) the plan is identi- 
 cally the same as above described, with the exception of the fact that 
 the average amount of money per mile per year available is much 
 less, but the result is that quite satisfactory improvement of roads by 
 the use of local materials has been accomplished by properly shaping 
 and crowning earth roads, so that immediate demands have been, 
 cared for. 
 
 The amount of money per mile per year available for this class of 
 work in New York State varies from $30 to $40 per mile per year, 
 and it has been found that by the use of proper machinery and under 
 proper supervision earth roads in some localities have been shaped 
 and crowned within that limit of expenditure, and that after such 
 roads have been shaped and crowned the form of road has been pre- 
 served and the surface kept smooth and free from ruts and depres- 
 
GOOD ]iOADS. 83 
 
 sions by the use of a lione or split-log drag or other implement of 
 like character. Such roads have been maintained or kept in prime 
 condition by the use of these hones or drags at an annual expense 
 varying from $6 to $15 per mile. 
 
 Therefore, under that system various towns have been enabled to 
 accumulate funds which, together with money voted by towns for 
 some special improvement, has enabled them to improve roads by the 
 use of gravel or crushed stone with an aggregate mileage nearly 
 equal to the mileage under the $50,000,000 bonding act or the contract 
 system of the State. 
 
 No State should be granted Federal aid excepting that such State 
 has a regularly organized department and that such department 
 conduct the work on such Federal roads within the State in accord- 
 ance with such rules and regailations as might be prescribed by the 
 Federal Government or under a system provided by a State and 
 approved by the Federal department. A plan of this character 
 Avould lead to an improved system of Federal roads within a short 
 period of time, and all of the work performed would be under the 
 proper supervision of proper officers of each State. A plan of this 
 character would become educational by forcing upon State or local 
 authorities a system of uniform practices in the proper conduct of 
 work of this character, and would not only prove beneficial so far 
 as it would relate to a Federal road within a State, but would develop 
 in each such State a system and plan of general improvement. 
 
 The climatic and soil conditions vary in the different States. There 
 are thousands of miles of public highways which would be desig- 
 nated as Federal highways which would need no other improve- 
 ment than the standardization as to width, proper construction of 
 culverts, and proper drainage, with a system devised for keeping 
 the road surfaces smooth and free from ruts and depressions and the 
 approaches to bridges and culverts brought to grade. 
 
 ,If the various States of the Union should accept Federal aid on 
 this plan to the extent of 30,000 miles — to connect the capital centers 
 of the country — at $400 per mile per year for the improvement, 
 repair, and maintenance of such highways, the Federal Govern- 
 ment would only be called upon to make an appropriation of 
 $12,000,000 per annum, provided all States cooperated. 
 
 The States of New York, Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, 
 and Pennsylvania, and other States that have undertaken the con- 
 struction of their main thoroughfares, would have no objection to a 
 system of this character, but probably would object to a system 
 inaugurated which could not be regarded as Federal aid, especially 
 so if a plan were devised by which the Federal Government were to 
 undertake a wholesale contract system. 
 
 (3) On what character of roads should the amount appropriated 
 by the Federal Government be used ? 
 
 Federal aid to a State containing a properly designated and 
 accepted Federal highway should be used for the purpose of im- 
 provement, repair, and maintenance of such Federal highway without 
 reference to the character or kind of road, either already improved or 
 simply an earth road. To illustrate: A Federal highAvay within any 
 State, say. 100 miles long, receiving Federal aid to the extent of $500 
 per mile per year would receive $50,000, and an equal sum appro- 
 priated bv the State would aggregate a fund of $100,000. An aver- 
 
84 GOOD ROADS. 
 
 age sum of $50 per mile would be more than sufficient, generally- 
 speaking, to properly shape and crown an earth road at the standard 
 width of 24 feet between ditches, thus leaving a balance of $95,000 
 for the purpose of making more permanent improvements. 
 
 The above is simply an example, but would apply at the same ratio 
 with the Federal roads tliree, four, five, or six hundred miles in 
 length within a State. 
 
 It has been demonstrated in many sections of many States that 
 there is an abundance of local material suited to local conditions, ' 
 and that by the proper treatment of the highways, by the proper use 
 of these local materials, the cost per mile for the improvement, repair, 
 and maintenance of the highways could be reduced to the minimum, 
 namely, from $50 to $1,000 or $1,500, and possibly $2,000, per mile. 
 This would inaugurate a plan whereby unimproved portions of high- 
 ways could be treated at a reasonable expense by the use of local 
 labor with local material properly fitted to local conditions and by 
 the use of foreign material where same is necessary. 
 
 As before stated, experience in carrying on highway work demon- 
 strates the fact that $50 per mile, safeguarded and expended under 
 competent direction, has accomplished as much as two, three, or even 
 five hundred dollars per mile expended under any other system. If 
 a plan of this character should be devised it would be the means of 
 demonstrating in nearly every subdivision or community of a State 
 the fact that local material and local labor can be utilized. It fur- 
 thermore would establish a precedent which could be followed by 
 local authorities in the conduct of highway work on roads other than 
 F'ederal highways by following the lead set by the State, under 
 direction of the Federal Government, in proper repair, improve- 
 ment, and maintenance. The execution of a plan of this character 
 would eventually result in a double economy. All work done would 
 be done in accordance with rules and regulations provided by the 
 Federal highway department and along lines which would harmonize 
 with possible later permanent improvement, culverts constructed 
 after certain standards and located permanently as regards any future 
 improvement; widening and grading would be done along the same 
 lines and, wliile providing a present improvement, would also place 
 each yard of material in the place where it would eventually be were 
 the road to be improved later in some more expensive manner. The 
 educational feature would be enlarged upon by the utilization of local 
 labor and by calling upon local authorities to perform work of this 
 character within the respective localities of the respective States. 
 
 No State in the Union, with the exception of New York State, has 
 undertaken a plan of highway improvement by a system of education 
 of local authcrities. That is to say, no attention whatever has been 
 paid to imiforni practices in the conduct of the highway work by 
 local authorities. The weakness of the i)ian inaugurated in the 
 various States, including the State of New ^'ork, is the fact that 
 their whole time and attention is directed toward the construction of 
 so-called contract roads or State roads, and no attention is paid 
 toward providing uniform practices in the conduct of general work 
 of this description. 
 
 The average amount per mile for ordinary town highway work in 
 the State of New York is less than $40. Were $500 per mile per 
 year from the Federal Government, together Avith $500 per mile per 
 
GOOD KOADS. 85 
 
 year from the State, making a total of $1,000 per mile per year avail- 
 able, such an amount properly supervised and expended, a kind of 
 improvement could be carried on varying in cost, as above indicated, 
 from $50 to $2,000 per mile, and even a greater amount in some 
 instances. A plan of this character would naturally provide proper 
 means by which a State or locality could devise proper plans by 
 which the people's interest might be best conserved, and by which 
 the moneys available for purposes of this character would be more 
 carefully and intelligently expended. 
 
 The attention of your committee is particularly called to the fact 
 that there is an existing insane idea that highway improvement 
 must be under the direct supervision and care of a civil engineer. 
 While I do not care to cast any reflection on members of my own 
 profession, yet I do desire to make the statement that from 60 to 80 
 per cent of all roads improved in this or any other State could 
 have been so improved under an experienced eye without the use of 
 a level, and, therefore, a smaller percentage of highway improve- 
 ment calling for the services of a civil engineer is evident. Skill,, 
 common sense, and ability to carry on work is more essential thaa 
 scientific attainment. 
 
 (4) Should the amount appropriated be limited to construction 
 or maintenance, or be given jointly for construction and mainte- 
 nance? 
 
 The average amount per mile per year appropriated for the im- 
 provement, repair, and maintenance of any Federal highway properly 
 designated should be used for both construction and maintenance. 
 Or, m other words, for the repair, improvement, and maintenance as 
 conditions might seem to demand. The moneys thus appropriated, 
 of course, to be safeguarded by carefully prepared rules and regu- 
 lations promulgated by the Federal department of highways, or in 
 accordance with a proper scheme for the outlay of such funds as 
 might be approved by such Federal department. 
 
 (5) To what extent, if aid is given, should there be Federal super- 
 vision ? 
 
 Federal supervision would be necessary to the extent of satisfying 
 the Federal department of highways that all moneys used on any 
 designated Federal highway, either that contributed by the Federal 
 Government or by the State, must be expended in accordance with 
 rules and regulations prescribed, or by a policy accepted. 
 
 (6) Submit a detailed plan workable for Federal and State co- 
 operation in construction and maintenance. 
 
 (a) A well-organized Federal highway department. 
 
 (i) That a State desirous of receiving Federal aid shall subscribe 
 to certain rules and regulations of the Federal department and shall 
 designate Federal highways upon which such Federal aid shall be 
 expended, together with amount appropriated by such State. _ 
 
 (c) That the conduct of highway work on any Federal highway 
 within any State shall be in accordance with such uniform practices 
 as may be prescribed or accepted by the Federal highway department. 
 
 (d) That a sum not to exceed $500 per mile per year shall be regu- 
 larly appropriated for the improvement, repair, and maintenance of 
 any regularly accepted Federal road within any State having a 
 regularly organized highway department, and that each such State 
 
86 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 receiving Federal aid shall be required to contribute an equal amount 
 providing the tax-pajdng power of such State would warrant it. 
 
 A plan as above outlined could be inaugurated and carried into 
 force and effect whereby desirous results could be attained within a 
 short period of time, and without imposing upon the Federal Govern- 
 ment a cumbersome and unwieldy undertaking. A system of Federal 
 aid of $20 or $50 per mile per year for the purpose of postal roads 
 would seem to be unwise, as, in the ordinary conduct of highway work 
 in the towns, the local authorities should be given to understand 
 that it is their duty to give proper care to such roads at their own 
 expense that they may continue to enjoy the benefits of a free rural 
 delivery system. A plan of Federal aid granting a certain limited 
 amount to be expended on postal roads would, in my judgment, re- 
 sult in an extravagant waste of funds, and the expenditure of such 
 moneys could not be properly supervised ; would open up additional 
 ways for evil practices, and would be productive of a minimum 
 amount of good which should be attained from an outlay of that 
 magnitude. That scheme was tried out in New York State and 
 found to be a failure, and as a result it became necessary to recodify 
 the whole highway law of the State in order that appropriations of 
 this character could be safely made and moneys therefor properly 
 expended. 
 
 NORTH CAROLINA. 
 
 LEONARD TUFTS, PINEHURST. 
 
 I have never been in favor of Federal aid, not because I do not think 
 at least theoretically it might be of great benefit to the country, but 
 because I think it would be difficult for the people to view it in the 
 broad way in which it should be treated. 
 
 I believe that if a road were built through a certain section that 
 the people in the adjoining section would demand that another road 
 be built for them. 
 
 You asked several questions which I will answer as follows : 
 
 (1) I believe that if Federal aid be inaugurated a very limited 
 number of through highways crossing the United States from north 
 1 o south and from east to west should be built. 
 
 (2) I think there can be no definite plan as to what the State or 
 local authorities should contribute to the road. There are some 
 States where the road, of necessity, must pass through a section that 
 is poor and througli a section that will be of very little benefit to the 
 State or to the people of that section. There are some towns where 
 the center of the town is in (he extreme corner and where in order 
 to pass through this center it would be necessary to make the road a 
 mile or more longer and place it in a poor location. The road may 
 not pass a house and may go diagonally across the township. In that 
 case the State or township should not pay as large a portion as States 
 or townships where it is of definite benefit to the people As a 
 general rule, 1 believe that the Federal Government should pay the 
 major part of the cost in order that they may demand that the' road 
 be built under their direct supervision and according to their in- 
 structions and that the location may also be decided by them 
 
GOOD ROADS. 87 
 
 (3) I presume that when j-ou refer to the character of the roads, 
 you want to know as to what construction should be used. This 
 should be determined by the Federal Government, and different ma- 
 terials and constructions should be used in different sections depend- 
 ing upon the availability of the material, the climatic conditions, 
 and the service that the road is to be put to. 
 
 (4) The amount appropriated should be limited to construction, 
 but should be given jointly for construction and maintenance, and I 
 believe the maintenance should be attended to entirely by the Gov- 
 ernment, and made a demonstration and used for the purpose of ob- 
 taining statistics. 
 
 (5) In order to make the roads of any value as a demonstration, 
 the supervision should be absolutely in the hands of the Federal 
 Government. 
 
 (6) In order to be of the greatest benefit, the roads should be con- 
 tinuous, so as to be a standard for all road construction and mainte- 
 nance. In a very small way I have been trying this experiment for 
 some time here in this State. I am building and maintaining roads 
 aggregating some 200 miles, with the agreement that I shall return 
 any profit to the county in which I do the work. These are through 
 roads, and the work I feel has been of surjDrising benefit to the roads 
 in the vicinity. I believe thai Federal aid will never be successful 
 until the responsibility is placed upon the Federal Government, as a 
 division of responsibility will never be satisfactory, and I believe 
 that the major part of the expense should therefore be placed upon 
 the Government. 
 
 NOBTH CASOLINA. 
 
 B. Cameron, fobmer president Farmers' National Congress, 
 
 Stagville. 
 
 The Farmers' National Congress (of which I was an officer for many 
 years and finally became its president) has always felt that the Gen- 
 eral Government should encourage the States in building and main- 
 taining good roads; the State should encourage the counties; the 
 counties should encourage the townships. Therefore the Government, 
 State, county, and township should contribute their equitable shares. 
 This would require each State to have a highway commission to 
 direct the matter. 
 
 Then I read a little book entitled " The Highways and By-ways 
 Df Great Britain as Seen from an Automobile." Some of these trips 
 I had taken myself, and the thought occurred to me. Why shouldn't 
 modern America with all of its boastfulness have some good roads 
 as well as ancient Rome? For after all the fine roads in Great 
 Britain, France, Switzerland, and Italy are simply the old Roman 
 roads kept up in those countries. 
 
 Hence I thought we should have some national roads as well as 
 local roads. The Department of Agriculture is interested in these on 
 account of the farming interest, the Department of War is interested 
 on account of national defense, and the Post Office Department is 
 interested on account of the rural delivery of the mails and parcels. 
 They could unite their interests and have the Army Corps of En- 
 oineers survey these national roads. I should say have a network 
 of them connect the capitals of the respective States with the capital 
 
88 GOOD LOADS. 
 
 of the Nation and with each other, then have some half dozen 
 transcontinental roads from ocena to ocean, and a few longitudinal 
 roads from Canada to the Gulf of Mexico and Mexico, say one along 
 the Atlantic, one along the Pacific, one on each side of the Appa- 
 lachian chain, one on each side of the Eockies, and one on each 
 side of the Mississippi River. Already some of these have taken 
 shape. The international highway from Quebec, Canada, to Miama, 
 Fla., was organized in November, 1911, and at the annual meeting in 
 1912 we were amazed at the progress made in one year. The Pacific 
 coast highway is also making rapid progress since its organization, 
 and now there is a plan on foot to connect these two by a route suffi- 
 ciently far south to be used all the year, especially in winter when a 
 more northern route will be blocked by snow and ice. These three 
 together will form the longest road in the world. 
 
 In the early days of the Republic dirt roads were all that we had, 
 and it was put into the Constitution that the Government should 
 build post roads. Then with the discoyery of steam everything 
 rushed to the steamboat, and when they found that they could put 
 steam on wheels there was a rush to the railroads. Now with the 
 advent of the automobile we return to our first love — ^the public road, 
 road. 
 
 The international highway from Quebec, Canada, to Miami, Fla., 
 will need aid chiefly between Washington and Richmond, Va., as that 
 country was devastated by war, and Fredericksburg is the only town 
 between them, and yet it is one of the most historic sections of our 
 country. Therefore it has occurred to many that the Lincoln 
 memorial should be a highway instead of a Greek temple or a park 
 or something else, and I think it exceedingly appropriate to make it 
 from Richmond through Washington to Gettysburg, as the capital 
 of the Nation would thus be linked with the capital of the Confed- 
 eracy. The North and the South would be bound together, and this 
 section Avould be a link in the great international highway from 
 Quebec to Miami, and it would be a fulfillment of Mr. Lincoln's cry 
 of " On to Richmond." So I hope that you will have an eye to this 
 also, as the fiftieth celebration of peace between the North and the 
 South is much more important to us than the proposed celebration 
 of the hundredth anniversary of the peace with Great Britain under 
 the treaty of Ghent; certainly it is more desirable as a peace 
 memorial. 
 
 Now, from the foregoing I will answer your six questions. 
 
 (1) As to a general plan upon which Federal aid should be given. 
 
 I should say that the aid should go to the States in a manner simi- 
 lar to that given to the various agricultural and mechanical colleges 
 in the respective States. 
 
 (2) To what extent the plan should require the State or local 
 authorities to contribute, etc. 
 
 I should say that every dollar the General Government gives the 
 State should cover with another dollar, and then the State can deal 
 with her counties and townships herself in the use of this joint sum. 
 On this basis I think every State will cooperate with the Government. 
 
 (3) On what character of roads should the amount appropriated 
 by the Federal Government be used. 
 
 I would say certainly on the national roads and rural free-delivery 
 routes, and on such other roads as the State may desire cooperation 
 
GOOD ROADS. 89 
 
 on, the Goyermnent being always ready to render assistance in the 
 way of engineering and road materials and chemicals and mechanical 
 appliances. 
 
 (4) The amount appropriated should be jointly for construction 
 and maintenance. 
 
 (5) To what extent, if aid is given, should there be Federal super- 
 vision ? 
 
 I would say on national roads and wherever else the State may ask 
 for it. 
 
 p. B. BEAED, SALISBURY, N. C. 
 
 (1) A stipulated sum should be given each State by the Federal 
 Government in aid to public roads. 
 
 (2) The county, township, and State should be required to con- 
 tribute two for one to get the Government aid. 
 
 (3) On all public roads, as the mail carriers use all public roads. 
 
 (4) Should be given jointly for construction and maintenance or 
 four-fifths for construction and one-fifth for maintenance. 
 
 (5) I do not think it is necessary for Federal supervision where a 
 State has good roads associations or State associations through which 
 the supervision could be conducted. 
 
 (6) By causing the States and counties to put up $2 for one sup- 
 plied by the Federal Government it will place three times the amount 
 of the Federal appropriation to be spent on roads. 
 
 NORTH DAKOTA. 
 
 T. B. ATKINSON, STATE ENGINEER, BISMARCK. 
 
 (1) I believe that Federal aid should be given to interstate roads, 
 such as would make continuous highways from the eastern to the 
 western coast and from north to south. I do not believe Federal 
 aid should be given except upon such roads. The location of these 
 roads to be determined by a joint commission consisting of the high- 
 way commissions of the several States, together with the Office of 
 Public Roads at Washington, D. C. 
 
 (2) The plan should require the State or local authorities to con- 
 tribute an equal amount of money appropriated by the Federal Gov- 
 ernment. North Dakota is prohibited by the constitution from grant- 
 ing State aid, but the constitution is in process of amendment and if 
 this amendment passes by a vote of the people at the general election 
 in 1914, laws providing for levying taxes for State-aid purposes can 
 be enacted at the 1915 session of the legislature. I believe after that 
 time North Dakota and the local authorities would be willing to 
 cooperate with the Federal Government in highway construction. 
 
 (3) The amount appropriated by the Federal Government should 
 be used in permanent highway construction. That is, some class of 
 paving should be used on these roads, the width of the same to be 
 determined by the traffic. . , ^ , ,,, v -^ j . 
 
 (4) I believe that the amount appropriated should be limited to 
 construction. 
 
90 GOOD BOADS. 
 
 (5) If Federal aid is given Federal supervision should extend to 
 the preparing of plans and specifications for the work and a general 
 supervisory control over the construction work. The actual work of 
 construction and maintenance should be done by the State or local 
 authorities. 
 
 (6) A commission consisting of eminent highway engineers of the 
 United States should be appointed to determine the character of the 
 roads through each State and should be authorized to prepare speci- 
 fications for their construction. It should be the duty of the Office 
 of Public Roads at Washington to inspect the work and see that the 
 plans and specifications as provided by the commission are carried 
 out. The highway commission in each State should have charge of 
 the actual Avork of construction. 
 
 J. DEXTER PEIKCE, CHAIRMAN COMMITTEE ON GOOD ROADS, L,ARIM0RE 
 COMMERCIAL CLUB, LARIMORE. 
 
 (1) As to a general plan uiDon which this Federal aid should be 
 given. 
 
 In my opinion the aid should be distributed in proportion to area. 
 In that way it would be applied more nearly in accordance with the 
 requirements. The larger States have more miles of roads to build 
 than small States. The more sparsely settled and least developed 
 States are more in need of the aid than the older and more developed, 
 and their development will add to the prosperity of the older States. 
 
 (2) To what extent the plan should require the State or local 
 authorities to contribute to the amount of money appropriated ; and 
 to what extent you think your State or local authorities would be 
 willing to cooperate with the Federal Government. 
 
 It would seem to me that the Federal Government should con- 
 tribute 20 per cent, the State 20 per cent, the county 20 per cent, and 
 the township or abutting land, or both combined, 40 per cent. Our 
 State could not contribute very much at the present time. Our con- 
 stitution limits oui- bonding capacity to a nominal figure and our 
 taxation for State purposes to 4 mills. This scarcely meets the re- 
 quirements of the ordinary expenses of the State. It is therefore 
 necessary to amend the constitution, and I believe this will be done 
 as soon as it is possible to do it. 
 
 (3) On what character of roads should the amount appropriated 
 by the Federal Government be used ? 
 
 Federal aid should not be confined to post roads, but should be 
 apportioned to any roads approved by the Federal commission or 
 engineers in charge of the work. 
 
 (4) Should the amount appropriated be limited to construction or 
 maintenance, or be given jointly for construction and maintenance? 
 
 Aid should be given jointly to construction and maintenance ; other- 
 wise they would not be kept up properly. That is the only way to 
 retain control. 
 
 (5) To what extent, if aid is given, should there be Federal 
 supervision ? 
 
 If possible the State engineer should be appointed a deputy to the 
 Federal engineer. In that way the ideas of the Federal and State 
 bureaus could be harmonized and coordinated. 
 
GOOD EOADS. 91 
 
 (6) Submit a detailed plan workable for Federal and State co- 
 operation in construction and maintenance. 
 
 T will not go into details of organization, as that can be done better 
 by experts in that line. I believe the main objects to be kept in 
 view are to furnish sufficient aid to encourage local authorities to 
 greater activity in road building, and at the same time secure suffi- 
 cient supervision by Federal and State authorities so that money 
 expended shall be applied with greater intelligence than at present. 
 Twenty per cent contributed by the Federal Government and 20 per 
 cent by the State should be sufficient for that purpose, and the money 
 appropriated would go further and accomphsh more than if the 
 percentage is larger. 
 
 OHIO. 
 
 A. H. HINKLE, MAINTENANCE DEPUTY, STATE HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT, 
 
 COLUMBUS. 
 
 (1) As to a general plan upon which this Federal aid should be 
 given. 
 
 (3) On what character of roads should the amount appropriated 
 by the Federal Government be used ? 
 
 To build a system of national roads to be laid out and adopted, 
 at least in a general way, when the appropriation is made. Such a 
 system of roads should be chosen regardless of State boundaries. 
 With reference to the distribution of the appropriation. State bound- 
 aries should not be considered except, possibly, to provide for a fair 
 distribution of the funds over the accepted system of highways. 
 
 Why? 
 
 (a) These roads will easily fall within the constitutional meaning 
 of post roads if this question is raised, for no citizen of the United 
 States, with his eyes wide open, can fail to predict that country mail 
 will, in the near future, be mostly carried by automobiles where there 
 is a suitable road over which to travel. Practically every main road 
 is, therefore, certain to be a post road after it is improved. 
 
 (h) The supply and demand of automobiles will in the nod dis- 
 tant future reach an equilibrium which means a normal price for 
 the same, a price reduced considerably below their present quota- 
 tion. This means more automobiles and hence a demand for better 
 roads, especially better main roads, because of the increased through 
 traffic. 
 
 (c) The large cities of our land will pay a goodly portion of any 
 eeneral tax, although it may be derived from a tariff. Hence, such 
 a tax for road purposes should be expended where the cities will re- 
 ceive some direct benefit from it. 
 
 (d) A revolution in our methods of transportation is rapidly tak- 
 ing place. If good transcontinental highways are constructed, thou- 
 sands of dollars now expended in foreign travel will be expended at 
 
 home. 
 
 (e) If the appropriation was distributed so as to be used on all 
 rural mail routes, it would be so scattered and often wasted under 
 our present system of administration that after millions of dollars 
 had been expended over a period of years we would not be able to 
 look back and see any permanent good that had come from the same. 
 
92 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 (2) To what extent the plan should require the State or local 
 authorities to contribute to the amount of money appropriated. 
 
 («) State or local authorities, two-thirds; Federal authorities^ 
 one-third. 
 
 (h) State or local authorities would be willing to contribute 
 three-fourths. 
 
 (4) Should the amount appropriated be limited to construction or 
 maintenance, or be given jointly for construction and maintenance? 
 
 In those States having well-organized highway departments, the 
 appropriation might be limited to construction only. In other States, 
 however, the Federal Government should provide for the main- 
 tenance of the Federal-aid roads. 
 
 (5) To what extent, if aid is given, should there be Federal super- 
 vision ? 
 
 The Federal Government should have full and complete super- 
 vision of the expenditure of all money appropriated by it. There 
 will always be a source of contention if the funds are turned over to 
 some smaller political unit, as is well illustrated in our own State in 
 the relation of the State highway department to the counties. 
 
 The Federal Government, by means of its civil service, will always 
 be more free from politics than is the State ; hence it would be wrong 
 to turn Federal funds over to the State. I believe, too, in a strict 
 civil service, and not by the appoinment of men because of their rec- 
 ommendations from political organizations. The question of prestige 
 through appointments is the cause of discontent, the formation of 
 political factions, and, too often, the source of trouble and even the 
 political downfall of the official himself. If this power were taken 
 from him as far as possible, it would often be a great relief to him. 
 He must fight for it so long as it is within his pow.er, but remove 
 this right and see the estimate of public officials rise in the minds of 
 the people. 
 
 (6) Submit a detail plan workable for Federal and State cooper- 
 ation in construction and maintenance. 
 
 Let us consider two authorities — Federal and the State. (Prob- 
 ably the Federal would be represented by the Office of Public Roads 
 and the State by its State highway department.) 
 
 Provision shall be made for the initiation of a Federal road by 
 a petition for the same from the State, through its State highway 
 department or other duly authorized authority, to the Federal Gov- 
 ernment. 
 
 Appropriation shall provide for Federal authorities to expend a 
 certain sum on condition that the State agrees to expend some propor- 
 tional amount on the designated national roads. The two shall agree 
 upon the roads, or parts of roads, to be improved by each, and each 
 shall approve the others plans and specifications. 
 
 Federal authorities shall have power, in case they see fit, to dele- 
 gate their supervision of the expenditures to the State who shall 
 exercise the same at all times under Federal direction and who shall 
 surrender such part or all of such supei'vision to the Federal authori- 
 ties when so directed. 
 
 The abutting property owners shall pay such part of the cost of im- 
 provement as is provided in the States laws to be paid on State roads. 
 
 For national roads right of way to be provided, and new right of 
 way paid for in the same manner as for Statas roads, or if there be 
 
GOOD KOADS. 93 
 
 none of the latter, then the same as for the highest class of roads now 
 existing in the State. 
 
 The appropriation bill should permit the money to be used for 
 either new construction or maintenance, the same to be at the discre- 
 tion of the State and Federal authorities having charge of the same. 
 
 r. H„ ENO, CIVIL ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, OHIO STATE UNIVERSITT, 
 
 COLUMBUS. 
 
 (1) As to a general plan upon which this Federal aid should be 
 given, it would seem to me best for it to come as an annual appropria- 
 tion to be expended upon a certain class of roads and under definite 
 supervision of Government engineers. The work to be done in co- 
 operation with the States of the Union— an equal share to each State 
 in the Union. Arguments may be raised against this plan upon two 
 counts at least: First, that any appropriation should be made pro- 
 portionate to the population ; and, second, controlled, possibly in part 
 by the taxable value of the property. 
 
 But it seem to me a slightly populated State or locality where the 
 property would not be so valuable as in some thickly settled State, 
 may be encouraged and greater good be done than in some densely 
 populated State; and that the final good forthcoming may warrant 
 an equal expenditure in every State in the Union. 
 
 (2) In my judgment each State of the Union should be required to 
 appropriate an equal amount, if they are to secure Government aid. 
 
 I have not sounded our local authorities, but from their action on 
 the topographic survey and similar public policies, I would say they 
 would be favorable to such a plan, possibly even granting more than 
 an equal share. 
 
 (3) I believe the roads to be chosen should be main traffic roads 
 between cities of large population and, so far as possible, directly in 
 line and continuations of roads to be so developed in other States. To 
 illustrate — such roads in Ohio as the Old National Pike and other 
 roads that might connect from Buffalo through Cleveland and other 
 points west in Indiana and Illinois should be chosen. Generally 
 east-and-west roads should be given preference over north-and-south 
 roads, although a few north-and-south roads should be chosen 
 throughout the United States. 
 
 (4) I believe the appropriation should be separated and designated, 
 so much for construction and a certain amount for maintenance. I 
 think it would be unwise to make one appropriation and State that 
 it was for construction and maintenance. One appropriation should 
 be made for construction and a definite, separate, appropriation for 
 maintenance. 
 
 (5) I believe that Federal engineers should have general super- 
 vision of the construction of Federal-aid roads, but that so far as 
 possible the work shoud be done through the State. 
 
 (6) I do not feel competent, in the limited time I have to give to 
 this subject, to submit a detailed plan workable for Federal ahd 
 State cooperation. My judgment would be in this that if the Gov- 
 ernment decides to go into Federal aid a commission should be ap- 
 pointed consisting of able enginers, attorneys, and financiers, and 
 possijsly representatives from the State, to work out a thoroughly 
 workable plan. 
 
94 GOOD ItOADS. 
 
 WILL P. BLAIK, NATIONAL PAVING BRICK MANUFACTURERS' ASSOCIATION, 
 
 CLEVELAND. 
 
 (1) As to a general plan upon which this Federal aid should be 
 given. 
 
 The general plan for Federal aid should be based upon a direct 
 contribution to aid the States in the construction and maintenance 
 of post roads which should be selected traversing routes in the several 
 States, which may be properly designated by reason of their exces- 
 sive use and importance to the States as their chief market roads. 
 
 The reasons which may be advanced for the support of the fore- 
 going plan are as follows, to wit : 
 
 It would concentrate the means and authority of the Government 
 upon a limited number of miles of such roads as are most excessively 
 used by the larger percentage of the traveling public. Fundamentally 
 and primarily it would establish a system that could be most ration- 
 ally followed up by the States, counties, and townships of the Union. 
 
 The authority and assistance of the Government could be limited 
 to the roads involved in such a plan. A precedent could be thus 
 set which would be entirely sufficient and satisfactory to the people 
 so far as the Government is concerned, and would not involve it in 
 a pressure for aid beyond its reasonable ability to care for. Naturally, 
 such a system would tend to provoke a healthy rivalry between the 
 States in taking the greatest advantage of such a system, by connect- 
 ing up with it their intercounty system of State roads. 
 
 (2) To what extent the plan should require the State or local 
 authorities to contribute to the amount of money appropriated; and 
 to what extent you think your State or local authorities would be 
 willing to cooperate with the Federal Government. 
 
 In carrying out the plan suggested in my answer to question 1, and 
 answering directly your question 2, I should say the plan should 
 be such that the National Government might extend to the State 
 assistance equal to two-thirds, but no more, of the cost of any of 
 the roads so planned. On the other hand, the State should be per- 
 mitted to contribute to the cost of such roads to the extent of two- 
 thirds, but no more. "Where the Government has extended aid in 
 excess of 50 per cent of the cost of the roads, through her highway 
 commission, to consist of three commissioners, she should elect which 
 road shall first receive aid. 
 
 The reason for this plan lies in the fact that many States would 
 be willing, in order to advance their system of chief post roads, to 
 contribute a larger proportion of funds necessary. "\AnTLere the Gov- 
 ernment contributes the larger proportion of the funds, she should in 
 all matters be the controlling authority. This could be done by the 
 Secretary of Agi'iculture acting as the balance of power in case the 
 Government furnishes the majority of the road fund, but where the 
 State furnishes the majority of the fund, then the Governor of the 
 State may act as the balance of power in such matters. In all cases 
 the State and Government, respectively, should be represented by a 
 highway commission of three members each. I think upon this plan 
 and bases many States would be ready to act with greater promptness. 
 
 (3) On what character of roads should the amount appropriated 
 by the Federal Government be used? 
 
GOOD EOADS. !)5 
 
 Unquestionably the funds appropriated bv the Federal Govern- 
 ment should be limited to the system of roads outlined in the fore- 
 going answer to question 1. 
 
 Particularly with reference to the character of the road, which 
 involves its manner and method of construction, plan of improve- 
 ment, and material of which it is made, these main roads must be 
 constructed of the most permanent character, such as will effect the 
 greatest possible economy considered severally in matters of con- 
 struction, maintenance, and use. 
 
 The reason for the foregoing plan of limiting the funds of the 
 Federal Government to the system of main roads is that it is simply 
 out of the question for the Government to scatter its efforts to a wide 
 mileage of either construction or maintenance. It could not under- 
 take the expenditure of sufficient money to put all the roads even in 
 passable condition, and its efforts if so directed would be futile and 
 unsatisfactory to the country. The character of road which involves 
 the manner and method of its construction and the material with 
 which it is made is the most important feature of the road problem 
 to-day. There is altogether too much money being wasted by so- 
 called experimental road propositions. It is both silly and foolish. 
 There are absolutely but two kinds of material from which to con- 
 struct highways that can in truth and in fact be denominated as per- 
 manent, and in the use of these two materials it is of the highest 
 necessity that they be constructed in the most approved manner and 
 method. The two materials of which we speak are vitrified paving 
 brick and a character of hard block stone, including granite. Out 
 of either of these materials roads may be constructed which may be 
 fairly characterized as permanent; that is to say, they will last for 
 at least a generation or more under such traffic as they will in all 
 probability be subjected to. At least maintenance charges on such 
 roads will be a matter of insignificance. Such roads are the only 
 kind that are at all likely to be maintained at a high point of maxi- 
 mum and continuous use. 
 
 Of course the particular plan of the road must take into consider- 
 ation the contingency and condition of travel. These chief post roads 
 should not be paved in their entire width with the permanent mate- 
 rial. In all cases a graded water-bound macadam of single width to • 
 carry a class of unshod horses, etc., should be provided. The upkeep of 
 such graded portion of road is minimized by its nonuse during sea- 
 sons of bad weather. 
 
 (4) Should the amount appropriated be limited to construction or 
 maintenance, or be given jointly for construction and maintenance? 
 
 The amount of appropriation should be limited definitely to con- 
 struction alone. The question of maintenance should be a question 
 separate and apart from construction and become the subject of spe- 
 cial legislation and provision. Where the Government can and is 
 willing and the States coincide with such judgment, and where roads 
 of the most permanent character are built, then the Government 
 should assume their maintenance. If, however. States are unwilling 
 to appropriate suificient money to build such roads in cooperation 
 with the Government, or where roads of secondary permanency are 
 built or of less permanent and doubtful character, then the burden 
 of maintaining such roads should be upon the States. 
 
96 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 The reasons for this answer are apparent. The Government should 
 not be called upon to maintain a road, the niaintenance charge of 
 , which should be so great as to make the road itself an uneconomical 
 one. There is more excuse for the Government indulging in an ex- 
 perimental road or one of doubtful character than there would be for 
 her to build her public buildings in such manner or with such mate- 
 rial as would result in continual expenditure for repairs. A road 
 should never be built as an experiment. Small sections of a road 
 may be built for experimental purposes — experiments by the Gov- 
 ernment in road building should be confined to the Office of Public 
 Roads — but National aid in building roads for use by the people and 
 by the Government as post roads should be kept separate and apart 
 from a laboratory effort. 
 
 (5) To what extent, if aid is given, should there be Federal 
 supervision ? 
 
 The answer to this question is largely indicated by answers fore- 
 going. If Federal maintenance is undertaken, then of course Fed- 
 eral supervision should follow ; otherwise not. 
 
 (6) Submit a detailed plan workable for Federal and State co- 
 operation in construction and maintenance. 
 
 The establishing of a national road commission of three members. 
 The bill should provide for the Secretary of Agriculture exercising 
 a majority power, becoming ex officio member of this commission in 
 such cases as may be provided for in the bill. 
 
 Such commission shall have power to appoint a corps of engi- 
 neers, who shall be especially qualified to design, supervise, and 
 construct such roads as may be determined upon under the pro- 
 vision of the act. 
 
 The commission shall be empowered to spend, in conjunction with 
 a commission representing any State in the Union, a sum not to 
 exceed $2,500,000 from the Federal Treasury in any one year, the 
 expenditure to be made only in conjunction with a certain propor- 
 tion of money, not exceeding two-thirds of the cost per mile of 
 any particular road, and in each case at least one-third the cost per 
 mile of such road, in each and all cases the State contributing the 
 balance required; but no State may be allowed to furnish less than 
 one-third the cost of the road. 
 
 Such Federal aid shall be extended only to such roads as may be 
 designated first by the State and approved by the Federal commis- 
 sion as such, which may be properly defined as the main post and 
 excessively traveled roads within such States, respectively. 
 
 The commission should also be clothed with power to make and 
 enforce all necessary rules and regulations to carry into effect the 
 purpose of the act. 
 
 The foregoing contains briefly my ideas, in a general way, that 
 ought to obtain in establishing and carrying into effect a program 
 for Federal aid in the construction and "maintenance of highways. 
 Of course I have not undertaken to suggest all of the details that 
 should be incorporated in the bill and will be necessary to carry into 
 effect this general plan, but I hope the foregoing suggestion's will 
 prove worthy a consideration by the comm'ittee, all of which is 
 respectfully submitted. 
 
GOOD EOADS. 97 
 
 W. C. WOOLEY, MAEION. 
 
 . (1) As to the general plan upon which Federal aid should be 
 given, m my opinion, you should cooperate with the State highway 
 commissioner, but by all means have a Government representative 
 to carry out the Government part. I would suggest that the Gov- 
 ernment pay 50 per cent and the State 50 per cent. 
 
 (3) On what character of roads should the amount appropriated 
 by b ederal Government be used ? 
 
 By all means, the old National Koad through Ohio should be 
 rebuilt and mtersectional roads from one county seat to another. 
 
 I would suggest that the appropriation be made for construction 
 and maintenance. 
 
 I should think that there should be Government supervision ovei 
 construction and maintenance. 
 
 I recently built eight miles of the old National Eoad for Franklin 
 County, just west of Columbus, which is considered the best piece of 
 macadam road in the State of Ohio. It is what we call a tar-bound 
 macadam. 
 
 I have also built a number of water-bound macadam roads through 
 the State of Ohio. 
 
 OREGON. 
 
 HENRY L. BOWLBY, EXECUTIVE OFFICER, PACIFIC HIGHWAY ASSOCIATION, 
 
 PORTLAND. 
 
 (1) I believe that under the direction of the Government a system 
 of Federal post roads should be established. This should consist of a 
 simple system of national trunk highways. Federal aid should be 
 given in each State according to the mileage of such Federal post 
 roads in that State and according to the cost of construction of such 
 roads. Across some of the Middle Western States, where road con- 
 struction is very simple, the amounts of Federal aid per mile should 
 be less than in the Mountain States, where the road construction will 
 be comparatively expensive. The Government should specify that 
 these post roads should be located with a maximum grade of 5 per 
 cent, and with a minimum radius of curvature of 100 feet. A right 
 of way 60 feet wide should be required. The graded roadway 
 should be at least 24 feet in width, and the road surfaced with ma- 
 terial suitable to stand the traiBc which will come upon it. This, of 
 course, must be determined by the Government authorities. 
 
 (2) The amount which each State should be asked to contribute 
 toward the construction of these post roads should be determined by 
 the Government authorities, taking into consideration the develop- 
 ment of the State, its population, and resources. Naturally, under 
 such conditions, the greatest amount of Federal-aid money would 
 be used in building national trunk highways across the more sparsely 
 populated States of the Union. This is as it should be, the older 
 and richer sections of the countrj' helping the development of the 
 newer States. 
 
 79558— PT 1—13 7 
 
98 GOOD BOADS. 
 
 (3) All roads constructed under Federal aid should be of the high- 
 est class of modern road construction; that is, the roads should be 
 located in the proper place, they should be graded in a permanent 
 manner to a proper width, they should be surfaced in a scientific 
 manner, the surfacing corresponding to the amount of traffic over 
 each section of the road. Federal-aid money should not in any case 
 be used in building mere trails. 
 
 (4) The maintenance of the roads being as important as their 
 construction, this will have to be provided for according to the condi- 
 tions found in each State. In those States where a competent State 
 highway department exists, the maintenance of the roads might be 
 turned over to the State. In those States where no properly de- 
 veloped State highway department exists the maintenance should be 
 under the direct supervision of the Government officials. To start 
 with, 5 per cent of all appropriations should be set aside for main- 
 tenance. This may have to be increased later. 
 
 (5) All roads completed under Federal aid should remain under 
 Federal supervision. When a road has been constructed in a State 
 and turned over to that State for maintenance, the Government 
 should still retain sufficient supervision to compel the proper mainte- 
 nance of the road. The Government should also prescribe regulations 
 for maintaining all Federal-aid post roads. The Government should 
 have complete supervision of the construction of all Federal-aid post 
 roads ; that is, when the Government aids a State in the construction 
 of a road, the Government should have the authority to prescribe 
 how the roads should be built. 
 
 (6) The details of operation of a system of Federal aid to road 
 construction would work out naturally between the Government 
 officials in charge of the road work and the various State highway 
 departments. The inauguration of Federal aid would encourage the 
 establishment of State highway departments in those States which 
 have not yet advanced that far in modern road building. 
 
 SOUTH DAKOTA. 
 SAMtJEIi H. LEA, STATE ENGINEER, PIEEEE. 
 
 With regard to Federal participation in the work of improving 
 highways in the various States, any such work should be carried out 
 in accordance with a general plan which should be comprehensive 
 and equitable and at the same time sufficiently moderate in scope to 
 allow being carried out without extravagance. It is thought that 
 some form of substantial aid by the General Government to the vari- 
 ous States and . communities can be worked out whereby practical 
 results can be obtained with due regard to economy. 
 
 (1) A general plan to be effective should comprise a practical 
 method of furnishing aid with due regard to local conditions and 
 requirements in the various parts of the Union' wliere road work will 
 be undertaken. _ Some method should be devised whereby such aid 
 would be given in conformity with local requirements and in accord- 
 ance with the extent of cooperation that would be afforded locallv- 
 
 A general plan should be sufficiently broad in its scope to allow 
 the proper exercise of discretionary authority on the part of the 
 Federal department charged with its execution. The expenditure 
 
GOOD EOADS, 99 
 
 of money appropriated for Federal aid should be conditioned upon 
 some schedule of cooperation with the State or community that is 
 interested. It would be advisable to designate the conditions upon 
 which Federal aid would be given and the extent of such aid within 
 certain stated limits. One condition of Federal aid should be the 
 establishment by the State of a highway department, with authority 
 to cooperate with the agencies of the Federal Government and to 
 formulate the necessary rules and regulations for road work in the 
 State. 
 
 (2) With regard to the proportion of cost that should be con- 
 tributed by State or local authorities for road improvement it is 
 thought that ordinarily the cost should be equally divided between 
 the Federal Government and the State. In this State, under present 
 conditions, such an arrangement would probably be sufficiently at- 
 tractive to cause the money to be raised locally for a projected road. 
 In some cases a smaller proportion of the construction cost than one- 
 half could be paid by the Federal Government with an agreement 
 that Federal aid shall be applied to maintenance after completing 
 the road. 
 
 (3) In my opinion, Federal aid for roads should be given pri- 
 marily to main or national highways, extending across several States 
 and connecting widely separated communities. Such roads being 
 interstate, are naturally eligible for national aid and attention. After 
 completion they will serve as model roads for the various Statesand 
 communities through which they pass. They will also constitute 
 arteries of travel and traffic, and lateral roads will be built to connect 
 with them at various points throughout their length. 
 
 Postal roads or rural delivery routes should also receive Federal 
 aid to some extent. This could take the form of some designated 
 sum per mile per annum for maintenance, to be paid under certain 
 conditions requiring local, construction of bridges and culverts and 
 other work of construction or repair. 
 
 (4) Maintenance may be considered as being of equal importance 
 with construction, since no road, however well built, will remain 
 good unless properly maintained. Road work is largely maintenance, 
 and no system of roads should be constructed unless adequate pro- 
 vision is made for maintenance. 
 
 It is thought that Federal aid should comprise both construction 
 
 and maintenance. . -r-, i i 
 
 (5) In all cases where Federal aid is given Federal supervision 
 should be comprehensive. For an interstate road it is considered 
 advisable that the entire line should be under some central authority, 
 with power to provide general rules and regulations. For intrastate 
 roads State supervision would be applicable with incidental Federal 
 authority. In some cases joint Federal and State supervision might 
 
 (Q) Where there is Federal and State cooperation in construction 
 and maintenance all general plans and specifications would either be 
 prepared or approved by the Federal authorities, who would have 
 Uneral supervision of construction and maintenance work under 
 certain conditions. State highway departments would, of course, be 
 pnrsnlted regarding local conditions and requirements; they would 
 be requested to prepare estimates and specifications for proposed 
 work and to make recommendations concerning same. 
 
100 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 After the approval and adoption of plans the work could be done 
 under State supervision; an arrangement could be made whereby a 
 State highway department could appoint as assistants such persons 
 ]n the service of the Federal department as might be designated by 
 chat department; these to be in local charge of road work and to be 
 paid out of the Federal appropriation. 
 
 W. H. STOKES, WATERTOWN. 
 
 (1) The establishing of a national highway commission. This 
 commission to be composed of five members, appointed by the Presi- 
 dent and confirmed by Congress. 
 
 This highway commission to be under the jurisdiction of the De- 
 partment of the Interior. Its duties would be the locating, building, 
 and maintaining transcontinental highways and interstate highways, 
 with a corps of competent engineers to supervise, locate, build, and 
 maintain the national highways. 
 
 (2) This expense to be borne by the National Government through 
 appropriations by Congress. The appropriations for this purpose 
 should be sufficient to build and maintain one transcontinental high- 
 way east and west and one interstate road north and south every 
 five years, to be constructed and maintained in a reasonable passable 
 condition. These national roads to be established and maintained 
 at Government expense in the ratio of about one road east and west, 
 one road north and south, every five years. 
 
 (3) These national highways to be the foundation of a system for 
 State highways to be intersected by the State roads, both latitudinally 
 and longitudinally. State legislation and appropriation to be uni- 
 form and in harmony with national legislation in the locating and 
 maintaining of State roads. This to be followed by county and town- 
 ship cooperation. These State, county, and township laws to be for- 
 mulated and recommended to the different States by your honorable 
 committee, so there may be, in the commencement of this important 
 movement, a uniformity and thorough system of establishing and 
 maintaining roads throughout the United States. 
 
 This answers briefly interrogations 1, 2, 4, 5, and 6. 
 
 I take the liberty in presenting to your honorable committee sug- 
 gestions as to State legislation. 
 
 First. That each State establish a highway commission composed 
 of three members, appointed by the governor and confirmed by the 
 State legislature, to establish, construct, and maintain State roads, 
 under the supervision of the State engineer or some other compe- 
 tent person. 
 
 Second. That a 2 mill tax be levied and collected for the establish- 
 ing, building, and maintaining of the public roads, one-half mill 
 on the dollar to be converted in to the State treasury, payable on the 
 order of the State highway commission, for the establishing, building, 
 and maintaining of the State roads, and 1^ mills on the dollar to re- 
 vert to the county treasurer from which county it emanates, to be 
 paid out on the order of the county commissioners, for the establish- 
 ing, building, and maintaining of the county roads, and the road 
 work to be done under the supervision of the county engineer or 
 some other competent person. 
 
GOOD EOADS. 101 
 
 Third. That each State license automobiles, basing the amount 
 of the license on the size and horsepower of cars, making the mini- 
 mum license $2 and the maximum license $10 per car per annum. 
 Fifty per cent of this amount so collected to be converted in to the 
 State treasury, to be paid out on the order of the State highway com- 
 mission for the establishing, building, and maintaining of State 
 roads, and 60 per cent of the amount so raised to revert back to the 
 county treasurer, to be paid out on the order of the county commis- 
 sioners, under the direction of the county engineer, for the establish- 
 ing, building, and maintaining of county roads. 
 
 This would give available funds sufficient to make good progress 
 in the establishing and maintaining of State and county road?. 
 
 M. p. BEEBE, PRESIDENT, TWIN CITT-ABERDEEN-yELLOWSTONE PARK TRAIL, 
 
 IPSWICH. 
 
 I have given the question of good roads some thought, and it is 
 quite clear to me that Federal aid should not be given ; that the Gov- 
 ernment should outline the roads to cover the entire United States 
 and build same. If it is left to the States there will not be any system 
 po far as the whole country is concerned. 
 
 In my judgment, there should be three or more main lines running 
 from coast to coast and as many from the Canadian border to the 
 Gulf and old Mexico. Other lines could be built connecting with the 
 main or trunk lines. The building and maintenance should be cared 
 for by the Government. 
 
 Allow me to suggest that there should be a national commission, 
 composed of one representative from each State and Territory. This 
 would make the movement very much more popular with our repre- 
 sentatives at Washington, and, in my judgment, would be far better 
 than a commission made up of representatives of the different 
 industries. 
 
 J. L. WHITE, VICE PRESIDENT, SOUTH DAKOTA GOOD ROADS ASSOCIATION, 
 
 SIOUX FALLS. 
 
 As a rule, I am not in favor of small units ; I believe a State should 
 be as small a unit as should be considered. The good-road enthusiasts 
 of this State have perfected a State organization, and if we succeed 
 in getting through our legislature this winter the proposed laws that 
 our organization has framed up it will give us about $150,000 to be 
 used in road construction this coming season and will be increased 
 yearly, which in a short time will give us a quarter of a million 
 annually. I believe that the Federal Government should be asked to 
 equal the amount the State raises, and I believe the full amount so 
 raised should be so expended in building permanent roads. I believe 
 the maintenance of these roads should be left to the counties. 
 
 The supervision of said road building, I believe, should be done by 
 the Federal Government, but the roads to be built or location of same 
 should be left to the State. 
 
 Our State organization is very anxious to build a State road, or 
 rather two of them, running east and west across the State, ,and later 
 two more roads running north and south through the State, and lat- 
 erals to be built to these roads as fast as practical. 
 
102 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 The class of roads to be built I will say that with 27 years' expe- 
 rience in building macadam roads and the coming of the automobile 
 has convinced me that the cheapest road in the long run, maintenance 
 considered, is the concrete road. The automobile has made the ma- 
 cadam road too expensive to maintain. 
 
 U. G. EEIMINGER, SIOUX FALLS. 
 
 My notion in regard to Federal aid on road building throughout 
 the tjnited States is that this aid should be in ratio to the amount of 
 money devoted to the building and maintenance of roads by the vari- 
 ous States and counties, and while a statement as to the aggregate 
 amount of funds provided by each of these three sources would be 
 arbitrary, yet I believe that a division requiring approximately 50 
 per cent of the construction fund to be furnished by the county, 25 
 per cent by the State, and 25 per cent by the Federal aid would be a 
 fair division. I put the greater part of this burden, or expense, on 
 the county for the reason that the greater part of the direct results 
 of better roads inure to the counties or local com.munities. 
 
 I am reasonably well acquainted with road conditions in Iowa, 
 Illinois, and South Dakota, and believe that public sentiment would 
 be decidedly in favor of joining hands in a movement of this kind. 
 
 Funds appropriated by the Federal Grovernment should be used 
 on roads which have been graded and thoroughly bridged, and it is 
 on the building of permanent bridges that I would lay especial stress. 
 I do not believe it is possible to build a permanent road, and I do 
 know that if the bridges are substantially built, preferably of con- 
 crete, that then a systematic method of maintenance kept up for a 
 period of years will result in a perfect roadway, so far as natural 
 conditions or materials will permit ; and as dirt or wagon-road build- 
 ing is very similar to railroad building, one can readily reconcile the 
 idea that maintenance is the one thing that will keep it in repair. 
 
 This last statement answers your question No. 4, as to whether a 
 Federal appropriation should be limited to construction or mainte- 
 nance. The big number of stretches of road which have been well 
 constructed and then have been neglected and in a comparatively 
 short time have gone to ruin, should be a sufficient answer against 
 the idea of construction upon the part of the Federal Government 
 unless there is ample provision for the continued maintenance or care 
 of the road after it is once brought to a satisfactory grade. 
 
 As I understand it, in the old country roads are kept in good con- 
 dition by means of a road patrol, and something of that kind should 
 be adopted in this country. In fact, I think the greatest step the 
 Federal Government could take would be to provide a road patrol 
 for those roads which had first been permanently bridged and then 
 graded by county or State authorities. This last statement also 
 answers in great part your paragraph 5. 
 
 TEXAS. 
 
 0. B. COLQUITT, AUSTIN. 
 
 I have some doubt as to the wisdom of the Federal Government 
 participating in a matter of this kind, but if it does, I think it should 
 
GOOD EOADS. 103 
 
 supplement the efforts of local authorities. In Texas good-road 
 building is under the jurisdiction and control of the commissioners 
 court of each county. Our law provides for the voting of bonds by 
 counties and by precincts in counties. The State does not have 
 supervision or control over the building of good roads in Texas. If 
 the Federal Government engages in good-road building, or makes 
 appropriations for this purpose, laws should be passed adequately 
 protecting the proper expenditure of such money, as a matter of 
 course. I think the local or county authorities, in most instances, 
 will be glad to cooperate with the. Federal or State Government in 
 the building of good roads. This answers your first and second in- 
 quiries. 
 
 No appropriation by the Federal Government should be applied, 
 except in the building of a first-class road, and if the Federal Gov- 
 ernment, as I have already stated, engages in or appropriates money 
 for the building of good roads, one of the conditions should be that 
 the road shall be kept in good condition by the authority having 
 jurisdiction and control over the same. It follows, therefore, I be- 
 lieve, that if the Federal Government appropriates money for the 
 building of a first-class road, provision should be made for main- 
 taining it as such. This answers your third and fourth questions. 
 
 You ask in your fifth question to what extent, if aid is given, should 
 there be Federal supervision. Here comes the entire trouble of 
 Federal appropriation or interference. According to my ideas of 
 local self-government, the largest powers compatible with good gov- 
 ernment should be vested in the local authorities, and no jurisdiction 
 ought ever be given to the Federal Government over public high- 
 ways belonging to the people of a county. To do so would cause 
 friction, and ultimately submerge local self-government into Federal 
 authority, I fear. 
 
 In your sixth question you ask me to submit a detailed plan work- 
 able for Federal and State cooperation in construction and mainte- 
 nance of roads. This I have not the time to do. The Democratic 
 platform of the State of Texas calls upon the legislature to pass a 
 bill creating the office of highway engineer, for the purpose of co- 
 operating with county authorities in the laying out and construc- 
 tion of first-class roads. 
 
 If the Federal Government does anything whatever, I believe it 
 should repose confidence in the State government, and let its help 
 come as an encouragement and aid to local authorities in the build- 
 ing of good roads. 
 
 O. E. DUNLAP, PRESIDENT CITIZENS' NATIONAL BANK. WAXAHACHIE. 
 
 (1) I do not think there can be inaugurated a practical general 
 plan, upon which Federal aid can be given. 
 
 (2) If such a plan should be adopted I think the counties through 
 which such highway passes should contribute 80 per cent of cost of 
 
 same. i -i, 
 
 (3) Only cardinal, first-class roads should be built. 
 
 (4) The appropriation should be confined to construction. 
 
 (6) I think supervision should be vested in State and counties, 
 and not Federal supervision. . , , , ^- u ^ 
 
 (6) I can not conceive of a practical plan of cooperation between 
 State and Federal governments for the building of highways. The 
 
104 GOOD ROADS. 
 
 vast area of our Government, I think, precludes any feasible plan 
 for Federal aid in building roads. A law that permits counties to 
 subdivide themselves into road districts, for the purpose of issuing 
 bonds in such districts to construct roads or pikes, in my opinion, is 
 the most practical method for the building of highways. Our State 
 enacted such a law four years ago. Since its passage this (Ellis) 
 county has organized nine road districts. The aggregate issue of 
 district road bonds under said law, within a little more than three 
 years, is $980,000. Two hundred and sixty miles of good gravel 
 pikes and cement culverts have been completed. We have sufficient 
 money left to build 100 miles more of good pikes. The rate of taxa- 
 tion varies; in some districts it is 22 cents on each $100 of taxable 
 property; in the highest the rate is 50 cents. This is not a heavy 
 tax. Our citizens are universally pleased with the result. This is 
 purely local self-government, with the small unit of the road district 
 as a basis to Avork from. 
 
 ROBERT J. POTTS, DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL ENGINEERING, TEXAS AGRICUL- 
 TURAL AND MECHANICAL COLLEGE, COLLEGE STATION. 
 
 (1) If Federal aid in road building is to be given at all, I believe 
 that it will be best to give the aid to the State through its State high- 
 way department, to be applied to certain trunk-line roads, more espe- 
 cially those of an interstate character. It should take the form of 
 part payment on the total cost of making these roads, the State 
 being required to bear the remaining part of said cost. The roads 
 to be thus improved should be selected by the State highway depart- 
 ment, and the character of improvement should be specified by the 
 said State department, but both these decisions should be passed upon 
 and approved by the Federal authorities before aid is given. In 
 general, I believe that the same relations should exist between the 
 National department and the State department as now exists between 
 the State departments and the county or township authorities in 
 States where direct money aid is given for road construction. 
 
 (2) Theoretically, the proportion of cost paid by the Federal 
 Government and by the State government, respectively, should be the- 
 same as the proportion of travel coming from outside the State and 
 the travel entirely within the State. It would clearly be impossible 
 to follow this rule in practice and some arbitrary division would 
 therefore be necessary. I would suggest that the Federal Govern- 
 ment pay one-third the cost of such roads as may be selected for the 
 national highways. I believe that the State and local authorities in 
 Texas would be willing to meet the remaining two-thirds of the cost 
 of all roads thus selected. 
 
 (3) The character of the road surfacing must necessarily vary 
 with local conditions. In my opinion it will be proper to spend the 
 Federal appropriation on any kind of surfacing upon which it i& 
 proper to spend local or State money. The idea must be to obtain 
 the best dollar's worth of road in each case. This will require some- 
 form of asphalt macadam in some locations, water-bound macadam 
 in other locations, gravel roads in many localities, and sand-clay 
 roads on a very large mileage of roads throughout the South and the 
 Mississippi Valley country. 
 
GOOD EOADS. 105 
 
 (4) Of the amount appropriated, a portion should be for con- 
 struction and a portion for maintenance. The Government's aid in 
 building a road should in every case carry with it an obligation upon 
 the States and communities to maintain the road. In order to show 
 good faith in snch an arrangement the Government should share 
 the burden of maintenance. I would suggest the same cooperative 
 arrangements for maintenance as are made for construction. 
 
 (5) If Federal aid be given, Federal supervision should at least 
 go far enough to insure proper economical expenditure of the money 
 in the various States. The Federal department should have au- 
 thority to immediately withdraw the appropriation from any State 
 or community where the quality of work does not come up to the 
 standards specified. All plans, specifications, and materials should be 
 passed on and approved by the Federal department. Beyond this, 
 I think that the work of laying and building the roads can best be 
 done by the State highway departments. This will have the added 
 good effect of encouraging the organization of an efficient highway 
 department in every State. 
 
 (6) In addition to details already set forth, I would suggest that 
 no State should be entitled to Federal aid until it has organized a 
 competent State highway department. Initiative for the improve- 
 ment of any road should then come from the people of the State 
 through its State highway department. The State highway depart- 
 ment would make approximate surveys and estimates of cost and 
 determine the portion to be borne by the Federal Government. They 
 would then apply for an appropriation for said improvements. 
 Should the Federal department be able to comply with the request 
 of the State, the State highway department would then make a de- 
 tailed survey, prepare complete plans and specifications for the 
 work, and submit these to the Federal department. If these are 
 found satisfactory to the Federal department, the work would be 
 advertised and let in the usual way, and the Federal Government 
 could pay its proportion of the expense to the State government upon 
 receiving satisfactory evidence that the State had paid its part. 
 
 VERMONT. 
 
 D. T. PERRY, SUPERVISOR OF HIGHWAYS, WINDHAM fOUNTY, WEST JU?AT- 
 
 TLEBORO. 
 
 (1) The general plan should be cooperative by Federal Govern- 
 ment^ the State, and the township or county in which the work is to 
 
 be done. . , i , 
 
 (2) The plan should require the State and counties to contribute 
 equal amounts with the Federal Government for road work. I be- 
 lieve local authorities would enter into such an arrangement without 
 
 hesitating. . j j. 
 
 The benefit accruing from such an arrangement would be to tester 
 a keen interest of all parties concerned, and especially the local 
 
 (3) The character of roads built with Federal aid should be in 
 keeping with the locality and the amount of traffic to sustain. 
 
106 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 The specifications should be flexible to fit various conditions rather 
 than a set type. 
 
 To the end that roads built in the back district need not be as 
 expensive as the more important trunk lines. 
 
 (4) The amount appropriated should be available for maintenance 
 and construction, with maintenance of first importance. 
 
 (5) The immediate supervision of this vFork should be under the 
 State management. Logically, the State could better supervise, 
 because of locality and with more knowledge of local conditions of 
 labor and material available, and possibly could act in better accord 
 with communities within their State than could those from outside. 
 The Federal Government, however, should act in an advisory way, as 
 it might appear for the general good of the work. 
 
 (6) Vermont State road department is already well organized, and 
 could take charge of such work, as could many other States who 
 already have State road organizations. 
 
 WASHINGTON. 
 A\ILLIAM J. ROBERTS, STATE HIGHWAY COMMISSIONER, 0LY5IPIA. 
 
 I am not prepared to express an opinion on the advisability of 
 giving Federal aid in road construction, since the policy of the Gov- 
 ernment should be determined by Congress and the President, and 
 the desires of this State should be expressed by the legislature and 
 the governor or by our Senators and Representatives in Congress. 
 
 However, there are a few principles to be observed in outlining 
 any system of highway construction if substantial benefits are to be 
 secured by such system. 
 
 Specifically answering your questions, I would reply as follows: 
 
 (1) As to a general plan upon which this Federal aid should be 
 given. 
 
 In my opinion, no Federal aid should be granted except upon roads 
 that have been adopted b}- a competent Federal road or engineering 
 board in conference or agreement with a similar board of like charac- 
 ter in each State, and these roads should be well-selected trunk 
 highways. 
 
 The work to be done in a given State should be carefully outlined, 
 plans and specifications prepared by the State department of roads, 
 and approved by the Federal department of roads. 
 
 No money should be paid from the Federal Treasury except upon 
 the certificate of some competent engineer, approved by the Federal 
 department, specifying the amount of work done, the amount of 
 money due, and stating that the work to be done under the plans 
 and specifications has been completed in accordance therewith. Pro- 
 vision should be made for partial payments, with proper reserves, 
 as is usual in most contracts. 
 
 (2) To what extent the plan should require the State or local 
 authorities to contribute to the amount of money appropriated; and 
 to what extent you think your State or local authorities would be 
 willing to cooperate with the Federal Government? 
 
 My opinion is that the best results are secured when there is some 
 form of self -a id. Hence I should require each State or local 
 
GOOD ROADS. 107 
 
 authority to contribute from one-half to two-thirds of the money to 
 be expended. Such contribution from the State or local authority 
 might be raised from any source— State, county, municipality, or by 
 local assessment. 
 
 Adequate provision should be made for the maintenance of the 
 road when completed. I believe that the expense of maintenance 
 should be borne by the same parties and in the same ratios as the 
 construction, but Federal supervision should require that repairs be 
 made when necessary, with some provision whereby the Government 
 could enforce collections from the other contributing parties their 
 proportion of the expense. 
 
 (3) On what character of roads should the amount appropriated 
 by the Federal Government be used ? 
 
 Since the total mileage of roads in the United States is reported 
 by the Bureau of Good Roads to cover more than 2,000,000 miles, it 
 is evident that only principal trunk lines should be considered in 
 any general plan for Federal aid in constructing roads, and in my 
 opinion this aid should be expended chiefly upon through routes 
 and upon the portions located outside of thickly settled cities, towns, 
 and villages. 
 
 A condition exists in Washington affording a splendid opportunity 
 for Federal aid in territory not subject to taxation, viz, through for- 
 est _ reserves, Indian reservations, national parks, and monuments. 
 This untaxed area covers more ^ than one-fourth of the entire State 
 of Washington, and includes some of the greatest wealth of the 
 State in timber, water power, agricultural lands, and minerals. 
 
 These roads should be selected by the Federal and State highway 
 board of engineers (see answer to No. 1), and the Federal board 
 might specify the proportion of the total roads that might be built 
 in any particular State. I believe that this ratio or proportion 
 ought to be based upon road mileage to be constructed rather than 
 upon population. 
 
 I would not favor any general distribution of small sums per mile 
 to be spent by local authorities, as this would result in a wasteful 
 expenditure without expert supervision and with no permanent bene- 
 fits to the road or community. Indeed, such a distribution of funds 
 would tend to retard the good-roads movement. 
 
 I would be in favor of making these Federal-aid roads examples 
 of excellent construction and proper maintenance, and would there- 
 fore require that they be built under the direction and supervision 
 of experienced and skillful road engineers and road superintendents. 
 Such roads should serve to instruct local authorities and road build- 
 ers in the expenditure of money efficiently and economically, and 
 should be an object lesson in the selection and use of proper mate- 
 rials and the maintenance of the road when completed. 
 
 For this reason the mileage to be improved under this act should 
 be limited so that all work done under it may be of high-class con- 
 struction, thorough maintenance, and stand for the best type of con- 
 struction known. 
 
 Such roads will cost more than the average of State roads hitherto 
 constructed. Our State standard is 24 feet wide, from shoulder io 
 shoulder, with 16 feet in width hard surfaced, and a i-foot shoulder 
 on either side. I should estimate the cost of such roads nt $15,000 a 
 mile at least. 
 
108 GOOD ROAI>S. 
 
 (4) Should the amount appropriated be limited to construction or 
 maintenance or be given jointly for construction and maintenance? 
 
 I should favor both construction and maintenance in this act. 
 The maintenance might be applied on roads selected as above out- 
 lined, that are already built and in fairly good condition, and the 
 construction or reconstruction applied where necessary. 
 
 (5) To what extent, if aid is given, should there be Federal 
 supervision ? - 
 
 I believe that in many States highway departments have been 
 already organized on an efficient basis, and that local supervision 
 would assure satisfactory construction and maintenance, but, in my 
 opinion, no Federal money should be paid out except upon certificates 
 approved, after inspection, by some member of the Federal board. 
 
 (6) Submit a detailed plan workable for Federal and State coop- 
 eration in construction and maintenance. 
 
 In those States which already have a working organization for 
 road construction I believe that the plan outlined above would work 
 satisfactorily. In this State the engineers of the highway depart- 
 ment, after a given road is selected and agreed upon, could furnish 
 plans and specifications for either construction or maintenance. The 
 Federal Government might adopt standard specifications for different 
 classes of work. When the proper type has been selected by the 
 State highway board the plans prepared by the State Department 
 could be sent to the Federal board for approval or modification. 
 The Federal authorities could then agree to pay their part of the 
 cost of the road upon estimates made by the State highway depart- 
 ment from time to time. These estimates should show the actual 
 amount of work done, giving quantities and rates, the partial pay- 
 ments being for 80 per cent of the work already done, the other 20 
 per cent being retained until 30 days after the contract has been 
 completed. 
 
 I would favor the State highway board's advertising for bids and 
 letting the contract subject to the approval of the Federal board. 
 If the State's engineers were given supervision of the work, the 
 Federal inspection would doubly assure that construction was done 
 according to plans. 
 
 The views here presented may not accord with those furnished from 
 States where conditions are entirely different, but I believe that the 
 essentials to any satisfactory Federal aid require — 
 
 1. That plans and specifications be furnished by experienced en- 
 gineers. 
 
 2. That the roads be constructed under skilled supervision. 
 
 3. That adequate provision be made for future maintenance of 
 the roads. 
 
 WISCONSIN. 
 A. n. HIEST, STATE HIGHWAY ENCIINEEE, MADISON. 
 
 (1) I believe that Federal aid should be given in such a manner 
 that the distribution of the money available from the National 
 Treasury shall be made in accordance with fixed rules, and it should 
 not be in the hands of Congress or the Members thereof, or in the 
 hands of anv officer of the States. 
 
GOOD EOADS. 109 
 
 Each State should, in cooperation with the United States Office of 
 Public Koads or its successor, lay out a system of public roads con- 
 necting the principal cities of the State, and the systems of adjoining 
 States should be made to join at the State lines so as to make con- 
 tinuous lines of travel. These roads should be limited so that their 
 mileage would not exceed 3 per cent of the total mileage of each 
 State. ^ 
 
 Such a system would benefit primarily the counties through which 
 the roads passed, in a minor degree the States through which they 
 passed, and in a still less degree the United States. We believe that 
 each of these three units should pay a portion of the cost of the work, 
 though States should be given the right to pay both the State's and 
 counties' share if they saw fit. I would propose that the county, 
 State, and Nation each pay one-third of the cost of construction on 
 the national system, and that the bill be so drawn that whenever a 
 county or a State, or both, make an appropriation to build certain 
 portions of this system the National Government be forced each year 
 to give its proportion of aid up to the limit of the allotment to each 
 State. 
 
 (2) Question (2) is partially answered above. I believe that the 
 local units would be glad to cooperate in financing the scheme of 
 through roads in the proportions named; and, that if they are not 
 so willing, no other body should be willing. 
 
 (3) I would propose that the Federal Government should pay 
 only one-third of the cost of the main traveled roads comprising 3 
 per cent of the mileage, as above. 
 
 (4) The appropriation of the Government should be limited to 
 the construction, and the States be required to keep the roads in 
 repair. 
 
 (5) I believe that Federal supervision should extend to the selec- 
 tion of the roads and the approval of the construction, both in the 
 preparation of the plans and in the prosecution of the work, but that 
 the direct control of the construction should remain in the hands 
 of the State highway commission, whose members and employees 
 would probably be more familiar with local conditions than any 
 other organization. 
 
 (6) The sixth question seems more or less the duplicate of the first 
 question. The plan I have in mind is one with the following steps: 
 
 (a) The creation of a national highway commission to be composed 
 of (1) an economist, (2) a business man, (3) the best highway engi- 
 neer obtainable. This commission should be given power to appoint 
 such engineers and experts as proved necessary. 
 
 (b) The selection of the main routes of travel by the State high- 
 way departments, their coordination by the national department, 
 and the filing with each State of maps showing these roads. 
 
 (c) The voting of money for improvements on the system by the 
 counties and States, or by the State alone if the legislature preferred. 
 
 (d) The preparation of plans and specifications for improvements 
 by the State highway commission, and their approval by the national 
 commission. 
 
 (e) The letting of contracts or making of other arrangements for 
 construction to be approved jointly by the representatives of the 
 State and National Government. 
 
110 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 (/) The construction of the road under the direct supervision of 
 the State highway commission in each State, with sufficient super- 
 visory inspection by the Government bureau in charge to determine 
 that the terms of the specifications were being complied with. 
 
 (f]i) The acceptance of the completed road by the State and Na- 
 tional commissions. 
 
 (h) The maintenance of the roads after construction by the State 
 authorities in accordance with the requirements of the national com- 
 mission. 
 
 (i) An appropriation by the National Government of not less than 
 $10,000,000 annually for the purpose contemplated, the money to be 
 divided betvv'een the States in the ratio of their assessed valuation 
 for purposes of State taxation. 
 
 In general, I can see very little justification for national aid for 
 highways, except the following: 
 
 "(1) it would encourage States that have not heretofore taken part 
 in the movement to enter upon highway construction. 
 
 (2) It would create a coherent system of through traveled roads, 
 of interest not only to the States individually, but to adjoining 
 States, and possibly in some few cases, to several States. 
 
 (3) It would distribute the cost in such a way that construction 
 might be encouraged because the cost was not all paid directly. 
 
 (4) It would standardize highway construction if an efficient na- 
 tional commission were formed, and would lead to better and more 
 uniform construction. 
 
 Too many people favor national aid because it seems to give some- 
 thing for nothing, and not because the scheme they suggest is an 
 equitable one, or because more economical results will be obtained. 
 It has seldom been found that the expenditure of special appropria- 
 tions under Government axispices has been actually economical or 
 that their distribution has been based on fairness or equity. I have 
 no sym]5athy with the idea of national aid for highways in the form 
 of n " jackpot " for political distribution (such as the rivers and 
 harbors and public buildings appropriations), as is seemingly com- 
 monlv demanded, and do not believe that the cost of these highways, 
 will be any less because the cost is collected indirectly by the General 
 Government. I feel that it is a sound i>rinciple that those who get 
 the benefits should pay the larger share of the cost, and believe that 
 any law formulated should be along such lines as will give an ap- 
 proximately fair distribution of cost between the units benefited. 
 
 The plea often made that automobiles from other States pass 
 through certain States to the detriment of their highways is not an 
 cffocdve plea to the thinking man, since automobiles passing through 
 a State leave much more money behind than thev destroy in the 
 v.-^liie of road surfacings. aiid it is felt that each State, as a general 
 proposition, should be willing to build its roads so that tourist traffic 
 would be encouraged. National aid would, however, produce a 
 quickening of this construction on the main line^, and without doubt 
 would be of value in this regard. 
 
 Finally, I believe that each State has developed or Avill develop' 
 a highway commission and force of employees who will he fuUv 
 competent to deal with tlie details of construction in that State, and 
 probably more competent than any national organization woidd be- 
 
GOOD EOADS. Ill 
 
 to deal with strict^ local conditions. There is room, however, for 
 an organization in Washington to supervise in a general way the 
 construction m which the Government is financially interested'; and 
 to give advice as to special problems, to investigate patents affecting 
 highway construction, and to conduct tests and experiments to deter- 
 mine the availability of new materials and forms of construction. 
 This national organization should be composed oi real leaders in 
 their especial line, so that it would contain within itself a body of 
 consulting experts who could give the best obtainable advice lipon 
 any phase of highway work. Nothing would be gained by forming 
 at Washington a large organization of mediocre men. The national 
 body to be of real value should be composed of men to whom the 
 men m charge of work in the various States could put their most 
 difficult problems Avith confidence in their ability to help them solve 
 them. 
 
 WYOMING. 
 A. J. PAESHALL, STATE ENGINEEE, CHEYENNE. 
 
 With the limited time it has been impossible to go into the subject 
 very thoroughly. This State does not have a regularly constituted 
 highway commission. It was only two years ago that the State 
 became directly interested in the construction of roads. The work 
 of locating the roads and preparing the plans and specifications and 
 overseeing the construction, which was to be done by convicts, was 
 placed on this office. As no great amount of work has as yet been 
 undertaken, it has not been necessary to form a distinct organization 
 for road work, everything being done by the regular force, which is 
 principally engaged in irrigation work, except when it has been neces- 
 sary to employ extra assistance for some particular part of it. Conse- 
 quently no great attention has been given to this line of work, and 
 many of the questions in connection with administration which are 
 constantly before the road officers in other States have not arisen. 
 The suggestions given in this letter are based on personal opinion, 
 ■ rather than an expression of what the people of this State may or 
 may not desire. 
 
 1. As to general plan upon which this Federal aid should be given. 
 
 The appropriation should be -spent only on such roads as may be 
 felected by a competent Federal road commission in agreement with 
 a similar State commission or State engineer. The work should 
 be done under the plans and specifications prepared either by Federal 
 authorities and approved by the State authorities, either as originally 
 plaimed or modified, or by plans prepared by the State authorities 
 and approved by Federal authorities. No money should be paid out 
 except upon the certificate employed by the Federal Government and 
 State. Federal expenditures should Idc approved by Federal engi- 
 neers and State expenditures by State engineers. Certificates should 
 state in detal the amount of work done, the amount due, and also 
 that the work has been done in accordance with plans and specifica- 
 tions. Provision should be made for payment as work progresses, 
 with the usual reservation of a certain percentage until the work 
 as a whole, has been completed and accepted by both Federal and 
 State authorities. (Will have to be modified in many States on no- 
 
112 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 count of the cost being met by counties or other subdivisions in which 
 the work is done.) 
 
 2. To what extent the plans should require the State or local au- 
 thorities to contribute to the amount of money appropriated, and to 
 what extent you think your State or local authorities would be willing 
 to cooperate with the Federal Government. 
 
 The amount should be determined by the character of the road 
 (whether used largely for mail or necessary for military operations, 
 and the density of the population. When used largely for Federal 
 purposes or when the population along the route is scattered the 
 Federal proportion should be greater than in cases where the use will 
 be principally local; the money to be used locally to be derived in 
 any manner agreeable to the people who would meet the cost of con- 
 struction, either by State or county appropriation or by individual 
 contribution. 
 
 It would also be necessary to provide a means of raising money for 
 the maintenance of the roads. This would be the greatest stumbling 
 block to be considered, as it would be difficult to make any arrange- 
 ment that would be satisfactory to the different administrations 
 which in the future would have the duty of keeping the roads up to 
 (he required standard. 
 
 As the matter has never been brought before the people of this 
 State, it is impossible to say what proportion they might be willing 
 to contribute. It is probable, however, that they would take what- 
 ever was available, even though they were opposed to the policy of 
 Federal aid in general. 
 
 3. On Avhat character of roads should the amount appropriated by 
 the Federal Government be used? 
 
 In general it should be used only on through routes. In some sec- 
 tions, especially mountainous districts, the roads should be con- 
 structed connecting locations that have no direct connection on ac- 
 count of the communities being unable to expend the required amount 
 to provide a road through difficult country. On through routes the 
 construction should be such that it may be, used as a model for other 
 roads. The character of the construction would depend upon the 
 density of the traffic that it might be reasonably expected to give. 
 In some mountainous districts the opening up and grading of earth 
 roads with reasonable grades would be all that would be necessary. 
 
 4. Should the amount appropriated be limited to construction or 
 maintenance, or be given jointly for construction and maintenance? 
 
 The amount appropriated should be used for either construction 
 or maintenance, to be determined by the engineers in charge. Pos- 
 sibly it might be better to use Federal aid for the larger part of the 
 cost of the roads and require the roads to be maintained by the local 
 authorities. (In most parts of this State a very considerable portion 
 of the cost of the roads is used in building bridges. If these are per- 
 manently constructed in the first place the maintenance of the roads 
 should not become a heavy burden on the people using them.) 
 
 5. To what extent, if aid is given, should there be Federal super- 
 vision ? 
 
 Federal supervision should be given only in examining and accept- 
 ing the work constructed. Federal appropriation should be expended 
 only on the certificate of the Federal engineers, although it might not 
 be necessary to have such an engineer on the work at all times. The 
 
GOOD EOADS. 113 
 
 veport of the local supervisor (acceptable to the Federal authorities) 
 might be accepted on certificate from the proper State authorities. 
 Until the system has been tried out it might be necessary to have a 
 Federal engineer constantly on the work to see that the local authori- 
 ties are competent. 
 
 6. Submit a detailed plan workable for Federal and State coopera- 
 tion in construction and maintenance. 
 
 Not having a complete highway organization, it is impossible to 
 outline a method of cooperation for this State that might work. If 
 Federal aid is given the State cooperation would depend largely 
 upon the method by which Federal aid is extended. 
 
 If the State has a highway board or commission with a competent 
 engineer, or even only a competent State engineer, plans for roads 
 could be prepared by the State subject to approval by the Federal 
 authorities. When approved and the proportion to be paid by the 
 Federal Government decided upon, the work could be advertised 
 and bids received by the State authorities and a contract let. The 
 State engineer, through his assistants, could supervise the actual con- 
 struction, the Federal supervision only being sufficient to determine 
 that the State supervision was competent. 
 
 Owing to the great difference in the laws of the various States, I 
 appreciate that a plan which appears good for one might be very 
 poor for another. The suggestions are offered only that j'ou may 
 secure as great a variety of opinion as possible. I expect that the 
 replies you receive from States where highway work has been carried 
 on for years will furnish a much better indication of what is possible 
 with Federal cooperation than anything I can offer. 
 
 monday, february 10, 1913. 
 
 Joint Committee on 
 Federal Aid in Construction of Post Roads, 
 
 Washington, D. 0. 
 
 The joint committee met pursuant to the call of the chairman at 
 8 o'clock p. m. 
 
 Present: Senator Jonathan Bourne, jr. (chairman), Senator Asle 
 J. Gronna, Representative Dorsey W. Shackleford, Representative 
 Gordon Lee, and Representative Richard W. Austin. 
 
 STATEMENT OF LAURENS ENOS. 
 
 The Chairman. Mr. Enos, it will be necessary for you to be sworn. 
 
 Thereupon the witness was duly sworn by the chairman. 
 
 The Chaieman. Please state your name, your residence, and occu- 
 pation. . 
 
 Mr. Ends. Laurens Enos, Buffalo, N. Y. ; I am a furniture dealer. 
 
 The Chairman. Have you any connection with any association 
 that is interested in the subject of good roads? 
 
 Mr. Enos. Nothing officially, except as president of the Three A's. 
 
 The Chairman. That is the American Automobile Association? 
 
 Mr. Enos. Yes. 
 
 79558— FT 1—13 8 
 
114 GOOD ROADS. 
 
 The Chairman. Will you explain please what that association 
 consists of, and how large it is in its scope? 
 
 Mr. Enos. I have a memorandum here which I would like to sub- 
 mit for your record. 
 
 The Chairman. This is an address on the part of the association 
 to this committee? 
 
 Mr. Enos. To this committee ; yes, sir. 
 
 The American Automobile Association has 44 State bodies and 
 500 clubs, with several thousand individual members, and a grand 
 total of 70,000. The average dues are $10 per member, which gives 
 about $700,000 paid by automobilists in securing conditions making 
 convenient and uniform the use of the motor-driven vehicle. The 
 greater part of this money is used in the localities wherein the clubs 
 have their existence. But a part is apportioned to the various State 
 bodies, and per capita dues are paid to the national organization. 
 
 While the American Automobile Association carries on the burden 
 of its highways improvement work through its national good-roads 
 board, the membership as a whole is interested in this work more 
 than in the other departments, which involve the encouragement of 
 touring, the obtaining of uniform legislation, and the control of all 
 kinds of automobile contests. The chairmen of the good-roads com- 
 mittees of the 500 clubs compose the national good-roads board, with 
 the addition of others who believe in the improvement of the 
 highways. 
 
 We contend that it is the duty of the Federal Government to sup- 
 plement State and county road systems Avith cooperation such as 
 shall strengthen the Nation, as the need of avenues of road commu- 
 nication is fully apparent, with the great increase of country travel. 
 Year-around communication between city and country, between each 
 locality and all others, is an essential requirement for the exchange 
 of commodities and of information. The cost of living problem is 
 not the only one which a complete system of good roads would go far 
 to solve. Enlightened public opinion, necessary to the complete 
 realization of the ideals of self-government on which our Nation is 
 founded can only be formed by providing the freest possible inter- 
 communication between the social units that make up the 48 Com- 
 monwealths. 
 
 We advocate the creation, wherever they do not now exist, of effec- 
 tive State departments of highways. Existing through highways 
 should be taken over by the State and thereafter should be built and 
 maintained by the State, which should also assist the counties in the 
 building of county roads and the towns in the maintenance of town 
 highways. 
 
 We favor at this time an annual registration fee, providing it is 
 lieu of a personal property tax, and the revenue therefrom is used 
 for the maintenance of existing highways. While it is plainly 
 unconstitutional to tax one class of road users and to except another, 
 we would waive this point for the time being, because of the results 
 which naturally follow the payment of this tax and its use for 
 road maintenance. 
 
 The Chairman. This statement to the committee represents the 
 views of your association, as I understand it ? 
 
 Mr. Enos. Yes. 
 
GOOD ROADS. 115 
 
 The Chairman. Having a membership and an organization in 44 
 of the 48 States? 
 Mr. Enos. Yes. 
 
 The Chairman. In all of the 500 clubs, what membership have 
 you? 
 
 Mr. Enos. Between seventy and seventy-five thousand. 
 
 The Chairman. Is it your opinion, and that of the association 
 of which you are president, that the Federal Government should 
 make appropriations in aid of public roads ? 
 
 Mr. Enos. Yes. 
 
 The Chairman. On what roads should the first Government ap- 
 propriation be expended ? 
 
 Mr._ Enos. I have Mr. Diehl, the chairman of the good-roads 
 committee, with me who will talk to you on that subject. 
 
 The Chairman. The details you would rather have left to Mr. 
 Diehl? 
 
 Mr. Enos. Yes. 
 
 The Chairman. What is the number of automobiles now in opera- 
 tion in the United States ? 
 
 Mr. Enos. I would not be able to tell you that. 
 
 The Chairman. I happened to be reading the paper to-night and 
 saw that there were some 340,000 automobiles made during the vear 
 1913. 
 
 Mr. Enos. Mr. Terry has those figures. 
 
 The Chairman. In addition to the statement that you have pre- 
 sented to the committee, are there any further remarks bearing upon 
 the subject which you would care to give the committee? 
 
 Mr. Enos. No, sir. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. You say in your statement that you collect 
 bomething like $700,000 a year. What do you do with that money ? 
 
 Mr. Enos. We do not collect it. It goes through the different 
 clubs and the State associations, and part of it finds its way to the 
 American Automobile Association. 
 
 Mr. SHACKLEroED. How much goes to your association? 
 
 Mr. Enos. About $70,000. 
 
 Mr. Shacki<eford. Your association favors national highways? 
 
 Mr. Enos. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. You do not believe in giving United States 
 money for the construction and maintenance of roads? 
 
 Mr. Enos. I would rather have Mr. Diehl go into these questions 
 in detail as he is familiar with the subject. 
 
 Senator Geonna. If an automobile manufacturer should decide to 
 give a certain percentage, would that add to the cost of the ma- 
 chines ? 
 
 Mr. Enos. I should not think so. 
 
 Senator Gronna. As I understand it, the automobile concerns 
 favor certain trunk lines ? 
 
 Mr. Enos. I understand they do ; yes, sir. 
 
 Senator Gronna. They do not favor a general plan of improving 
 all the highways, but just certain trunk lines; is that correct? 
 
 Mr. Enos. I understand they favor the improvement primarily of 
 trunk lines. 
 
 Mr. Austin. You have no objection to Congress going ahead on the 
 other roads? 
 
116 GOOD KOADS. 
 
 Mr. Enos. On the trunk lines; no. 
 
 The Chaieman. Has the association, as such, mapped out any con- 
 crete plan on which they are united, or have they simply passed their 
 expression as to a' general policy for the improvement of roads? 
 
 Mr. Enos. Just as to the general policy. 
 
 The Chaieman. Is that all you have to say, Mr. Enos ? 
 
 Mr. Enos. Yes, sir. 
 
 The Chairman. We thank you very much. 
 
 STATEMENT OF GEORGE C. DIEHL. 
 
 The Chairman. Mr. Diehl, it will be necessary that you be sworn. 
 Thereupon the witness was duly sworn by the chairman. 
 
 The Chairman. Please state your full name, residence, occupa- 
 tion, and the official capacity in which you appear before the com- 
 mission — if j'ou appear in any official capacity ? 
 
 Mr. Diehl. George C. Diehl; civil engineer of Buffalo, N. Y.; 
 county engineer of Erie County, N. Y. I appear this evening par- 
 ticularly as chairman of the good-roads board of the American Au- 
 tomobiles Association and also as chairman of the good-roads com- 
 mittee of the New York State Automobile Association. 
 
 The Chairsian. Have you a statement that has been prepared to 
 submit for the committee, or will you just give an oral statement? 
 
 Mr. Diehl. I have prepared no written statement and would pre- 
 fer to merely state — possibly in a disconnected and in an impromptu 
 manner — the ideas I have on this subject. 
 
 The Chairman. We Avill be glad to receive them. 
 
 Mr. Diehl. In the first place I assume your committee are to de- 
 termine whether or not there should be Federal aid in highway 
 construction. 
 
 The Chairman. The committee has to make out a plan and make 
 its recommendation to Congress for official action, whatever it may be. 
 
 Mr. Diehl. I would state, as bearing on the point whether or not 
 the Federal Government should participate in roads, that for over 
 100 years throughout the United States the general policy of all 
 the States was that the highways should be constructed and main- 
 tained at the expense of the locality in which they were situated — 
 that is, at the expense of the twonships. It was found — after a cen- 
 tury of work — that the roads were scarcely any better than at the 
 outset because the townships could not afford to construct the high- 
 ways, and because it was not a sufficiently large unit to properly 
 carry on the work. It was further found that the cities of the 
 country benefitted from the road construction almost equally with 
 the rural districts by reason of their being the market places. There- 
 fore, it was demand desirable some 18 or 20 years ago to enact in 
 the several States and counties legislation which sought to divide 
 the expense of highway construction and maintenance between the 
 urban and the rural localities. In counties which had a large city 
 within their borders, a county aid law gave satisfactory results and 
 a fair apportionment of the expense between the country and the 
 city. 
 
 The greatest improvement which has been accomplished in this 
 country to date — the only improvement which has resulted in a prop- 
 
GOOD iiOADS; 11 Y 
 
 «rly developed and -well connected system of roads — has been from 
 the enactment by the State legislatures of State-aid laws. I would 
 cite the States of Massachusetts, Connecticut, New Jersey, and New 
 York as showing what can be done with a proper State-aid law. 
 The fact remains that there are many States in the United States 
 which do not contain large centers of wealth and population, and to 
 illustrate that point I might add, for instance, that in the State of 
 Massachusetts there is a total assessed valuation of four billions of 
 dollars and there are about 20,000 miles of highway. In other words, 
 there is an assessed valuation of about $200,000 for each mile of pub- 
 lic highways, an assessable valuation, whereas in the State of Rhode 
 Island the assessable value is about $200,000 and in New York 
 $150,000. Nevada, for instance, has only an assessed valuation of 
 $600 per mile of highway. In other words, the State of Nevada has 
 only one three-hundredth part of the taxable assets per mile that 
 the State of Massachusetts has. Assuming that one State spread in 
 precisely the same manner as another, it would take the State of 
 Nevada three hundred times as long as the State of Massachusetts 
 to accomplish the result, leaving out entirely the matter of indirect 
 taxes. For instance, in the State of New York the indirect tax, 
 up until a few years ago, covered the entire tax of the State. 
 
 At the present time, in 25 States out of the Union — which is con- 
 siderably more than half — the assessed valuation is less than $10,000 
 per mile, or one-twentieth of the amount it is in the State of Massa- 
 chusetts, one fifteenth of the amount in New York State. Without 
 burdening your committee with statistics, as I know you have gath- 
 ered them from the Director of Public Roads and from your own 
 statistician, I want to say that a casual study of those statistics 
 v.'ould convince one that there will never be a connected and properly 
 developed system of highways in many of the States and the United 
 States unless money is received from outside of the State, or unless 
 the cities of the United States contributing toward the expense of con- 
 struction. Being a resident of New York State, where this senti- 
 ment might not be quite as popular as in other States, I would say 
 that the great improvements of New York City are very largely due 
 to the fact that it is on the cheapest route across the continent where 
 it breaks through the Appalachian divide, and the Mohawk River is 
 the lowest crossing of the Appalachian system of the entire breadth, 
 north and south, of the country. 
 
 The Chairman. And it is due to the transportation advantages? 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. Yes, sir. The argument I am making is that the 
 cities of the East rely on the natural resources of the West and the 
 central part of the country to properly bear a burden of that expense, 
 and the only way of making a division of the burden of such an 
 expense is by the enactmeent >of a Federal highway law of some kind. 
 That would divide the cost of construction between the urban and the 
 rural localities much the same ts it would divide the cost between the 
 city and country, in a county with a large city, by a county-aid law, 
 or with the State and a number of cities by a State-aid law, and our 
 association believes that there should be some form of Federal high- 
 way legislation, and we believe it necessary in order to secure that 
 
 Mr. Austin. What is your proposed Federal legislation that would 
 effect this proposition of yours? Is it for the cities of the east 
 
118 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 to furnish the money or to be taxed to meet the extension of road 
 improvement in the Western States ? 
 
 Mr. DiEPiL. The proposition is that your committee will, I pre- 
 sume, recommend legislation to Congress. It is to recommend that a 
 certain percentage of the cost of roads be borne by the Federal Gov- 
 ernment, the tax of the Federal Government be spread 
 
 Mr. Austin. You are speaking about the rich cities of the East 
 doing this ? 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. They bear their share of the Federal tax, which is 
 of course indirect. The Federal tax, being indirect, might be said to 
 be pro rated over the country in proportion to the popula,tion, and 
 therefore a large percentage of all the Federal tax is paid by the 
 great cities where the population concentrates. The one way I have 
 to suggest of taxing cities is to tax them through their contribution 
 to the revenues of the United States, which in turn would pay a share 
 of the cost of highway construction. 
 
 The Chairman. Your presentation is for the purpose of showing 
 the justification on the part of Congress of taking from the general 
 fund appropriations for road improvements? 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. Exactly. 
 
 The Chairman. And you base that on the experience you have had 
 in the different States and the policy that has been in vogue in the 
 different States in the way of State aid ? 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. Yes, sir. 
 
 The Chairman. Your idea is that we should apply the same prin- 
 ciple in Federal aid that has been given by States in State aid ? 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. That experience has proven wise in the States. 
 
 The Chairman. On what roads would the first Government appro- 
 priations, if they were made, be expended ? 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. That is the next question which I want to present to 
 the committee. If it is conceded that Federal aid is desirable, then 
 immediately the question arises what roads should be imjproved with 
 Federal money, and there are three principal contentions, as I under- 
 stand it, amongst the advocates of Federal aid, which are as follows : 
 First, that the expenditure should be sp'read over 1,000,000 miles 
 of highway, that it should include all the post roads of the United 
 States. 
 
 Mr. Austin. Over a million miles, you say? 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. Over a million miles. That is one suggestion. I am 
 now going to give the three suggestions and then I will state what 
 our association favors. The second suggestion is that the Govern- 
 ment aid should be placed on those roads which lead from the farms 
 to the market, or the main roads that are traversed by the farmer in 
 reaching a shipping point. The mileage of those highways is 10 per 
 cent, approximately, of the total mileage of the United States, or 
 about 200,000. The third suggestion is that the money should be 
 expended on the main trunk lines which connect each State with 
 every other State and which connect all the larger centers of popula- 
 tion — -which might be termed the national roads. These roads com- 
 prise about 1^ or 2 per cent of the total mileage of the country, or 
 about from thirty to forty thousand miles. 
 
 Mr. Austin. One scheme is for how many miles ? 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. For a million miles; that covers the post roads. The 
 second is for 200,000 miles, the feeders to the railroads and to the 
 
GOOD KOADS. 119 
 
 market. The other is for from thirty to forty thousand miles, the 
 national routes across the country intersecting every State and con- 
 necting all large centers of population. Based upon the discussion of 
 this matter over a period of several years, and, upon the unanimous 
 action by the executive committee, the board of directors, and the 
 conventions which our association has held, we feel that the great 
 danger to this Federal-aid movement is that the Government would 
 be swamped if they undertook to improve too great a mileage in the 
 United States. We feel that what the Government does it should 
 do well; that if it makes contributions it should see that the roads 
 are properly constructed, that the money is economically expended, 
 and that the construction shall be of such form that it will be lasting, 
 durable, and produce the results which it is desirable to produce. 
 
 Hr. Shacklefoed. The last plan you mentioned, and the one 
 which your association favors, does not contemplate any contribution, 
 does it, for a national road to be constructed and maintained solely 
 by the United States ?' 
 
 Mr. DiEi-iL. No, sir. I will come to that point later. 
 The CHAiRjrAN. Did I understand you to say you favored the third 
 plan? 
 
 Mr. DiEHi,. Not yet. T was just coming to that. I will favor that 
 in a moment. Our association feels that spreading the money over 
 this tremendous mileage of the first plan, over all the roads in the 
 United States, could not produce good results, and we feel in regard 
 to the market roads that it is asking the Government to do more than 
 they ought to be called upon to do. 
 
 The Chairman. By "market roads" you mean the 200,000 miles 
 of road? 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. The 200,000 miles of road. Let me say at the outset 
 that our association in no way opposes the improvement of the 
 market roads if the United States Government wishes to improve 
 them. 
 
 Mr. Austin. They are only opposed to the Shackleford proposi- 
 tion. 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. We are opposed to that plan and I will discuss that 
 later. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. Haven't I a circular issued by your depart- 
 ment, a letter from some of your officers saying that the National 
 Government should build and maintain these national roads as a 
 national enterprise, and having taken that much burden off of the 
 States and counties that no Federal money should be spent upon any 
 intrastate roads. 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. I have been coming to that. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford, I want to ask you now. You say you are not 
 opposed to these other schemes and I want to ask you if you have not 
 said in your circulars that having built these national roads at the 
 expense of the National Government, the National Government ought 
 not be required to go any further and that no Federal money should 
 be used upon any intrastate roads. I would like to ask whether you 
 
 said that. . , .1 . 
 
 Mr. Diehl. I would like to place m evidence the statement that 
 Mr. Shackleford refers to, to show that his statement is generally 
 correct. 
 
120 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 Mr. Shacklefokd. I want to know if that is not specifically what 
 you say? 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. The statement is what has been said. 
 
 Mr. SHACiiLEroED. I want to ask you if your association has not 
 sent out this statement in a circular : 
 
 We believe, however, that the Federal Government will have done practically 
 its full duty when it shall have talien over and improved and provided for the 
 maintenance of the great interstate routes, the highways upon which the traffic 
 falls most heavily, and the making and upkeep of which constitutes the 
 greatest item of expense in a State highway system. Relieved of the burden 
 of the interstate routes, every Commonwealth should then provide amply for 
 Its intercountry and township roads and would have available a greater amount 
 of money than it could hope for in any ineffective and scattered distribution of 
 Federal funds. 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. Mr. Shackleford reads from the statement which I 
 wish to introduce in evidence and, of course, I admit he has read it 
 correctly, and that together with the other statements that are in 
 the circular are what have been indorsed by the association. The 
 qualifying statement which I wish to make is" as follows : 
 
 That our association does not have the egotism nor the foolishness, 
 if you want to call it that, to come before this committee and say 
 that we know all about this proposition. Neither do we come here 
 to antagonize any number of propositions that have been suggested, 
 but we do say in that statement that we believe that the Govern- 
 ment should maintain those interstate highways, such as I have 
 described. We believe that there is a function, in the highway 
 improvement, for the local townships, for the county, for the State, 
 and for the National Government. We believe that the function of 
 the National Government is to improve these 30,000 miles of roads 
 which constitute the backbone or the basis of proper State, county, 
 and town systems. We believe that the function of the State is that 
 it should in turn construct a State system, such as has been done in 
 the State of New York, connecting the various counties in the State, 
 and we believe it is the duty of the county, in cooperation with the 
 State, to construct the main market roads which lead from the 
 farms to the markets and to the shipping points. We do believe it 
 is the duty of the township to construct the rural highways, or the 
 unimproved lateral roads to conect the individual farm with the 
 main market road, or with the roads to the railroads, with the State 
 highway, or with the national roads, as the case may be. We be- 
 lieve that each one of those subdivisions has a definite function 
 to perform. 
 
 Mv. Austin. You say 30,000. You have several times said 40,000. 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. I refer to 1^ to 2 per cent of the milage, which 
 would be from thirty to forty thousand miles. I would say in 
 that connection that while I have worked out maps showing some 
 of these lines, it has not been done with the detail that would 
 naturally be done by competent boards who give their time and atten- 
 tion to the solution of this problem. I would say that the roads 
 which should, in my judgment, be improved by the United States 
 are those roads which are agreed upon by a competent Federal offi- 
 cial, or a Federal commission, or whoever has charge of this matter 
 for the Federal Government, and the State highway commissions of 
 the several States. 
 
GOOD KOADS. 121 
 
 The Chairman. That is, cooperation between the two? 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. The State highway commission and the Federal Gov- 
 ernment, through its delegate, should cooperate to select the routes 
 which would be improved by the National Government; and I say, 
 very frankly, that in my opinion and in the opinion of the men of 
 our association we believe that that should not exceed 2 per cent of 
 the mileage in the United States, but we do not object to your 
 building the market roads into cities. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. These thirty or forty thousand miles of na- 
 tional highway are to be constructed and maintained solely hv the 
 United States'? 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. I am coming to that a little later, if you will let me 
 take this up in my own way. 
 
 The Chairman. Before you proceed I would like to ask this ques- 
 tion: Is Federal aid to good roads justified from a standpoint of 
 improved transportation or of increased transportation facilities? 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. Both. 
 
 The Chairman. How are you going to get increased transporta- 
 tion facilities if you confine your construction to the present high- 
 ways, your thirty to forty thousand miles under your classification? 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. The experience has been in each one of the States I 
 have cited which has State aid that no road is built by the States, but 
 that it induces the counties and townships to likewise build county 
 and township systems which will be connected up with the State 
 systems. There never has been a road built, for instance, across New 
 York State that the people who did not live on the road have not 
 insisted that the county connect them up with the State road, and in 
 turn the township conned; up with the county roads. To illustrate 
 that point a little more clearly, you gentlemen are probably aware 
 that in 1905 the people of the State of New York adopted a 
 $50,000,000 bond issue at the general election. At the last general 
 election another $50,000,000 bond issue was up, and that carried with 
 it an amendment to the constitution that $20,000,000 of that is.sue 
 should be expended upon State roads which were built and main- 
 tained solely at the expense of the State. 
 
 Mr. Austin. You mean the county roads? 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. No, sir. The State roads which are built and main- 
 tained solely at the expense of the State. There are many, many 
 townships in the State of New York which would touch a State high- 
 way. It further provided that $30,000,000 of that sum should be 
 expended on county roads, which are roads built jointly by the State 
 and the county. There are many localities which are not inter- 
 sected by county roads, and thus there are many localities in the State 
 of New York which are not touched by ^ny roads that are built under 
 this proposed $50,000,000 bond issue, yet in spite of that fact, as an 
 argument showing that that backbone system actually benefits every- 
 bocly in the State, there was not a county in the State of New York 
 that did not vote in favor of that $50,000,000 referendum, by an in- 
 creased vote which they gave over the vote in 1905 for the first bond 
 
 issue. 
 
 The Chairman. At the first bond issue was there any difference 
 as to what percentage was to be spent on the State and county roads? 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. No, sir; at the first bond issue there was no State 
 hio-hway construction, and I am glad you asked that question. 
 
122 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 because it shows the lines of thought along which I am working. 
 When the first $50,000,000 bond issue was made the only class of 
 road was a road built to be paid for 50 per cent by the State, 35 per 
 cent by the county, and 15 per cent by the township. The initiative 
 came from the county, but the local board would pass a resolution 
 for a road and the State would meet that appropriation to build it. 
 The result was that after a number of years of building, around the 
 large cities there were arteries leading into the markets, but they did 
 not connect up at county lines. The law was then amended in order 
 to get the continuity of highways, with a certain percentage of the 
 roads, and in the State of New York 3.75 per cent of the roads are 
 what are called State roads. The law was amended so that these 
 roads should be constructed entirely at the expense of the State for 
 the purpose of continuity or connecting up. The law was then 
 amended so that the county highways, which was the original class, 
 should be constructed jointly by the State and by the county, leaving 
 out the township. 
 
 The Chaib.aean. Fifty per cent each? 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. No ; 65 per cent by the State and 35 per cent by the 
 county. In addition to that there has been an enactment for the 
 purpose of constructing the rural or lateral roads. Those are con- 
 structed and maintained by the township authorities, and one-half 
 of the cost is borne by the State out of an annual tax levy; that 
 money does not come out of the bond issue the people voted for. 
 The work on those township roads has been under the direction of 
 the State highway commission and under the immediate supervision 
 of the county superintendent of highways, with the result that no 
 matter what part of the State or what part of the county a man may 
 live in he is in favor of a State road across the State, and he is in 
 favor of the county roads intersecting the county, because he knows 
 when he goes to market that whereas he may have to traverse a short 
 distance of his rural roads he ultimately comes onto the main roads 
 which lead him to the large city. The law has worked profitably 
 and well, and that it has been a benefit to the city and a benefit to 
 the country is shown by the vote of the people when it carried prac- 
 tically without opposition, with a 400,000 majority in favor of the 
 second bond issue. That demonstrates that not only the division 
 of the expense is fair and proper between the cities and the rural 
 localities, but it further demonstrates the benefits that accrue, which 
 in the ultimate analyses would probably be the best test, better than 
 any theoretical test. 
 
 Mr. Austin. What does it cost you per annum to maintain your 
 roads ? 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. That varies from $30 to $1,000 a mile, depending on 
 the character of the construction. If you will permit me, I would 
 like to take up a few minutes of the committee's time to interject an 
 idea about costs. I think there has been too much talk throughout 
 the United States about the cost of constructing a mile of highway. 
 There can be little comparison in the cost of constructing a highway 
 which carries 100,000 tons a day with the highway that carries 100 
 tons a day. The measure of cost should be the number of tons per 
 foot width of highway. I merely want to call attention to the fact 
 that it is not fair to sa}' how much it would cost to build highways 
 
GOOD EOADS. 123 
 
 in the State of New York and how much it would cost to build them 
 in the State of Nevada, for they are hardly comparable. 
 
 Mr. Austin. What are the dimensions of the State highways in 
 New York? 
 
 Mr.DiEHL. The roads are 32 feet wide between ditches, of which 
 the middle 16 feet is metaled, that is, macadam, asphalt, or brick, or 
 whatever material is used in the construction of the highways. 
 
 Mr. Austin. What is the depth of the material? 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. Depending entirely on the traffic. When they first 
 started building roads in New York State they were all 6 inches 
 deep. Now they are of all dimensions, from 5 to 18 inches, depend- 
 ing on what the road is expected to perform. Regarding the distribu- 
 tion of the Federal fund, assuming that the Federal-aid law is 
 passed, there have been several suggestions made, among them one 
 that the fund should be divided according to population; another 
 that the fund should be divided according" to area. 
 
 Mr. Austin. What do you think of Senator Swanson's bill on 
 that? 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. I have forgotten his bill for the instant. I have his 
 bill on file. What does he provide? 
 
 Mr. Austin. He wants a division along the lines you mentioned. 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. I was just coming to that. The first suggestion, as I 
 stated, was based on population, the second on area, and the third on 
 the total mileage of all highways. The fourth is a combination of 
 uU those three and I may add that the last $50,000,000 bond issue in 
 New York is being divided on the combination of the first three. If 
 I may inject a personal opinion, and I am not venturing, when I get 
 down to the details, to say that I am actually giving the opinion of 
 the American Automobile Association, it must be evident to you, 
 gentlemen, that I have not been in personal consultation with every 
 one- of the 75,000 members of our association, but I would say that 
 my opinion is that none of those plans is exactly the plan that ought 
 to be followed, although we do not antagonize any one of them. Any 
 one of the plans would be satisfactory to us, but I believe that money 
 should not be divided, but rather the mileage of improved highways 
 should be divided. In other words, if you lay out a system, a na- 
 tional system of highways, and the State of New York contains 5 
 per cent of the total . national system, then every time the United 
 States Government builds a thousand miles of road 5 per cent of that 
 mileage should be built in New York State. 
 
 The Chairman. How do you deterlnine your first 5 per cent for 
 New York? 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. iVs I have just stated under the last heading, I believe 
 these roads should be determined by the State highway commission 
 and the Federal authorities in charge of this work. 
 
 The Chairman. Do you mean you should call all of the State 
 highway commissions together and the Federal authorities in charge 
 of the work and let them make an apportionment and a determina- 
 tion as to what percentage shall go to each State? 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. No. 
 
 The Chairman. How would you arrive at your original determina- 
 tion? 
 
124 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. By allowing the Federal authority to confer with the 
 State highway commission and determine what constitute the high- 
 ways which should be affected bv this act. 
 
 The Chairman. Then your determination of the apportionment 
 would be based entirely upon what constituted the highways already 
 in existence and allow for the creation of no new highways at all? 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. No ; not at all. They could determine any highways, 
 except, as I stated at the outset, it should not exceed 2 per cent of 
 the total mileage of any State. 
 
 The Chairman. How do you get your apportionment between the 
 48 States? 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. Just as I have stated. The State highway commission 
 and the Federal authority agree upon the highways to be constructed. 
 
 Senator Gronna. In other vrords, you favor the appropriation of 
 a lump-sum figure and leave that to this commission to apportion. 
 Is not that correct? 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. That is practically the effect of it. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. The Federal authority would select the roads 
 that were to be improved? 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. Yes ; not exceeding 2 per cent of the total mileage. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. Let me see if I understand you correctly. Do 
 you believe that the Federal authority, whoever it may be, the di- 
 rector of good roads, or some other functionary, should consult with 
 each State highway commission, and after having consulted with 
 them, then he would determine how many roads would go to each 
 State and where they should be located? 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. Yes; and also determine on the location. The ques- 
 tion arises should the Government money be expended for both con- 
 struction and maintenance, or either one or the other. In my judg- 
 ment the Federal money should be used for both construction and 
 maintenance. I think it would be unwise for the Federal Govern- 
 ment to put money into construction without having a definite sys- 
 tem of maintenance, and the only way that you could be absolutely 
 sure of proper maintenance of the roads would be that it should be 
 handled exactly the same way as the original construction. 
 
 The Chairman. Under that plan what would you do in New York, 
 for instance, where it has expended $100,000,000 ? Would you give it 
 credit for its expenditures? 
 
 Mr. Diehl. No, sir. I do not believe that this bill should be 
 retroactive in any respect. You may be surprised to hear that com- 
 ing from the State in the Union that has spent the most money on 
 roads, but we have spent a lot of money and we are willing to spend 
 a lot more if necessary. I do not believe you should try io go back 
 and reimburse New York, Massachusetts, Connecticut, or Rhode 
 Island for any roads they have built. I do not think you should 
 undertake that proposition for it would be too complicated and it 
 would mean a lot of unnecessary expense. The road enthusiasts in 
 chose States would be for Federal aid, without being paid for it. 
 
 Mr. Austin. I do not think you need discuss that proposition, for 
 I do not believe Congress will ever do it. 
 
 Mr. Diehl. Regarding the proportion of the expense to be borne 
 by the National Government and to be borne by the State in the con- 
 struction and maintenance, that statement from which Mr. Shackle- 
 
GOOD EOADS. 125 
 
 ford read a few moments ago said we believed that the Government 
 should pay it all. We do, but we do not oppose other measures, and 
 1 think most of the members of our association realize that at this 
 time it is not possible to pass through Congress any legislation which 
 would ask the Government to pay the entire cost of this construction. 
 I personally feel that at the present time the Government should 
 require the State to put in half and they should put in half. I am 
 <?qually convinced that there are certain States in the United States, 
 and I have stated examples, where the assessed valuation is low, that 
 will have to be helped by the National Government more than one- 
 half. They can not afford to pay even one-half of this cost, and I 
 think after such a statute has been in operation for several years 
 that it would be necessary to have a graduated percentage paid by 
 the State, the National Government paying more in the poorer States 
 than in the richer States like New York; and I would further state 
 that such a practical plan has worked in such a way in New York. 
 All the counties there do not pay 3.5 per cent, but the poor counties 
 are only called upon to pay 30 or 25 per cent. 
 
 Mr. Austin. How do you determine that? Does the commission 
 determine that? 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. No. The amount is determined by statute based upon 
 the assessed valuation per mile. A company pays 2 cents per thou- 
 sand dollars on the assessed valuation, so a county that has an as- 
 sessed valuation per mile of $10,000 pays 20 per cent, instead of 35 
 per cent. Likewise, the State, in giving aid to the townships, gives 
 from 50 cents to a dollar, or more, based on the assessed valuation 
 per mile. 
 
 The Chairman. Your measure is the assessed valuation per mile? 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. The measure is practically the taxable assets the 
 township has to build its highways. In other words, it endeavors to 
 contribute according to their ability, and I believe that the Fedci'al 
 Government should pay to the poorer States a larger percentage 
 than it pays to the richer ones upon a graduated scale, arid notwith- 
 standing that statement which I have introduced in the evidence, I 
 do not believe at this time the Government should be called upon to 
 pay the entire erst of construction. That brings us to the last point. 
 
 Mr. Austin. What is your estimated cost on the 30,000 miles ? 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. I have not an estimated cost on that, but I would 
 say that these highways could be constructed at an expense not to 
 exceed ten or twelve thousand dollars a mile, which would be from 
 three hundred to three hundred and fifty million dollars. 
 
 Mr. Austin. How much for the cost of maintenance? 
 
 Mr. DiEHi.. The cost of maintenance would, in my judgment, 
 run about $500 per mile per annum, but you must understand that 
 that is only a mere guess on my part, and I have no doubt that your 
 experts could work it out in greater detail. 
 
 Mr. Austin. When you come here and favor 30,000 miles, we want 
 to know something about what it is going to cost. 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. I will be glad to give it as best I can. I would say 
 frankly I would think the road would cost from t(m to twelve 
 thousand dollars a mile' in original construction, the maintenance 
 would be $500 per mile per year. That would be my best judg- 
 ment, without any details at hand. 
 
126 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 Mr. Lee. What kind of a road would you build for $10,000 a 
 mile ? Would it be brick, asphalt, or what ? 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. Dependent entirely upon the travel. There would 
 be certain highways which probably would be gravel, others would 
 be macadam, others would be bituminous macadam, others concrete 
 and others brick. I do not think there is any highway engineer in 
 this country that would say you could build roads from one end of 
 the United States to the other, all of the same width and dura- 
 bility, and of the same material, width, thickness, or character of 
 construction, and the material used in the construction must be 
 based upon the travel which not only passes over the road now but 
 which in the immediate future can reasonably be expected to pass 
 over it. The last point is in the supervision of the highways; who 
 should supervise them. I believe the supervision of a highway 
 should be exercised by the governmental authority having charge, 
 in cooperation with the State highway commission_, in every State 
 where there was a satisfactory and a competent highway commis- 
 sion which has produced results, and which the gentleman in charge 
 for the Government saw could produce results. He could avail 
 himself of that highway commissioner to supervise the construction 
 and maintenance if he desired. It would not be compulsory, how- 
 ever, on his part in States where they do not have satisfactory 
 highway commissions, but the supervision would rest with the Fed- 
 eral authority. 
 
 Mr. Shacklettoed. In the first instance that would be left to the 
 discretion of the Federal authority whether he would put it on the 
 State or not. 
 
 Mr. DrEHL. Yes. He could avail himself of the organization if 
 there was one, but I think if the Government is putting 50 per cent 
 into the cost of the road, they should be amply protected to see that 
 the money is wisely and economically expended and that the roads 
 are properly constructed and maintained. 
 
 The Chairman. You say you favor a plan of cooperation in con- 
 struction and maintenance. How about the maintenance of the roads 
 already constructed? 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. They should be maintained in such proportion by the 
 United States Government and the State highway commission 
 jointly. For instance, one of these roads would probably be a road 
 from New York to Buffalo across New York State, which has been 
 built by the State of New York. The maintenance of that road 
 would then devolve upon the Federal Government and the State 
 jointlj' in such proportions as the bill might carry. 
 
 The Chairman. 'V'V'liat power of supervision would the Federal 
 Government have over that road if it cooperated in maintenance 
 and had not cooperated in construction? 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. There would not, in my judgment, be any difficulty 
 whatever in getting the State to consent, by resolutions of the State 
 legislature, to give the Government the right to come into that State. 
 
 Mr. SHACKLEroKD. But you think the Government ought to have 
 supervision of that road? 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. In cooperation with the highway commission. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. But if there should be differences of opinion 
 between the Government functionary and the State highway com- 
 mission, which would be the dominant factor? 
 
GOOD KOADS. 127 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. There can only be one. 
 
 Mr. Shacklefoed. Who should that be ? 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. The Federal authority, just the same as in the State 
 the State has the authority over the county highways. 
 
 Mr. Shackleitgrd. That would be necessary in order that the 
 Federal Government might be properly protected. 
 
 Mr. DiBHL. Yes ; and that roads should be maintained in a uniform 
 manner all over the United States, just the same as in the county 
 which I represent in New York State, where I care for the roads in 
 the county without any suggestion whatever from the State high- 
 way commission unless there is conflict. I believe our association 
 believes that the highways which would be improved by Federal 
 money should be those highways which accommodate the greatest 
 number of people and which carry the greatest volume of tonnage, 
 and I might add that we are opposed to the plan suggested by the 
 Shackleford bill of putting $15, $20, or $25 per mile on the various 
 post roads of the country. 
 
 The Chairman. Then it is improved transportation facilities 
 rather than new transportation facilities which is the dominant 
 factor in your mind? 
 
 Mr. DiEHL,. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. Austin. What is your objection to the Shackleford propo- 
 sition ? 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. The objection is this: That, in the first instance, it 
 places too great a burden upon the National Government of caring 
 for the million miles of highways. Secondly, that the roads once 
 established will not be permanent. I may be wrong, but as I under- 
 stand, the bill now calls for $15, $20, and $25 per mile, dependent 
 upon whether the road is earth, gravel, or macadam. I have 
 heard there is still another bill which provides for $30, $50, and 
 $60. There is another bill, I understand, that runs it up to $60 
 on the first schedule, which amounts to $20,000,000 a year; on the 
 second schedule it will amount to probably $40,000,000, and the 
 proposition would be popular in townships. It is popular in the 
 townships of New York State. I know the officials of over 500 
 townships in New York State, and I have talked with the officials of 
 over 100 townships. 
 
 Senator Gronna. Are you basing your figures on the total mileage 
 of post roads? 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. The total mileage of post roads is about 1,000,000 
 miles. I have talked to the representatives of 100 different town- 
 ships in New York State about the Shackleford bill, and they all 
 say they hope it will pass, so that one township will get $1,500, 
 another township $2,000, and another fellow said his township would 
 get $2,500; and they said to their K^presentative in Congress, "If 
 you can get that money, get it," and if another incumbent said, " It 
 you will elect me, I will give you twice as much," they turn to him. 
 As for the improvement of highways, I do not think it will improve 
 the highways for any one of the townships I am familiar with, nor 
 will they carry on their highway construction any differently from 
 what they are doing it now, but they will use that money for other 
 purposes "through their general fund. 
 
128 GOOD ROADS. 
 
 Senator Geonna. In other words, Federal aid would not, in your 
 judgment, be an inducement to the township or to the smaller 
 localities to make better roads. Is that your idea ? 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. In my judgment, in the State of New York such so- 
 called Federal aid will not. They will carry on their highway con- 
 struction precisely the same as they do now on their town and 
 rural roads, whether you have the Shackleford bill or whether you 
 do not, and I may say that my opinion is based on some 20 years' 
 experience working on that type of road. I have charge of 2,000 
 miles of the kind you refer to. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. On a road from the city of New York to Buf- 
 falo, or one from Boston, by way of New York, to San Francisco, 
 to what extent would they compete with the railroads as transpor- 
 tation lines or mail routes ? 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. I do not know. 
 
 Mr. SHACKLEroED. Do you think they would compete at all^ 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. I am sure I do not know. As transportation routet,, 
 if you mean that a piece of freight would be carried from Boston to 
 San Francisco, I would say no. If you mean a piece of freight 
 would be carried from New York to Syracuse, I would say yes. 
 
 Mr. Shackleeord. AVhat I want to know is, whether or not, from 
 the standpoint of utility, our highways, as transportation lines or as 
 mail routes, are of any value except as feeders to the water ports or 
 railroad stations. 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. I would say the construction of trunk lines would 
 generally better all the highways in the United States, and that it 
 would reduce the cost of transportation of the mails over the high- 
 ways of the United States. I would say unreservedly, in my judg- 
 ment, that the improvement of these main routes, with the subse- 
 quent encouragement of the State, county, and township, would 
 have a tendency to improve all the highAvays of the United States 
 and would produce a greater saving that the giving of $20 or $25 
 per mile to the township authorities in different towns. 
 
 Senator Gronxa. Of course the plan you suggest would not be a 
 plan for trvmk lines. It seems to me it would be only a plan for 
 transcontinental lines. 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. As I said at the outset, I am referring to the trunk- 
 line plan that has been indorsed by our organization, but we do not 
 in any way oppose other bills. We realize that this is a very broad 
 question, and there must necessarily be widely divergent ideas. If 
 there is any plan your committee saw fit to put this money on the 
 main market roads, we are for it. We believe the transcontinental 
 road, if you wish to call it that, is the best plan, but we are in favor 
 of the other plan if we can get it. 
 
 Senator Gronna. When you speak of trunk lines, you mean for 
 the cities or for the entire country? 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. For the entire country; that benefits the city and the 
 country alike. In reply to a question put to Mr. Enos as to whether 
 or not he Imew anything of the plan of the manufacturers to give 1 
 per cent of their gross business for one year for the purpose of mak- 
 ing contributions, and to what extent that plan had matured. I would 
 state that the information I will give with reference to that will be 
 
GOOD BOADS. 129 
 
 merely what I have gathered with conversation with Mr. Carl Fisher, 
 who is at the head of that movement. We are representing here the 
 organized motorists, the men who are in it for the sport, and not the 
 men who are in the manufacturing business. We do not represent 
 the manufacturers in any sense of the word. Mr. Enos and I are not 
 here as paid members, but we are in it for the sport and we do not 
 represent the manufacturers, nor do we make a cent out of it. Mr. 
 Carl Fisher, the head of the Prestolite Co., is urging on the manu- 
 facturers to give 1 per cent of their gross business for one year. If 
 they do that, it will amount to between twelve and fifteen million 
 dollars. Already they have pledges from a number of manufactur- 
 ers which brings the amount pledged to something over a million 
 and a quarter, and the indications, in my judgment, are that they will 
 get $5,000,000 or $6,000,000 pledged to this proposition, and that 
 money will be turned over by them either to the Federal Government 
 or to the State authorities, or to any competent authority who will 
 use it for the purpose of constructing a highway that leads from the 
 Atlantic to the Pacific Ocean. 
 
 Mr. SHACKLEroED. That is a definite highway? 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. Just one highway, but they have not as yet established 
 the route. 
 
 Mr. Shacklefoed. That is just a single higway from the Atlantic 
 to the Pacific? 
 
 Mr. DiEHL. Yes, sir. 
 
 The Chairman. We thank you very much, Mr. Diehl. 
 
 STATEMENT OF MR. JOE L. LONG. 
 
 The Chairman. Mr. Long, it will be necessary for you to be 
 sworn. 
 
 Thereupon the witness Avas duly sworn by the chairman. 
 
 The Chairman. Kindly state your name, residence, and occupa- 
 tion? 
 
 Mr. Long. My name is Joe L. Long, of Des Moines, Iowa. I am 
 editor of a monthly magazine called The Eoadmaker. I am not 
 representing any organization ofiicially, but my paper is the official 
 organ of various good roads associations— the highway, automobile, 
 and other associations having indorsed it. Primarily my business 
 is furnishing to people the opinions of other men. While I have 
 some decided opinions of my own on these matters, at the same time 
 I prefer to have them brought out through questions from the com- 
 mittee. I do not care to deliver any good roads address to an 
 audience of this kind. I consider myself more of a good roads 
 evangelist than a teacher. I believe it is easy to find men able to 
 build good roads, but I further believe it is hard to find men like 
 Mr. Craft to get them to do it. 
 
 Mr. Austin. What have you been advocating? 
 
 Mr'. Long. I have been advocating general improvements and I 
 take iip editorially, every phase of improvements. I have touched 
 on national aid. We advocate, of course, improving the highways 
 in every way practicable. I try to advocate things we can get done 
 now, rather than painting pictures of a heaven on earth 100 
 79558— PT 1—13 9 
 
130 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 years ahead of time, and I believe that it is more important to the 
 State and Nation that we should start right than to get up to much 
 speed to begin with. In our State affairs we are trying to get an 
 active highway commission. The State highway engineer has done 
 a great deal of work with road improvements, and we have had a 
 highway commission in existence for some years, but only as a paper 
 commission. It consists of an ex officio commission who are mem- 
 bers of a highway commission by reason of the fact that they are 
 professors of the agricultural college. Our State highway engineer 
 has the magnificent appropriation of $10,000 a year with which to 
 work. 
 
 The Chairman. That is all the appropriation you have for good 
 roads in the State of Iowa ? 
 
 Mr. Long. Yes. We spend $7,000,000 a year in county and town- 
 ship work, and $10,000 a year to maintain an information bureau, 
 and we have a very excellent man in the State highway engineer, but 
 he has had no opportunity. This winter the trouble we have been 
 having with the enthusiasm that has been aroused is to get the fellows 
 not to try to go too fast. We want to create an active highway com- 
 mission, and the enthusiasts naturally talk of providing a great State 
 aid fund. The situation in Iowa, as you gentlemen understand, is 
 somewhat different from that in Alabama or in New York. In the 
 State of New York the road system is a matter of connecting up large 
 cities. There the principal roads connect cities of large population. 
 In Alabama the problem is the helping of communities which are not 
 able to build roads. In Iowa it is a question of getting people to 
 build them who are able to do it. There are hardly a thousand sec- 
 tions of land in Iowa to-day that are not producing good crops. I 
 passed a farm the other day for which a man refused $400 an acre. 
 The average value of the best farms in Iowa will exceed $200 per 
 acre, and land in Iowa will average $100 per acre. There is scarcely 
 a section of land in the State, unless it might be some sandy stretch 
 or some swampy overflow, that is not worth $100 an acre. 
 
 Mr. Shacklefoed. What are the types of roads you maintain in 
 Iowa? 
 
 Mr. Long. In Iowa we have practically no great amount of roads, 
 except dirt roads. In Greene County, where the gravel is plenty, 
 we have a large amount of gravel roads. That one county has built, 
 without additional or special tax, between 400 and 500 miles of gravel 
 road, but all they have to do is to take off about 2 feet of black 
 dirt and shovel the gravel. 
 
 Mr. Shaokleford. Will you give the committee some description of 
 these dirt roads, how they are constructed and maintained, and at 
 about what cost? 
 
 Mr. Long. The cost of constructing dirt roads in Iowa, as the 
 
 fentleman said a while ago, is about like the cost of constructing a 
 ouse. In the whole northern half of Iowa there are very few hills. 
 There is generally just about enough roll to drain, and in some places 
 not enough for that. We have spent within the last 15 years in that 
 part of the State many million dollars to build drains and ditches 
 for the farm lands. That is all done by special assessment. 
 Mr. Shackleford. What is the width of one of those dirt roads? 
 Mr. Long. The standard dirt road that our highway commission 
 advocates is 32 feet, I believe, from ditch to ditch. They are 30 
 
GOOD EOADS. 131 
 
 or 32 feet, with 5 or 6 feet on either side sloping to the ditch quite 
 sharply, and 20 to 24 feet of travel surface of what you call center 
 road, gradually crowned. 
 
 Mr. SHACKLEroKD. How much is it crowned above the ditch ? 
 
 Mr. Long. From 18 to 24 inches. 
 
 Mr. Shacklefoed. How is that maintained? 
 
 Mr. Long. That is maintained practically altogether with a drag. 
 The Iowa soil is altogether black loam. You can scarcely find a mile 
 of anything but black loam, or vegetable mold, and it is simply a 
 question of keeping it leveled up. so that wh6n it rains it will easily 
 drain. The drag is a great instrument to maintain the roads in 
 Iowa. I believe I would be safe in saying that in no other five 
 States are there as many drags in operation as you would find in 
 Iowa. 
 
 Mr. Lee. You mean a split log drag ? 
 
 Mr. Long. Yes ; that is, in one of its various forms. 
 
 Mr. SHAcjiLEroED. In what condition do you keep those roads ? 
 
 Mr. Long. In the past three or four years we have had practically 
 no really bad roads in Iowa. The roads have been exceptionally 
 good for four years. We attribute that largely to exceptional 
 weather. A dirt road, when it is graded up so that the water runs 
 off, will retain its confoi-mation if it is dragged after a rain, but 
 occasionally they drag it when it is too dry. It will dry very 
 quickly but no dirt road will stand up under travel and rain to- 
 gether. Within the past four years we have not had what you 
 might call a rainy week. Only once have we had a rain for any 
 long-continued time. The consequence is that everything we have 
 done has been a net gain. Roads have been built up and our work 
 has not been a loss, so we scarcely know whether we have a system 
 that will continue to maintain the dirt roads in good condition, or 
 whether it is all because of the exceptional conditions. 
 
 Mr. Shacklefoed. Are any of those dirt roads tiled? 
 
 Mr. Long. Yes. There is only one problem to a dirt road, and 
 I think I can say it safely, in this distinguished company, that when 
 a man goes to building a dirt road he has one question to settle, and 
 that is the question of drainage. If he gets his water off and from 
 under it he will have as good a road as can be built. As one man 
 in our State has expressed it, a dry cellar and a tight roof is abso- 
 lutely necessary to a good road. When you have a perfect dirt road 
 and you want to build a hard road, all the difference between the 
 dirt road and the highest type of hard road is only the surface. 
 
 Mr. Atjstin. What national aid do you advocate? 
 
 Mr. Long. The State of Iowa is in a little different condition from 
 many other States. We can probably handle our problems as well 
 as any other State in the Union. We have no occasion for a system 
 of trunk-line roads other than a tourist proposition. Every county 
 in Iowa has from two to five or. six wealthy towns. We have more 
 banks in Iowa than any State in the Union and we have more money 
 per capita on deposit, so therefore Federal aid means getting our 
 people to do what they ought to do without. That is the way I 
 look at it, and I shall speak of it as a citizen of a State like Iowa. 
 I believe the Government should encourage the building of roads. 
 I think the putting up of funds as you are going to do should be 
 primarily with the object of getting people to help themselves. 
 
132 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 The Chairman. As a stimulus? 
 
 Mr. Long. As a stimulus. A matter of fifteen or twenty dollars 
 per mile to our people would not amount to enough to be any incen- 
 tive to them to build roads particularly, because I say there is not a 
 township in Iowa that does not spend about that much, and we have 
 plenty for maintenance. 
 
 Mr. Shacklefohd. How many miles are there in your State, do 
 you know? 
 
 Mr. Long. We figure about 175,000 miles. I believe that is the 
 road and street system. Our section lines would indicate about 
 112,000 miles. I think perhaps that amount of mileage includes 
 streets. 
 
 Mr. Shacklefoed. "Well, we will say you have 100,000 miles. 
 
 Mr. Long. We have more. 
 
 Mr. Shacklefoed. One hundred thousand, at $15 a mile, would be 
 $1,500,000. 
 
 Mr. Long. Our townships alone would raise $2,500,000. 
 
 Mr. Shackueford. Federal aid would give your State a million 
 and a half a year. 
 
 Mr. Lee. What percentage of your mileage is post roads ? 
 
 Mr. Long. I could not give you that, but it is a very large percent- 
 age. Iowa has, perhaps, the largest percentage of farmers receiving 
 mail by the rural routes of any State in the Union. That is due to the 
 fact that every section has from one to four farms in the State of 
 Iowa and all the roads are reasonably passable. We have no commu- 
 nities that are not farmed, and no communities that have not fairly 
 good roads in dry weather. 
 
 Mr. Austin. You think you have something like 115,000 miles of 
 road? 
 
 Mr. Long. The State highway commission put that figure higher 
 than that, I believe, but they may include streets. Here is my idea 
 of what the Government aid should be : I am opposed to the Gov- 
 ernment trying to pay one-half and the State one-half, because I 
 believe such a system would bring about extravagance; for instance, 
 to cite one objection, through building a few miles of a high type of 
 road in scattered sections the overhead expense would be large, and 
 the prices that would result would be a discouragement. If you 
 built 6 miles of road in each congressional district in a State — and I 
 take it from my knowledge of politics that these roads would be dis- 
 tributed quite evenly among the congressional districts — if it resulted 
 in a price of fifteen to thirty thousand dollars a mile, you would 
 discourage that community from building any further roads. 
 
 Mr. Austin. You must remember this committee is evenly divided 
 between Members of the House and Members of the Senate. 
 
 Mr. Long. I realize that; but I have had some experience with 
 politics, and I understand it is quite necessary to present some good 
 and special reason for authorizing a large expenditure of money. 
 I am sure our congressional district would not feel we were being 
 treated rightly if we did not get our share, and I am quite sure it 
 would have something to say about that. I would think a Congress- 
 nian would not feel justified in voting for it unless it was reasonably 
 distributed. For instance, I have in mind a bill introduced by 
 Senator Jackson. I have discussed that same thing in my paper. 
 
GOOD EOADS. 133 
 
 Mr. Austin. As I understand it, you think Mr. Shackleford's 
 figures are too low? 
 
 Mr. Long. I was going to say, personally I would prefer to see it 
 on a diflFerent basis. I am not objecting to his bill, but I wanted to 
 give you my idea of it. 
 
 Mr. Austin. I understand you do not object to the bill, but you 
 think the amounts are too low. 
 
 Mr. Long. I would personally favor, and I believe it would be 
 better, so far as Iowa is concerned, to pay an amount for construc- 
 tion rather than an amount for maintenance. In other words, I 
 would like to see the United States adopt a plan with the various 
 States similar to that the State of Michigan adopts with the various 
 counties ; that is to say, you make the proposition to a State that 
 if it will build a mile of a certain type of road and bring it up to 
 a certain standard of perfection, the Government will pay a reward 
 of so much per mile. 
 
 Mr. Shacklefoed. Permit me to say, the so-called Shackleford bill 
 was based upon the Michigan law. The Michigan law was the type 
 I had in mind when I drew my bill. 
 
 Mr. Long. I am only giving my personal view. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. You say in drawing a bill it should be drawn 
 so as to meet the majority views in the House and Senate? 
 
 Mr. Long. Sure. You must have the thing that appeals to the 
 interests of the community. In Iowa, for instance, we are debating 
 the question of how to create State aid. Now, the question is shall 
 we levy a 1-mill tax and distribute that, or shall we turn over to 
 the present highway commission an automobile-license fund which 
 would bring in $500,000 a year. I am advocating the automobile- 
 license fund for this reason: That is distributed on practically a 
 territorial basis; that is, each county draws pro rata according to 
 the number of townships. There are from 80 to 85 counties in Iowa 
 that will get a little more than they pay in; not much, because the 
 automobiles are well distributed over Iowa. 
 
 Mr. Austin. We understand all the farmers in Iowa have auto- 
 mobiles ? 
 
 Mr. Long. Over half of the automobiles in Iowa are owned by 
 farmers. In a large city, like Davenport, they naturally have a 
 large number of automobiles. Therefore, three or four of those 
 big cities will contribute more than their counties draw out. _ You 
 can understand that ratio appeals to the counties that are getting a 
 little more than they are paying in. My idea in advocating using 
 this as a State aid fund is that, in the first place, it is a State license ; 
 secondly, I think it would be much easier to get a bill through which 
 benefits 85 counties than one which will benefit only 14 counties, and 
 I think it would be a practical proposition to consider the same thing 
 in the United States Congress. In other words, if a man represents 
 a district, and a bill is to the special interest of his district and to 
 the State as a whole, he would be foolish if he did not support that 
 
 measure. . , , • 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. You have been connected with this road busi- 
 ness for a long time. Can you give us any idea what the various 
 automobile licenses are in the various countries of the world ? 
 
 Mr. Long. The only one I am acquainted with outside of the 
 United States is England. England raises $7,000,000 ; I will not be 
 
134 GOOD BOADS. 
 
 positive, but I think it is about $7,000,000 a year. There they have 
 two or three kinds of taxation. My recollection is that on certain 
 classes of cars the road tax amounts to about $150 a year. Then 
 there is a tax of 6 cents a gallon on motor spirits. The two together 
 would amount to about $7,000,000, the motor spirits amounting to 
 about $4,000,000 and the other $3,000,000. Outside of that I can not 
 give you the figures, but that, I think, is the highest tax in the world. 
 They are receiving a fancy sum when you consider England is 
 exactly the same size as the State of Iowa. 
 
 Mr. Austin. Now, tell us what you want us to do. 
 
 Mr. Long. My idea would be that the Government would encour- 
 age the building of roads more in a community like ours by paying a 
 reward per mile for construction rather than an amount per mile 
 for maintenance. We maintain our roads in the State of Iowa in a 
 very good manner and quite generally, and we have already a spe- 
 cial sum for the maintenance of dirt roads that can be used for 
 nothing but dragging, about $1,000,000 per year, and as much more 
 is optional. 
 
 Mr. Shacklefoed. If the Government should put out large sums 
 of money for road construction in the State, what provision would 
 you make to guarantee to the Government that these roads would be 
 maintained ? 
 
 Mr. Long. It seems to me that self-interest in a community which 
 has sufficient ambition to invest several thousand dollars, or even 
 several hundred dollars, per mile in a road would be a sufficient 
 guaranty that they would take care of their property. It would 
 hardly be considered necessary in a State like Iowa to secure a pledge 
 that we would take care of anything that we had invested our money 
 in. A communitjr that did not have public spirit enough to take 
 care of roads which they have already constructed would certainly 
 not be apt to have ambition enough to invest money. For illustra- 
 tion, we will say that we have A, B, C, D, and E classes. Eoughly 
 we will say that the Government defines these classes of roads, and 
 it will pay $100, $200, $300, $500, and $1,000 per mile reward 
 for the construction of roads ranging from the highest type to dirt 
 roads and gravel roads. 
 
 Mr. Austin. Give us your figures on what you advocate in the 
 way of a reward. 
 
 Mr. Long. Those are my minimum figures that I would give as 
 making a start, and I am figuring this so that it would take about 
 the same amount of money as to run the other proposition. That is 
 reversing the order under the classification. Of course class A 
 would draw from the Government $1,000 per mile, and that would 
 be the highest type of hard road. 
 
 Mr. Lee. That is for the construction only? 
 
 Mr. Long. For the construction only. Class B would draw $500 
 per mile, class C $300 per mile, class I) $200, and class E $100. 
 
 Mr. Austin. Have you figured that out on the post roads of this 
 country? 
 
 Mr. Long. I am figuring on the general knowledge of about how 
 much money is invested in roads. I think it would take less money 
 to pay those rewards than it would to pay them $50 and $60 per mile 
 for maintenance. 
 
GOOD BOADS. 135 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. Less than it would in the long run, but not 
 less per year? 
 
 Mr. Long. Less per year. You understand there will not be 
 2,000,000 miles of road constructed in one year. Take a thousand 
 dollars per mile for a concrete or brick road, and I should iudge 
 from $1,000,000 to $2,000,000 would fill the requirement for a 
 year. Take a gravel road at $200 per mile, and I should say if 
 there were 10,000 miles built in the country within a year, we would 
 be making an excellent increase and a very fine showing for what 
 the Government encouragement would be doing in the line. It 
 would only be paying for the building of the roads. I do not be- 
 lieve that any community that has built roads has any trouble in 
 maintaining them ; that is, the ordinary road. 
 
 Mr. Austin. Would you want us to pay anything on those roads 
 you have already constructed in Iowa? 
 
 Mr. Long. Oh, no. The Government certainly can not afford to 
 consider for a moment the giving back of money which has been 
 spent in roads _ already constructed. We have our dirt roads in 
 passable condition. "We have not much road which will conform 
 to your specifications. 
 
 The Chairman. Haven't you a road that will meet all the exi- 
 gencies of the situation? 
 
 Mr. Long. No ; we haven't a road that suits us. We expect in the 
 State of Iowa to soon be spending $10,000,000 a year for roads. We 
 will spend every year after that an increase, in my judgment, of 
 from two to five million dollars, until we are spending $25,000,000 a 
 year. 
 
 The Chairman. As I understand, the conditions for the past five 
 years have been favorable ? 
 
 Mr. Long. Yes. 
 
 The Chairman. What has been your maintenance per mile, on the 
 average, for the past five years on the roads which you have? 
 
 Mr. Long. I can tell you that somewhat accurately. Basing the 
 average cost on our 112,000 miles of road, we have spent approxi- 
 mately $3,000,000. We have spent for other road building, such as 
 culverts, by townships, about $2,000,000, and for maintenance wholly, 
 such as grading and dragging, about $2,000,000, of which a little 
 less than $1,000,000 is out of the drag fund and a little more than 
 $1,000,000 out of the township fund. 
 
 The Chairman. Therefore, $2,000,000 has maintained in the last 
 year 112,000 miles of road? 
 
 'Mr. Long. Yes ; 112,000 miles of road. 
 
 Mr. Lee. You did not state the cost of those roads? 
 
 Mr. Long. The cost of building a dirt road? 
 
 Mr. Lee. Yes. 
 
 Mr. Long. To give any idea of that would be very dii&cult. I 
 will, however,- give you some instances. Van Buren County, in 
 Iowa, issued a statement for last year that they graded 200 miles 
 of road with a tractor and heavy grader, bringing the roads up to a 
 very fine grade, at an average cost of $15.11 per mile. That was for 
 gasoline and labor. They had a $3,500 outfit on which no interest 
 was charged. Figuring the depreciation on that at 10 per cent, it 
 would be $350. You would have to add to that about $1/7? or $2 to 
 
136 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 each mile for the use of the outfit. That was for a road which was 
 already graded partly, but they went over it with a competent man 
 and first-class equipment, and brought it up to grade. I have in my 
 magazine for last month, a copy of which is in the library here, 
 pictures of that road. I also have pictures of a road built by the 
 tractor outfit — a heavy power engine and equipment. 
 
 The road was built with the tractor outfit for demonstration at a 
 cost for labor and gasoline of $9 per mile. The road work was 
 already partly there, but they graded it 36 feet wide, brought some 
 dirt up to the middle and brought it to a perfect finish. While that 
 work was going on men were holding watches and checking the time 
 •and everything else in connection with the work. That is given as 
 the cost of finishing a road that is already partially built. To take 
 a flat, level road and bring it to a grade of 36 feet wide, cutting 
 ditches 18 inches deep, and making a crown 18 inches above the level 
 is estimated at a cost of from $100 to $150 per mile. The prairie 
 sod is a thing we have not met for many years. In South Dakota, 
 I understand, it costs from $200 to $500 a mile, and that cost is due 
 to the fact that they have a much tougher sod. 
 
 Senator Geonna. Speaking of your conditions, you mean where 
 you have a perfectly level country? 
 
 Mr. Long. That is it. 
 
 Senator Gkonna. Are you acquainted with the northeastern part 
 of the State? 
 
 Mr. Long. Yes. And we can spend just as much money per 
 mile as you have to spend. 
 
 Senator GtRONNA. What would the cost be up in that country ? 
 
 Mr. Long. There are places where it would cost $10,000 to build 
 a quarter of a mile of road, just simply the earthwork. I have 
 known of places where $5,000 has been spent on one hill, on 200 
 yards of road, in the State of Iowa. There is no possible way you 
 can estimate the cost of building a road over a hilly country. 
 
 Senator Geonna. That is in the northeastern part of your State? 
 
 Mr. Long. Well, it is a very rough section of the country. 
 
 Mr. Lee. You have stone or other obstructions? 
 
 Mr. Long. No; generally speaking. In my country I should say 
 no. There are many counties in Iowa where you could not find a 
 rock if you went over it with a garden rake. So I would say, if 
 I was placing a price on building a dirt road, outside of grade, the 
 average price in the State of Iowa would be $200, and in the Dakotas 
 about $350. Our soil is easier to handle than the prairie soil. 
 
 Senator Geonna. If I understand you correctly, you are not 
 enthusiastic over Federal aid, so far as your State is concerned ? 
 
 Mr. Long. From a local standpoint, no. Speaking as a citizen 
 of the State of Iowa I would say it is somewhat immaterial, but 
 speaking from a general standpoint I believe the Government ought 
 to do something to encourage the improvement of roads. I take it 
 that the principal object you have in making the appropriation is 
 not so much to make an assessment as it is to get the other fellow 
 to make an assessment. You have three propositions on road build- 
 ing. The first is to go at it on your own hook, and to build a Gov- 
 ernment road. Secondly, to form a partnership and go in with the 
 States and build roads. The other is to pay a bonus, or, if you wish 
 
GOOD BOADS. 137 
 
 to call it such, a subsidy for the construction and maintenance of 
 roads. You have those three things to decide between, but anything 
 you do should be on the mileage basis, in my judgment, because 
 that is definite and absolute. 
 
 The Chairman. What do you mean when you say a mileage 
 basis ? 
 
 Mr. Long. Rather than say 50 per cent, 25 per cent, or 10 per cent 
 on the cost of construction or maintenance. 
 
 The Chairman. You mean the apportionment between the States 
 should be based on mileage ? 
 
 Mr. Long. No. According to mileage as the bill contemplates. 
 This bill of Senator Jackson's provides that regardless of the price 
 we pay, up to not exceeding $15,000 a mile, that the Government 
 would pay one-half the contract price of the road. I want to see 
 that whatever the Government does is done on a mileage basis and 
 leave to the State the selection of material and manner of construc- 
 tion, because of the varying conditions we will have to deal with 
 in different localities. We have counties in Iowa wher« it would 
 be a crime to build anything but a gravel road. 
 
 The Chairman. You think the local representatives are better 
 equipped to judge what kind of a road should be built? 
 
 Mr. Long. Surely. The Government should classify the roads and 
 then pay so much per mile for that classification. 
 
 Mr. SHACKLEroRD. Your idea is to let Congress define gome general 
 type and let any State or county come within that classification that 
 chooses to do so ? 
 
 Mr. Long. That is my idea. I would personally prefer help as a 
 premium on construction, rather than as a matter of maintenance. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. I had some conversation with you to-day and 
 you indicated some sort of an editorial which will appear in your 
 next paper. If it is not too soon, I would ask that it be put into the 
 record. 
 
 Mr. Long. I would be glad to do so. The article reads as follows : 
 
 Senator Jackson has introduced a bill appropriating $10,000,000 to be spent 
 as Government aid for road building, his plan being that the Government shall 
 pay one-half the cost of such roads as are constructed in a manner that meets 
 with the approval of the department. 
 
 The bill provides that any State may suggest a road to the Postmaster 
 General for his approval. When it is constructed in a manner satisfactory to 
 the Secretary of Agriculture, the Government shall pay half the cost providing 
 it does not esceed $15,000 per mile. It is in substance the same bill that has 
 been before Congress for two or three sessions and it has, in a general way, 
 been backed by the men favorable to Federal aid. 
 
 While such a start would be much better than none, the Roadmaker be- 
 lieves the plan to be susceptible to great improvement. The objections to the 
 proposed plan— as we view it— are : First. It would be difficult for the Govern- 
 ment to provide sufficient funds to go any great length in this work and the 
 consequence would be that the States already building great systems of high- 
 ways would get all of the money. Second. The fact that the Government would 
 pay half of the cost would have a tendency to cause extravagance in the build- 
 ing of highways. Third. The appropriation would be so small that it would 
 not build to exceed 100 miles in each State If it was so distributed and we 
 believe it would have a tendency to delay the construction of cheaper types of 
 road on account of the fact that the people would want to secure the Govern- 
 
 "we believe the United States Government should appropriate liberally for 
 road construction, but we believe that the policy of paying a reward per mile 
 will be of more practical aid in the development of a road system. If the 
 
138 GOOD BOADS. 
 
 Government would pay a reward of from $100 to $2,000 per mile, under regu- 
 lations similar to those in Micliigan, for sucli roads as are properly constructed, 
 an appropriation of $25,000,000 per year would go a long ways toward cover- 
 ing road construction tbroughout the country. 
 
 It would have a tendency to encourage every community to go ahead and 
 build roads and it would also induce economy, because the community would 
 actually be paying the difference. Of course, some provision regarding ap- 
 proval by the Secretary of Agriculture and the Postmaster General would be 
 necessary, but the money would go much farther and from time to time the 
 reward could be increased as funds were available. 
 
 If the General Government could pay three or even five thousand dollars per 
 mile as a maximum reward for a high-class road, it would be much better, but 
 whatever funds are put into road building should be on the mileage basis 
 rather than on a percentage basis, because only in this way can graft or the 
 suspicion of graft be eliminated from it. Perhaps no one thing in the road 
 program is of more importance than to eliminate the opportunities for graft and 
 for charges of graft to be made. 
 
 The taxpayers are very suspicious of road appropriations. They have reason 
 to be from their past experience of the way in which this money has been 
 spent, and the road program must eliminate, so far as possible, all opportunity 
 for misappropriation of funds if it is going to be carried on, as it must be, with 
 the sanction and approval of the people who are paying the bills. 
 
 An appropriation of $10,000,000 under any regulations that are reasonable, 
 will be welcomed by the road workers, but we believe that a right start is equal 
 to half of the sum of the work to be undertaken. Not only millions but billions 
 ■will be spent in this country in the next generation in the construction of high- 
 ways. In that work town, county, State, and Nation all will have a share. 
 Honesty and efficiency in the construction of these roads is of as vital import- 
 ance as the durability of the roads themselves. If road-building authorities 
 have not the confidence and support of the public, their work is bound to be 
 greatly hampered, if not doomed, to failure. 
 
 I do not want to undertake to present any general road proposition, but it 
 always has seemed to me in the discussion of roads most men overlook the fact 
 that the United States Is the greatest road-building nation of all history. I 
 hardly ever attend a meeting but what somebody gets up and wants to know 
 why the United States is the only nation which does not build roads. I think 
 we have built five times as many roads of the highest type as any nation in the 
 world; but just as we were starting out on our road program we discovered a 
 new kind of road ; we discovered a road built out of iron rails, to which a cer- 
 tain type of carriage is adapted. Men talk about roads as though they were 
 competitive with the railroad systems. I consider that the railroad system is 
 our national system of highways. I think the Government has, as a whole, 
 demonstrated that we have vested rights in those highways, and we can control 
 them to a certain extent, and we must understand that wagon roads are the 
 other half of our transportation system. "We are simply supplementing our pres- 
 ent system. We have no possible reason in the State of Iowa to figure roads as 
 anything more or less than a means of getting the products to and from the main 
 roads or railroads, outside of a tourist proposition, and whatever we do on our 
 roads we are going back 100 years when we undertake or pretend to com- 
 pete with the railroads. The first railroad that was built from New York 
 to Albany was delayed for some years by an injunction or by an action in court 
 to prevent the railroad being built on account of the fact that it would inter- 
 fere with a charter that a certain stone-road company or pike company had, 
 and it was held up because it would injure the business of the pike company. 
 There is no competition. We can not possibly hope to carry their passengers, 
 freight, or mail, or offer a service by motor which will be in competition on the 
 matter of price with the railroads. 
 
 Senator Geonna. I do not think that anybody believes in the idea 
 that the highway is in any way in competition with the railroad. 
 
 The Chairjiax. I have not heard that suggested. 
 
 Mr. Long. Probably not, except that the people speak of a national 
 system of highways as if we had no national system of highways. 
 
 Senator Gronna. Is not this true : That those who have to use the 
 highways in this country have to pay more per mile for hauling than 
 any other class of people on earth? 
 
GOOD EOADS. 139 
 
 Mr. Long. Anywhere else on earth? 
 
 Senator Geonna. Yes. While the cost is only 7^ mills per mile per 
 ton on the railroads, it costs an average of 24 cents per ton per mile 
 on the roads. 
 
 Mr. Long. "We have the lowest rates per ton per mile on the main- 
 line transportation and the highest on the other. I will cite an illus- 
 tration which I think is worth putting in the record. I published 
 recently a clipping from a Watertown (N. Y.) paper, giving the name 
 of a gentleman who hauled a load of hay into a town 18 miles dis- 
 tant, for which he received $131.20 — the highest price ever paid for 
 a load of hay in the community. He received $30 per ton. He 
 hauled that 18 miles that day and returned home that evening. You 
 say the average cost is 24 cents per ton per mile. At 7 cents per 
 ton per mile this man would have received $5.04 for a day's wagesj 
 
 Senator Geonna. That is an extraordinary case. In my State 
 you can haul a load of hay 15 miles and you will do well if you receive 
 $20 for it. _ 
 
 Mr. Long. This man hauled 72 ton miles with a team that weighed 
 2,200 pounds. If we had the same improvements our cost of trans- 
 portation would be the same. 
 
 The Chaieman. Mr. Long, we thank you very much for your 
 views. 
 
 STATEMENT OF CHARLES THADDEUS TERRY. 
 
 The Chairman. Mr. Terry, it will be necessary for you to be sworn. 
 The witness was thereupon duly sworn by the chairman. 
 
 The Chairman. Kindly state your full name. 
 
 Mr. Terry. Charles Thaddeus Terry, lawyer, New York City; ad- 
 dress, 100 Broadway. 
 
 The Chairman. You are associated with the American Automobile 
 Association ? 
 
 Mr. Terry. Yes ; and incidentally the chairman of the legislative 
 board of the American Automobile Association. 
 
 The Chairman. Would you favor the committee with your views 
 and suggestions in reference to the statute that we have before us 
 for Federal aid to good roads ? 
 
 Mr. Terry. Thank you. I shall be glad to do so, Mr. Chairman. 
 The committee have exercised a great deal of patience to-night, and I 
 know they are weary, and therefore I am going to state my views 
 as briefly as possible. I have always believed that a great deal is to 
 be gained by knowing what you want and being able to state it. I 
 am not going to put any decorations on what I have to say, but I am 
 just going to make my point and give my reason for it and then stop. 
 I do not want anything which I have to say to have any weight what- 
 ever except as good reasons are given for it. My view about the 
 building of roads from a technical point of view, the best construc- 
 tion of roads, the relative cost of dirt roads, macadam roads and brick 
 roads, would be worth nothing at all. I understand that this hearing 
 is for' the purpose of determining the method in which, if at all, the 
 Federal Government will lend its aid to the construction and main- 
 tenance of roads. 
 
140 GOOD KOADS. 
 
 The Chairman. You are correct in your understanding. 
 
 Mr. Terry. I shall assume as granted that a,ll interests in this 
 country which have given their thought and intelligence to the 
 matter are in favor of some kind of Federal aid to good roads. I 
 shall take it for granted that the reasons for that industrially, agri- 
 culturally, educationally, and socially are all well known and need 
 not be gone into. Therefore the remaining question is the one to 
 which you are addressing yoursleves to-night, namely, how that shall 
 be done. I think that it should be done by startmg with a poiat 
 which shall be permanent and substantial. I mean by that, that 
 when the Federal Government sets its own hand to doing something, 
 for the roads, it shall do something which shall be impressive and 
 which shall make a mark. In that connection I want to say, as my 
 text, that the way in which I think the Federal Government should 
 do that thing in the fii-st instance is by way of an object lesson, by 
 way of instruction and education; an object lesson to the various 
 sections which make up our dual system of government. The 
 United States is a nation which happens to be made up of 48 sovereign 
 States, but it is a nation first, last, and all the time, and as such it 
 must take care of this tremendous transportation system known as 
 the highways. There is no competition between our highways and 
 the rauToads — none whatever; they are dovetailed together and each 
 helps the otheT-. They are so far- from being in competition that 
 they run parallel one with the other in their beneficency to the 
 people; so I elimmate that. How is the Government going to do 
 these things ? I say, in the first place, that it is not going to do it by 
 spreading the butter out so thin all over the country that you can not 
 mid it anywhere. 
 
 As a matter of common sense and reason, and that is all I am 
 evoking in what I say, $25, $50, or $60 a mile is neghgible, and I say 
 that it is not up to the dignity of the United States to go into the good 
 roads project m any such way as that. Twenty-five dollars a mile, 
 $30 a mile, or $60 a mUe is not a flea bite on the question of an im- 
 proved system of highways of the United States, regarded as a 
 nation. Therefore I have no need to ?ay to you that I am oppo-:ed 
 to the theory which our good friend Mr. Shackleford has proposed in 
 his bill. If his bill were as good a bill as he is a man, it would be all 
 right, but I think it has gone astray. I think that the Federal 
 Government can not afford to make the kind of a mistake I be- 
 lieve is involved in that bill, because after that bUl has been in opera- 
 tion for 10 years you will not be able to find the results of it. As I 
 understand it, the communities to which the $25 or $50 or $60 a 
 mile is given are not obliged to use it for the roads at all. They can 
 put it in their general fund. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. Will you allow me to ask you a question right 
 there? Before the State can collect any money on this $15 a 
 mile, or $30 a mile, or $60 a mile, the people who have built the road 
 must already have spent the money necessary to construct it and main- 
 tain it for years. Then why has not the Government already given 
 its money before it pays it ? 
 
 Mr. Terry. It would be then simply a question of paying back 
 something which, as I will attempt to show in a moment, should have 
 been done by the communities without foster-fathering. 
 
GOOD KOADS. 141 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. Is it not safer to pay it back than it would be 
 to pay in advance? 
 
 Mf . Teery. It would be. What I am coming to is that it would 
 not be the function of the Government, as regards the roads all 
 through the little townships, to pay it in advance, and if that is true, 
 it would not be a sound policy to pay it back after it has been ad- 
 vanced by the community. Now, let us see where we stand and what 
 value would be put in a road by spending $25 a year on it. Would 
 there be anything of permanence, anything of substance to iadicate 
 that the Federal Government had been at work on those roads? 
 Nothing whatever; you could not find it. It would take that amount 
 to fill up a hole or two holes in a mile. What we are trying out now, 
 as it seems to me, is something new, something which wUl show the 
 hand of the Federal Government, and show that the Government has 
 determined to improve our general road system as a national propo- 
 sition and not to hand out a little money here and there and to 
 another place. That will not be, as I take it, to the credit of the 
 coimtry, nowever agreeable it might be to the financiers of the little 
 townships. 
 
 Mr. Shacklefoed. You are an able lawyer. Poiat out what au- 
 thority there would be for building the particular kind of a road 
 you have in mind ? 
 
 Mr. Teeey. I wUl do that with a great pleasure, with the indul- 
 gence of Mr. Shackleford and the chairman, when I get to it. There 
 is another point, and I take it as the main argument in favor of this 
 system proposed in Mr. Shackleford's bill, that applies to a system 
 of roads which the Federal Government is now using, and if I under- 
 stand his argument along that line, it is this: That inasmuch as the 
 Federal Government uses those roads for postal purposes, it might 
 be reasonably called upon to pay a rental for them. I think, Mr. 
 Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, the reverse conclusion is 
 necessarily to be drawn from that, because if the United States Gov- 
 ernment has already, at great expense, brought beneficence and ad- 
 vantage to these communities by distributing mail throughout them 
 at its own expense, why double it by also paying for the roads over 
 which the postal service is carried ? It reminds me of a story, Mr. 
 Chairman, and I never tell a story unless it is for an illustration. A 
 said to B, "I am very hard up. Please loan me $10." B said, 
 "Certainly, here is the ten." A took the $10 and said, "B, one good 
 turn deserves another; now give me another ten." That is this case. 
 
 Mr. Shacklefoed. If it is the function of the Federal Government 
 to carry the mail it is also its duty to provide itself with the facDities 
 for doing that, such as postmasters, mail carriers, and, for instance, 
 in your city an immense post-office building. If in order to dis- 
 tribute the mail in New York the whole country shall build for you a 
 post-office building, why should you not in turn help the other people 
 of the country to build the post roads over which they carry their 
 mail? All of them are facihties to aid the Government in carrying 
 the mail, and why is it not just as proper that the Government 
 should provide itself with a mail route as it should a post-office 
 building ? 
 
 Mr. Teeey. You might just as well say, Mr. Shackleford, that 
 when somebody is making a donation to John Smith it would be 
 
142 GOOD ROADS. 
 
 reasonable for John Smith to say, "Now, you have given me $25, 
 please give me a pocketbook to put it in." 
 
 Mr. Shacexefoed. Is it not the function of the Government to 
 carry and deliver mail? 
 
 Mr. Tekby. Certainly; and it is doing it with great facihty. 
 
 Mr. Shacklefoed. Is it not the duty of the Government to pro- 
 vide itself with all facilities necessary to perform that function ? 
 
 Mr. Teeey. I think not. I think the conclusion is if the Govern- 
 ment says to the rural district ' We are going to provide you, at great 
 expense, with mail dehvery," then it is no more than fair for the 
 Government to say "You must give us the means for delivering the 
 mail." 
 
 Mr. Shacexefoed. And the city give us the building. 
 
 Mr. Teeey. As to the building in New York, I suppose that, con- 
 sidering the revenue which the United States gets out of the mail in 
 New Yoik, that antiquated building there is but a fieabite, and 
 would bear inspection proportionately to the revenue from mails in 
 any portion of the country. 
 
 Mr. Austin. Where the Post Office Department establishes a city 
 delivery of maU they require the city authority to provide sidewalks. 
 That is one of the requisites to be carried out before they will pro- 
 vide a city delivery. If the Government has a right to expect that 
 of every town where a city delivery of mail is established, why would 
 not the Government have the right to have good roads for the trans- 
 portation of the rural maU ? 
 
 Mr. Teeey. It would, and that argument would lead to the require- 
 ment that localities where mail is delivered should furnish the road 
 for transportation. 
 
 Senator Geonna. No rural route is established now unless they 
 have the roads. 
 
 Mr. Teeey. Precisely, and I so understand. I feel that Congress 
 would make a mistake which could never be corrected, certainly not 
 in our time, if it should pass such a measure as the Shackleford bUl. 
 It has been plainly demonstrated here to-night that everybody in 
 the townships and the various communities would be glad to have 
 money handed to them. That goes without saying, and that is 
 human nature, but after $25 a rmle has been handed to them this 
 year they are coming back next year, as they have already said to 
 you, and you have heard it to-night, that $25 is not enough, and of 
 course it is not enough for any substantial purpose. They will ask 
 you to make it $30 the next year for a dirt road, or $30 for a 
 macadam road, whereas it was $25, and in the following year it will 
 be $40, and so on. There will be no end to the appeals along that 
 line. If you pass such a bill, when an appeal is made every Con- 
 gressman's hands will be tied, because if he stands up, as he wiU be 
 obliged to stand up if he follows the dictates of reason, and says that 
 we must stop here at $30, his constituents will come down on him 
 like a thousand of brick and say, "You are the fellow who stopped 
 our money; we want more money in our township, and we will 
 throw you out." In other words, you will find yourselves on a 
 toboggan, which will drop you out of sight before you realize it. 
 
 Mr. Shacklefoed. Do you remember the first'appropriation for 
 the rural mail was only $10,000 ? 
 
 Mr. Teeey. I think that was before my time, Mr. Shackleford. 
 
GOOD EOADS. 143 
 
 Senator Gronna. That was only about 7 years ago. 
 
 Mr. Shacklefoed. A snaall beginning may get us up to good 
 roads after a wliile. 
 
 Mr. Terry. The question is on what theory you shall begin. If 
 you begin on a sound theory, capable of reasonable extension, then 
 you are all right. 
 
 The Chairman. What is your idea as to a sound theory? That 
 is what the commission have to work out and we would like very 
 much to get your views in concrete shape as to what you think is a 
 solution of the problem before us. 
 
 Mr. Terry. My idea is that the dignified way for Congress to go 
 about the Government improvement of roads in this country is to 
 begin at the beginning and not at the end, not to put the cart before 
 the horse by dissipation of finances into the corners, but by begin- 
 ning at the beginning in the sense of taking the interstate roads 
 first. There are two clauses of the United States Constitution 
 which give Congress the power to do this thing which we are talking 
 about. One of the clauses is the post-office clause of the Constitu- 
 tion, and the other is the interstate-commerce clause, and it is under 
 that clause that the Supreme Court has talked on various occasions 
 as to the power of Congress to deal with the subject, and it is from 
 that angle that I want to say to you that the roads which Congress 
 should take up should be the roads with which Congress has a 
 right primarily to deal, and those roads are the roads which carry 
 commerce, indaistry, merchandise, and passengers from one State into 
 another. I have not anything to do with trunk lines or market 
 roads, or anything of that sort. You can adopt any road you 
 please — and I will come to the way in which that should be done in a 
 moment — but the thing that Congress should do to base itself on 
 the Constitution and to be in a scientific position is to begin first with 
 those things in the province of Congress, namely, the means of inter- 
 state commerce. The automobile is going to be a factor in commerce 
 greater than the railroads ever were. Railroads run strictly on a 
 narrow line, and stop at strictly scheduled stations, and do not go off 
 into the comers and byways, but the automobile does. The automo- 
 bile has no time-table, but it runs anywhere there is merchandise and 
 passengers to be carried. 
 
 The Chairman. The railroad will be simply an assembling point. 
 
 Mr. Terry. That is it, the vehicular traffic using the road. Look- 
 ing at those means of travel which are used on the highways of the 
 country, Congress addresses itself to that commerce which is within 
 its province, namely, interstate commerce. First, therefore, it 
 seems to me in order to begin at the beginning instead of the end, 
 the question is to deal with those roads which are strictly interstate 
 roads connecting the various States. My colleague, Mr. Diel, speaks 
 of 30,000 or 40,000 miles of those roads. 
 
 The Chairman. In the State of New York ? 
 
 Mr. Terry. No; in the country at large. That is all that it will 
 be necessary for Congress to contemplate in the first instance for the 
 purpose of handling the good-roads proposition at the outset. Deal- 
 ing with those roads it puts itself squarely on its great big province of 
 deafing with interstate commerce ; that is the main thing for Congress 
 to deal with. Then, what is the result of that ? I say that is the 
 
144 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 starting poiat, and I say it is the scientific, logical starting point. 
 What it should do next, and what the extension of that shall be is 
 quite a different question. You are not going to pass a constitutional 
 amendment, you are not going to do anything except by statute, 
 and that statute is always flexible. You can do year after next 
 what you please, but this start is the important thing. The theory 
 is the important feature. The scientific basis on which the United 
 States should enter into the question is the important feature at 
 this time. Under the Shackleford bill I i,hink you will find it is a 
 circle instead of being a starting point. That is my difficulty with 
 that bill. No one can harp or cavd, as Congress says interstate com- 
 merce is our proviuce, and we are going to do our duty in that province 
 in the matter of good roads. Therefore, under the duection of the 
 Office of Good Roads, which is a Federal department, we will find out 
 what those roads are. 
 
 That is one of the first considerations. We will know by plans and 
 specffications and maps precisely what we have to deal with. That 
 is the second. Then, when we have dealt with that, we will determine 
 how much we can do. on that 30,000 mUes of roads this year, next year, 
 and how much the following year, and then make the appropriation 
 accordingly. The cost to the Federal Government of that would not 
 be in the same year compared with the cost to the Federal Govern 
 ment in two or three years of a plan such as Mr. Shackleford proposes. 
 One dollar a mUe means a million dollars, and what is $1 a mile ? Ten 
 dollars a mile means $10,000,000, because there are a milHon miles of 
 post roads, and with $10,000,000 how far have you gone ? If you take 
 up the question of an interstate road, availing yourselves of the things 
 the States have already done, and manj' of them have done it so well 
 you will not have much trouble with them, then you get a complete 
 system of Federal roads covering the necessities of interstate commerce. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. Can you give us an illustration of what would 
 be typical interstate roads ? 
 
 Mr. Terry. In answering that I would say this : Of course we have 
 a good many bad things in New York, and I hope it will be taken with- 
 out prejudice if I refer to my State. We have police systems and other 
 systems connected with the police systems in New York, but we have 
 some good things, and I do think our theory of highway construction 
 is a good thing, and that it may be taken safely as an object lesson. 
 I thmk the system adopted by the Federal Government — not a 
 Chinese copy, but in accord with the general New York principle — 
 will work out to the satisfaction of everybody, and let me tell youTiow. 
 If you begin with the township, as I said a moment ago, you will begin 
 at the wrong end. The experience of every State which has tried it 
 has been generally favorable because of the results obtained from a 
 system similar to that employed in New York, and I think the director 
 of public roads will tell you so. If the State takes hold of the good- 
 roads situation and develops a plan and goes to the county as the next 
 unit and works in cooperation with the county and there has been no 
 friction whatever in doing that, and then the county takes up the 
 matter between itself and the township and there has been no friction 
 there, the county helps the township, the State helps the county, and 
 there is a complete chain. 
 
 The Chairman. And complete State supervision in the State ? 
 
 Mr. Terry. Yes. 
 
GOOD EOADS. 145 
 
 The Chairman. Apply that to the Federal Government. 
 
 Mr. Teeey. In that I want to say there is not the sHghtest inter- 
 ference with State rights. The State can regulate all that traffic on 
 tha,t road for the rights and safety of everybody, and the only super- 
 vision which the Federal Government takes in that connection is that 
 It asks, m advance, the State to agree with it upon a plan, and that 
 IS all. They ask the States to agree upon a permanent plan, and not 
 a plan for to-day nor one for to-morrow, is not the State going to 
 do it ? I say, first, logically and humanly speaking, it is going to do 
 it, because when it does it will get the Federal aid. I say, secondly, 
 it is going to do it, as shown by the experience in the State with its 
 counties and townships, where it has worked well every time, and 
 there has been no friction in that kind of a system. If the Federal 
 Government adopts that same kind of a plan in dealing with the 
 States, the State in turn being on the ground and aiding the county, 
 the county in turn being close to the township, it makes a perfect 
 system. That system has stood well in practice, and it has no argu- 
 ment against it that I know of. 
 
 The Chaieman. How are you going to carry that out in extenso 
 without creating a large bureau in the Federal Government ? 
 
 Mr. Teret. Just to make it practicable, the head of your Office of 
 Pubhc Roads has made all the plans under the statute by Congress. 
 
 The Chaieman. That is theoretical ? 
 
 Mr. Teeey. Yes; just theoretically speaking. Now, those plans 
 call for the improvement or partial construction, as the case may be, 
 of a through State road of a certain State; let us say, for instance, 
 New Jersey. The Director of Public Eoads takes his plans to the 
 highway commissioner of New Jersey and says to him, "What do 
 you think of that ?" He says it is good or it is not good, and then 
 they sit down together and go over the matter, or the Director of 
 Public Eoads will do that by mail, if you like. They sit down together 
 and go over the matter, and even in those States where there are no 
 highway commissions there are State officers who are competent and 
 capable of doing it and are doing it. 
 
 The Chaieman. But do you think it desirable for every State to 
 have a highway commission ? 
 
 Mr. Teeey. By all means, and that is growing every year. It is 
 only going to be a matter of a short time before they wiU aU have 
 them. The director of public roads and the highway commission 
 will determine what the plan shall be. When there is a controversy 
 which looks as though it could not be solved, obviously the State is 
 going to concede its preconceived notion in favor of the Federal 
 Government, or it otherwise does not get the Federal aid. Then 
 that is all agreed upon with the States, what kind of roads they shall 
 be and how they shall be maintained. 
 
 The Chairman. Then what? What supervisory power is to see 
 that the conditions are lived up to on the part of the State, so far as 
 the Government is concerned ? 
 
 Mr. Teeey. That plan will involve not only the original expendi- 
 ture of money, but it wiU involve certain elements of maintenance, 
 and the moment the compact is broken, if we can conceive of it 
 being broken, which I can not, the aid which is furnished by the 
 ^Federal Government stops. 
 79558— PT 1—13 10 
 
146 GOOD KOADS. 
 
 The Chairman. What is the cooperation on the part of the State, 
 both in construction and in maintenance ? 
 
 Mr. Terry. There is a proportion which the committee iti its- 
 wisdom wni have eventually to work out, and I do not know that I 
 am competent to pass on that. If I say 50 per cent and 50 per cent 
 there might be objection to that, but finally you have to get 
 down to some percentage basis. The difficulty is that you will have 
 different elements entering into the subject. You will have the 
 population, the amount of commerce, and the difference in the load 
 gomg over the road, a difference in the agricultural use of the road, 
 the difference between the wealthy and the poor State, and the 
 difference in the square miles in a State and such questions as that 
 to determine. 
 
 The Chairman. Is not there a difference in the conditions in the 
 different States as to population, area, tonnage, and all that ? 
 
 Mr. Terry. Certainly- 
 
 The Chairman. How are you going to take all those questions into 
 consideration ? 
 
 Mr. Terry. Well, this is just my tentative suggestion, Mr. Chair- 
 man: I am really not competent to pass upon these technical things, 
 and I want you to understand that in the first place. But, as a 
 matter of common sense, when the Office of Public Roads has deter- 
 mined how much of those roads it will build during the current 12 
 months, it finds out what proportion of the 30,000 miles of interstate 
 road, main line, lie in the State of Iowa, if you please. Then it is 
 going to make Iowa's proportion of the distribution of the fund, thfr 
 same proportion of what Iowa's roads bear to the 30,000 miles. I 
 do not know of any other way of working that out. I have also 
 looked at that from the standpoint of population, and it is not far 
 off. I have looked at it from the standpoint of trafiic, of merchan- 
 dise carried over the roads, and passengers, and it is pretty accurate. 
 
 The Chairman. You think the local necessity has oeen the incen- 
 tive for the local development ? 
 
 Mr. Terry. That is it exactly. Nature has provided for that, and 
 it works automatically from that point of view. You can not control 
 that, and there is no use of trying to force it. The development of 
 the State takes care of that, and if the Federal Government meets the 
 natural development of the State, is not that scientific and logical ? 
 
 The Chairman. What espionage do you get on the part of the 
 Federal Government over the different States afterwards ? I mean, 
 in the way of the fulfillment of conditions, without creating a large 
 bureau ? 
 
 Mr. Terry. Let me approach that from the other point of view, if' 
 I may, for the moment. It would require a great deal less inspection 
 and a great deal less watching to follow the system which I have 
 suggested than to follow the post-roads system, because then you 
 have 1,000,000 miles as against 30,000 miles. 
 
 The Chairman. But on the post-roads system you have 40,000 
 rural carriers, or governmental representatives, as media of informa- 
 tion. 
 
 Mr. Terry. Yes; I get that point, Mr. Chairman, but then I ask 
 you to compare the accuracy and value of the reports of letter carriers 
 with those of your trained employees in the road department and the 
 
GOOD EOADS. 147 
 
 information they would gather from the engineers in the various 
 States. 
 
 The Chairman. Over an assumed 30,000-mile basis « 
 
 Mr. Terry. Yes; over an assumed 30,000-mile basis. 
 
 Senator Gronna. I believe I understand you to say you base this 
 on population and traffic. Is that correct 1 
 
 Mr. Terry. In this way: That it would be rcrdly based on popula- 
 tion as the means of trafhc, but the peicentage lo be arrived at would 
 be mathematically the mileage of the trunk hnes in the S1 ate as com- 
 pared with the total of 30,000 miles of roads in the country which 
 would come under this plan at the outset. 
 
 Senator Gronna. In my State we have only about 600,000 people, 
 and we have nearly 400,000,000 bushels of grain. Practically all of 
 that grain has to be hauled to some station. How are we going to 
 reconcile those two propositions, with 600,000 people and 400,000,000 
 bushels of grain ? I presume that is a i;-reat deal more than they have 
 in the State of New York. 
 
 Mr. Shaokleford. Can 3"ou not build those same road^ down to the 
 trunk lines ? 
 
 Senator Gronna. I just wanted Mr. Terry to elaborate on that and 
 see how we are going to work that out in the agricultural States. 
 
 Mr. Terry. In order to bring that out, and that is what I proposed 
 here, I would have to ask another question. The question would be 
 how much mileage of roads do j^ou want in .State roads which connect 
 with some roads in another State '( Have you roads which you could 
 follow? I mean, a fairly good trunk line; say, for instance, a road 
 which a man would use in starting at tlie eastern end of your State to 
 go to the next State ? 
 
 Senator Gronna. As a matter of fact, this 400,000,000 bushels of 
 grain, to say nothing of the hay and stock, is interstate business. 
 
 Mr. Terry. That is what I would ask you. To carry that inter- 
 state traffic, if a farmer lived here, for example, one there, and one 
 there, he would first go down to some of the main trunk lines, would 
 he not ? 
 
 Senator Gronna. Yes. 
 
 Mr. Terry. What I am asking is, what would be the mileage of 
 those main trunk lines to which the farmers would converge to get 
 into the interstate stream of traffic ? 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. If the road was from Buffalo, what would be 
 the distance across your State ? 
 
 Senator Gronna. Two hundred and forty miles one way and 400 
 miles the other way. 
 
 Mr. Terry. That is 640 miles. It would be as 640 is to 30,000 
 miles. That would be your percentage for distribution of the fund. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. Of course if you go east and west it would be 
 240 miles. 
 
 Mr. Terry. Yes; but you have 640 miles of road and it would be 
 as 640 is to 30,000. I think that is accurate. 
 
 Senator Gronna. Yes; as to the number of miles, but you under- 
 stand perfectly well that that mileage would be used by only a 
 very small percentage of the people. 
 
 Mr. Terry. Do they not all converge, if they are going into another 
 State? Do they not all converge into those two trunk Hnes going 
 east and west and north and south? 
 
148 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 Senator Geonna. Well, I am simply speaking of the highway traffic 
 as we use it. We use them as highways. 
 
 Mr. Shaokleford. I think the Senator means they try to get to 
 the railroads. 
 
 Mr. Terry. That would only shift the question a little. Instead 
 of trunk lines running through your State, they would be trunk lines 
 running through sections of your State to railroad centers which you 
 have to reach. 
 
 Senator Gronna. I believe you said this interstate road would not 
 be a competitor with the railroads. That is absolutely true. The 
 railroad is the factor we depend on to carry our goods to market. 
 
 Mr. Terry. Suppose that the shipping point for a large section of 
 your State were located at a certain place. Then you would have 
 certain collateral roads and main roads running there, would you not? 
 
 Senator Gronna. I can give you the situation as it is. You might 
 say that 10 miles on either side of this particular road you mentioned 
 could be used by the farmers. 
 
 Mr. Terry. Then, when you have those, you get your trunk line, 
 so called ? 
 
 Senator Gronna. Less 10 miles on either side of this interstate 
 road. 
 
 Mr. Terry. Then, when you extend those, you really get a road 
 through the State. I mean, every road goes to the railroad center, 
 no matter how small it is, whether it is dirt or macadam. I suppose 
 I could go from any point in New York State to a railroad center. So 
 that it comes down to this : That you still could take into contempla- 
 tion whatever your main trunk lines are through the State. It is not 
 hard to calculate those. Every State has those, and they are main 
 trunk lines as distinguished from collateral roads. 
 
 Senator Gronna. My intellect may not be what it ought; but I can 
 not understand where we are going to have the great benefit of such 
 a great undertaking as you speak of by investing the money simply in 
 these model roads. You speak of it as a system of first model roads. 
 Now, as a single proposition, if the Federal Government were to under- 
 take that, of course the people would have no objection ; but when you 
 couple it together with State affairs, county affairs, and township 
 affairs it is a different proposition altogether. 
 
 Mr. Terry. Is not the chain all down the line ? I speak of them 
 as object lessons. First the Government has to begin somewhere, 
 and it can not build all the roads in every State — that, of course, is 
 an impossibility. The Government has to put its money where it 
 will do the most good. I will^ay it will do the most good by building 
 some main lines first and using them as an object lesson, as many of 
 the States have already done, and as an encouragement to the other 
 political divisions of the States to do their share to build the State 
 roads, county roads, and township roads, feeders into the main arteries 
 of travel. Then you would have a complete system of roads in each 
 State under a uniform plan set by the Federal Government. 
 
 Senator Gronna. We hear a great deal about the high cost of 
 hving. If it cost, as it does, all the way from 25 to 50 cents per ton 
 per mile for the farmer to cany his product to the freight station, is 
 it not highly important to reduce that as much as possible ? Is not 
 that really the first thing to touch upon? 
 
GOOD EOADS. 149 
 
 Mr. Terky. Yes. But, however, it is not the province of the 
 Federal Government to go into that in the first instance. That is 
 the province of the State, or the next political division of the State, 
 -the county. The Federal Government can not go into the minor 
 political divisions in the first instance, and perhaps not eventually. 
 That is what I mean by saying you have to begin somewhere. 
 
 Senator Gronna. Now, then, give us an illustration to show 
 where these roads which you speak of would be of greater advantage 
 to the people of the country than the one I have given? 
 
 Mr. Terry. It would be of greater advantage to me country in just 
 the same way that the model roads built by any State are of more 
 advantage to the country than the former dirt roads. It is the same 
 principle exactly. 
 
 Senator Gronna. I can readily see that those roads, if built be- 
 tween cities, could be used as roads for pleasure, and I can readily 
 see where they would be not only a benefit, but a great deal of com- 
 fort could be had by having roads of that kind. What I was trying 
 to get at was the real benefit to the people. 
 
 Mr. Terry. I will give you an illustration. Among other things 
 I am a farmer. I have a farm just outside of Albany of about 300 
 acres, and I have had it long enough to know at least what the ex- 
 
 Senses are of taking grain to market, and products, and vegetables, 
 [y farm is three-quarters of a mile off the main road. A load of hay 
 has to go over a little dirt road which I constructed, making a short 
 cut, ramer than going 2 miles by dirt road to the main highway, and 
 the main highway leads into Albany, 6 miles. That is where you get 
 it. That is not a question of pleasure, but that is real industry, that 
 is trade, and that is where the State road comes in. 
 
 Senator Gronna. Would not that apply to farmers generally all 
 over the United States ? 
 
 Mr. Terry. That is what I say. 
 
 The Chairman. But the road to Albany is measured by the pos- 
 sible load on the half mile of road you constructed. 
 
 Mr. Terry. Very good. I assure you that that helps us for 6 
 miles tremendously and reduces the expense of going to the market 
 by 65 per cent. 
 
 The Chairman. But if the half mUe is poorer than the 6 miles, the 
 amount of your load is determined by the half mUe ? That is the 
 weakest link in your chain. 
 
 Mr. Terry. I know, but 6 miles out of 6^ miles is better than noth- 
 ing. Before we had the State road it was 6^ mUes of rough going. 
 Now, what about the half mile of dirt road? It just happens, for- 
 tunately for my illustration, that the township has now taken up this 
 dirt road which I constructed, and that is the township's busmess, 
 and not the business of the Federal Government. The township has 
 taken that road up and improved it under the advice of and with the 
 aid of the county, the county in turn gettmg the advice and the aid 
 of the State. The county has aided the township and the township 
 has taken up the dirt road and within the last eight months has 
 improved it in a way which they call their first method. 
 
 The Chairman. What about the man who lives up in Senator 
 Gronna's State, who is 100 miles from either of those trunk lines? 
 
 Mr. Terry. Would he be 100 miles from a trunk line il the Federal 
 Government put it through ? 
 
150 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. There are many farmers who would not be 
 within 100 miles of either of those trunk roads, but they have to pay 
 the tax to help build those roads. 
 
 Mr. Terry. If all of those miles of road there were improved by 
 the $25 a mile contribution no one of these farmers would drive his 
 load of hay over those 100 miles. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. Some of them do not live within 100 miles of 
 any trunk road. 
 
 Mr. Terrt. That is nob the question. You would not lor a 
 moment think of driving 100 miles to market. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. But he would be buUding a fancy road for some 
 people, and he would have no road at all. 
 
 Mr. Terry. Neither would he under the so-called Shackleford bill. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. According to your theory nobody would have 
 any road under that. 
 
 Mr. Terry. I think that is so. I plant myself on that. That is 
 not a fair illustration, because the farmer who is 100 miles from the 
 railroad station does not truck to market. 
 
 Senator Gronna. Is it not true the amount you could actually 
 improve would be based on the half mile instead of on the 6 miles 
 of which you speak ? 
 
 Mr. Terry. I must say that there is a break in the chain. Senator, 
 because you are forgetting we have the advantage of the 6 miles at 
 least by Government aid. 
 
 ■Senator Gronna. But you would have to make two or three trips 
 on the half mile before you got to the trunk road that you speak of, 
 
 Mr. Terry. We would until the township did its duty by those 
 roads, just as the Federal Government does its duty by the main 
 trunk line, and the State performs its duty and the county does its 
 duty by the still more collateral roads. 
 
 Senator Gronna. But the county would have helped to build the 
 main line, and the township 
 
 Mr. Terry. Not necessarily. Let me put it this way. If the 
 Federal Government gives this aid to the State, then the State has 
 so much more money to give to its counties, and the counties have 
 so much more money to give to their townships. 
 
 The Chairman. As I catch your idea, the strong feature of Federal 
 aid, to your mind, is primarily one of stimulation by demonstration ? 
 
 Mr. Terry. Primarily, yes. 
 
 The Chairman. To my mind, and I am only speaking for myself, 
 and I am open to conviction, an increased transportation facility 
 should be the disideratum from the viewpoint of increased produc- 
 tiveness of our natural resources. Do you not get the greatest benefit 
 in that way ? 
 
 Mr. Terry. Yes. What has been the history, Mr. Chairman, on 
 that point ? It has been the history given us by the railroads, that 
 wherever a railroad has been pushed through a theretofore sparsely 
 populated community, and they have done it for profit and not for 
 theory, that sparsely populated neighborhood has httle by little 
 grown up until the growth of these communities meets the means for 
 transportation, and that means increased transportation. That is 
 just what the railroad does it for. 
 
 The Chairman. To return to another point in your presentation, 
 how are you going to do away with the building up of a large bureau ? 
 
GOOD KOADS. 151 
 
 How are you going to have the direction or the knowledge on the part 
 of the Federal Government as to compliance with whatever condi- 
 tions may be attached either in construction or maintenance ? 
 
 Mr. Terry. You get it a little simplified by considering the way in 
 which Mr. Page and his assistants have been doing it for the last three 
 or four years. Mr. Page and his assistants havfe been called in to 
 consult and to lay down plans for the development of a highway 
 system for a considerable number of States, and he has watched it 
 through. 
 
 The Chairman. That is under an expenditure, we will say, of 
 $300,000 a year, but here is a possible expenditure of $20,000,000. 
 They are not analogous cases, are they ? 
 
 Mr. Teery. No. I do not think, however, you would need those 
 men, but supposing that from the appropriation which Congress 
 made for this purpose, that $750 or $1,000 was used for the payment 
 of an inspector assigned to each State. I do not know whether that 
 would be enough, but I think it would be sufficient. Would that be 
 too large a sum for one man in each State, and one is practically all 
 you would need, for when you have your proposition accepted by the 
 State, then you bring in a corps of watchers and inspectors, and in 
 fact all the State force. 
 
 The Chairman. Provided they participate in the expenditure. 
 
 Mr. Terry. Precisely. We must assume that is the fact and we 
 must assume the States will do with the Federal Government what 
 the counties have done with the States, and if we assume that, then 
 the coordination is complete, because there has been no trouble 
 in that coordination between the State and its counties, and I see 
 no reason to anticipate that there will be a lack of that coordination 
 between the States and the Federal Government. 
 
 The Chairman. Then you think your plan could be carried out 
 without any addition of a large force in the bureau of good roads ? 
 
 Mr. Terry. That is just my view of it. That is a practical ques- 
 tion, but I point to the experience in the States. Do you know 
 that the second $50,000,000 appropriation in the State of New York 
 was carried by a majority made up of farmers and others who live 
 not at all on the systems of highways. 
 
 The Chairman. When was that? In 1905? 
 
 Mr. Terry. This year. 
 
 The- Chairman. I mean the first $50,000,000 appropriation? 
 
 Mr. Terry. That was in 1905. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. The first one was for $50,000,000 to be 
 expended by the State, but this last one was to be $20,000,000 
 expended by the State and $30,000,000 by the counties, and it 
 carried by a larger majority than the other. 
 
 Mr. Terry. Yes. I am speaking of the great majority which it 
 gained, for it shows that those who voted for it and made up the 
 bulk of the vote were, to a very large extent, those who did not 
 live on the roads at all. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. What was the motive of allowiag thurty million 
 of the fifty million to be distributed by the counties ? Was not that 
 to allow it to be popular ? 
 
 Mr. Terry. No. It was along the line of the general scheme, 
 because the main arteries had all been built, and that is what I say 
 now I am speaking of it as the first step to you, Mr. Chairman, 
 
152 GOOD BOADS. 
 
 and the second step might be the same as was taken in New York. I 
 think eventually you are going to get down to smaller communities. 
 When the machinery is running and it does not cost so much, you 
 are goiug to get down to smaller communities, and you are going to 
 get the collateral roads, with the Statb doing its part more largely 
 under the stimulus of the National Government; and after you have 
 built your main trunk line — the country is accustomed to using this 
 money for this purpose — then you will branch out into the col- 
 lateral lines of road. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. What is your patrol system on the roads? 
 Have you organized a regular patrol system ? 
 
 Mr. Terry. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. How many miles of road do you give an indi- 
 vidual ? 
 
 Mr. Terry. I would not attempt to answer that, because it would 
 not be accurate. I know simply that the State has been apportioned 
 with so many patrols under each county engineer, and they patrol 
 them and watch so many miles. 
 
 Mr. Shackleford. Your idea would be that the Federal Govern- 
 ment would have absolutely nothing to do with that whatever, that 
 that would be entirely under the local supervision, and the Federal 
 requirement would be complied with because the State participated 
 in the cooperation ? 
 
 Mr. Terry. Yes, and the Federal Government's representative 
 could take it up with the State highway commissioner, or in par- 
 ticular instances with 5 or 10 counties through which the road ran, 
 and he could, by getting their report, find out just what was being 
 done. You have asked for some data with regard to automobiles, and 
 I will hand you a short statement. 
 
 The Chairman. This is authentic, is it not? 
 
 Mr. Terry. Yes. 
 
 The Chairman. We will put it in the record. We thank you for 
 your views, Mr. Terry. 
 
 STATISTICS OP THE AUTOMOBILE INDUSTRY. 
 
 The growth of the automobile industry has been astounding. Over $1,000,000,000 
 are invested and thousands of men are employed in the making of cars and accessories 
 and in their selling and upkeep. 
 
 Six hundred and four concerns manufacture automobiles, trucks, and motors. There 
 are 13,408 dealers, 9,299 public garages, 559 supply stores, and 779 repair shops. 
 
 The total number of cars in use, including 54,000 commercial motor-driven vehicles. 
 Is 1,010,483. 
 
 The output for 1912 was 878,261 cars. The estimated production for 1913 is over 
 600,000 cars. 
 
 The value of the cars exported in 1912 was $28,239,212, an increase of $9,000,000 
 over the previous year. 
 
 The imports dropped to $2,298,973, a decrease of $147,275. 
 
 An industry of this magnitude and its thousands of employees, like those of other 
 industries, and, in fact, all human beings, are affected and must help pay the heavy 
 price of transport over inadequate and indifferently maintained roads. 
 
 The Chairman. I will also direct that the following brief by Mr. 
 Terry upon the subject of Federal aid in highway improvement be 
 inserted in the record : 
 
GOOD EOADS. 153 
 
 Memorandum Establishing that it is Expedient and Advisable toe Congress 
 TO Legislate and to Make an Appropriation Looking Toward Federal Aid 
 IN Road Building, and Pointing out the Most Expedient Way in Which this 
 CAN BE Done, and Establishing that Congress has Power Under the Con- 
 stitution TO Legislate and Provide Appropriations for the Purpose. 
 
 A great amount of work has been done for the purpose of accomplishing a national 
 system of highways throughout the country, and to secure aid of the Federal Govern- 
 ment for that purpose. It was not until the last year that anything was accomplished. 
 With the introduction, however, of Representative Underwood's resolution, the 
 result sought seems possible of attainment. 
 
 It seems to a great many people in the country so necessary for the proper develop- 
 ment of this Nation, that the Federal Government take action to bring about the im- 
 provement ia the development of the public highways, that it is stating and support- 
 mga proposition not possible of contradiction when one makes an argument in favor 
 of Federal aid, for the construction and maintenance of good roads. It may be well, 
 nevertheless, to make a concrete and short statement of the arguments in favor of 
 Federal aid to good roads, so that those who have not had the time to consider the 
 matter, may have the benefit of the work and consideration which has been given to 
 it by others. 
 
 It is our purpose, therefore, in this memorandum to establish: 
 
 I. That it is expedient and advisable for Congress to pass legislation and to make 
 appropriations granting Federal aid for the improvement, cohftruction, and main- 
 tenance of the public highways. 
 
 II. That the best results can be accomplished by the joint action of the Federal 
 and State Governments under the general supervision of the National Bureau of 
 Public Roads. 
 
 III. That Congress has power under the Constitution to legislate to bring about 
 the construction, improvement, and maintenance of the public highways and to 
 make appropriations for that purpose. 
 
 I. that it is expedient and advisable for congress to pass legislation and 
 TO make appropriations granting federal aid for the improvement, con- 
 struction, AND maintenance OF THE PUBLIC HIGHWAYS. 
 
 The subject of good roads is one which has come to be a national issue. It is a 
 question which affects not only the locality, but the Nation as well. There seems to 
 be no dispute but that the construction and maintenance of good roads throughout 
 the Nation would be attended by great advantages, commercial, educational, and 
 industrial. It will be sufficient merely to enumerate these numerous advantages 
 and then refer to the power granted to Congress by the Constitution to assist in me 
 construction and maintenance of good roads. 
 
 (A) Good roads will assist commerce in furnishing quicker transportation facilities, 
 economy in transportation, and the opening up of new markets. 
 
 Without facilities for transportation and intercommunication there can be no 
 commerce. The idea] system of transportation would be one in which every com- 
 munity has been united with every other community by a system of roads in which 
 there would be no isolated communities or any which did not have free access to 
 either neighboring or distant places. The National Government has recognized this 
 same principle in the construction of the transcontinental railways, and has assisted 
 in their construction by the granting of enormous tracts of land. Although this was a 
 material advantage to commerce, yet that is just the beginning of the system which 
 would be necessary before the conditions would be at all satisfactory. There are 
 numerous outlying districts which have not access to other outlying districts, or even 
 to railroad centers, except over dirt roads, which are not under any sj'stem of main- 
 tenance, or which are, in a majority of instances, always in a state of disrepair. Con- 
 ditions such as these affect the economy of transportation in two ways: First, by the 
 greater cost of hauling the freight over bad roads, and, second, the additional cost in 
 transferring freight from one conveyance to another, occasioned by the fact that direct 
 communication between the points in question is impossible, because there is either 
 no continuous road from place to place or the road is in such condition at places as 
 not to permit of continuous travel. 
 
 A comparison of the cost of transportation for a ton per mile in this and foreign 
 countries shows that the cost in this country is approximately three times that of the 
 cost in -foreign countries, due to the bad condition of the roads. When it is remem- 
 bered that 59 per cent of the total exports of the United States are farm products, this 
 item of economy in transportation is a feature of large proportion. This additional 
 
154 GOOD ROADS. 
 
 •expense of transportation not only affects the foreign markets, but the domestic 
 markets as well. It is one of the elements recognized as one of the causes for the high 
 ■cost of living. It is obvious that if a farm product were to reach the market at one- 
 third the cost of transportation, the cost of the commodity to the consumer would be 
 ■correspondingly decreased. 
 
 A network of good roads throughout the United States, under a single system and 
 under systematic management, would open up all markets for all producers, a con- 
 ■dition which does not now exist. 
 
 (B) Good roads would be of great industrial advantage and would relieve the con- 
 gestion of labor, equalizing the supply and demand, and affording quicker and more 
 available means of intercommunication. , ^ 
 
 A condition often exists. in this country which should be eliminated, if possible. 
 Reference is made to labor conditions as affecting the question of supply and demand. 
 In one district we find the supply exceeding the demand, resulting in unjustly low 
 wages and lack of employment, and in another district we find excessive demand, 
 Tesulting in abnormally high wages. An equalization of the supply and demand 
 would be a great advantage to this country, and the advantage would not be local 
 tut national. The Department of Commerce and Labor recognizes this condition, 
 and one of the purposes of the department is to bring about equalization; but the 
 ■condition would be much more readily eliminated if there was ready communication 
 between the districts where the supply exceeds the demand and the districts where 
 the demand exceeds the supply. 
 
 A national system of good roads would, in a measure, permit the unemployed to 
 reach the district where labor is in demand without the great expense for transpor- 
 tation which is now present. Not only would the laborer benefit, but the manufac- 
 turer as well. The manufacturer would be enabled to select his factory site wherever 
 the natural resources of the country permitted, with every assurance that he could 
 always reach his market. 
 
 (C) Good roads would be of great educational advantage in securing a centralized 
 and better system of schools for outlying districts, and a more ready dissemination of 
 knowledge and information through the increased facilities for distribution of period- 
 icals and publications. 
 
 In the rural districts it has been found necessary to establish numerous schools, each 
 having but few pupils, the curriculum of which is supposed to cover everything from 
 the alphabet to higher mathematics and languages. This unquestionably is an eco- 
 nomic loss to the community, which can only be obviated by centralizing a system of 
 schools. But such a centralization would be impossible under the present system of 
 travel and transportation. With good roads throughout the rural districts it would be 
 possible to secure the attendance of the pupils of the numerous small schools at one 
 larger central school, which would be not only more efficient but thorough. This 
 would result in better schools for the community and better education for the pupils, 
 and the educational advantages which would arise from a system of good roads would 
 not result alone from the increased facilities of education, but from a centralized system 
 of public schools. 
 
 In addition to this, the outlying rural districts would be in closer touch with the 
 larger centers of education and civilization. The opportunity to travel and observe 
 is an education in itself, broadening the mind of the traveler in giving him an insight 
 into the ways of life of his neighbors, which he otherwise would not have had. 
 
 With greater facilities for transportation and travel a resident of the outlying rural 
 districts would no longer be limited in his reading matter to the yearly almanac and 
 a monthly paper, but would have the newspapers and periodicals in his home with 
 almost the same frequency as the resident of the large city. This could be accom- 
 plished not only by means of the increased facilities afforded the rural free delivery, 
 but also through the facilities afforded to the distributing agents of the various news- 
 papers and publications. Such newspapers and publications at the present time 
 ship their magazines or newspapers to numerous central points of distribution through- 
 out the United States, from which points they are distributed to the various subscribers. 
 To improve the conditions of the roads from the various centers of distribution would 
 assist in the placing in the hands of the subscriber his periodical or newspaper much 
 sooner than he otherwise would have received it. 
 
 (D) Good roads would be of great social advantage in bringing the partially settled 
 communities in closer touch with the large centers of population. 
 
 There has been much dissatisfaction expressed in the rural districts with the condi- 
 tions there existing in regard to the lack of amusement and diversion for the farmers 
 and their families. This-dissatisf action with farm life has resulted in the farrtier boy 
 and girl leaving the farm and going to the cities. The condition of isolation which 
 often exists in rural districts is very oppressive and is chiefly accountable for the 
 
GOOD EOADS. 155 
 
 dissatisfaction which the farmer experiences with his lot. To remove this isolation 
 and to permit free and ready intercommunication with other centers would mean the 
 removal of the dissatisfaction. An opportunity to visit his neighbors without killing 
 his horses or breaking his vehicles on the bad roads would mean a great deal to the 
 farmer. It is seldom that the farmer at the present time in the districts where the 
 roads are bad will be induced to leave the farm for a visit or recreation, except upon 
 the annual camp meeting or the coimty fair. The farmer may be prosperous, but 
 lis prosperity does not improve the condition of the roads. 
 
 In certain rural districts where the roads are good, the prosperous farmer has an 
 automobile, and thus is enabled quickly and at small expense to keep in touch with 
 his immediate neighborhood. But other prosperous farmers in districts where the 
 roads are poorer, are prohibited this advantage, solely on account of the condition of 
 the roads. The automobile is no longer the plaything of the rich, but a recognized 
 economic means of transportation and travel. It is an economy which is denied to 
 the residents of the district where the roads are bad. 
 
 (E) The nation would be benefited by a national system of good roads through 
 economy in postal service, increased transportation facilities in tune of war, and the 
 closer communion of the people. 
 
 The advantage to the United States Government through the economy of trans- 
 portation of mail alone is sufficient to justify Congress in furnishing aid to the construc- 
 tion and maintenance of good roads. The rural free-delivery system is now very exten- 
 sive and is a considerable item of expense in the postal .service. It has been estimated 
 that a system of good roads would save two-thirds of the preseno expense in transpor- 
 tation . This saving would likewise be present in the case of the rural free delivery 
 and Would represent a substantial economy to the Government. 
 
 The parcel-post system installed by this Government would find its greatest demand 
 for service throughout the outlying districts, and in order that the parcel post might 
 be efficient a system of good roads is absolutely necessary. The United States Gov- 
 ernment has recognized the necessity of good roads in the Philippines, Alaska, Panama, 
 and Guam, authorizing for the purpose of the construction and maintenance of public 
 roads in the Philippines and Guam the expenditure of $3,000,000 and 185,000, re- 
 spectively. Congress has put itself upon record as admitting the national advantages 
 of public roads in the aforementioned places, yet hesitates to make the same con- 
 cession for its own territory with which the Government should be more immediately 
 concerned. 
 
 A system of good roads for the United States would permit of the ready transporta- 
 tion of the Army in time of war from one section of the country to the other. This 
 could be accomplished without reliance upon the railroads or other means of trans- 
 portation. It needs no argument to show the advantage gained by the Government 
 m this respect alone. 
 
 But, in addition to this, the intercommunication of all sections of the country with 
 one another would serve to bring about a closer bond of sympathy and interest of the 
 people of the Nation and eliminate physical divisions of one section of the people from 
 another, making a greater community of interest in the people and a greater patriotism 
 for the Central Government. 
 
 (F) Modern means of transportation and the economic position held by the auto- 
 mobile require a national system of good roads. 
 
 The last 10 years has seen a development of the motor vehicle and the universal use 
 of this means of conveyance not only for the purposes of pleasure but also commerce. 
 The automobile has developed to supply an urgent demand for a ready and reliable 
 means of conveyance for use in transporting passengers and freight through the districts 
 which are not touched by steam or electric railways. In large cities and the surround- 
 ing sections where the roads are good we find the large commercial houses transporting 
 their freight by means of motor trucks from their warehouses to the centers of distribu- 
 tion in outlying districts. This method of transportation, by reason of its economic 
 features, has universally been recognized and adopted where the condition of the roads 
 will permit. 
 
 Before such a method of conveyance can be adopted successfully and economically 
 in any section of the country it is essential that the roads in such section of the country 
 be complete and in good condition. It is to be remembered also in this connection 
 ' that the automobile and motor truck are not used for short trips, but their routes have 
 extended from coast to coast. It has been a great problem with the motor-vehicle 
 associations to select continuous routes for any great distance throughout the United 
 States, and it must be said that the problem has not been satisfactorily solved, nor 
 will it be solved until a uniform system of good roads has been constructed, with the 
 proper provisions for their maintenance. 
 
156 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 The motor vehicle is a recognized economic advantage to the Nation, and the people 
 of the Nation should not be denied this economy through the failure of the Government 
 to provide good roads. 
 
 (G) The passage and the carrying into effect of the parcel post calls for action by the 
 Federal Government in aid of the development of good roads. 
 
 The new parcel-post law will necessitate the delivery by the United States Govern- 
 ment, particularly in the rural districts of additonal mail of larger bulk, and new means 
 of transportation will have to be used for this purpose. In order that the law be car- 
 ried into proper effect and that the increased mail be delivered with eflSciency, it is 
 an absolute necessity that the roads be made to meet the means of transportation, and 
 Federal aid for that purpose is required. 
 
 The benefits to be derived from improved roads by the Nation are best summed up 
 in the short pamphlet of the American Association of Highway Improvements, as follow : 
 
 "Improved roads will bring better schools and greater attendance, better health and 
 quicker medical attention, better farms and more cultivated land, better crops and 
 cheaper transportation, better economic conditions and more producers, better social 
 conditions and less isolation, better church attendance and better citizens." 
 
 POINT 11. THAT THE BEST RESULTS CAN BE ACCOMPLISHED BY THE JOINT ACTION OP 
 THE FEDERAL AND STATE GOVERNMENTS UNDER THE GENERAL SUPERVISION OF 
 THE NATIONAL BUREAU OP PUBLIC ROADS. 
 
 Because of the system of Government under which we live, and the ma,ny limita- 
 tions upon the power of Congress, and the many different sovereign States with 
 which the Federal Government would have to deal in promoting; a national policy 
 for the improvement of State highways, it would not seem possible that sufficient 
 funds could be provided to make the matter of construction, improvement, and 
 maintenance of public highways a Federal matter alone. The Nation is too large, 
 and its sovereign subdivisions too many to admit of such a thiag. The question of 
 local taxation for the same purpose must be given consideration and the action already 
 taken by the several States is a matter of much importance. There is no use for 
 anyone to come before Congress and contend for something that is not possible of 
 accomplishment. The proposition for the construction and maintenance of good 
 roads is now a practical concrete proposition, no longer a theory. What Congress is 
 anxious to accomplish and what all those who are seeking good roads are anxious to 
 accomplish is the result, and it is a plain truth that no result is accomplished without 
 taking into consideration actual conditions and actual facts. It might well be, as 
 a matter of theory, that the Federal Government alone has power and the facilities 
 to construct and maintain the national h^hways alone, without consideration of 
 State aid, or of State supervision. If the Office of Public Roads of the United States 
 was so oi^anized as to take the matter in hand and to carry it forward alone, no one 
 would doubt that we would have better roads and better plans for the improvement 
 of roads that we can secure by the joint action by the State government and the 
 Federal Government. 
 
 Every one is ready to concede also, that if we want good roads and Federal aid, the 
 most practical way to accomplish the result is by cooperation between the State and 
 Federal Governments. 
 
 Let Congress, therefore, enact a law providing appropriations for the construction, 
 improvement, and maintenance of public roads under the direction of the United 
 States Office of Public Roads. Let the director of the United States Office of Public 
 Roads formulate and adopt such plans for the construction, improvement, and mainte- 
 nance of the public highways as will in his judgment promote and facilitate interstate 
 commerce and trade, and the postal service; providing, however, that such plans shall 
 be drawn in cooperation with and meet the approval of the authorities having charge 
 of the construction and improvement of the public highways of the States; the idea 
 being that the work done by the States, and the work done by the Federal Govern- 
 ment, should be in entire accord and not in conflict. 
 
 This result would not be difficult to accomplish. When the construction of a high- 
 way is planned by the United States Office of Public Roads, it could be submitted to 
 and made to accord with the plans of the Highway Commission of the particular State 
 or States through which the contemplated national highway would pass. 
 
 The United States Office of Public Roads should also be given power to assist in the 
 development of State plans for the improvement of the public highways where such 
 State plans would come within the scope of the Federal legislation, and would, in the 
 judgment of the Office of Public Roads, tend to the end sought to be accomplished by 
 the proposed legislation. 
 
GOOD EOADS. 157 
 
 The Office of Public Roads should be given in the bill power of condemnation to be 
 exercised, however, only upon the approval of the State highway commissions to the 
 plan which is sought to be carried out by the condemnation. 
 
 The most difficult part of the legislation will come in the matter of the division of 
 the money appropriated by Congress for the purpose, among the several States. It 
 will be objected, naturally, unless there is an egual division of the fund that one 
 section of the country may receive more than its just share of the funds appropriated 
 by Congress. Anyone will concede that an equal division of funds in every State 
 ia the Union will not produce the best roads, nor will such a plan produce, or be likely 
 to produce, roads of considerable benefit to the Nation as a whole. It would seem that 
 the best way the result could be accomplished by legislation, is to allow the amount 
 to be distributed among the several States to be controlled, as far as possible, by the 
 desires of the people of those States as shown by the amount of State appropriations 
 made. Where a State, therefore, appropriated $1,000,000 for the improvement of the 
 highways, the National Government, through the Office of Public Roads, might spend 
 in that State with a greater effect more money than is spent in a State where no appro- 
 priation is made. This, of course, could not control where the Bureau of Public 
 Roads is following out its plan of a national highway through several States, but it 
 could control the general distribution of the fund in each State. Such a plan would 
 stimulate the various States to activity in the improvement of the highways, which 
 would go a great way toward the accomplishment of the result to be reached. 
 
 To put the suggestions here made in more concrete form, I suggest a bill drafted as 
 follows: 
 
 1. A general clause fixing the scope of the act as being for the construction, improve- 
 ment, and maintenance of public highways, to promote interstate commerce, and 
 trade, and postal service. 
 
 2. A clause granting to the Director of the United States Office of Public Roads the 
 power to carry into effect the provisions of the act. 
 
 3. A clause fixing the duties of the Director of the United States Office of Public 
 Roads and providing that all plans formulated and adopted by such office shall meet 
 ■with the approval of the State highway comnJissioners, or other persons in the States 
 through which the roads contemplated by such plans run. 
 
 4. A clause granting to the Director of the United States Office of Public Roads 
 the right to institute condemnation proceedings in the name of the United States, 
 to carry out any plan approved, as required in the previous paragraph. 
 
 5. A clause makmg appropriations for the purpose, dividing one-half of the appro- 
 priations equally among the States which likewise appropriate a similar sum to the 
 same purpose, except in a case where a State has no such power of appropriation 
 under its constitution, and appropriating the other half for the construction, main- 
 tenance, and iinprovement of national highways on plans formulated by the United 
 States Office of Puis lie Roads, and approved by the State authorities. 
 
 If a bill drawn in accordance with these suggestions could be passed, it would obviate 
 the ob.iection that some States would be deprived of benefit under the act, and at the 
 same time it would allow for the carrying forward of a general national plan of highway 
 improvement. 
 
 POINT III. THAT CONGRESS HAS PC WEE UNDEE THE CONSTITUTION TO LEGISLATE TO 
 BRING ABOUT THE CONSTRUCTION, IMPROVEMENT, AND MAINTENANCE OP THE PUBLIC 
 HIGHWAYS AND TO MAKE APPROPRIATIONS FOR THAT PURPOSE. 
 
 The power vested in Congress to enact such legislation has been clearly established 
 by repeated decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States in defining the scope 
 of that paragraph in the Constitution reading as follows: 
 
 "Sec. 8, Par. 3. The Congress shall have power to regulate commerce with foreign 
 nations, and among the several States, and with Indian tribes." 
 
 The right of Congress to improve our harbors and waterways, to construct canals, 
 and to regulate the height of bridges spanning rivers, channels, and other waterways 
 lying wholly within the boundaries of a State, is based entirely on this paragraph. 
 
 The fact that up to the present time Congress has not exercised the rio:ht to promote 
 commerce between the States by constructing and improving public highways in the 
 various States, can not be construed as evidence that the power to do so has been abro- 
 gated. In the case of County of Mobile v. Kimball (162 U. S., 695) the question was 
 raised as to the right of the State of Alabama to enact a law lor certain improvements 
 in the port and river of Mobile, it being contended that such a law was in conflict with 
 the constitutional right of Congress to regulate commerce between the several States. 
 Mr. Justice Field, who delivered the opinion of the court, said: 
 
 ''Inaction of Congress upon these subjects, unlike inaction upon matters affecting 
 all the States and requiring uniformity of regulation, is not taken as a declaration that 
 
158 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 nothing shall be dene with respect to them, but is rather to be deemed a declaration 
 that for the time being, and until it seems fit to act, they may be regulated by btate 
 
 ^"ln°the case of Miller r. The Mayor of New York (109 U.S., 385) it was held that the 
 act of Congress authorizing the building of the Brooklyn Bridge, a structure wholly 
 within the State of New York, was constitutional. The court said ■ ' 'Such uniformly 
 has been the construction given to that clause of the Constitutipn which confers upon 
 Congress the power to regulate commerce," citing Pennsylvania v. Wheeling & Bel- 
 mont Bridge Co. (59 U. S., 421); The Clinton Bridge (10 Wallace, 454). 
 
 In the case of Clinton Bridge, Mr. Justice Nelson, on the authority of the Wheeling 
 & Belmont Bridge Co. case, held that the act of Congress declaring the Clinton Bridge 
 across the Mississippi River at Clinton, Iowa, a lawful structure a,nd a post route, and 
 prescribing certain Tegulations for its maintenance, was constitutional. He said: 
 
 "The question whether or not it was competent for Congress to interfere and legalize 
 the bridge, under the power to regulate commerce, and whether or not the act put 
 an end to the pending suit, were questions examined and settled in the affirmative 
 in the case already referred to (Wheeling Bridge case). The reasons for the con- 
 clusions arrived at will be found there and need not be repeated here. 
 
 "Several cases have been before this court relating to bridges over navigable waters 
 of the United States in which questions were raised as to the authority by which the 
 bridges could be constructed, the extent to which they would obstruct the free navi- 
 gation of water, and the right of private party to interfere with their construction and 
 continuance. * * * The power vested in Congress to regulate commerce with 
 with foreign nations and among the several States includes the control of the navi- 
 gable waters of the United States so far as may be necessary to insure their free_ navi- 
 gation, and by navigable waters of the United States are meant such as are navigable 
 in fact, and which by themselves or their connection with other waters form a con- 
 tinuous channel for commerce with foreign countries or among the States. (The 
 Daniel Ball, 10 Wall., 557.) 
 
 "East Eiver is such a navigable water. It enters the harbor of New York and 
 connects it with Long Island Sound. Whatever, therefore, may be necessary to pre- 
 serve or improve its navigation, the General Government may direct; and to that end 
 it can determine what shall and what shall not be deemed an interference with or an 
 obstruction to such navigation." 
 
 Under this case of Miller v. The Mayor of New York it would seem that Congress 
 has the power under the commerce clause not only to construct, improve, and main- 
 tain or authorize interstate highways, either by water or by land, but it has power to 
 construct, improve, and maintain any and all public highways by water or by land 
 which connect with or intersect or lead into such interstate highways. 
 
 The case where the matter was fully considered and the authority of Congress 
 clearly defined is the case of Luxton r. The North Eiver Bridge Co. (153 U. S., 525). 
 
 In this case, by act of July 11, Congress authorized the incorporation of the North 
 River Bridge Co., and authorized the construction of a bridge across the Hudson 
 River between the States of New York and New Jersey. The third section of this 
 act is as follows: 
 
 "That the bridge, with its approaches and railroads thereon, constructed under the 
 provisions of this act shall be a lawful structure and a military and post road, but no 
 toll charge shall be made for the transmission over the same of the mails of the United 
 States or for the right of way of the United States postal and telegraph purposes." 
 
 The fourth section of the act incorporated the company and gave it the right and 
 power of eminent domain. 
 
 The question in the case arose over the right of the corporation to condemn a certain 
 parcel of land in Hoboken for the purposes of the bridge and for a roadway thereto 
 through commissioners appointed by the circuit court for the purpose. It was claimed 
 that the act was unconstitutional. Mr. Justice Gray, writing the opinion for the court, 
 said: 
 
 "The validity of the act of Congress incorporating the North River Bridge Co., 
 rests upon the principles of constitutional law, now established beyond dispute. The 
 Congress of the United States being empowered by the Constitution to regulate com- 
 merce among the several States, and to pass all laws necessary or proper for the pur- 
 pose of carrying into execution any of the powers specifically conferred, may make 
 use of any appropriate means to that end. 
 
 "Congress therefore may create corporations as appropriate means of executing the 
 powers of government, as for mstance a bank for the purpose of carrymg on fiscal 
 operations m the United States or a railroad corporation for the purpose of promoting 
 commerce among the States. (McCullough v. Maryland, 4 Wheat., 316; Osborne v. 
 The Bank of U. S., 9 Wheat., 738; Pacific Railroad Removal cases, 115 U S 1-18; 
 California v. Pacific Railroad, 127 U. S., 1-39.) 
 
GOOD ROADS. 159 
 
 "Congress has likewise the power, exercised early in this century, by successive 
 acts in the case of the Cumberland or National Road from the Pacific across the Alle- 
 ghanies to Ohio, to authorize the construction of a national highway connecting 
 several States. (See Indiana v. U. S., 148 U. S., 148.) 
 
 "And whenever it becomes necessary for the accomplishment of any object within 
 the authority of Congress to exercise the right of emment domain and take private 
 lands, making just compensation to the owner. Congress may do this with or without 
 a con'current act of the State in which the land lies. (Van Blocklin v. Tennessee, 
 117 U. S., 151-154; Cherokee Nation v. Kansas Raihoad, 135 II. S., 614-656.) 
 
 "From these premises the conclusion seems to be inevitable that although Congress 
 may, if it see fit, and as it has often done, recognize and approve bridges, erected by 
 the authority_ of two States, across nav^able waters between them, it may, at its dis- 
 cretion, use its sovereign powers, directly or through a corporation created for that 
 purpose, to construct bridges, for the accommodation of interstate commerce by land, 
 as it undoubtedly may to improve the navigation of rivers for the convenience of 
 interstate commerce by water." 
 
 Mr. Justice Gray held that the judicial opinions cited in support of the opposite 
 view were not, having regard to the facts of the cases in which they were uttered, of 
 controlling weight. He cites the case of United States v. The Railroad Bridge Co. 
 in the Circuit Court of Appeals, 6 MacLean, 517, and says that Justice MacLean's 
 dissenting opinion in the Wheeling Bridge Co. case is absolutely unsound, and concurs 
 with Mr. Justice Nelson's majority opinion, citing the Clinton Bridge case, Miller v. 
 New York. Also Stockton v. Ball, and the New York Railroad Co. (32 Fed., 9), Wm. 
 Ette Bridge v. Hatch (125 IT. S., 1), in which case it was decided that Congress might 
 allow the States to construct bridges between States or, exercising its sovereignty, 
 might construct them itself. Mr. Justice Gray then said: 
 
 "In California v. The Pacific Railroad (127 U. S., 1) it was directly adjudged that 
 Congress has authority in the exercise of its power to regulate commerce among the 
 several States, to authorize corporations to construct railroads across the States as 
 well as Territories of the United States, and Mr. Justice Bradley, speaking for the 
 court and referring to the acts of Congress to build railroads across the continent, said : 
 
 " 'It can not at the present day be doubted that Congress, under the power to regu- 
 late commerce among the several States, as well as to provide for postal accommo- 
 dations and military exigencies, had authority to pass these laws. The power to 
 construct or to authorize individuals or corporations to construct national highways 
 and bridges from State to State, is essential to the complete control and regulation 
 of interstate commerce. Without authority in Congress to establish such highways 
 and bridges, it would be without authority to regulate one of the most important 
 adjuncts of commerce. This power in former times was exerted to a very limited 
 extent, the Cumberland or National road being the notable example. Its exertion 
 was but little called for as commerce was then mostly conducted by water and many 
 of our statesmen entertained doubts as to the existence of the power to establish 
 ways of communication by land. But since, in consequence of the expansion of the 
 country, the multiplication of its products, and the invention of railroads and loco- 
 motion by steam, land transportation has so vastly increased, a sounder consideration 
 of the subject has prevailed and led to the conclusion that Congress has plenary 
 power over the whole subject.' " 
 
 After quoting the above, Mr. Justice Gray said : 
 
 "The act of Congress now in question declares the construction of the North River 
 bridge, between the States of New York and New Jersey, to be 'in order to facilitate 
 interstate commerce ' and it makes due provision for the condemnation of land for the 
 construction and maintenance of the bridge and its approaches, and for just compensa- 
 tion to the owners, which has been accordingly awarded to the plaintiff in error. 
 
 "In the light of the foregoing principles and authorities, the objection made to the 
 constitutionality of this act can not be sustained." 
 
 From the above cases and authorities it is clear that under the commerce clause of 
 the Constitution, Congress has the power to construct, maintain, improve, and regulate 
 any of the public highways of the United States between the several States and any 
 public highways leading into or connecting therewith. 
 
 Respectfullv submitted. 
 
 Charles Madden Terry, 
 Chairman Legislative Board American Automobile Association. 
 
160 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 tuesday, febbtjary 11, 1913. 
 
 Joint Committee on 
 Federal Aid in Construction of Post Eoads, 
 
 Washington, D. G. 
 The joint committee met, pursuant to adjournment, at 8 o'clock 
 p. m. 
 
 Present: Representative Dorsey W. Shackleford (acting chair- 
 man), Eepresentative Martin B. Madden, and Representative Rich- 
 ard W. Austin. 
 
 STATEMENT OF J. M. LOWE. 
 
 The Chairman. Kindly state your name and residence. 
 
 Mr. Lowe. J. M. Lowe, Kansas City, Mo. 
 
 The Chairman. What connection have you with the road ques- 
 tion? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. I am president of the National Old Trails Road Asso- 
 ciation, which was organized at Kansas City last April, having for 
 its purpose the rebuilding, building, and maintenance of a na- 
 tional road from Washington City over the old Braddock Road 
 to a connection with the old Cumberland or national highway, 
 which was built and maintained by the Government for more than 
 a quarter of a century, the Boone's Lick Road, surveyed and estab- 
 lished by Daniel Boone and his sons, and by way of the Santa Fe 
 Trail west from Kansas City to Santa Fe, N. Mex., thence over the 
 El Camino Real of New Mexico, over which Doniphan and Kearney 
 marched in the conquest of Chihuahua, New Mexico, and California. 
 
 Mr. Madden. How many miles would that be? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. Three thousand one hundred and eighty miles. 
 
 The Chairman. What is your plan ? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. Our theory is, and that for which we stand most stren- 
 uously, that the Government should build and maintain this road, 
 -or any other road that is national in character, out of the national 
 revenues, superintend it and control it as absolutely as they do the 
 navigable waters. 
 
 The Chairman. Under what power would you construct that 
 road? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. Under the power to regulate commerce between the 
 States. The Supreme Court has passed on that, and the last de- 
 cision was by Mr. Justice Brewer, in which he took the position, 
 which was agreed to by the balance of the court, that Congress has, 
 in the power to regulate commerce, the power to build roads ; and also 
 in the express authority in the Constitution which authorizes them 
 to Ijuild or " establish " — in the language of the Constitution — ^post 
 offices and post roads. 
 
 The Chairman. I believe there is a bill pending in Congress that 
 provides for this road ? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. Yes, sir; there are two of them. One was introduced 
 by Mr. Borland, of Missouri, and one by Mr. Francis, of Ohio, prac- 
 tically the same bill. 
 
 The Chairman. Have estimates been made as to what would be 
 ihe probable cost of that road ? 
 
GOOD ROADS. 161 
 
 Mr. Lowe. None by any more expert than myself, and I am not an 
 expert road builder in any sense. I have established or fixed an esti- 
 mate on it, guided by the cost of macadam roads in Jaskson County, 
 Mo. The average cost of roads in that county is about $6,000 per 
 mile. 
 
 Mr. Madden. How wide? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. Sixteen feet. 
 
 Mr. Madden. How deep is the macadam road? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. I think the average is about 11 inches, from 8 to 12. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Your estimate of the cost of this road was not based 
 on any survey? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. No, sir ; but I think if you are the friends of the good- 
 roads movement you will get definite estimates yourself provided you 
 want them. 
 
 Mr. Austin. That would be $18,600,000 for one road? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. Yes, sir. 
 
 The Chairman. What provision had you planned for the main- 
 tenance of such road after its cost of construction had been entailed ? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. By the Government. I think it ought to have abso- 
 lute control and supervision of the road. I think it would be a 
 great mistake to divide responsibility and authority in the main- 
 tenance of the road. 
 
 The Chairman. By what plan would you maintain that road ? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. By the same plan practically that we use in the im- 
 provement and dredging of the rivers and harbors and other public 
 works. 
 
 The Chairman. I mean, would you keep overseers constantly 
 over it? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. I think so. I think it is the only way any road can 
 be maintained. 
 
 The Chairman. How much force would it take to keep that road 
 maintained ? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. I do not know. A road that would not be used any 
 more than that, perhaps one man could look after anywhere from 
 -5 to 10 miles. 
 
 Mr. Austin. What is the cost of maintenance in Missouri of your 
 macadamized road? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. I do not know exactly what. It varies. It would also 
 \'ary much on this road. In the vicinity of Washington, or any large 
 center, where there would be a great deal of traffic, and especially a 
 great deal of automobile traffic over it, it would take more men to 
 look after it than it would out in New Mexico. 
 
 Mr. Austin. How many other roads would you build of that im- 
 portance and character? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. As many as the Government would need. 
 
 The Chairman. What would be the Government's need for this ? 
 
 Mr. LowB. It would accommodate, I think, perhaps, more people 
 than any other line that has been talked about, though some of these 
 others are almost equally as important, and perhaps fully so. I 
 have not made a personal investigation, but it has been stated that 
 25,000,000 people live within a day's automobile drive of this central 
 i-oute. It runs through a thickly settled, populous part of the 
 
 79558— PT 1—13 11 
 
162 GOOD BOADS. 
 
 country. It runs through the capitals of Ohio, Indiana, within less 
 than 70 miles of the capital of Illinois, within less than 20 miles of 
 Jefferson City, within less than 15 miles of the capital of Kansas^ 
 through the capital of New Mexico, the capital of Arizona, and 
 through southern California. 
 
 Mr. Austin. That would be about 26,000,000 people, about one- 
 fourth of the population of the United States. 
 
 Mr. Lowe. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Have you any plan for other roads that are con- 
 templated along this same line ? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. JNo, sir; I have not any plans. I know that what is 
 called the northern route — from New York, by way of Buffalo, 
 Cleveland, Toledo, Chicago, Des Moines, Omaha, Denver, Salt Lake, 
 and San Francisco — is strongly advocated by John Brisbane Walker 
 and others, and it would be a magnificent and important national 
 road. The only possible criticism that I would indulge would be 
 that a good proportion of the winter the road would be out of com- 
 mission on account of the weather it has to encounter, while the 
 center, or the national road, would be good at least 10 months out of 
 the year, if not the entire year. 
 
 Mr. Madden. HaA-e you anj' road in contemplation running from 
 north to south? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. I have not. It has been talked about and Mr. War- 
 burton has introduced a bill in Congress establishing a system reach- 
 ing every captital in all of the States. That is, a system running 
 east and west and also north and south. 
 
 Mr. Austin. Your road taps 11 States, as I understand. 
 
 Mr. Lowe. Yes, sir; I think it would. 
 
 Mr. Austin. Do you think you could get that through Congress? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. I do not know. I have not had a great deal of experi- 
 ence with Congress, but I believe it ought to go through. I believe 
 it is feasible, practicable, and an economical expenditure of the 
 public funds, and more economical than any other system that I 
 have had my attention called to. 
 
 Mr. Austin. Then, you would not touch a single New England 
 State or the Southern States? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. No. I think the Southern and the New England 
 States ought to have a national road just as well. I will say, by way 
 of emphasis, that as president of the National Old Trails Associa- 
 tion, we stand first for that, because that was the purpose and object 
 of our creation, yet, if there is another road equally national in 
 character, of equal importance commercially, of equal historic inter- 
 est, and of every other kind of interest that might enter into the 
 question, that ought to have precedence, then we will gladly give 
 way and throw our entire organization behind that kind of a move- 
 ment. 
 
 Mr. Austin. Now, you are following a trail. Are you following 
 the country where the population is scattered? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. I thought I stated, but if I did not, I intended to say, 
 that I believe this road accommodates a greater number of people 
 than any other road that has been suggested. I am nob sure ihat 
 that is true, but I am inclined to think it is. By way of lending 
 emphasis to my statement that we would be behind any other move- 
 
GOOD ROADS. 163 
 
 nient, if you do not kn&w it, I want to say for what it is worth, 
 that we are organized in every village, hamlet, and town along the 
 line of this road from Wheeling, W. Va., and from the western line 
 of Arizona. We are not quite through Arizona, but our purpose is, 
 within the next 30 days, to be organized clear across the continent. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Your idea is that such a system of roads as you 
 have organized would be more advantageous to the people of the 
 United States than the construction of roads by the States in such 
 localities as they might thus designate, with the Federal Government 
 cooperating in the payment of the cost. 
 
 Mr. Lowe. I do not think there is any conflict at all anywhere 
 between State action in building roads and the National Govern- 
 ment. I think the States will all have their hands fully occupied 
 by building roads that are of a local character and local signifi- 
 cance and connecting with any system of national highways that 
 might be adopted. 
 
 Mr. Madden. What do you say to the proposition that the States 
 want cooperation with the Federal Government in the construction 
 of such roads as they may desire to construct? Would that be pos- 
 sible, feasible, and desirable, in the face of a policy such as you 
 outline ? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. It might, be, and I started out in thinking on this 
 question of roads with that idea uppermost. I believed that there 
 ought to be close cooperation between the States and the National 
 Government, and that the National Government, perhaps, would 
 hardly be justified in aiding any State unless the State showed a 
 willingness to do something itself, but I have abandoned that idea 
 entirely. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Of course there woidd not be any thought of aid- 
 ing the States unless the State expended a sum at least equal to 
 what the Government might expend. 
 
 Mr. Lowe. Well, the more I have studied that the more I am in- 
 clined to cut out that word " aid." 
 
 Mr. Madden. Well, put it " cooperation." 
 
 Mr. Lowe. Yes. And I even do not like that very well. I say 
 that, and yet I would be the most reluctant to do anything that 
 would retard the sentiment of road building. In other words, I 
 believe the people ought to learn to help themselves, and the best 
 way in the world is to let them rely on their own individual eiforts 
 in building roads. I believe that any farmer, near whose land a 
 road passes ought to be taxed in the support of the road. I believe a 
 national system of roads ought to be favored by the Government for 
 its own uses and its own purposes, and let the States build theirs. 
 
 Mr. Austin. How much would you ' recommend that we ask Con- 
 gress to appropriate in a year? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. From twenty to twenty-five million dollars a year 
 will build, in my judgment, a good transcontinental line of road 
 each year. 
 
 Mr. Austin. How many roads would you have us appropriate 
 for each year? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. At least one each year, and as long as you needed addi- 
 tional highways. I believe you will get it cheaper and quicker that 
 way than in any other. 
 
164 GOOD KOADS. 
 
 Mr. Austin. Would that be of more benefit to the country than 
 for the National Government to give the $25,000,000 to the States, 
 on condition that the States raise a like amount, and the counties 
 raise a like amount, making $75,000,000 a year expended on roads 
 to be designated by the State commissions ? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. The difficulty, in my opinion, with that kind of "co- 
 operation " will be that — I can best get at that by saying that a 
 road is valuable only as it goes to some place. A road across a 
 township or road district is of some value, but a road is of infinitely 
 greater value if it goes across a county, and of still greater value if it 
 goes across a State, and of incalculable value if it goes across a conti- 
 nent, and any system of roads ought to go somewhere — they ought to 
 have some objective point. Any road is just as strong and valuable 
 as its weakest link. If all the States would " cooperate," and all the 
 counties through which a road ran would " cooperate," and do it 
 loyally and honestly, it might work; but when you divide responsi- 
 bility and authority, and one would wait on the other, I question 
 whether you would ever get a system of good roads. 
 
 Mr. Austin. In time, if $75,000,000 were expended every year, say, 
 for 10 or 20 years, would we not have some good roads in this 
 country ? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. Undoubtedly. I believe, however, you will find when 
 you start into that kind of partnership — I do not know but what 
 my State would be among the first — the States would sit back and 
 say, " There is no reason why the Government could not build this 
 road themselves entirely." I started out with the idea that they 
 ought to be made to " cooperate," and the more I have thought of 
 that the more I have thought it would lessen the prospect of going 
 ahead — that it would retard road building rather than encourage. 
 
 Mr. Austin. Take your own State of Missouri; and suppose we 
 say to Missouri that Congress will give $1,000,000 a year for 10 
 years, provided the State would put up $1,000,000 and the counties 
 would put up $1,000,000 for 10 years. There would be $30,000,000 
 expended on the roads in the State of Missouri. Would not that 
 be more valuable to the people of Missouri than a national highway? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. Unquestionably. I have no doubt that the State legis- 
 lature would agree to that, but we would have to thrash it out first 
 with the State legislature, and then we would have to go before the 
 counties in some way or other to get them to take action. You 
 would get one county here and another there, and then you would 
 probably skip two or three counties, and you would be a long time 
 in getting the people educated up to the point of supplying their 
 part. 
 
 Mr. Austin. If these two propositions were submitted to the 
 people of Missouri — your highway from Washington to the Pacific 
 Ocean and the other proposition — which one would the people of 
 Missouri adopt? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. I would state unhesitatingly — and I may not be as well 
 advised on that as my friend Judge Shackleford here — that it would 
 adopt my proposition without any question. 
 
 Mr. Austin. What do you think of the Shackleford bill? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. I was coming to that.. That is the reason I said he, 
 perhaps, understood the situation better than I. I believe they 
 
GOOD BOADS. 165 
 
 would adopt the system that I have outlined in preference to 
 another, for the reason that it is inconceivable to me that any State 
 would hesitate for one moment if the National Government should 
 offer to build just one road and only one road through the State; yet 
 if it would do it and agree to maintain it, I think every man in the 
 State would vote in favor of that proposition. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Your proposition is, then, that they would agree 
 to vote for something that did not cost them anything, rather than 
 vote for something that did cost them something ? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. That is it exactly. They are not reluctant to accept 
 anything free, and if it were built we v/ill at least have one road, and 
 when we have that we are relieved of that much taxation. Would 
 any sane mind oppose that? 
 
 The Chairman. Here is a thought that has come to my mind 
 quite frequently. Suppose the Federal Government were to coop- 
 erate with the State of Missouri and give her a million dollars for 
 road construction in that State. Is there danger that the State 
 would subsequently get a little tight for resources and not be able to 
 do anything toward maintaining it? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. Absolutely, and would let Uncle Sam do the balance. 
 
 The Chairman. Then the Government, in that case, would be in 
 the attitude of having to lose what it had put in in construction, or 
 bear the whole burden of maintenance? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. Yes, sir. I think the whole question of maintenance 
 was pretty well illustrated in the history of the old Cumberland 
 Eoad. Clay pronounced that as the greatest roadway in the world 
 after it was finished, and he had seen the best roads. There may 
 have been some burst of oratory in his statement, but that was his 
 declaration. And the States permitted it to decay. 
 
 Mr. Austin. Have not our condition and the country changed 
 since Clay's time? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. Very materially, but there was a magnificent highway 
 built by the Government and maintained by it for more than a 
 quarter of a century, and they turned it back to the States and it 
 immediately went into decay and ruin. 
 
 Mr. Madden. But there is an awakening among the people of the 
 States now? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. There is ; but I do not know how long it will last. It 
 looks to me like it has come to stay. 
 
 The Chairman. There was some awakening in Clay's time. 
 
 Mr. Lowe. There was considerable.- This old road became a na- 
 tional issue in a national campaign, and as our friend from Nebraska 
 says it was the " paramount " issue, and it may be an issue again. 
 
 Mr. Austin. Tell us something about the Shackleford bill, which 
 we all favored during the last session of Congress, but to which the 
 Senate would not agree. 
 
 Mr. Lowe. I do not know that I can throw very much light on 
 that. You gentlemen understand that as well or better than I. 
 
 Mr. Austin. You know it provides for an annual rental of post 
 roads of $15 for a dirt road, $20 for a gravel road, and $25 for a 
 macadam road. 
 
 Mr. Lowe. Yes. There is one thing of infinite ^alue in that propo- 
 sition which makes me reluctant to criticize any portion of it, and 
 
166 GOOD KOADS. 
 
 that thing which I characterize as of infinite value is that it is a 
 recognition of the justice and fairness of the Government applying 
 some portion of its revenues to the building of roads. That may be 
 the solution, and while I would not set my judgment for one moment 
 against his, nor anybody else's, yet that is a new question and the 
 people are learning very fast. We all have a great deal to learn yet. 
 I am satisfied, however, we are both striving for the same thing. 
 
 Mr. Austin. I do not believe you can have both of these proposi- 
 tions enacted by Congress. 
 
 Mr. Lowe. No ; nor do I. 
 
 Mr. Austin. Then it comes down to the one which you prefer. 
 
 Mr. LovPE. I prefer the one which I first indicated. 
 
 Mr. Austin. What are your objections to the Shackleford bill? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. Under the Shackleford bill I am afraid the appropria- 
 tion will be used, as public funds so often are, by scattering them 
 out among the congressional districts and among the States and 
 counties and be frittered away and no roads, practically, will be 
 built. 
 
 Mr. Madden. What do you say to this proposition: Under the 
 Shackleford project the fundamental idea is, if I understand it, to 
 lay down a principle to which the States will be required to conform 
 before they can get the cooperation of the Federal Government. 
 Would not such a plan as that prevent the possibility of the very 
 danger which you have just suggested? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. Well, it might have that effect, but I doubt it. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Suppose that the Government of the United States, 
 through Congress, should offer to contribute to the building and the 
 maintenance of roads throughout the Union, setting aside $25,000,000 
 a year, to be apportioned between the States, according to the popii- 
 lation of the States, providing that no State could get the amount 
 apportioned to it until it had expended a least an equivalent amount, 
 but that after it had expended an equivalent amount, or double the 
 amount, and the proper Government authority certified that it had 
 expended that amount on the building of roads within the State, it 
 would then entitle it to the amount set aside for the State. If it 
 did not expend the amount it would not be entitled to the contri- 
 bution. Would there be any danger of a scandal, which you did 
 not say but which I think you suggested, ensuing by the scramble 
 for roads in congressional districts, and the possibility of men run- 
 ning their campaigns on the amount of money they could get from 
 the Federal Treasury ? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. I chink I understand what you mean by the question, 
 and it is possible that it might have some such effect as that, but this 
 difficulty suggested itself while you were asking the question : Would 
 you apply that principle of the bill to new roads exclusively, or 
 would you apply it to the roads already built ? 
 
 Mr. Shacklefoed. The bill applies to both. 
 
 Mr. Lowe. What I am getting at is this: Along the line of this 
 Old Trails road, the people in Missouri, and some of them in Mr. 
 Shackleford's district, have voluntarily bonded themselves, and one 
 road district in his congressional district, without a single solitary 
 village or town m the district, passed a unanimous vote in favor of 
 using bonds to build this road and not some other road. Ohio has 
 
GOOD ROADS. 167 
 
 rebuilt the road clear across the State, and Indiana has done the 
 same thing. I think it would be unfair to those States, or to any 
 road district having already built the road, to not be permitted to 
 share in the pro's isions of a bill like this. 
 
 Mr. Shacklefoed. The bill to which Mr. Madden referred did 
 allow that. 
 
 Mr. Maddeh. I would like to have you confine your answer to the 
 question where it is asked, so that we can know what the answer is, 
 and not have it cover three or four pages later on and then forget it. 
 
 Mr. Lowe. I was trying to get to that. I question seriously 
 whether that is the best solution of the road problem, because there 
 are so many objections that can be raised to it. In the first place, 
 the amount is insignificant. 
 
 Mr. Madden. How do you know what the amount would be? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. The amount that you give to each county. 
 
 Mr. MAboBN. I am talking about apportioning this to the States. 
 
 Mr. Lowe. I know, but so much a mile. 
 
 Mr. Madden. No. We will leave the question of mileage out. 
 The question I put to you was that we set aside, say, $25,000,000 a 
 year and apportion that amount among the States according to the 
 population, and each State would be entitled to its proportion of the 
 $25,000,000 when it expended an amount equivalent to that which 
 was apportioned to the State, or double, as the case may be. The 
 thing I want you to tell us is whether you think, under such a plan, 
 any scandal could ensue? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. Oh, no. I did not intend to imply that there would 
 be any scandal that would grow out of any of these suggestions. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Then I misunderstood you. I do not exactly mean 
 to say that there would be a financial scandal, but possibly a political 
 scandal, if a man were running for Congress on the theory that he 
 could get a certain sum of money out of the General Treasury. I 
 would consider that a scandal, in a way. But if the proposition 
 worked automatically, and no man, no matter who he was, or how 
 potential he was, could exercise any influence to get an amount ex- 
 cept what was apportioned, and that would come regardless of what 
 his attitude might be, then the question is whether that is the theory 
 upon which we would go, or whether we would go upon some theory 
 that would give somebody power to say that he could get money out 
 of the Federal Treasury for some purpose that would advance his 
 political destiny. 
 
 Mr. Lowe. There is another thought that occurs to me in that 
 connection, and that is that the people are beginning to understand 
 that the revenues are derived by taxation. However, if you go to 
 the people of any State, particularly to those States which have not 
 benefited by the appropriations heretofore made by Congress, and 
 say it is true we have used your revenues for the building of har- 
 bors, the dredging of harbors, and 10,000 other purposes to which 
 the revenues have been applied, I think we would meet difficulties 
 alone that line— to say to them you must agree in advance to retax 
 yourseh'es before you can have the benefit of taxes you have already 
 
 paid. . 
 
 Mr. Madden. The rivers and harbors are not there in like propor- 
 tion with the way in which you can build roads? 
 
168 CJOOD EOADS. 
 
 Mr. Lowe. They are there and particular counties and localities 
 are benefited by the fact that they are there. 
 
 Mr. Madden. I say they are not so distributed that you could ap- 
 portion the money to them ? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. No; but the rivers are distributed largely across the 
 continent. To go back to these people and say, " It is true we have 
 used your revenues for these purposes, and you can not have any 
 benefit from the appropriation unless you voluntarily agree to tax 
 yourseh°s again for this purpose," in that event I think we will 
 meet with some difficulties. 
 
 The Chairman. Is there not a difference in the two situations? 
 A harbor is the terminal for the railroad, and a railroad station is the 
 terminal for the highway, so that, after all, the harbor we dig in 
 Chicago is the ultimate terminal of the dirt road Ave dig in Missouri 
 or Tennessee? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. Of course you finally get there, and the roads own all 
 the harbors. 
 
 The Chairman. We go from the dirt road until we get to the rail- 
 road and load our freight there on the cars and the cars pull away 
 to the harbor at Mobile or Chicago. The harbor itself is a facility, 
 as is the railroad, for receiving the goods that are transported over 
 the highways. 
 
 Mr. Lowe. Yes. It is absolutely irue, as Lincoln said in one of the 
 best road speeches I ever read, made in 1848, while he was in 
 Congress, that there is no pviblic improvement of such local character 
 and advantage as to have no general benefit. That is true of harbors 
 and it is true of everything. Of course it gets rather remote when 
 you go out in the back districts. The men living in immediate touch 
 with these improvements receive the direct benefits. There is no such 
 thing as absolute equality. Jefferson wrote very beautifully on that 
 subject, but absolute equality can not very well be found in taxation 
 or in anything else. The thing equality is not to be avoided, of 
 course, but rather to strive for. 
 
 Mr. Austin. How would you decide which one of those roads 
 should be built first? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. Just as I would decide it if I was a member of a legis- 
 lature, and a question was presented in the legislature, or if I was a 
 member of the county board and the matter was presented in the 
 board. 
 
 Mr. Austin. You would have a great highway, Representative 
 Warburton would have another, and the automobile people would 
 have another. How would we decide which one to work on? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. Congress can decide that question as well as any other 
 authority. 
 
 Mr. Austin. You would have us vote on it in the House? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. Yes ; either by direct action or by appointing a bureau 
 to pass upon these improvements. If we had waited in our county 
 until some general plan could be agreed upon and everybody accom- 
 modated at once with a road, we never would have had a road, but 
 we had to begin somewhere, and of course the men who did not get 
 it were very indignant, because they thought they were the ones who 
 ought to have it. We felt that way in Missouri, and so would every 
 otlier congressional district feel like they ought to have preference 
 
GOOD ROADS. 169 
 
 in the matter. However, Congress can decide that question, and I be- 
 lieve when it is ultimately worked out pretty nearly every Congress- 
 man would get a road through his district, and I think he would get 
 it quickly. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Would it not be taking the power away from the 
 States, which they ought to have now, of selecting the location for 
 their roads? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. I do not think so. The State has the undoubted power 
 to select all the roads of a local character for State interests, and 
 they would not be interfered with in that, and the Government, if 
 necessarj', could exercise the right of eminent domain. Originally 
 several statesmen doubted whether they could go into the States and 
 exercise eminent domain, and they got Maryland, Pennsylvania, and 
 Virginia to pass an act in the legislatures authorizing it to be done 
 before the Cumberland road was built. Mr. Calhoun insisted that 
 no such authority was necessary, that the Government was supreme 
 in the matter, and he made a very curious argument, politically, that 
 it would cement the States and thus preserve the Union; and a late 
 writer has insisted that perhaps it has done more to accomplish that 
 very purpose than any other single factor. It is not necessary to go 
 into all that history, but that was the result of all that legislation. 
 The National Government undoubtedly has a right to build a na- 
 tional highway through a State, whether the State consents or not; 
 but no State would oppose it. 
 
 Mr. Austin. Under your plan of this national highway, we would 
 not get any help from the States? 
 
 Mr. LowB. Oh, no; and you do not need it. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Your organization is for the purpose of promoting 
 to a successful conclusion the construction of a highway from Wash- 
 ington to the Pacific Ocean? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. To the Pacific Ocean; yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Of course you would prefer that to anything else, if 
 for no other reason than the fact that you are organized for that 
 purpose ? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. Why, yes. We stand for that, of course. That is the 
 very life and purpose of our organization ; but while that is true, yet 
 we stand ready to do and are doing, as best we can, anything to help 
 the road movement anywhere; and particularly do we stand for a 
 general system of national highways. As I said a while ago, if there 
 is any other road that Congress may deem more important to be 
 built first, we will get behind that, and we will take our place in the 
 class, even if it is at the foot of the class, and then spell up. 
 
 Mr. Madden. All the time you have in mind that the Government 
 is not cooperating with the States? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. Austin. Have you polled the Missouri delegation on your 
 proposition ? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. No, sir. I can not imagine that there is a solitary 
 Member who would vote against it. If he would, he would not be 
 likely to come back to Congress. 
 
 Mr. Austin. Does it touch St. Louis? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. Oh, yes. It runs right through St. Louis. Mr. Bor- 
 land has a message to-night from the Board of Trade of St. Louis. 
 
170 GOOD ROADS. 
 
 Mr. Austin. And do you think you would be successful in getting 
 the majority of the Members of Congress of the States through 
 which your highway passes? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. Yes ; I think so. I can not imagine why we would not 
 get it from the majority of the Members of any State. 
 
 Mr. Austin. Do you think the Alabama delegation would support 
 that proposition with reference to 
 
 Mr. Lowe. No; I think they prefer to have it first, and if they 
 can produce the argument first why they should have it I am for it 
 first. 
 
 Mr. Austin. Would that road benefit Florida? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. Undoubtedly. There is no State in the country that 
 would not be benefitted. 
 
 Mr. Austin. How would the State of Maine be benefitted by it ? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. Because it is one of the States in the Union, and any- 
 thing that would add to the prosperity of the country is a help to 
 every State. There is not a harbor that has been built in Maine 
 that has not been contributed to be Georgia and Florida and South 
 Carolina. 
 
 Mr. Austin. If you were a Member of Congress from the State 
 of Florida or Maine, would you vote for this national-highway prop- 
 osition in preference to a proposition to give the State of Florida 
 or the State of Maine a million dollars a year for ten years ? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. I would, viewing the question as I do now — the general 
 principle of it. I would. 
 
 Mr. Austin. You think a Member of Congress can do that and 
 ever be returned ? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. I do indeed. I do, because I think the people are look- 
 ing at this in a much broader view. 
 
 Mr. Austin. Do you think the farmer in Florida who wants to 
 get his produce to the nearest railroad would look at it from that 
 view? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. I do. He might hesitate until he could see the road 
 coming in his direction. 
 
 The Chairman. Would you say the Government is doing it? 
 Isn't it the people doing it after all? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. Absolutely. We get in the habit of looking at the 
 Government as some foreign institution, and we think it is unap- 
 proachable. 
 
 Mr. Austin. I do not believe in my district that a Democrat or a 
 Eepublican would vote for your proposition as against the other one. 
 
 Mr. Lowe. Well, that may be so. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Do you think that if your proposition should be 
 adopted by Congress or any State or countv in the Union, you 
 would ever build a road to lead up to it without calling for the 
 Federal Government to pay the bill? 
 
 Mr.' Lowe. T think so. I think they recognize the fact that the 
 road did not cost them anything. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Then they would see the necessity of building the 
 next road in that way? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. Of course that would have to be met. and (hey would 
 hive to be convinced they were being benefited bv it. 
 
GOOD EOADS. 171 
 
 The Chairman. In the case of a farmer hauling produce from his 
 farm, would he cross a railroad to get to this highway, or would he 
 stop at the railroad before he reached the national highway? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. It would depend on which paid him best. 
 
 The Chairman. Which would pay him the best. 
 
 Mr. Lowe. It would depend on where his town was. If he could 
 ^o over the road to the market place cheaper than he could by rail, 
 that would be one thing. 
 
 Mr. ArrsnN. The mail would not be carried on that highway? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. Yes; undoubtedly. 
 
 Mr. Austin. As against railroad transportation? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. Oh, no. 
 
 Mr. Austin. You could not ship any goods by that route from 
 Washington to California? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. You could locally, but I look for the day, and I do not 
 think it is far off, when light freight will be hauled "for 40. 50, and 
 100 miles on a truck. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Do you think if we had the national hi,2;hways that 
 you suggest, that any considerable amount of the products of the 
 farm or the factory would be hauled from town to town on them, 
 like they are now hauled in Europe? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. I think the vast majority would be. 
 
 Mr. Madden. And that would take away, in large measure, from 
 the transportation by rail? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. No ; it would go to the railroads. They would not be 
 in competition with the railroads at all, except in a very local way. 
 
 The Chairman. Leaving out the pleasure riding in automobiles 
 and leaving out tourists, would not electric lines go very much far- 
 ther toward giving transportation than long-distance roads? 
 
 Mr. Lowe. I believe that one cross- State highway, however it 
 might be built, whether by the Government or by local taxation, 
 from Kansas City to St. Louis would be worth in material benefit 
 to the country between the two cities twice as much as any railroad 
 that can possibly be built. I think it would be invaluable to the 
 farmer and to the people living along the line of the road. I have one 
 other matter I want to explain, and I want to say this with all the 
 emphasis that it is necessary it should be said, and that is this: 
 That our organization is not affiiated with nor interested in any 
 organization of manufacturers of automobiles, or any other line of 
 industry. We have not at any time been influenced by any posi- 
 tion they may have taken, or anything of that character. We are 
 as independent of any influence of that character as it is possible to 
 be. Having said that, if you will permit me, I will ask you to heai- 
 from Mr. Kenyon, who is president of the Indiana Federation of 
 Good Roads, representing the general interests of the State. 
 
 The Chairman. We thank you for your views. 
 
 STATEMENT OF C. A. KENYON. 
 
 The Chairman. Please give your name and residence, and s(:i(e 
 what connection you have with the road movement. 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. My name is C. A. Kenyon. I live at Indianapolis, 
 and I am president of the Indiana Good Roads Association. I am not 
 
172 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 connected with any automobile association, nor do I hold any brief 
 from those people or any material or road builders' association. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Will you tell us under what system Indiana builds 
 her roads and pays for them ? That is a very interesting subject. 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. Indiana probably represents the extreme of locali- 
 zation in the building of roads. No other State in the Union has 
 gone to the extreme in taxing the cost of road building to the imme- 
 diate localit}' where the road is that Indiana has. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Tell us how they originated the system of roads that 
 is about to be made; what they do in the matter of service; what 
 they do in the matter of making specifications ; what they do in the 
 matter of issuing securities with which to pay for the roads; and 
 how they let the contracts; what the width of the road is; what 
 they are made of ; and what they cost ? 
 
 Mr. Ken YON. That is a very comprehensive question. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Well, just answer each one of them separately. 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. If you will allow me to state it in my own way I can 
 probably cover it in a way that will be intelligent without trying to 
 follow the particular way in which you have put the questions. In 
 Indiana we have no State highway commission or State officer for the 
 supervision or control of roads of any kind. The counties do not 
 contribute to the building of new roads, except, you might say, the 
 counties may have contributed some by the purchase of old toll turn- 
 pikes. "We had a great system of toll roads in Indiana that were 
 privately owned, and under the provision of the law in Indiana it 
 allowed the counties to purchase those roads, and thej? became what 
 are called county -roads. To that extent they have contributed, but 
 the counties have no power to bond themselves, nor have they any 
 power to raise a tax for the construction of a new road of any kind. 
 They have, however, the right under the law to make a levy for 
 the purpose of keeping the county roads in repair. 
 
 Mr. Austin. Haven't they the right to issue bonds for a gravel 
 road? 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. No, sir; I will explain in a moment how that hap- 
 pened. Now, so much for the counties. We come next to the town- 
 ships. We had what was common with other States, the old law in 
 regard to making a levy not to exceed 40 cents on $100, a portion of 
 which might be paid in cash, not to exceed 10 cents, and the balance 
 to be worked out. Under the old plan that came down from me- 
 dieval times. 
 
 i\Ir. Madden. A poll tax. 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. It was not only a poll but a property tax also. They 
 can call out the men for from two to four days, but if your property 
 is assessed for road maintenance you can also work that out, so that 
 it is a kind of a double arrangement. Under this plan we have a 
 township trustee, and from two to six supervisors, according to the 
 number of miles of road in the township. The tax is worked out by 
 the railroads and the public-service corporations as well as the 
 farmers. It is usually done for the railroads by contract, and there 
 are very great abuses. The contractor takes it and works it out for 
 the railroad at a discount. The supervisor is authorized to issue a 
 tax receipt to the man who works it out, and by filing that tax 
 receipt with the treasurer of the coimty the I'ailroad tax is paid, or 
 
GOOD KOADS. 173 
 
 that farmer's tax is paid, and the supervisor had the authority to 
 give a tax receipt without any other formality than taking out his 
 book, writing it, and giving it to him. So you can see the abuses 
 that might grow up under such a system. Many worked it out 
 honestly, and some even do more than they should do. They some- 
 times do this to the detriment of other communities. 
 
 They will say in one township, " Let us take this section of road, 
 improve it, and get rid of it by turning it over to the county;" so 
 that the farmers come out and work on that road. They may leave 
 one road here and another there in the same township, without any 
 ^vork being put on it for that year. They will haul gravel and do 
 work on that one road, and do the best they can on it and then turn 
 it over to the county commissioners, and say " that that is a county 
 road and hereafter you must take care of it ; we are free from it." 
 Many so-called improved roads of Indiana were built in that way. 
 They are built without engineering, many times without proper 
 drainage and proper foundation, but they had metal on them to 
 the extent of gravel. So much for that. Then we have what is 
 called a method of building roads " by assessment " in a township. 
 The landowners along the line of the road petition the county com- 
 missioners to build a road ; and I may say, to shorten my statement, 
 that this same general method applied also to a subsequent law 
 which was called road building " by taxation," or what many under- 
 stand as the "three-mile or the five-mile gravel road law" under 
 which the cost of the road is levied as a tax against all the jDroperty 
 in the township exclusive of cities of 30,000 and over. Then we can 
 issue serial bonds running from 1 to 20 years, called " gravel-road 
 bonds," to liquidate that indebtedness, and it is spread on the 
 tax duplicate in that way. Whether it was by " taxation " or by " as- 
 sessment," the plan that I started out to describe is usually adopted. 
 Property owners along the line of the road petition for the road, and 
 that petition is filed, giving a general statement that they wanted 
 to have the road improved to possibly a certain width, or with pos- 
 sibly a certain kind of material, and some other details of that kind. 
 The commissioners would appoint viewers. Possibly an engineer 
 would be one — three viewers who would examine the road and 
 suggest plans and specifications. 
 
 The county surveyor could be called upon, but inasmuch as his is a 
 constitutional office the only qualifications that a man had to have 
 to be elected as county surveyor were that he should be a resident 
 and a voter in the township, but he did not have to be an engineer. I 
 have heard of clerks of drug stores and hardware houses being elected 
 as county surveyors. To that extent they had few scientific men to 
 instruct them as to roadbuilding. Under another provision that was 
 subsequently passed, they could in some counties, hire an outside 
 •engineer to assist them. These viewers would report, and if there 
 were no remonstrances against it, the road would be built upon the 
 specifications recommended. They would advertise for bids in the 
 ordinary way, and then the road would be built after a contract had 
 been let. Of course some striking abuses came up under that plan, 
 due to the lack of scientific knowledge and the lack of experienced 
 men in handling the situation. It is generally understood in a com- 
 munity that the man who circulates the petition would be the local 
 
174 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 inspector, if he wants it, although he knows nothing about the con- 
 struction of roads. I have heard of one instance, within the year,, 
 where they set some stakes for telephone poles that ran along the 
 road, and the inspector ordered the contractor to lay the road accord- 
 ing to those stakes, which, of course, were haphazard and rather 
 line than grade stakes. The next thing that happened, the office 
 of public roads here in Washington sent a man out, on the request 
 of some of the citizens who did not think it was being built cor- 
 rectly or according to specifications, to examine, and the result was 
 that the work was stopped, and it is laying unfinished up in Elk- 
 hart County now. There are other cases where such happenings 
 go through without objection, regardless of whether the road is 
 built properly or not. I often have letters from men asking if I 
 would permit such a change in the specifications to be made if I 
 were the engineer in their locality, and I have various questions of 
 that character. In spite of that, owing to the fact that we have a 
 large supply of gravel which is easily obtainable, a good many roads 
 have been built. 
 
 Mr. Austin. What are your gravel roads costing you now? 
 
 Mr. Ken YON. Some of "those gravel roads were built by working 
 out the road tax, and no one knows what they did cost. 
 
 Mr. Madden. What do you know of the method of building roads 
 in Porter County and Lake County, in Indiana? 
 
 Mr. Kbnyon. Porter County and Lake County are up near Chi- 
 cago. They were built mostly under the 3 mile gravel road law 
 and assessed as a charge against the township. 
 
 Mr. Madden. It is against the abutting property? 
 
 Mr. Kenton. Part of it. Where roads are built by " assessment " 
 the cost is spread 1 mile each way, and those built by " taxation " 
 were assessed over the whole township. 
 
 Mr. Madden. What they do there is this : They agree upon a sys- 
 tem of roads, whether it has 10 or 12 miles, around a certain square, 
 or whatever it may be ; then they survey it, they make specifications^ 
 ask for bids, and before they let the contract they issue bonds payable 
 in one, two, three, four, and five years. 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. Yes; and up to 10 and 20 years. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Then they sell the bonds before they let the contract^ 
 so that they have a certainty that the money is in the treasury before 
 the contract is let. Those roads are all built scientifically. 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. You have only partly stated it. If you take the 
 statement that I made a moment ago — that is, as the law provides — 
 they had no other law than the one I just indicated by which they 
 could build the roads. A number of men could get together and say, 
 "If you will sign for our road we will sign for yours," and others 
 would say the same, and in that way was built up the series of roads 
 leading into Chicago. 
 
 Mr. Madden. The fact is they have built more miles of road 
 through these counties than any other counties in the United States 
 within the last four or five years. 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. No; that is not true. They have between 600 and 
 700 miles in Lake County and a less number in Porter, which is just 
 south of it, whereas down in Park County, which is south of Terra 
 Haute — the only place of any size in that county is Rockville, of 
 
GOOD EOADS. 175 
 
 which you probably have never heard— they have over 1,000 miles of 
 so-called improved roads that were built by that same process. 
 Nearly every township is up to its limit of taxation. They say, " We 
 signed for your road, now you sign for ours." And then the people 
 on next one would do the same thing. 
 
 Mr. Madden. What effect does that have on the price of the farm 
 products to the farmer ? Has it increased the value of his product 
 to him the year round? 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. Of course, those roads are not built well enough to 
 say that he could haul in the winter months. They are built of 
 gravel and when the winter comes the wheels of an ordinarily loaded 
 vehicle would go down very deep at this season of the year. 
 
 Mr. Madden. What about the roads that are built of crushed 
 stone ? 
 
 Mr. Kenton. They are arresting drivers all over the State of 
 Indiana now, anyone who starts to haul a 2-ton load. We have a 
 law which provides that a wheel must be of a certain width to haul 
 a certain load when the roads are wet, and so forth. They were de- 
 stroying the roads so rapidly, the soft roads that were not properly 
 constructed, when I left that they felt they could not afford to keep 
 them up, they could not afford to tax themselves in order to main- 
 tain them unless the law is enforced. 
 
 Mr. Madden. What is your idea as to the comparative value of 
 building roads by townships, counties, or States? 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. I think that our extreme local way is not the best one. 
 It has not proven so in any country or any State in the world, at 
 any time that I know of. 
 
 _Mr. Madden. What would you suggest as the smallest political 
 division to take charge ? 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. I do not say that any political division should take 
 charge of all the roads. 
 
 Mr. Madden. You mean that the State should not ? 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. There are certain roads that are of such supreme 
 importance that everybody is concerned with those roads, and to- 
 that extent the Nation should help to build and maintain them, and 
 so cetrain roads should be State roads, and certain roads should be- 
 county roads, and certain roads should be township roads, with us,, 
 just as they found in France, Germany, Austria, and other coun- 
 tries abroad that it was necessary to divide the roads in national, 
 departmental, and arrondissement according to the traffic, or accord- 
 ing to the importance of the road. You may hold your meetings- 
 for five years, but I do not believe you will find any system of taxa- 
 tion that will be entirely equitable in this matter. It is a thing 
 that comes about in the course of time, as all systems of taxation 
 have to work themselves along equitable lines by stages. One man 
 says that he has a road in front of his house, and he does not want 
 to be taxed to help build a road in another locality. One of" 
 our Senators said to me, and he wrote to a gentleman in Illinois 
 the same thing. "We have roads in Indiana. Why should In- 
 diana be taxed to build a road in Illinois." That is the same propo- 
 sition, that a man in a township, who has a good stone road in 
 front of his place, says to the one who has not, " Why should I be- 
 taxed to build that road for you. You pay for your own road." 
 
176 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 Mr. Madden. What would you think of the feasibility of the 
 Government cooperating with the States in the matter ot road 
 building and maintenance? 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. My idea is something along this line. 1 Have 
 studied the road question, as I have said, in Europe and our own 
 country, and the only place that I have ever been able to fan4 where 
 they had a splendid system of highways, was where they had JNa- 
 tional and State cooperation. They have them m France, Crermany, 
 Austria, and in Italy and Spain. . 
 
 Mr. Madden. But the central government in those countries is 
 the supreme power. 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. Oh, no ; it is not. France is a Republic the same 
 as our country, and they have departments and arrondissements. 
 The central government may not levy a local tax in any one of those 
 arrondissements for the purpose of building a road, but it must 
 come fro mthe local people, the same as it does with us. They 
 secure that cooperation by making it a condition that when a State 
 contributes a certain amount o'f money for the building of a road, 
 that at the same time that local community must contribute a like 
 amount, or whatever the sum is. They have a sliding scale in 
 France, as you probably know, by which the local community can 
 contribute a certain amount. The two are spent together and it is 
 done under the supervision, or with the approval and under the 
 inspection of the National Government, and in order to get a suffi- 
 cient number of engineers and skilled men for the construction of 
 roads they have established a School of Bridges and Roads in 
 France, much the same as we have at West Point, and Annapolis, 
 our military and naval schools. A young man graduates in this 
 school, and by a couple of years practice, becomes an expert engi- 
 neer. If you go through Ohio, Indiana, and other States, you will 
 find that a man who has worked out his road tax for a number of 
 years, feels quite competent to say just how a road should be built, 
 he knows just as much about it as they do he thinks, and as a matter 
 of fact, concerning a rather practical thing, he does know that, but 
 when it comes to a problem that requires an expert engineer, he 
 falls down, and then the road may be destroyed by reason of his 
 inability or lack of knowledge to take care of it. It is the old story 
 that for the want of a nail the shoe was lost, and for the want of 
 the shoe the horse was lost, etc. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Suppose the Federal Government should enact a law 
 to cooperate with the States in the construction and maintenance of 
 roads; under whose direction would you think the money should be 
 spent ? 
 
 Mr. Kbnyon. Of course, that is a matter of judgment, but I be- 
 lieve if it were purely a national route — and there may be a few such 
 routes as that — it should be expended under the direction of the 
 Federal Government, but if the National Government was merely 
 contributing with the States it would be possible to draw a bill that 
 would provide that the States were to 'pay half and the Government 
 half; that the law should prescribe the kind of specifications under 
 which the road should be built and maintained, and the States should 
 give a guaranty that they would supply an equal amount of money 
 not only for construction, but for maintenance. Then one man as 
 
GOOD EOADS. 177 
 
 an inspectoi' or supervisor of that road, from the National Govern- 
 ment, ^Yould be sufficient. In France they have comparatively few 
 Government men. It is the local man that takes care of the road. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Then your idea is that if the' Federal Government 
 cooperated with the States in building and maintaining roads, the 
 jurisdiction over the road and the construction and the mainte- 
 nance should be left with the State ? 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. No. The construction should be done by the State, 
 but with the approval and under the inspection of a Federal officer. 
 They can put a man on a motorcycle, and that one inspector can 
 inspect a thousand miles of road or more for repairs. 
 
 Mr. Austin. If you were a member of this commission, what 
 would you favor? 
 
 Mr. Kenton. I will give you my idea about that. First, while 
 I can say that theoretically I believe in what Judge Lowe says, I 
 doubt whether you can get such a proposition as that, but why should 
 you not do this: Take this National Old Trails Road, this bill of 
 Mr. Boreland's, and I will answer by making this general statement 
 which will answer your proposition, I think. 
 
 Mr. Austin. You are going to discuss a proposition which you 
 have just stated you did not think we coidd get through. 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. No, I am not, except by a very big modification. 
 Suppose that you take this proposition : There is started in Indian- 
 apolis a proposition to give $10,000,000 for an ocean to ocean high- 
 way. I understand they have between $5,000,000 and $6,000,000 
 already subscribed for the proposition, which I think it would be 
 fair to say could be utilized for this purpose. If the Nation and 
 each State contributed a certain portion you could build that road 
 and have it ready in two years, for the great exposition. 
 
 Mr. Austin. Do you mean each State along that road, or each 
 State in the Union? 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. Each State along that road contributes, but not 
 each State in the Union. 
 
 Mr. Austin. You mean those 11 particular States? 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. Yes. Let the United States pay one-half or three- 
 fourths of it, but provide for it in that way. I believe Mr. Page, 
 the Director of Public Roads, estimated that the cost would be about 
 $30,000,000 altogether to build a high-grade road. You must re- 
 member a large portion of this road has been graded, has had metal 
 put on it, and the bridges constructed, and the drains just need 
 cleaning out in a great many places, and you have already a thousand 
 miles of road with just a surface to put on. Suppose that you put on 
 a modern surface — and you can do it within two years— you would 
 have that road completed before you could be ready to do much with 
 
 this subject in a big way. ,.,.,,. -, • x- -c ^i, 
 
 Mr. Austin. You mean you can build this road in time tor the 
 
 exposition? , ^ .,,,., ■ i.i, 
 
 Mr Kenyon. Yes, sir ; it can be done easily, but it requires the co- 
 operation of the States. But what have you then? You have no 
 more expenditure in that $20,000,000 than you would have under 
 one of these other bills that would provide a like amount in a less 
 period of time. More people would use that road m the entire 
 United States in the next two or three years than any other road. I 
 79558— PT 1—13 12 
 
178 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 think it would be safe to say a quarter of the population would use 
 that road in some place within two years after it was built. 
 
 Mr. Austin. Yo^^ want the States to aid and the judge wants 
 the Government to foot the entire bill. 
 
 Mr. Kenton. I am talking about a different proposition from 
 what the judge advocated. 
 
 Here would be a great highway running across our vast domain — 
 almost straight through the center of it, easily accessible at short 
 distances to a very large number of people, and, in fact, to a quarter 
 of the entire population of the Nation. That would be an object 
 lesson in road building, and it is an opportunity for studying how 
 roads should be constructed and maintained, the density of traffic, 
 and various systems of administration. It would show what is the 
 best plan of cooperation between the State and Union, whether it 
 is advisable in places along the line to have that cooperation extend 
 to the counties and townships, and other valuable information which 
 you gentlemen are now seeking. I do not believe in the counties 
 and townships participating. I do not believe it is practicable for 
 them to do so. You would get more information in one year from 
 the statistics that would come in from the use of this highway as 
 to what this Nation needs than you could get by academic discus- 
 sion in five times the period. Nearly every place where advance- 
 ment has been made has been due to the people being convinced 
 bj' seeing these things. The Japanese have a saying that one look 
 is better than a thousand words. That is true. So it is with road 
 building. While in New York State I was talking with Mr. Mc- 
 Clintock, who is State engineer, at Rochester, and I said to him, 
 " What effect does this highway commission for your State roads 
 have on your State road building? " He said it had completely 
 changed the ideas of the farmers upon the question of road building; 
 that where they used to want $1,500 and $3,000 roads, as soon as 
 they saw a good, first-class road that was hard the year around, their 
 petitions invariably — whether the road was to be paid for by the 
 State or county — were asking for these high-grade roads, even 
 though they were locally going to pay for them. He said that it 
 taxed the ingenuity of his department to keep them down to what 
 he thought would be an economical road for them. They did not 
 take into consideration the density of traffic, whereas the highway 
 commission did; that they counted the traffic just the same as they 
 do in France. 
 
 You must remember this one thing: That from 80 to 90 per cent 
 of the traffic of all our roads passes <iver from 10 to 20 per cent of the 
 roads, so, therefore, allowing that we have 2,250,000 miles of road 
 in this country, there are only 250,000 miles of road that have any 
 considerable amount of traffic that need to be considered by the 
 United States and the States together. The rest of the roads are 
 local, because the roads I have spoken of carry from 80 to 90 per cent 
 of the traffic. If you say the Nation is interested in one-fifth of 
 that 10 per cent of roads, what have you got? You have only about 
 40,000 miles of road in this entire Nation that have any considerable 
 amount of traffic on them that the Nation need be concerned in. 
 With the vast resources of this country what could you do? In a 
 few years you could have those roads, with very moderate appro- 
 
GOOD EOADS. 179 
 
 priations from the General Government, provided the system was 
 organized into such a system as the world has not heard oi. 
 
 Mr. Austin. Would you have much of that road in New Mexico 
 and California? 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. I am not acquainted there. I live in Indiana. 
 
 Mr. Austin. Why would not the French system suit our country? 
 Why would not that fit in our country ? 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. It would. I do not see any reason why the French 
 system would not. 
 
 Mr. Austin. Do you- know of any system better than the French 
 system for our country ? 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. No. 
 
 The Chairman. How would you constrain the States to do their 
 part after the Government had spent large sums of money? How 
 would you constrain them to keep up their pro rata share of the 
 maintenance and not saddle it all on to the General Government? 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. How are you going to bind this Nation lo keep up 
 the Panama Canal? 
 
 The Ci-iAiEMAN. If one question answers another, I will ask you 
 this: Why is it the local districts in Indiana have turned roads over 
 to the counties? They built, as you say, very poor roads, and then 
 thrust them off onto the county to be maintained. Why would not 
 the county thrust roads off onto the State, and then why would not 
 the State thrust them off onto the Nation ? 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. If the State gave the aid to the countj'^ or the 
 township, then the State should say to the county or township, "As 
 a consideration for this, you must give bonds, as it were, that you will 
 maintain with us this road," and the Nation should say to the State, 
 "As a consideration of our giving you this aid for the construction 
 and upkeep of this system of highways, you must give bond to us that 
 you will supply an equal amount of money, for that purpose." 
 
 Mr. Madden. You mean for the maintenance or for the construc- 
 tion? 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. Yes, sir; for both- 
 
 Mr. Madden. What good would the bond be? 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. What good would any national obligation be? Our 
 obligations are all good. Our State obligations are good, and our 
 county obligations are all good. 
 
 Mr" Madden. All you could get would be a legislative enactment 
 holding the State to the policy. 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. There have been a few States where they have repu- 
 diated their bonds. 
 
 Mr. Austin. Will you Irindly draft a bill along the lines of the 
 French road system, and hand it in as a part of your testimony ? 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. Well, that is asking of me a pretty big job. 
 
 Mr. Austin. You are devoted to this cause. You know more 
 about that than the balance of us, and you say that that is the best 
 thing for this country. 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. No; I did not say that at all. Far be it from me 
 to make any such suggestion now. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Your idea is that if the Federal Government should 
 offer to contribute to the States a fixed sum annually, on condition 
 that they should spend an equal sum, or twice that sum, the amount 
 
180 (JOOD ROADS. 
 
 offered by the Federal Government to be available to the State only 
 when the State had expended the amount which it would be required 
 under that offer to expend, it would be a good plan ? 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. Is not this the trouble with that proposition? 
 
 Mr. Madden. I am asking you for your opinion. 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. I will state that in asking you a question. 
 
 Mr. Madden. I would rather have an opinion from you. 
 
 Mr. Ejenyon. I will put it in that form if you would rather have 
 it that way. If we give a bond after the State has spent the money, 
 there has been no supervision of the expenditure of that money; 
 they come along with an affidavit that we. have spent $1,000,000, 
 $2,000,000, or $6,000,000, and we want $5,000,000 from the Govern- 
 ment. Very well. Our affidavit is in proper form. 
 
 Mr. Madden. No; we would not go on the presumption that we 
 would be so reckless as to let them do that. 
 
 Mr. EIenyon. After they have spent so much money your proposi- 
 tion is to give them a like amount? 
 
 Mr. Madden. My proposition is that they have spent all that they 
 would be required to spend, under the Federal law, and all that the 
 Federal Government would be required to contribute, and then the 
 Federal Government would contribute its proportion. 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. In other words, do I understand that they are to be 
 coordinate; the expenditure of the Federal fund with the State fund? 
 
 Mr. Madden. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. Then I misunderstood you. If, of course, the money 
 were to be spent at the same time, both the money of the State and 
 the Nation 
 
 Mr. Madden. No. The State would first spend what the Nation 
 offered to contribute, and what it was required to pa/ itself, and after 
 it had spent the two amounts the Nation would reimburse the State. 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. I do not believe that would be practical, because it 
 would be taxing the resources of the State to raise money, while the 
 Federal Government already had it at hand. If they were going to 
 appropriate $5,000,000, give it to them^ or if it were $1,000,000, give 
 it to them, and have it expended at the same time, and all spent under 
 national supervision; then the Nation could see that not only the 
 money of the State is properly spent, scientifically spent, and eco- 
 nomically spent, but they see that its own money is spent in the 
 same way. 
 
 Mr. Madden. That is exactly the information we want. We want 
 your idea. 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. That is my idea of it. 
 
 The Chairman. That would take the State ronds out of the State 
 control and put them under Federal control. 
 
 Mr. lijiNYON. It need not take it out of State control if the bill 
 were properly drawn, because why ? The Federal Government could 
 say, '^We accept your petition for Federal aid, for $1,000,000. We 
 have our $1,000,000 ready to spend, and we desire to spend it on 
 these roads." 
 
 The Chairman. That is, the Federal Government would indicate 
 the roads ? 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. No; the local authority would indicate the roads. 
 The State highway commission would indicate the roads and sub- 
 
GOOD EOADS. 181 
 
 mit that and the specifications, for example, and a profile of the 
 roads. A high-grade engineer could take thofnt specifications and 
 say, " Here you have a 10 per cent grade. That is not right. You 
 must correct that. Reduce those grades to 5 per cent. You have a 
 9-foot width of roadway. "We can not contribute our money for a 
 9-foot roadway; you must make that l-i or 16 feet." 
 
 Mr. Austin. Have a standard roadway? 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. Yes; a standard roadway. They can further say, 
 " YoTi allow a soft limestone to be used without proper inspection or 
 reguhition. We want a provision put in the specificsitions saying that 
 that shall be inspected and tested before it is used." Then they say 
 that in the grading of the road, while the metal portion shall be a 
 16-foct road, the foundation shall be gi^aded only 18 feet wide. The 
 expert can say that experience shows you must have tlie shoulders 
 wider or the road will soon be destroyed; you can not economically 
 maintain the road; you must correct that. Then you may go ahead 
 and let your contract, and when the bids are in then we will say 
 that such a road can be constructed at such and such a price. 
 
 The Chairman. Then, under such a plan, the Federal tribunal 
 would be dictating the entire thing, and say that they shall not have 
 it unless it suits the dictates of this Federal functionary, whoever 
 he may be. 
 
 Mr. Ken YON. No. If the State were to construct it would you 
 want to allow Federal funds to go out to help build those roads in 
 a haphazard way? Must you not have somebody who knows, in 
 order to see that economy and prudence is observed? That is all 
 there is to it. That is merely a standard specification. 
 
 The Chairman. Why should not the State have the same power to 
 see that prudence is observed? You are assuming that the Federal 
 man will be better than the State authority. You are assuming that 
 the Federal functionary ig going to be more careful, more prudent, 
 more economical, and more inclined to look after the enterprise than 
 the representative of the State. Under your plan the State proposes 
 and the Federal functionary disposes. Is not that the proposition 
 as you present it ? 
 
 Mr. Ken YON. Hardly. They may propose to build a road, but if 
 you leave it to the State, here is the trouble you will get into : One 
 State will have an efficient highway department, and the Govern- 
 ment road department, of course, will be efficient, and there will be 
 no trouble between those two, and the plan would harmonize at 
 once. But suppose the next State you wanted to go through had" an 
 inefficient commission, and they said that gravel was good enough 
 to put on their roads, where the next road was built of broken stone. 
 
 The Chairman. Suppose, on the other hand, the same thing pre- 
 vails with the Federal functionary ; that it has an incompetent man 
 who has a veto over all the other States? 
 
 Mr. Ken YON. I take it for granted that as careful men as you 
 gentlemen are who come to Washington would see to it that the local 
 communities would not be swindled by any such official in a public 
 office at Washington. There are too many high-grade men here to 
 permit that to be done. 
 
 The Chairman. My observation does not warrant me in going 
 as far as you go, and I have been here a good while. Do not those 
 
182 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 things fall under us ? Let us take the public buildings that are being 
 erected in the United States. There is a gang of contractors that 
 puts up the post office buildings everywhere throughout the country, 
 because the functionaries here who control those things make their 
 specifications, provide their materials, and so forth, in such a fashion 
 that when the trained contractors, who follow them all around, bid 
 on them our local contractors rarely ever secure one of those con- 
 tracts. Why? Because this Federal functionary had not adminis- 
 trated that with a view to giving them an equal show. 
 
 Mr. Kenyok. Then it is your duty, is it not, to see that that Fed- 
 eral functionary is not retained? 
 
 The Chairman. How can you do that? 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. By an investigation and report you could remove 
 any officer, I imagine. 
 
 The Chairman. There are some 32 or 33 States that have highway 
 commissions ? 
 
 Mr. Keny^on. There are 40 States that have adopted them in one 
 form and another. 
 
 The Chairman. Is it not fair to assume that those men will be as 
 competent as any one man here? 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. Possibly so; but you fail to get coordination. 
 
 The Chairman. You fail to get the coordination throughout the 
 various States ; but it seems to me 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. The roads already belong to the States, I will 
 grant you ; but wherever a road is so improved it comes within that 
 2 per cent I was speaking of. I was not calculating that there would 
 be more than 2 per cent of the roads the Federal Government would 
 be concerned with. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Then you would never get any cooperation from the 
 Federal Government if it is confined to 2 per cent, because if there 
 is any law to be enacted seeking cooperation it would have to be 
 general in its application. 
 
 The Chairman. The director, in his testimony before the com- 
 mittee, gave it as his opinion that there would be only about IJ 
 per cent of the roads of the country to which a contribution should 
 be made in any event. 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. Do you know what that would amount to in Illinois 
 on that basis ? You would have about 2,000 miles of road in Illinois. 
 Two thousand miles of road in Illinois would give you such Federal 
 cooperation that it would be all you could possibly claim for Gov- 
 ernment aid. It would give you a couple of lines, one from west to 
 east, through the center, and three lines up and down the entire 
 State. 
 
 Mr. Madden. What do you think of an idea that a great many 
 people have that all roads used as post roads should be partially con- 
 structed and maintained out of the Federal Treasury ? 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. That is all right, if you care to embark on such a 
 vast enterprise. 
 
 Mr. Madden. The question is. Whether you can confine the enter- 
 prise to any narrow limits to start on ? 
 
 Mr. KJiNYON. I have been saying I was limiting that on the basis 
 of travel. Of course the mileage of post roads over which the mails 
 are carried is large. 
 
GOOD EOADS. 183 
 
 Mr. Madden. It is about 1,100,000 miles, I think. 
 Mr. Ken YON. If you attempt to give each year a sum of money 
 per mile, which would really amount to anything in the way of con- 
 struction or repair, it would take such a vast sum that you would 
 be staggered by it. For example, the statistics in Massachusetts, 
 which have been very carefully compiled for many yeras, show that 
 prior to the advent of the automobile to any considerable extent the 
 cost of the macadam roads per mile per annum was $65 for main- 
 tenance, and the roads were well kept up, as you know. 
 
 Mr. Madden. That would be about 1 per cent on the cost at $6,000 
 a mile. 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. Yes; since the advent of the automobiles on those 
 routes, where there are as many as 100 automobiles a day, it means 
 a traffic of about 115 other vehicles, 215 altogether, according to the 
 last census. The division of traffic at this time is probably equal. 
 The figures for the last census, 1912, are not in, but they show where 
 they had that traffic of 100 automobiles and 115 teams that it re- 
 quired between $600 and $700 per mile to maintain those roads. 
 
 The Chairman. Do you think it would be fair to take a State like 
 Massachusetts with such a dense population, which is virtually one 
 entire city, and use that in a comparison of all this vast country 
 of ours ? 
 
 Mr. Kjinyon. No. 
 
 The Chairman. Then take some fair comparison. 
 Mr. Kenyon. I was showing what a vast sum you would be up 
 against, and if you want to spread that equally over the country you 
 can see where it would go. Suppose we divide the sum you are going 
 to raise for construction, and we will say a mile of road costs $6,000 — 
 plenty of them were built in New York through that rocliy country 
 which cost $14,000 a mile — how much could you contribute to each 
 mile of road for construction ? If you contributed any material part 
 of it, do you not see that the sum would be so vast you would be 
 staggered in saying that the Federal Government could grant any- 
 thing for these post roads? 
 
 Mr. Madden. According to your idea I conclude that under any 
 law which could be enacted, or any Federal cooperation participated 
 in by the States, it would be necessary to serve a number of miles 
 in each State in the Union and lay out a comprehensive plan of 
 roads, for the construction and maintenance of which the Govern- 
 ment would cooperate in the expense. So that, in the beginning, 
 before we commence to cooperate at all, we would know exactly how 
 many miles of road we would participate in. 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. That information is practically all available now. 
 I can tell you how many miles of road there are in Indiana,_ how 
 many are improved, and so on, and the other States have practically 
 
 the same figures. , ^ , , ^^ j. . j 
 
 Mr Madden. But in order for the Federal Government to under- 
 stand' exactly how many miles of road it was going to have to build 
 and maintain, it would be necessary not only to make surveys in 
 advance, but to make maps, compile statistics, and to have every- 
 thing systematized in advance of any action on the part o± the fed- 
 eral Government. ■iit7T,„4. 
 Mr Kenyon. Why would it be necessary to make surveys' What 
 is the use of surveying a road you have no intention of improving? 
 
184 (iOOJJ KOADS. 
 
 Mr. Madden. I take it from what you say that only a certain 
 number of roads should be built at any expense to the Federal Gov- 
 ernment, and we ought to agree on those roads before we start. 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. I could go to our State university and the high 
 schools and call for volunteers to take the census of the traffic on 
 the roads in Indiana^ and within a month I could give a very fair 
 idea of the amount on every road of any importance in the State. 
 
 Mr. Madden. You would leave it to the university students to 
 decide which roads the Federal Government should cooperate in 
 builfiing and maintaining? 
 
 Mr. Kenyox. No; but if they have a map and they show 100 
 teams — 90 on this road, 50 on that, 5 on this, and 10 on another — then 
 the Federal Government can be in a position to say that a certain 
 road runs bet^Yeen centers of one State to another carrying inter- 
 state traffic to a large amount. Therefore that road may be con- 
 structed. 
 
 The Chairman. Are you talking about interstate traffic on a 
 highway ? 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. You would be amazed at the amount there is. 
 
 The Chairman. I would be amazed if there were much outside of 
 tourists. 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. Well, that is a matter which must be considered 
 along with the other traffic. When you come to consider the law, is 
 it not true that the automobile is entitled to go on the same road just 
 the same as a man with a wagon? You know when they first op- 
 erated the railroads they ran only passenger trains to amount to any- 
 thing; there were no feeders. Gradually, as they built up, it de- 
 veloped that the biggest source of revenue was from the freight, 
 and, while now and then you will see a special train go through with 
 men and women who are millionaires, you will agree with me that 
 the greatest amount of their revenue comes from the freight. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Let me ask, if you were the sole man to decide this 
 question, if you were the director in chief, without having to report 
 to anybody, and you were going to start to build a system of roads 
 in the States of the Union, what would be the first thing you would 
 do? 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. I would rather you would not put that up to me in 
 that way. I would not assume such a responsibility. 
 
 Mr. Madden. I will tell you what I would do if I were put in your 
 place, if you will allow me. The first thing I would do would be to 
 find out how much of an obligation I was going to incur, and ascer- 
 tain how much that obligation would be, and I would put myself in 
 possession of all the information that would enable me to determine 
 how many miles of road of a certain class I was going to ultimately 
 build. Then, after I had that information, I would decide whether it 
 would involve me in an expenditure far beyond my means, and if I 
 found that it was going to involve me in such an expenditure I would 
 cut my cloth according to the means. I would not, however, attempt, 
 under any circumstances, to enter on such an enterprise as you have 
 outlined without first putting myself in possession of all the informa- 
 tion. Whether that would require surveys or map making, or what- 
 ever it might require, that would be the first fundamental work that 
 I would undertake to do. 
 
GOOD KOADS. 185 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. Let me ask you a question, if I may. Do you think 
 it would be practical to do that, except in theory ? 
 
 Mr. Madden. If it were not practicable to do that, it would not be 
 practicable to do anything. 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. Let me cite an illustration. In this country the com- 
 munities are growing everywhere. In Massachusetts possibly the 
 policy is settled. It may be true in New Jersey and Connecticut that 
 it is fairly well settled as to what will be established, but one-half of 
 my State is hardly developed as it should be. Can you go to work 
 and gather a comprehensive lot of information that would allow you 
 to go into this question when the thing is one of progression and 
 growing? A thing which is true to-day, with the rapidity with 
 which American genius goes forward, is not true to-morrow. We 
 develop a section so rapidly that what is a luxury to-day is a neces- 
 sity to-morrow. 
 
 Mr. Madden. What I understood you to say a few moments ago 
 was that you would make three roads running north and south in 
 Illinois, or three roads running east and west, as the case may be, 
 and two roads the other way. 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. Hardly as strong as that. I figured out what 2 per 
 cent would be, and I said 2,000 miles, and I said that with 2,000' 
 miles of road you could do that, but not necessarily that you should 
 do it. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Of course, the facts developed might require more 
 than you originally laid out. 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. What brought that out was that you were rather in- 
 clined to think that the 2 per cent I was speaking of would not be 
 satisfactory to the States. I was merely indicating to you how much 
 it would be and what you could do with that 2,000 miles. It may be 
 that Mr. Page's judgment of 1^ per cent might be correct, and in some 
 places it might be only 1 per cent, because in some of the Western. 
 States they are growing more rapidly and they find necessities that 
 we do not know of. The point I was trying to make was this : Sup- 
 pose, for example, when we first started the Post Office Department, 
 Congress had said that before they made appropriation creating the 
 Post Office Department they must have the exact cost and detail of 
 every building in every city for all time to come, or they had asked 
 for the same information with regard to the parcel post. This road 
 proposition is practically the same in that it is a progressive one. 
 
 Mr. Madden. It is quite a different proposition. 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. In what way, may I ask? 
 
 Mr. Madden. In the first place, the operation of the Post Office 
 Department depends altogether on the volume of business that comes 
 to it as to how it has to be operated, and the number of men to be 
 employed. The construction of a road and only to construct it ends 
 that question, except as to its maintenance. 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. But you always have to consider the marvelous 
 rapidity of the increase of traffic and of changing population. Let 
 me give you an idea. In Massachusetts when they started the matter 
 of road building there they had an abandoned farm commission, so 
 many people had moved off of the farms, they had that commission 
 appointed by the State. Four years ago, after they commenced 
 buildino- those roads, they repealed that law as to the abandoned' 
 
186 GOOD BOADB. 
 
 farm commission, because there were no abandoned farms. Wherever 
 there was a road every farm had been taken up, and the people had 
 gone back to the farms. It changed the character of many of the 
 communities. 
 
 The Chairman. In that connection, do you think it would be a 
 fair distribution of the money raised by general taxation to devote 
 it to the rebuilding of certain localities to the exclusion of others ? 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. That was a State proposition which I was using as an 
 illustration. 
 
 The Chairman. Will not that illustrate your State road condition 
 here? 
 
 Mr. Ken YON. When they started to build roads in New York State 
 Roosevelt was making a great point of the fact that they had 17,500 
 abandoned farms in the State of New York in 1900. If you will look 
 at the statistics of 1910 you will find that there were less than 1,000 
 abandoned farms, occasioned largely by the matter of road con- 
 struction. 
 
 The Chairman. Is that a matter of statistics — that it is on account 
 of the road construction? 
 
 Mr. Kenton. The fact that it was principally along the line of 
 road construction that this happened shows it. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Is there anything to show the building of roads re- 
 habilitating the farms? 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. I am taking that from the report of the State High- 
 way Commission of New York. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Has he any statistics on that? 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. I take it for granted that he has, although I have 
 only seen the statistics in regard to the number of farms. You can 
 find that in your census report. The information is easily available. 
 Going back for a moment, the thought has just comie to my mind 
 whether or not if you took this bill which provided for that highway, 
 it would be only one year's appropriation, and whether or not you 
 would not get such a vast amount of information in regard to it, in 
 every respect, besides the good it would do the people in our country, 
 that we could very well aifford to do it. 
 
 Mr. Austin. Would you prefer shifting that proposition and 
 substituting the French system in this country ? 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. If we could at once inaugurate the French system I 
 would be in favor of it; but there is such a vast number of people 
 who have gone on record for the local highway proposition that it 
 would be difficult for them to see this other thing. For example, 
 where a number of people see a good road they will tell about it to 
 twice the number, and the first thing you know that information has 
 gone all over the country, as ordinary information on political sub- 
 jects will circulate. 
 
 The Chairman. Let me put to you a practical problem that we 
 have to work out. Suppose that, after investigating the sentiment 
 both of the country and of the people who were to represent the 
 country, it would be found that so ambitious a proposition as you 
 have presented could not be passed, either the French scheme or the 
 national road to which you refer? Then what do you think as to 
 the educational value of the distribution among the post roads of 
 ' some of the Federal contributions by way of reward or donation or 
 
^= L.*jou ilUAUo. 187 
 
 whatever you choose to call it, stimulating the people to build roads 
 themselves ? 
 
 Mr. Ken YON. That would be a good idea if you could guarantee 
 to each section a sample of road here and there, even if it was only 
 5 miles of road. 
 
 The Chairman. You have confidence in the Federal functionaries 
 doing the right thing. Suppose we say, as has been proposed by sev- 
 eral bills — and some that have not been introduced but are in con- 
 templation — that for each mile of road over which the mail is carried 
 and which is brought up to the specifications prescribed by law at 
 the end of each fiscal year we will pay a given sum, and provide fur- 
 ther that nothing shall be paid for any mile that has not been con- 
 structed and maintained up to a specific standard established in the 
 statute, and leave it to a Federal functionary, as you propose, to say 
 whether or hot these roads have been kept up to that standard for 
 the year? Would that encourage road building? 
 
 Mr. Kenton. It would to that extent. The only trouble, as I have 
 said, would be getting an appropriation sufficient to be substantial. 
 
 The Chairman. But if it encouraged the people to build roads for 
 themselves it would do some good? 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. Oh, yes; I grant you that. 
 
 The Chairman. Do you not think that certain localities would 
 make their roads good enough to get that special contribution, and 
 that it would stimulate other communities to emulate their example? 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. I am thoroughly convinced of that. 
 
 The Chairman. That is the practical proposition. I doubt whether 
 there is any gentleman in Congress who would introduce a bill that 
 is as ambitious as he himself favors, but if it should be found that 
 some of those more elevated propositions can not be put across, that 
 the people are not ready for it, that the Eepresentatives here, or a 
 majority of them, would not vote for it, do you not think it would 
 be advisable for us to take up some moderate beginning, hoping that 
 it might extend, from time to time, and grow into something that 
 would be a good system ? 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. Certainly. You never get anywhere unless you 
 make a start. There is one thought that comes to me as you have 
 asked that question. If you would make it possible, for example, 
 to compound in a road district, or a locality, the amount of money 
 contributed for these main roads wherever they wished to have them 
 constructed, so that you would have money enough, for example, to 
 build a mile in the center of a district where the people would. see it 
 and maintain that road, they would see a good road. If you at- 
 tempted to go out and find any considerable number of miles of road 
 that could comply with that specification, unless the specification 
 was very lax, you would not find them, and some States would not 
 get anything. 
 
 The Chairman. In that connection let me give you an example. 
 Some three or four years ago the Director of Good Roads said that 
 he would put up a mile of sample road in my district if the people 
 would furnish the money. They did, and he put that road up there 
 as a Federal proposition, but the people have not taken a hand in it. 
 That mile of road has not been duplicated at any place in my county. 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. How long since it was constructed ? 
 
188 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 The Chairman. I suppose three or four years. The point I 
 wanted to get your opinion on is, do you not think that alter all 
 the people have to pay these taxes, whether they are county, State, 
 or national, and is it not the most desirable thing to get the people 
 themselves to consider how to build roads and get them at work 
 building them, and if we could pass some model bill here that tended 
 to stimulate that, would not that be a step toward the more ambi- 
 tious schemes which you have in your mind ? 
 
 Mr. Ken YON. Yes. 
 
 The Chairman. I want to say that that is only on the assumption 
 that the majority of the people and the majority of the Congressmen 
 are not willing to go to the length that you advocate. If your sug- 
 gestion could not be accomplished, would not this other be a desirable 
 thing in order to make a start? 
 
 Mr. Ken YON. Sure. I grant you that, subject to the limitations 
 that I have already expressed. 
 
 The Chairman. T suppose, even if some of these bills are to be 
 passed, that there is no Member of either House who would contend 
 that any one of them is the limit of what we would desire, but I think 
 the plan has been to plant an acorn and let it sprout and grow up, 
 ultimately growing to a great tree, and in the meantime watch its 
 growth. Do you not think this is all rather experimental, and do you 
 not think we ought to start rather modestly ? 
 
 Mr. Ken YON. I ain not one who believes that there is so much ex- 
 periment about it as one might think. 
 
 The Chairman. I do not mean an experiment with roads, but an 
 experiment with legislation? 
 
 Mr. KJENYON. What I mean is this: The information from a dozen 
 countries and from 30 or 40 States that are in very much the same 
 juxtaposition as the Nation is here have worked it out, not only in 
 building, but in the administration ; and whether or not each partic- 
 ular community must go over the same experimental process, we will 
 not take the experience of other States and other nations on the 
 matter; but we must go step by step ourselves, as a child learns to 
 walk, even though someone has shown us the way to do it otherwise. 
 That is the only thought I had along that line. I do believe that so 
 marvelously rapid has become this new method of transportation 
 that in another five years it will stagger your imagination to see 
 what has been done within that time, and we are not a little bit pre- 
 pared for it. The road system has not anywhere near kept pace with 
 the transportation system, with the vehicle system. 
 
 The Chairman. I think you are correct on that; and while much 
 emphasis has been laid on automobiles, I am satisfied if we would 
 start some system that would grow into a general system of good 
 roads, that the motor truck would be quite as common as the motor 
 carriage. 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. I was down through New Jersey last year. You were 
 talking a while ago about the railroads being the transportation car- 
 riers of freight. I saw a man drive up with a 3-ton truck just about 
 25 miles out of New York City, and thp man had piled up on a lit- 
 tle platform at the side of the road a lot of produce of one kind 
 and another, and the front section of that truck was empty. Three 
 farmers living adjacent to one another had purchased the truck and 
 
GOOD ROADS. 189 
 
 they were each to have a third of the freight on it. The third man, 
 who was the closest to town, was just putting on his share when I 
 •came along. I stopped to ask about it, and he told me about their 
 purchase of the truck. I asked him how it came out. He said that 
 they got their produce on the market at New York City at half 
 past 7 in the morning; that it sold at higher prices than they ever 
 were able to sell theretofore when they shipped it, and they had the 
 truck back by noon. 
 
 The Chairman. In that view of it let us see what sort of a system 
 of roads this would be. Instead of the Santa Fe Trail, let us take 
 Indianapolis, for illustration. Suppose you had good highways 
 radiating from Indianapolis for 25 miles in every direction. Would 
 not that tend more largely to accommodate commerce than to have 
 one continuous route stretched out across the country ? 
 
 Mr. Kenyon. That would no doubt make practically every farm 
 within that radius not only double in price, but double in the 
 amount of produce that it could turn out. There is no question 
 about that. The other thought is when we start to build a trunk 
 line of railway, the first thing we know the feeders commence to 
 come in. When Mr. Finley took hold of the Southern Eailway it 
 was hardly a paying proposition. He went along the line of that 
 railroad and induced the farmers to build roads. He told me that 
 in five or six years, from the road that had been built, he increased 
 the income of that road $7,000 a mile from the extra amount of mate- 
 rial that was taken to the railroad by reason of having the good 
 roads. He gave prizes for good roads, and also gave prizes for rais- 
 ing the greatest number of bushels of corn on an acre. There was 
 an old man at the Richmond convention who told me that he came to 
 the road convention because he had never been much interested until 
 recently. He said, " My boy, who was 17 years old, took the second 
 prize for raising corn on land which for 40 years I thought was 
 cotton land." He said, " I did not suppose it was possible to raise 
 corn on that, and when the boy wanted to have some land to raise 
 corn on for this prize I was not going to give it to him until his 
 mother appealed to me." He said the boy raised 115 bushels of corn 
 on that acre. He further said, " I was perfectly amazed. I said 
 to myself, ' You are an old fool. For 40 years you have thought 
 that land was worth nothing but to raise cotton on.' " He said " a 
 young dude came down from Washington and he put a little potash 
 here and a little lime there, which I did not take any stock in, but 
 I found out within a year that he was right." 
 
 Thereupon, at 10.35 o'clock p. m., the committee adiourned to 
 meet at the call of the chairman. 
 
190 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 tuesday, february 18, 1913. 
 
 Joint Committee on 
 Federal Aid in Construction of Post Roads, 
 
 Washington, D. C. 
 
 The joint committee met pursuant to adjournment. 
 
 Present: Representative Dorsey W. Shackleford (acting chair- 
 man), Representative Martin B. Madden, Representative Richard 
 W. Austin, and Representative Gordon Lee. 
 
 STATEMENT OF HON, C. B. SLEMP. 
 
 The Chairman. Kindly give jour name and occupation. 
 
 Mr. Sij^rp. C. B. Slemp. I represent the Ninth District of Vir- 
 ginia in Congress. 
 
 The Chairman. We will be glad to hear anything you have to say 
 on the subject of good roads. 
 
 Mr. Slemp. Mr. Chairman, it is not my purpose ti > discuss the im- 
 portance of the good-roads movement or the question of Federal aid 
 to roads, but I thought I might make one suggestion that would be 
 helpful to the committee, and in accordance Avith that idea I intro- 
 duced a resolution into the House, being House resolution 816, which 
 reads as follows: 
 
 Resolved, That a standing committee of the House, consisting of twenty-one 
 members, to be styled the Committee on Post Roads, be elected, to whom shall 
 be referred all proposed legislation relating to the construction, building, and 
 maintenance of post roads. Including appropriations therefor. 
 
 Besolicd. That Rule X be amended by striking therefrom the words "post 
 office and post roads " and inseiting in lieu thereof the words " postal service." 
 
 Resolved, That Rule XI, clause fourteen, be amended by striking therefrom 
 the words "post office and post roads" and inserting in lieu thereof the words 
 " postal service." 
 
 The purpose of this resolution is to have a standing committee of 
 the House, as the lesolution states, to whirli all matters referring to 
 road building and road legislation shall be referred. 
 
 In other words, I would carve two committees out of the Commit- 
 tee on the Post Office and Post Roads, one with jurisdiction of all mat- 
 ters pertaining to the postal service, including appropriations there- 
 for, and the other — the new committee — with jurisdiction of the 
 the construction and maintenance of post roads, including the appro- 
 priations therefor. Each committee would formulate and work out 
 legislation and be as fidly occupied in their several tasks as have 
 been the Committees on Commerce and Rivers and Harbors. No one 
 realizes more than I do that a committee of the House is jealous of 
 any part of its jurisdiction, however obsolete or disused its powers 
 may be, and that it has not been without a struggle that jurisdiction 
 lias been di\'ided. And I apprehend that my present proposition will 
 encounter objection from. those who will be loath to yield up a part 
 of their authority and privilege. But I also apprehend that this 
 tremendously progressive movement for Federal aid for good roads 
 will not by its friends be allowed to be impeded or checked by any 
 selfish policy, for this question is too big and too far-reaching in its 
 consequences for good that its thorough consideration should be em- 
 barrassed or thAvarted in order to gratify personal ambition. 
 
GOOD EOADS. 191 
 
 I submit that in view of the widespread, I may say universal, in- 
 terest in good roads on the part of the States and their civil sub- 
 divisions, on the part of hundreds of commercial organizations, on 
 the part of millions of individuals, agriculturists, and manufacturers 
 alike, out of which has come untold activity and the expenditure 
 of millions of dollars, that this subject — the extension of Federal aid 
 in conjunction with and cooperation of the States — is one that has 
 assumed such magnitude and such import as to affect every household 
 in this broad land that it ought to engage exclusively the serious at- 
 tention of a single committee of the House of Representatives. Is 
 it not, at least, paramount to the subjects of improved waterways, 
 which, as a means of interstate commerce, comes in for a large share 
 of the House's attention and over which one committee has jurisdic- 
 tion? Is it not even of greater importance to the country than the 
 great questions of immigration, of irrigation, of canals, or educa- 
 tion, of expositions, of Territories, of Indian affairs, of public build- 
 ings, of the Army, and of the Navy, each of which subjects belongs 
 to the jurisdiction of a separate committee? 
 
 In order to give you an idea of the formation of all committees of 
 the House, with the hope that you might possibly incorporate this 
 resolution in whatever suggestion you make to the House in your 
 report, I have prepared a brief outline of the formation of the 
 various committees of the House. 
 
 Mr. Madden. And their jurisdiction? 
 
 Mr. Slemp. And their jurisdiction and when they were established. 
 Mr. Madden. What do you mean by "postal service"? 
 Mr. Slemp. To make that clear, the present jurisdiction of the Post 
 Office and Post Roads Committee has to do with the postal service 
 generally. I would have a committee whose jurisdiction would be 
 limited to that service. It is questionable even now whether it has 
 jurisdiction on this good-roads question or not. Most of these good- 
 roads bills have been referred to the Committee on Agriculture. 
 
 Mr. Madden. That is because the bills themselves referred to the 
 Secretary of Agriculture. The bill which I introduced does not 
 refer to him. 
 
 Mr. Slemp. I do not think that this makes any difference, so far 
 as my resolution is concerned. If all of these bills were referred 
 to the present Committee on the Post Office and Post Roads instead of 
 to other committees, I think the importance of this subject demands 
 exclusive consideration of them by a separate committee of the 
 House. While any ambiguity as to which committee of the House 
 these bills would go could easily be settled, yet I advocate the selec- 
 tion of a committee because I think the importance of the subject 
 is such that it should have a standing committee with exclusive 
 jurisdiction. I have introduced the resolution above mentioned pro- 
 vidino- for a committee that would be similar to the Rivers and 
 Harbors Committee, which has the right to make appropriations. 
 To that extent the new Post Roads Committee would differ from the 
 Public Buildings Committee, which only has the right of authoriza- 
 tion The Committee on Postal Service, then, would handle all 
 the administrative matters of the Post Office Department, including 
 the parcels post, the postal-savings bank and the Railway Mail 
 Service and Rural Free Delivery and other matters. 
 Mr. Madden. Does not that cover the roads ? 
 
192 GOOD ROADS. 
 
 Mr. Slejip. No. sir; I do not know that it dees; but if this resolu- 
 tion is not framed just right to give exclusive jurisdiction to the 
 proposed committee, I would expect it to be amended. 
 
 Mr. Madden. How are you going to take jurisdiction of the roads 
 over which the mail is carried? 
 
 Mr. Slemp. The present Committee en Post OfTice and Post Roads 
 does not have such jurisdiction. If it ever did, it is obsolete. The jur- 
 isdiction of this new committee would be the maintenance and con- 
 struction of post roads and all matters relating thereto. The present 
 Post Office and Post Roads Committee does not necessarily have 
 jurisdiction now of all matters pertaining to the postal service. 
 There is the piiysical location of post offices in the country and their 
 construction, and that comes under the Public Buildings Committee. 
 And similarly the physical roads on which the mail is carried and 
 the maintenance and construction of such roads should be within the 
 province of another committee. I have prepared a statement about 
 the formation of the various committees just to show that the sug- 
 gestion I make in establishing a new committee is in line with the 
 precedents of the House. I have desired to contribute some thought 
 to the subject of good-roads legislation, and the selection of a com- 
 mittee on Post Roads seems to me to be the most direct and effective 
 method of getting results. 
 
 Mr. Maddek. This commission is a joint commission now* 
 
 Mr. SiJi::\iP. I realize that this is a joint commission, and for this 
 reason it can not be a continuing affair, unless you have a joint reso- 
 lution passed by Congress. Your term will expire here on the 4th 
 of March, unless there is an appropriation. 
 
 Mr. Madden. No; it will not. 
 
 ]\Ir. Slejip. At any rate, you have no right vested in you of 
 bringing a bill into the House from this commission. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Sure. We have a right to bring in legislation. 
 
 Mr. Slemp. My idea about your function was that you were to re- 
 port to the Plouse and to the Senate. When that report is received 
 it has to be referred somewhere, has it not ? I say right at this point 
 that the place to refer your report and all of the valuable statistics 
 and the hearings and your conclusions should be to a separate com- 
 mittee of the House with nothing else to do. 
 
 When the report of your joint committee and the report of the 
 Secretary of Agriculture and Postmaster General shall be made to 
 Congress, to which committee of the House will they be referred — 
 to Agricuture, where now are slumbering peacefully the good-roads 
 propositions of many aspiring statesmen, or to the Committee on the 
 Post Office and Post Roads, whose dockets hardly permit of another 
 entry? That your report and that of the two Cabinet officers men- 
 tioned would go to the one or the other of these committees is cer- 
 tain, and it would make no difference as to which one, so far as achiev- 
 ing further progress is concerned. For what can be expected or 
 hoped for from those sources, the channels leading from which are 
 choked with many and divers schemes for the benefit of farmers 
 and the improvement of the postal service, forming a dam against 
 proposed legislation which the good-roads reports would only serve 
 to make more impregnable, to the delight of the self-constituted 
 guardians of the Treasury and the enemies of Federal aid? 
 
GOOD EOADS. 193 
 
 I say that the selection of such a committee as I have outlined is 
 in accordance with the precedents of the House when subjects become 
 of great importance in the thought of the country. I wish to say 
 a,lso that Democratic Congresses, in my investigation, have been a 
 little more liberal in forming committees than Republican Con- 
 gresses. A great many of these committees were formed in Demo- 
 cratic Congresses, and then a great many Congresses would start com- 
 mittees by making select committees, and these select committees 
 would be made permanent committees. It is a very interesting thing 
 to trace the evolution and formation of committees in the House, 
 which are always in response to a public demand. And if the chair- 
 man will indulge me I shall now read this statement. 
 
 The Chairman. Proceed, Mr. Slemp. 
 
 COMMITTEE ON WAYS AND MEANS. 
 
 Mr. Slemp. The Committee on Ways and Means originally had as 
 a part of its duties the examination of the public departments, their 
 expenditures, and the economy of their management. (Annals, 1st 
 sess., 7th Cong-, p. 412.) But in 1814 the Committee on Public Ex- 
 penditures was created, with jurisdiction over these matters. The 
 jurisdiction of the Ways and Means Committee also included the 
 appropriation bills and general oversight of banking and currency 
 matters. But on March 2, 1865, this branch of the committee's 
 jurisdiction was given, respectively, to the newly created Committees 
 on Appropriations and Banking and Currency. 
 
 The Committee on Ways and Means, by reference of the subject 
 to it by the House, had jurisdiction of the oleomargarine bill, but 
 jurisdiction of this subject was later conferred on the Committee on 
 Agriculture. (49th Cong., 1st sess., Cong. Eecord, p., 2193.) 
 
 COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS. 
 
 Created March 2, 1865, to relieve the Wavs and Means Committee 
 of war legislation (2d sess. 38th Cong., Globe, pp. 1312-1317), with 
 authority to report the general appropriation bills. 
 
 In 1885 the Army and Military Academy bill was given to the 
 Military Affairs Committee, the naval bill to the Naval Affairs 
 Committee, the Post Office bill to the Committee on the Post Office 
 and Post Eoads, the consular, and diplomatic bill to the Foreign 
 Affairs Committee, and the Indian bill to the Indian Affairs Com- 
 mittee, leaving the Committee on Appropriations with the bills men- 
 toned in clause 3 of Rule XI. (1st sess. 4,9th Cong., Eecord, pp. 168, 
 T96, 278.) The Agricultural appropriation bill has been with the 
 Committee on Agriculture since 1880. (2d sess. 46th Cong., Eecord, 
 pp. 684-686.) 
 
 While the Committee on Appropriations has jurisdiction to report 
 appropriations, the power to report legislation authorizing appro- 
 priations belongs to other committees. 
 
 COMMITTEE ON BANKING AND CURRENCY. 
 
 Created March 2, 1865, to assume some of the jurisdiction of the 
 Committee on Ways and Means. (2d sess. 88th Cong., Globe, pp. 
 1812-1317.) 
 
 79558— PT 1—13 13 
 
194 G001> EOADS. 
 
 COMMITTEE ON INTERSTATE AND FOKEIGN COMMERCE. 
 
 Originally the Committee on " Commerce and Manufactures." 
 (3d Cong., Journal, p. 375.) Separated in 1819. (1st sess. 16th 
 Cong., Annals, pp. 708, 709.) Sometimes in conflict with the Com- 
 mittee on Ways and Means. (1st sess 17th Cong., Annals, vol. 1, p; 
 530.) Had jurisdiction of river and harbor appropriation bill until 
 1883, when Committee on Rivers and Harbors established. (1st 
 sess 48th Cong., Record, pp. 196, 214.) In 1892 given present name. 
 (1st sess. 52d Cong., Record, p. 653.) 
 
 COMMITTEE ON RIVERS AND HARBORS. 
 
 Authorized as a standing committee December 19, 1883, with 
 jurisdiction of subjects relating " to the improvement of rivers and 
 harbors," and with the same privilege of reporting the river and 
 harbor bill that had been enjoyed by the Committee on Commerce, as 
 now provided in section 56, Rule XI. (1st sess. 48th Cong., Record, 
 pp. 196, 214; 2d sess. 45th Cong., Record, pp. 18, 20, 21, etc.) 
 
 COMMITTEE ON MERCHANT MARINE AND FISHERIES. 
 
 Succeeded the Select Committee on American Shipbuilding and 
 Shipowning Interests. (1st sess. 50th Cong., Record, p. 146.) 
 
 While this committee has a wide jurisdiction over the subject of 
 the merchant marine, yet the old Committee on Commerce and the 
 present Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce have re- 
 
 Sorted upon certain branches of the subject. (1st sess. 48th Cong., 
 :eport No. 1665; 1st sess. 57th Cong., Report No. 739.) 
 
 COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE. 
 
 Created as a standing committee in 1820. (1st sess. 16th Cong., 
 Journal, p. 479.) Jurisdiction enlarged by giving to it the subject 
 of forestry (2d sess. 46th Cong., Record, p. 684), which had been 
 within the jurisdiction of the Committee on the Public Lands. 
 Given jurisdiction of agricultural appropriation bills. (2d sess. 46th 
 Cong., Record, pp. 684-686.) Given jurisdiction of legislation re- 
 lating to imitation dairy products, manufacture of lard, which had 
 been with the Ways and Means Committee. (1st sess. 49th Cong., 
 Record, p. 2193.) 
 
 COMMITTEE ON THE POST OFFICE AND POST ROADS. 
 
 When this committee was made a standing committee, December 9, 
 1808, it was composed of one Member from each State. (2d sess. 
 Cong., Journal, p. 345.) It is now composed of 21 Members and 1 
 Delegate. Its jurisdiction over subjects relating to the post office 
 and post roads was fixed in 1811, and practically remained unchanged 
 until 1885, when it was also given authority to report the post-office 
 appropriation bill. (1st sess. 49th Cong., Record, pp. 168, 196, 278.) 
 
CiOOD KOADS. 195 
 
 COMMITTEE ON THE PUBLIC LANDS. 
 
 Since 1901 matters affecting irrigation, which had gone to Public 
 Lands because they affected the national domain, began to be con^ 
 sidered exclusively by the Committee on Irrigation of Arid Lands. 
 (2d sess. 56th Cong., Eepts. Nos. 2904, 2927, 2934.) 
 
 committp;e on railways and canals. 
 
 When established as a standing committee, in 1831, it was named 
 " Committee on Roads and Canals," notwithstanding vigorous oppo- 
 sition on the ground that such action might be construed as an in- 
 dorsement of an elaborate system of internal improAement. On the 
 other hand, it was urged that there had already been special com- 
 mittees on the subject. It was given jurisdiction of matters " relat- 
 ing to railways and canals and the improvement of the navigation of 
 rivers." {1st sess. Cong., Annals, pp. 1438, 1442.) The claims relat- 
 ing to " the improvement of the navigation of rivers " was to a large 
 extent obsolete, the Committee on Commerce exercising that jurisdic- 
 tion. (2d sess. l.jth Cong., Record, pp. 18, 28.) The jurisdiction of 
 this committee as to railways has been absorbed by the Committee on 
 Interstate and Foreign Commerce, but it still reports on legislation 
 relating to canals. 
 
 COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION. 
 
 As early as 1829 a standing committee on education was proposed, 
 but it was successfully opposed on the ground that the jurisdiction 
 of the subject of education belonged to the several States. (1st sess. 
 21st Cong., Debates, pp. 475, 477.) 
 
 On March 21, 1867, to a proposition to establish a standing com- 
 mittee on labor, the Committee on Rules reported an amendment tc 
 establish a committee on " Education and Labor," the recent creation 
 of the Bureau of Education rendering such a step desirable. (1st 
 sess. 40th Cong., Globe, p. 264.) On December 19, 1883, the two 
 jurisdictions were divided. (1st sess. 48th Cong., Record, pp. 195, 
 196.) 
 
 COMMITTEE ON LABOK. 
 
 Created December 19, 1883, when the jurisdiction of the old Com- 
 mittee on Education and Labor was divided. (1st sess. 48th Cong., 
 Record, pp. 195-196.) 
 
 COMMITTEE ON INVALID PENSIONS. 
 
 Successor to the Committee on Revolutionary Pensions and the 
 Committee on Military Pensions, with jurisdiction of matters relat- 
 ing to the pensions of the Civil War. (2d sess. 46th Cong., Rec, 
 p. 205.) 
 
 COMMITTEE ON PENSIONS. 
 
 See Committee on Invalid Pensions. Has jurisdiction of matters 
 relating to the pensions of all the wars of the United States other 
 than the Civil War. 
 
196 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 COMMITTEE ON WAR CLAIMS. 
 
 War claims were formerly considered by the old Committee "on 
 Kevolutionary Claims," which originally was the Committee on Pen- 
 sions and Revolutionary Claims. 
 
 On December 2, 1873, its name was changed to " War Claims " and 
 its jurisdiction defined. (1st sess. 43d Cong., Rec, p. 23.) 
 
 COMMITTEE ON REVISION OF THE LAWS. 
 
 Created as a standing committee July 25, 1868. Successor to the 
 old standing committee "on Revised and Unfinished Business," 
 which had become obsolete, while the Select Committee on Revision 
 of the Laws had become of importance sufficient to warrant establish- 
 ing it as a standing committee. (2d sess. 40thCong.,Globe, p. 4495.) 
 
 COMMITTEE ON ELECTION OF PRESIDENT, VICE PRESIDENT, AND REPRE- 
 SENTATIVES IN CONGRESS. 
 
 Made a standing committee on August 18, 1893, having been a 
 select committee prior to that date. (1st sess. 53d Cong., Rec, pp. 
 447,478.) s, ,PP 
 
 COJIMITTEE ON ALCOHOLIC LIQUOR TRAFFIC. 
 
 Made a standing committee on August 18, 1893, having been a select 
 committee from May 16, 1879. (1st sess. 53d Cong., Record, pp. 477, 
 478.) 
 
 COMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION OF ARID LANDS. 
 
 Select committee prior to August 18, 1893, when made a standing 
 committee. (1st sess. 53d Cong., Record, pp. 477, 478.) 
 
 COMMITTEE ON IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION. 
 
 Select committee prior to August 18, 1893, when made a standing 
 committee. (1st sess. 53d Cong., Record, pp. 477, 478.) 
 
 COMMITTEE ON THE CENSUS. 
 
 Created as a standing committee on December 2, 1901, to succeed 
 the Select Committee on the Twelfth Census. The creation of this 
 standing committee was in anticipation of the act of March 6, 1902, 
 which created a permanent census office. (1st sess. 57th Cong., Rec- 
 ord, p. 45.) 
 
 COMMITTEE ON INDUSTRIAL ARTS AND EXPOSITIONS. 
 
 Established as a new standing committee on December 2, 1901. Be- 
 fore its formation various committees exercised its jurisdiction. Thus, 
 the Committee on the Library reported the initiatory legislation for 
 the World's Columbian Exposition, Interstate and Foreign Com- 
 merce had jurisdiction of the Centennial Exposition at New Orleans, 
 
GOOD BOADS. 197 
 
 and the Committee on Agriculture reported the joint resolution relat- 
 ing to participation in the Hamburg International Exhibition of 
 Domestic Animals. 
 
 The various members of your honorable commission have indi- 
 vidually declared for Federal aid to post roads. The people have 
 declared for it. Party platforms have indorsed it. Leaders and 
 other Members of Congress are outspokenly in favor of it. 
 
 Majoritj' Leader Underwood is on record as saying: 
 
 For many years I have favored this proposition. 
 
 Speaker Clark said: 
 
 I believe the time has come for the General Government to actively and 
 powerfully cooperate veith the States in the building of a great system of public 
 highways. 
 
 It remains now but to make these thoughts and conclusions effec- 
 tive. How best can this be done ? What is the next vital step ? 
 
 Your honorable commission can not bring in a bill, however much 
 you desire to do so, nor can you appropriate money. You can only 
 suggest and recommend plans and submit information to Congress. 
 
 This done, what next ? I make bold to furnish the answer : 
 
 That the next vital and most effective step in securing Federal aid 
 to road construction is the establishment of a new standing committee 
 of the House to be called the Committee on Post Roads. 
 
 First. Such action would follow House precedents (especially in 
 Democratic Houses) in establishing new committees when the public 
 interest so required. 
 
 Second. The importance of the subject demands such attention and 
 consideration as can not be given it by committees having jurisdiction 
 over many other subjects. 
 
 Third. It is one of the subjects specifically delegated to Congress 
 by the Constitution and the only one of the subjects not exclusively 
 within the jurisdiction of a House committee. 
 
 Fourth. With a Committee on Post Roads having exclusive juris- 
 diction of all matters pertaining thereto we are certain to have the 
 best thought on the subject and thus prevent the enactment of hastily 
 considered legislation. 
 
 Fifth. By this method we are certain to get immediate and con- 
 tinuing results. 
 
 New committees of the House are created in the manner proposed 
 by my resolution, i. e., by a report from the Committee on Rules, 
 either as an independent proposition or when the rules of the House 
 are adopted at the commencement of a Congress. 
 
 Rule X prescribes the names of committees and fixes the number 
 of Members who shall serve thereon. 
 
 Rule XI defines the jurisdiction of committees. 
 
 The last new Committee on Insular Affairs was created by amend- 
 ment of the rules at the commencement of the Fifty-sixth Congress — 
 a resolution having previously been referred to the Committee on 
 
 Rules. 
 
 Mr. Austin. Would you also provide for a similar committee on 
 the subject in the Senate? 
 
 Mr. Slemp. I have talked with Senators about that and they tell 
 me it would not be necessary to have a resolution in the Senate to 
 provide for that committee, that that is done by the Senators them- 
 selves by some sort of an agreement among themselves. Another 
 
198 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 thought also occurs to me at this point. Of the affairs of the United 
 States, jurisdiction over which was given to Congress by the Con- 
 stitution, every single one has a committee of the House to represent 
 it exclusively, except Post Koads. 
 
 In other words, the power to collect taxes and to borrow money 
 is within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Ways and Means; 
 to regulate commerce, within the jurisdiction of Interstate and For- 
 eign Commerce ; to establish uniform laws on the siibject of bank- 
 ruptcies and to create inferior courts, within the jurisdiction of the 
 Judiciary Committee ; to coin money, within the jurisdiction of Coin- 
 age, "Weights, and Measures ; to promote the progress of science and 
 arts, within the jurisdiction of the Committee on Industrial Arts and 
 Expositions (of recent origin) ; to secure letters patent, within the 
 jurisdiction of the Committee on Patents; to raise and support 
 armies, within the jurisdiction of Military Affairs; to provide and 
 maintain a navy, within the jurisdiction of Naval Affairs ; for organ- 
 izing, etc., the militia, within the jurisdiction of the Committee on 
 the Militia ; legislation for the District of Columbia, withinthe juris- 
 diction of the Committee on the District of Columbia; foreign immi- 
 gration and uniform naturalization, within the jurisdiction of the 
 Committee on Immigration and Naturalization. 
 
 But the subject of post roads — once great in the view of the framers 
 of the Constitution — long nocuous — now again assuming its rightful 
 position in the eyes of the people and of Congress, considered worthy 
 of specific mention in the Constitution as properly a national subject, 
 has been made to share meager attention with and to be overshad- 
 owed by the correlated subject of post offices, over both of which the 
 Committee on Post Office and Post Koads has jurisdiction. Has not 
 the subject of post roads equal constitutional right with the militia 
 and those other specific objects I have pointed out to consideration 
 exclusively by a committee of the House without being subordinate 
 to another question delegated to Congress? 
 
 Why that is, I do not know, unless it was simply because the inter- 
 est in. the subject has been one of recent date and therefore public 
 sentiment did not force the consideration that ought to be given to 
 the subject. 
 
 INIr. Madden. Would the Interstate Commerce Committee have 
 charge of roads over which interstate commerce would pass ? 
 
 Mr. Sle:\ip. I think you can fix it definitely^any question as to 
 jurisdiction — right here. I should say that it would have no more 
 jurisdiction over post roads than the Interstate Commerce Committee 
 now has jurisdiction over rivers and harbors. I hope to see the day 
 when you will have common carriers on public post roads. I do not 
 know whether you will get to the point of regulating roads like you 
 do the railroads, but you will remember Mr. Warburton mentioned 
 the "iO-mile haul. 
 
 Mr. Waebueton. I agree with you on that point. They alreadj^ 
 \vA\e them in France. 
 
 Mr. Slemp. I think that the whole subject is coming right along 
 in the order we have had in the railroads. I do not presume to offer 
 Tou a solution of all the good-roads problems. I ha^e been waiting 
 for the report of this commission to make up my own mind, because I 
 tliink the commission was ably selected, and I think the Members 
 
GOOD ROADS. 199 
 
 of the House and of the Senate and, in fact, of the country gener- 
 ally are awaiting with great interest your conclusions ; but what I 
 am interested in also is how are you going to make your conclusion 
 effective after you get to the House. Are you going to send it to 
 the Post Office and Post Koads Committee and overburden that com- 
 mittee, or send it to the Agricultural Committee that has a bill to 
 bring out, or give it to the Interstate Commerce Committee when 
 they have closed their doors to more hearings? 
 
 Mr. Madden. Let me ask you this: This matter having been re- 
 ferred to this joint committee with instructions to report a bill, the 
 question is whether after a bill is reported it would not be con- 
 sidered as having come from the committee and go on the calendar? 
 Mr. Slejep. I would say this: If it were possible to make this 
 
 commission a continuing affair 
 
 Mr. Madden. I am only asking that question. 
 Mr. Sle3ip. I say I do not know, but personally I do not think so. 
 The report will be given to the Speaker, and the Speaker will refer 
 it to some standing committee. It certainly has to go somewhere. 
 1 am providing for the best possible consideration and attention to 
 be given to your work by advocating the selection of a committee of 
 exclusive jurisdiction, to whom your report would be sent, and by 
 whom it would be considered. As to getting results, you give us a 
 post roads committee, then we will have a bill in the House, and see 
 how quickly it passes, provided it is legitimate. I would say that 
 this subject would get so much better care and so much better thought 
 if it were placed in the hands of a committee such as I suggest. 
 
 Take the men who are on the Post Office Committee, working day 
 and night to bring out a bill that will expend $280,000,000 a year. 
 They have not the time to go into the expenditure of another 
 $100,000,000 a year nor to discuss bills like Mr. Warburton's or 
 Senator Swanson's, but if you give us a committee from the House, 
 composed of 21 members, coming from all parts of the country, they 
 will be responsive to the wishes of the people, they will give the sub- 
 ject the consideration it deserves, and they will get results. 
 
 In the fullness of time such a committee will devise a plan whereby 
 will be conferred upon one or more departments the duty of submit- 
 ting reports and annual estimates to Congress, just as the War De- 
 partment now submits here reports of examinations, surveys, and 
 projects for the improvement of rivers and harbors, but such reports 
 will be considered by this committee much in the same rnanner as 
 reports of engineers are considered by the Committee on Elvers and 
 Harbors, until, as in the case of the annual river and harbor appro- 
 priation bill, there will also come to be an annual post-roads bill — a 
 bill as reasonably contemplated by the Constitution when it con- 
 ferred upon Congress jurisdiction to establish post roads as when it 
 conferred upon Congress authority to improve Waterways. Indeed, 
 there is specific constitutional authority to establish post roads, 
 whereas the authority for the improvement of rivers and harbors is 
 gathered from the commerce clause of the Constitution. 
 
 That is about all I have to say. I think the information which I 
 have o-iven here about the formation of these other committees is 
 accurate or at least I have tried to make it so. I feel like apologiz- 
 ing to you for taking so much of your time, because I knew you had 
 this thouo-ht in mind, but it occurred to me that your time might be 
 
200 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 saved through some one preparing this data for you. If you decide 
 to adopt the resolution, you have the precedents of the House, the 
 history and formation of all committees, before you, and you have a 
 growing public sentiment that is demanding legislation behind you. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Your suggestions are very mteresting, and I, for one, 
 am very much obliged to you. 
 
 Mr. Slemp. I will say, finally, if I am any judge of the attitude of 
 the House on my resolution, it will go through. I voted for Mr. 
 Shackleford's bill last year. I did not want to vote for it, but I 
 could not vote against it, so I simply stated in the House that, while 
 I did not favor the bill in all its features, I was going to vote for it. 
 For some reason or other I could not make up my mind that that 
 money, if expended as contemplated in his bill, would be wisely ex- 
 pended, but felt, coming from the overburdened and overcrowded 
 Post Office Committee, that the subject was worked up in the last 
 days of the session and it had not been given the consideration that 
 it ought to have been given, yet I was in sympathy with the general 
 movement, and so voted. 
 
 Mr. Austin. You may say in that connection Mr. Shackleford ren- 
 dered the subject of good roads valuable service in directing atten- 
 tion and securing results. 
 
 Mr. Slemp. I am very much obliged to Mr. Austin for that sug- 
 gestion. It gave me the first hope I had on the subject, and I knew 
 from that start, Mr. Chairman, that the thought of the country would 
 be directed to it, and sooner or later we would get a roads bill, but we 
 only want one after a most careful consideration is given the subject. 
 The action of the various political parties on this subject also is very 
 interesting. For some curious reason we did not get it into our plat- 
 form in Chicago. The subject was entirely omitted. 
 
 Mr. Lee. But you have got it in your platform. 
 
 Mr. Slemp. No; I can not say that we have, but it is in the plat- 
 form at Baltimore. 
 
 Mr. Lee. It was in at Denver, too. 
 
 Mr. Slemp. Yes, sir. It is also in the Progressive platform. Why 
 it was not put in at Chicago I do not know. 
 
 Mr. Lee. I thought it was in there. 
 
 Mr. Slemp. No ; it was not. We were all so busy there with other 
 things we overlooked it. It is in the Democratic platform and it is 
 in the Progressive platform. I want to say to the Democrats that 
 they have their opportunity to make good on the subject, and I do 
 not know anything that would be any better for them, from a general 
 standpoint, than to get in front of this movement in the country. 
 They are committed to it nationally. Mr. Chairman, I would also 
 favor offering a resolution in the House to put every member of this 
 commission on the new Committee on Post Eoads. That is where the 
 House members of this commission ought to be so that the House can 
 have the advantage of your two years of investigation and the statis- 
 tics and the hearings you have had. The suggestion of a new com- 
 mittee is not made in any spirit of taking from you the authority 
 that is given you when you have been selected by the two bodies as 
 the men especially efficient for this service, but I would strengthen 
 your position if I could. 
 
 I will say that we have to meet the criticism of the pork bar- 
 rel. This commission has to meet it. You had to face it last 
 
GOOD BOADS. 201 
 
 year, Mr. Chairman, but that does not cause us to stand back any, 
 because this good-roads policy is right and for the general good. 
 I will say in that connection that the rivers and harbors bill used 
 to be considered a pork-barrel proposition, but it is not so considered 
 to-day. President Taft did that subject a great deal of good last 
 year when he sent the rivers and harbors bill back to Congress and said 
 that the bill ought to be vetoed, since it was a pork-barrel proposition, 
 but also stated that there are so many good things in it he would let it 
 go through in order to save them, and these good measures carried 
 the balance. I think since that time that the public attitude and the 
 congressional attitude on the subject has changed. We have to rely, 
 in the last analysis, upon public sentiment backing us up in every 
 movement, condemning us when we are wrong and standing by 
 us when we are right. That is the way I would answer the argu- 
 ment in regard to the pork-barrel proposition. We have to face it, 
 and we might as well do so now. 
 
 It must be apparent, even to a casual observer, that the demands 
 upon Congress from the diversified interests of a hundred million 
 people render totally inadequate the present facilities for the con- 
 sideration and dispatch of the great volume of business presented. 
 The congestion must be relieved. Congress, now sitting almost con- 
 tinuously, is unable even by liberal House rules, to dispose of more 
 than a very small percentage of its business. 
 
 Committees are overloaded. Increased membership thereon does 
 not seem to have relieved the congestion appreciably. Members are 
 overworked, and the necrology roll is apalling. Forty-one addi- 
 tional Members in the next House will still further aggravate the 
 situation. Members find it more than ever difficult to attend the 
 meetings and perform the duties of even one committee. What relief 
 can be afforded, not to say what remedy can be applied, for at best 
 the situation can only be relieved? 
 
 In my judgment relief can come, in part, by a wider distribution 
 of the jurisdiction of committees through the creation of new com- 
 mittees. And I think no better object lesson can be furnished tO' 
 meet a great public demand than by the creation of a standing com- 
 mittee on post roads. A study of the history and jurisdiction of 
 House committees has convinced me that their evolution since the 
 formation of the Government is the reflection of public sentiment 
 on given subjects as those subjects become of great interest to the 
 people. The time has now come for Congress to recognize good- 
 roads sentiment, and in no more practical way can this be done than 
 by the creation of a new committee of the House with sole jurisdiction 
 of the subject in all of its phases. 
 
 The following statement relating to the creation and jurisdiction of certain House- 
 committees is supplemental and was not included in the original statement, for the 
 reason that the facts do not have as direct a bearing upon the subject of a proposed 
 Committee on Post Roads as do the facts contained in the original statement. 
 
 Committee on the Judiciary.— Cre&ted June 3, 1813, as "an additional standmg com- 
 mittee to take into consideration matters touching judicial proceedings." Attention 
 was called to certain defects in the laws relating to the judiciary, and m order to rem- 
 edv these and to render the decisions of the House more uniform on these subjects the 
 establishment of the committee was urged. Its jurisdiction since 1880 has been of al! 
 Hiibipcts relating "to judicial proceedmgs, civil and criminal law." (1st sess. 13th 
 S)nr Annals vol 1, p. 132; 2d sess. 46th Cong., Record, p. 205.) 
 
 Committee on Coinage, WeighU, and Jfeaswres.— Established as a standmg committee 
 January 21, 1864. (1st sess. 38th Cong., Globe, p. 297.) In earlier days its jurisdiction 
 
202 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 was considered by select committees. December 7, 1825, a select committee on 
 weights and measures was appointed. (1st seas. 19th Cong., Journal, p. 30.) When 
 made a standing committee it was called Committee on a Uniform System of Coinage, 
 Weights, and Measures. On March 2, 1867, the name was changed to present form. 
 {2d sess. 39th Cong., Journal, p. 601.) 
 
 Committee on Foreign Affairs. — ^Prior to Seventeenth Congress select committees on 
 foreign relations had been appointed. (Ist sess. 11th Cong., Annals, p. 90.) Made 
 a standing committee March 13, 1822, (1st sess. 17th Cong., Journal, p. 351.) Juris- 
 diction, as defined in 1880, over subjects relating to the relations of the United States 
 with foreign nations. (2d sess. 46th Cong., Record, p. 205.) The words "Including 
 appropriations therefor," were added to jurisdiction in 1885. (1st sess. 49th Cong., 
 Record, pp. 168, 196, 278.) 
 
 Committee on Military Affairs. — A standing committee was proposed December 7, 
 1815 (1st sess. 14th Cong., Annals, p. 380), but was not created until March 13, 1822 
 (1st sess. 17th Cong. Journal, p. 357). Its jurisdiction, as defined in 1880, was over 
 subjects relating to the military establishment, and the public defense other than 
 appropriations for its silpport. (2d sess. 46 Cong., Record, p. 205.) In 1885 it was 
 given jurisdiction of the Army and Military Academy appropriation bills. (1st sess. 
 49th Cong., Record, pp. 168, 196, 278.) 
 
 Committee on Naval Affairs. — This committee was first proposed December 7, 1815 
 (1st sess. 14th Cong., Annals, p. 380), but was not made a standing committee imtil 
 March 13, 1822 (1st sess. 17th Cong., Journal, p. 351.) Its original jurisdiction was 
 over subjects relating to the Naval Establishment; but in 1885 this was modified when 
 the naval appropriation bill was taken from the Appropriations Committee and given 
 to the Committee on Naval Affairs. (1st sess. 49th Cong., Record, pp. 168, 196, 278.) 
 
 Committee on Indian Affairs. — Established as a standing committee December 17, 
 1821, but its jurisdiction prior to 1885 was over subjects relating to the relations of 
 the United States with the Indians and the Indian tribes. In 1885 it was given 
 jurisdiction of the Indian appropriation bill. (1st sess. 17th Cong., Annals, p. 553; 
 1st sess. 49th Cong., Record, pp. 168, 196, 278.) 
 
 Committee on the Territories. — Established December 13, 1825, "to examine into 
 the legislative, civil, and criminal proceedings of the Territories, and to devise and 
 report to the House such means as in their opinion may be necessary to secure the rights 
 and privileges of residents and nonresidents." (1st sess. 19th Cong., Journal, p. 46.) 
 In 1880 its jurisdiction was defined as at present over subjects relating "to Territorial 
 legislation, the revision thereof, and affecting Territories or the admission of States." 
 (2d sess. 46th Cong,, Record, p. 205.) 
 
 Committee on Insular Affairs. — Created December 8, 1899, with jurisdiction of "all 
 matters (excepting those affecting the revenue and appropriations) pertaining to the 
 island.^ which came to the United States through the treaty of 1899 with Spain and 
 Cuba." (1st sess. 56th Cong., Record, p. 60.) 
 
 Committee on Mines and Mining. — Established December 19, 1865 (1st sess. 39th 
 Cong., Globe, p. 83). Jurisdiction, as defined in 1880, of subjects relating "to the 
 mining interests." 
 
 Committee on Public Buildings and Grounds. — First established on September 15, 
 1837, with jurisdiction of "subjects relating to the public edifices and grounds within 
 the city of Washington," (1st sess. 25th Cong., Globe, p, 34.) On March 10, 1871, 
 jurisdidion was extended to include "all the public buildings constructed by the 
 United States." (1st sess. 42d Cong., Globe, p. 53.) Its present jurisdiction is in 
 the form of the rule adopted in 1880, providing for the reference of subjects relating 
 "to the public buildings and occupied or improved grounds of the United States, 
 other than appropriations therefor." (2d sess. 46th Cong., Record, p. 205.) 
 
 Committee on Patents. — Created September 15, 1837, with jurisdiction relating to 
 patents alone. (1st sess, 25th Cong,, Globe, p, 34,) In 1880, when the present form 
 of the rule was fixed, the subjects of "copyrights and trade-marks" were added. 
 (2d sese. 46th Cong,, Record, pp, 824, 825,) 
 
 Coiniidttee on Claims. — This committee divides with Elections the honor of being 
 the oldest standing committee of the House, It was established November 13, 1794, 
 with jurisdiction of all "matters or things touching claims and demands of the United 
 States," (3d and 4th Congs., Journal, p, 229). "The jurisdiction of the committee 
 has not continued so broad as when first e.stablished, as war claims have generally 
 gone to another committee , Its present jurisdiction is over subjects relating to private 
 and domestic claims and demands other than war claims against the United States. 
 (2d sess. 46th Gong,, Record, p, 205,) 
 
 Committee on the District of Co?um6ia,— Established as a standing committee Janu- 
 ary 27, 180S, in order to simplify the District business, to save the forming of many 
 committees, and to promote consistency and uniformity in the laws relatino- to the 
 District, (1st sess, 10th Cong., Annals, vnl. 2,,p, 1512.) Its present jurisdic^tion as 
 
GOOD EOADS. 203 
 
 defined in the rule as adopted in 1880, is over subjects relating "to the District of 
 Columbia other than appropriations therefor." (2d sess. 46th Cong., Record, p. 825.) 
 
 Committee on Reform in the Civil Service. — Made a standing committee August 18, 
 1893, ha in: been a select committee prior to that date. (Ist sess. 53d Cong., Record, 
 pp. 477, 478. 
 
 Committees on expenditures in the various departments of the Government {10). — On 
 Februaiy 26, 1814, the Committee on Public Expenditures was created in order to 
 relieve the Committee on Ways and Means of some of its duties. (2d sess. 13th Cong., 
 Annals, p. 1695.) This committee was continued until the revision of the rules in 
 1880, when it was dropped. The several committees on expenditures in the various 
 departments dated from March 30, 1816, with the exception of such departments as had 
 not then been created. (1st sess. 14th Cong., Annals, p. 1298.) The Committees for 
 the Departments of Interior, Justice, Agriculture, and Commerce and Labor date, 
 respectively, from March 16, 1860, (1st sess. 36th Cong., Globe, p. 1209), January 16, 
 1874 (Ist sess. 43d Cong., Record, p. 677), December 20, 1889 (Ist sess. 51st Cong., 
 Record, p. 336), and December 11, 1905 (1st sess. 59th Cong., Journal, p. 120). 
 
 Committee on Rules. — From the first (Jongress in 1789 there has always been a Com- 
 mittee on Rules, but it was for many years simply a select committee authorized at the 
 beginning of each Congress to report a system of rules, and continued to be a select 
 committee until the revision of the rules on 1880, when it was made a standing com- 
 mittee. (2d sess. 46th Cong., Record, p. 205.) 
 
 Committee on Accounts. — Established December 27, 1803 (1st sess. 8th Cong., 
 Journal, pp. 498, 503), and on December 17, 1805, is enumerated as a standing com- 
 mittee, with jurisdiction to superintendent and control the expenditures of the con- 
 tingent fund and to audit the accounts of Members for their travel to and from the seat 
 of Government, and their attendance in the House. (1st sess. 9th Cong., Annals, p. 
 284.) Its present jurisdiction is over subjects "touching expenditure of the con- 
 tingent fund of the House, the auditing and settling of all accounts which may be 
 chaified therein by order of the House." (2d sess. 46th Cong., Record, p. 205.) The 
 law (28 Stat. L., p. 768) provides for a temporary Committee on Accounts during the 
 recess before the organization of the House. 
 
 Committee on Mileage. — Established September 15, 1837, with jurisdiction of the 
 subject of mileage, formerly with the Committee on Accounts. . (1st sess. 25th Cong., 
 Globe, p. 35.) 
 
 Committee on Library. — The Joint Committee on the Library is a creature of the 
 laws rather than the rules, the statutes providiag for it originally and conferring on it 
 several duties. (2 Stat. L., p. 56; ibid., p. 129.) In accordance with the requirements 
 of the statutes the House and Senate in 1909 adopted a resolution by concurrent action 
 authorizing the appointment of a joint committee on the library. (Journal, 11th 
 Cong., pp. 71, 78, 142. See also joint rule adopted in 1843, 1st sess. 28th Gong., 
 Globe, pp. 13, 18.) In the revision of 1880 this committee was recognized in the rules 
 of the House, the joint rules having ceased to exist in 1876. (2d sess. 46th Cong., 
 Record, p. 205.) Its jurisdiction, as defined in 1880, is of matters "touching the 
 Library of Congress, statuary and pictures. " 
 
 Committee on Printing.— On March 3, 1830, a Committee on Printing was proposed 
 to have supervision of the printing for the House. (1st sess. 21st Cong., Journal, 
 p. 479.) In 1842 the Committee on Retrenchment reported in favor of a standing, 
 committee on printing, but the proposition was rejected. (2d sess. 27th Cong., Globe, 
 pp. 287, 291.) On Mai-ch 16, 1844, abuses in the management of engraving led to the 
 creation of the "Committee on Engraving, " which continued for 15 years. (1st sess. 
 28th Cong., Globe, p. 393.) The Joint Committee on Printing was created by law 
 August 3, 1846. (9 Stat. L., p. 114.) From time to time various functions have been 
 confeiTed by law on the Joint Committee on Printing. 
 
 Committee on Enrolled Bills.— Prior to 1880 a joint rule provided for the exammation 
 by a joint committee, appointed as a standing committee for that purpose, to carefully 
 compare the enrollment with the engrossed bills as passed in the two Houses. (1st sess. 
 1st Cong Journal p. 67.) The present committee and its jurisdiction was created 
 and defined by the rules in 1880. (2d sess. 46th Cong., Record, p. 205.) 
 
 STATEMENT OF KEPEESENTATIVE S. WARBURTOIT, OF TACOMA, 
 
 WASH. 
 
 r The Chaieman. Mr. Warburton, will you kindly give us your full 
 name and residence ? 
 
 Mr. Wakburton. S. Warburton. 
 r The Chairman. You have been giving some attention to the sub- 
 ject of roads Kindly give the committee the benefit of your thought. 
 
204 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 Mr. Wabbueton. I have introduced a bill providing for a system 
 of national highways. There are two basic features, one the system 
 and the manner of locating it, and the other the manner of raising 
 the fund with which to construct it. The basic point in the location 
 of the roads is the connection of the State capitals with the National 
 Capital, looking at it from a national point of view, and it seems to 
 me that feature is very important. Another feature is that the 
 roads would have the advantage of a definite location for what are 
 known as trunk lines of road. I then undertake to locate the roads 
 through the heavy centers of population with a view of having the 
 routes located along the line of commerce and travel. 
 
 I have spent a great deal of time especially on the trunk lines of 
 road. Using the capitals as a basic point and the United States Capi- 
 tal as one of the chief points I have been able to locate a system of 
 roads connecting every State capital with the United States Capital, 
 which goes through every city of a population of over 100,000, with 
 the exception of one, which is Fall River, Mass., and Fall River is on 
 a branch line. After I located the roads in that way I then began 
 to determine what extra mileage would be necessary to place every 
 city of 25,000 inhabitants on a trunk hne or on a branch line. The 
 mileage was so small that I then determined to drop it to towns of 
 20,000 inhabitants. In the bill I have introduced every town and 
 city of over 100,000 is on a trunk line, every capital is on a trunk 
 line and every seaport above 20,000 population is on a trunk line. 
 Out of 230 cities, of a population between 20,000 and 100,000 peo- 
 ple, over two-thirds are on trunk lines. The seventy-odd cities that 
 are not on the trunk lines can be reached by a mileage of less than 
 2,200 miles. It is rather hard to determine the exact mileage as to 
 that, because it is impossible to say just where the engineer would 
 leave the trunk hne to connect with the city of 20,000 inhabitants. 
 The line on the map here from Raleigh, N. C., to Asheville, N. C, is 
 new and the line from Little Rock through Fort Worth and Dallas, 
 Tex., to El Paso is new. The Une here I shall change to conform to 
 the line of roadway recently adopted by the conference at AsheviUe, 
 N. C, fixing a trunk Une of road. This will necessitate cutting out 
 the line from San Antonio, Tex., to El Paso, Tex. San Antonio will 
 then be on a branch line instead of on a trunk line. 
 
 Mr. Austin. How many miles does your system of road embrace ? 
 
 Mr. Wakbueton. It will be close to 20,500, including mileage 
 through cities. 
 
 Mr. Austin. How many States does it penetrate? 
 
 Mr. Warburton. It reaches every capital in every State Jand 
 reaches every city of 20,000, with probably six exceptions. 
 
 Mr. Austin. Have you any estimate covering the cost ? 
 
 Mr. Warburton. I have approximately an estimate. 
 
 Mr. Austin. If it will not stagger the committee, I would hke to 
 hear it. 
 
 Mr. Warburton. I have consulted every road engineer that I hap- 
 pened to know and have been able to reach and they all agree that 
 $15,000 probably would be a sufficient amount, per mile — between 
 fifteen and seventeen thousand. 
 
 Mr. Austin. Per mile ? 
 
 Mr. Warburton. Per mile. 
 
 Mr. Austin. You can build it for less than that ? 
 
GOOD BOADS. 205 
 
 Mr. Warburton. You can not build a hard surfaced road for much 
 less than $15,000. 
 
 Mr. Austin. That is as expensive as a standard gauge railroad. 
 Mr. Warburton. Oh, no. A standard gauge railroad with rails 
 -on it would cost about $50,000 per mile. If we are going to have a 
 national system, which I am in favor of, we want the best hard sur- 
 faced road., because in the long nin it is the most economical. 
 Mr. Austin. Is that a macadamized road ? 
 
 Mr. Warburton. I would not build a macadamized road, because 
 every State in the Union tliat has had any experience in recent years 
 with macadam roads has found it the most expensive road they can 
 build and maintain. 
 
 Mr. Austin. What material would you use? 
 
 Mr. Warburton. I got Mr. Page to write the section. I was going 
 to make it equivalent to an asphalt, bitulithic, or vitrified brick i-oad. 
 It is equivalent to any paved street. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Do you consider a paved road as good as a concrete 
 road, for example ? 
 
 Mr. Warburton. This permits of concrete, if the engineer or the 
 director of public roads thinks it is the best. It leaves that to his 
 discretion. It is the highest type road. 
 
 Mr. Austin. You use various kinds of material in the various 
 sections of the country ? 
 
 Mr. Warburton. Yes. 
 
 Mr. Madden. You have left out Chattanooga ? 
 
 Mr. Warburton. No; I have not. I have not put in this map the 
 branch lines that are to be built subsequently to the trunk lines. I did 
 not put them on for the simple reason which I have stated before. 
 I do not know just quite how these lines would run; I only name the 
 points and it is hable to vary 10 or 12 per cent between the points. 
 
 Mr. Lee. You have left out a line from Nashville to Atlanta. 
 
 Mr. Warburton. I have spent months trying to plan a system with 
 the least mileage to connect the largest centers of population. 
 
 Mr. Austin. You connect capitals with each capital. 
 
 Mr. Warburton. Not capitals four ways. For mstance, supposing 
 you were at Nashville, you would go to Atlanta in this direction. If 
 you were at Columbia you would go in this way. If you were at 
 Springfield you would have two or three roads on which you could 
 travel to Atlanta. 
 
 Mr. Austin. In other words, you go to Montgomery to get to 
 Atlanta from NashviUe ? 
 
 Mr. Warburton. Yes, sir. 
 
 Mr. Austin. You could go by way of Birmmgham ? 
 
 Mr. Warburton. Yes, sir. This is what probably would occur: 
 People in Atlanta would build up here to Chattanooga a line of their 
 own, and then they could go direct to that city and then tp NashviUe, 
 etc. In other words, I am expecting every State to fill in an equal 
 amount of trunk-line road connecting with each national road. 
 
 Mr Madden. Is it your idea that the roads laid out in your plan 
 are to be built out of the funds of the Federal Government « 
 
 Mr Warburton. AU of them. My idea is simply this: Whether 
 this system is too large or too small, that whatever money the Gov- 
 ernment puts into roads in any State, it ought to keep up the roads 
 and maintain them. If the Government is going to maintain 10,000 
 
206 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 miles of road, cut the cloth that way. If you are going to build 
 20,000, build 20,000, and when you get through you have a system. 
 
 Mr. Austin. How much would you appropriate every year for this 
 system ? 
 
 Mr. Waeburton. It would take five years under my plan to build 
 those roads. I would like to branch into that feature, if you wiU 
 listen to me. I know the difficulty of getting an appropriation out 
 of the Treasury, because money is usually appropriated in advance. 
 I have taken as the item to be taxed an item that is not practically 
 taxed at all or does not bear a fair proportion of the taxes. I wUl, in 
 this connection, give you a little history. I propose to raise this 
 fund by an additional internal-revenue tax on tobacco and cigars. 
 This is only a suggestion I am making, but I think you will agree 
 with me. At the close of the war we had a very light tax on tobacco; 
 it was not a large tax. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Could you put an increased tax on tobacco and 
 cigars now and provide that part of that tax should be made for a 
 specific purpose ? 
 
 Mr. Waeburton. I do not thmk there is any doubt about that. 
 
 Mr. Austin. Did we not increase the tax on tobacco and cigars 
 during the Spanish-American War ? 
 
 Mr. Waeburton. Yes, sir; but took it oflf after the war. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Have you thought about getting this money from 
 the patent medicines ? 
 
 Mr. Waeburton. No. I am not very particular just how we get 
 the money. The tobacco tax was light. In 1873 we had a surplus, 
 and a dangerous surplus, in the Treasury. There was a great cry, 
 and a very proper one, that we must reduce the revenue; we had too 
 much money and the money was accumulating in the Treasury, so 
 we took the tax off of tobacco. The tax on beer is identical now with 
 that at the close of the war. The tax on whisky is a little higher than 
 it was at the close of the war. It was reduced to 75 cents and raised 
 later. 
 
 Mr. Austin. It is $1.10 now? 
 
 Mr. Waebxirton. Yes. Our impost duties on cotton and woolen 
 goods are about the same. In 1873, when it became necessary to 
 reduce the tax, the protected interests did not want it reduced on 
 their goods. There was no excuse for taking it off of whisky and 
 there was no excuse for taking it off of beer, and really there wasn't 
 much excuse for taking it off of tobacco, but it seemed to be the 
 easiest way of reducing the revenue. In 1875 we again had a surplus, 
 and our legislators looked the matter over to see where they could 
 reduce it, and they took it off of tobacco again. In 1879 we had a 
 surplus and a very large surplus, and again we cut the internal-revenue 
 tax almost in two on tobacco and stUl left it on aU of the other things. 
 In 1883 we again were bothered with a surplus, and again we left the 
 tax on everything else and took it off of tobacco. In 1879 we reduced 
 it over the protest of the Commissioner of Internal Revenue, who said 
 that the internal-revenue tax on tobacco was low and ought not be 
 reduced, nobody was asking that to be reduced; but we had to do away 
 with that surplus. Now, that is the history of the tax on tobacco. 
 We reaUy at the present time have the lightest, smallest tax on 
 tobacco of any country in the world. 
 
GOOD EOADS. 207 
 
 Mr. Austin. How much would you increase it, and how woukl it 
 affect the sale of tobacco, cigars, and cigarettes? 
 
 Mr. Warburton. I double the rate on chewing and smoking to- 
 bacco, which would be an increase of 8 cents per pound. For in- 
 stance, on Edgewood tobacco, which is now selling for $1 per pound> 
 you would pay $1.08. For a 25-cent package you would have to 
 
 f>ay 27 cents. I grade the tax on cigars, which no revenue law of 
 ate years lias, and that is the reason I can not tell just what amount 
 it will bring in. The tax on cigars of all kinds that are over 3 ]30unds 
 per thousand, T think, since 1873, has been exactly the same, wliether 
 two for 5 cents, 5, 15, or 20 cent cigars. The rate has been and is 
 now the same on all classes of cigars. I am speaking of the internal 
 revenue, and not duty on tobacco that is imported — S3 per thousand. 
 I think that it is manifestly wrong; have always felt so. I do not 
 think a man should pay as much tax on a 5-cent cigar as I should 
 pay if I buy a 15-cent cigar; so I change the law in that respect. 
 Under my bill I raise the 5-cent cigars from $3 a thousand to $4.50 a 
 thousand; the 10-cent cigars and up to 12^-cent cigars I raise to $6 a 
 thousand; and the 15-cent up to $10 a thousand; in other words, 
 the 15-cent cigars would pay 1 cent tax as against three-tenths of a 
 cent. To illustrate further: A man who smokes 5-cent cigars in 
 order to be even would have to smoke 32 instead of 33. If you 
 smoke 10-cent cigars, you would have to smoke 29 instead of 30; if 
 20-cent cigars, you would have to smoke 32 instead of 33. 
 
 Mr. Madden. Would not that reduce the income ? 
 
 Mr. Warburton. I think not perceptibly, because the number of 
 cigars is increasing each year. It would not make any difference. 
 As a matter of fact, this would occur: The manufacturers would 
 reduce the size of your cigar one-thirtieth, and you could not tell the 
 difference between the two if you laid them side by side; no smoker 
 would know the difference. I do not feel there is a man who uses 
 tobacco — and I have talked to a good many — who will not agree with 
 me that it is about the easiest and simplest way to raise the money. 
 The internal-revenue tax on tobacco last year was $70,000,000. I 
 simply provide in my act that all above $70,000,000 shall be set 
 aside as a good roads fund to be drawn upon by the commission or 
 by the director of good roads. 
 
 The highways I propose will, if constructed, and as soon as 
 constructed, become great lines of commerce and travel, and will 
 be used by all classes of people. There is nothing that promises 
 so much ia reducing the cost of transportation for the short hauls, 
 such as 30, 40, or 50 mUes, as the auto truck. No sooner are hard 
 surface roads completed to large centers than the auto truck appears 
 on the road as the freight carrier for the distances I have men- 
 tioned. The wholesale house immediately beglas to deliver its 
 goods to small towns and farming communities by the auto truck. 
 The big farmer hauls his product to the larger centers by the auto 
 truck where heretofore he has merely hauled it to the nearest raU- 
 wav station. The dairyman and the truck farmer can deliver 
 their goods by the auto truck two or three times the distance that 
 they could theretofore deliver them and in cheaper and far better 
 condition The city gets its butter, and eggs, and milk, and garden 
 products, and aU kinds of farm produce from a much larger terri- 
 tory and at a much less cost than heretofore. The farm Me is made 
 
208 GOOD BOADS. 
 
 more attractive. The farmer who lives on such a road within 10 
 miles of a city has all the advantages of both citj and country life. 
 The saving to the farmer in marketing his goods is very large. Our 
 rich people go abroad every year, spending; it is estimated, over 
 $100,000,000 in touring the continents of Europe, very largely 
 for the reason that to tour this country is simply a muddy, back- 
 breaking job, while over there they can get the finest roads^ A 
 large part of these millions could be saved to this country by such' 
 a system of roads. I was talking with Judge Gibbons, of Los Angeles, 
 about this matter and he agreed with me that, while his country 
 was making an immense amount of money out of the tourists on 
 account of their splendid hard-road system, the great big benefit 
 <;ame from the use by them of the auto truck and freight wagon. 
 I asked him to give me briefly the experience of his people along 
 these Hnes. He did so and I here insert his letter in full. You 
 will observe Ihat he never mentions the tourists in his statement, 
 though everybody knows that Los Angeles profits very heavily 
 by them. He thinks, as I think, that the great big benefit of a 
 system of this kind comes from the auto truck and freight wagon, 
 although a very great benefit comes from the tourist and the pleasure 
 of the people who live along them. He says: 
 
 It is with much pleasure that I shall endeavor to comply with your request to 
 furnish you some information concerning the development by Los Angeles County of 
 a highway system of a character to permit its use by heavy vehicles, such as auto 
 tiucks. 
 
 Four years ago the people of our county voted an issue of $3,500,000 in highway 
 fjonds for the purpose of constructing a system of about 300 miles of highways, so 
 designed as to reach every center of population in the county, and so arranged that 
 the city of Los Angeles, the principal center of population in the county, should be 
 the center of the highway system. You will understand that the city of Los Angeles 
 is surrounded by a number of smaller cities and towns, varying in population from 
 500 to 40,000, at a distance of from 5 to 35 miles. 
 
 The type of highway adopted was a road 16 feet wide, composed of a broken-atone 
 foundation 6 inches in depth at the center and thinning somewhat toward the sides, 
 covered by a finishing coat of oil macadam composed of finely crushed rock and gravel 
 mixed with crude oil, the road supported on each side by shoulders of crushed rock 
 and gravel 3 feet in width. This type of construction was adopted as being most likely 
 to resist the wear of auto vehicles, the oil finish offering, it was conceived, the best 
 resistance to the suction effect of automobiles tires upon the surface of the highway. 
 Portions of the highway system in a large part of our county were not in proximity 
 to deposits of either gravel or stone. Furthermore, our contractors had had no expe- 
 rience in highway building, and no gravel pits or stone quarries suitable for furnishing 
 material had been opened when the first advertisement for bids for constructing 
 portions of this highway system were made. As a result, the first parts of the system 
 ■constructed cost the couuty about $14,000 per mile. The construction has been 
 under way for somethiug more than three years, and the last^sections are now under 
 construction, and the system will be entirely completed within the next few weeks. 
 Within the past year and since gravel pits have been developed and stone quarries 
 opened up for furnishing the proper material, the county has awarded contracts lor 
 ■constructing sections of the highway at a price of $7,500 per mile, or a little more 
 than one-half the price of the first contracts awarded. 
 
 The economic advantage of the system as developed has been fully demonstrated. 
 Notwithstanding the fact that Los Angeles is the center of three systems of steam 
 railroads which have running out of the city to various centers of population 13 lines 
 oi road, and of a system of electric suburban lines aggregating 1,000 miles in extent, 
 which reaches every center of population in the county, there has been established 
 along our highway system as fast as completed, lines of auto trucks, which have suc- 
 cessfully competed in rates for transporting freight with both steam and electric 
 roads. As an illustration, I was told a few days ago by the manager of one of our 
 largest morning papers that his paper and another morning paper had been carrying 
 their papers by electric car to a town about 30 miles from Los Angeles. Upon inves- 
 tigation they found that they could secure this service by truck at a large reduction, 
 
GOOD BOADS. 209 
 
 and they have established a truck service in place of the electric car service at a 
 saving of 45 per cent of the cost of carrying their papers on the electric suburban car. 
 One of our largest lumber companies, whose lumber is landed at Redondo, a seaport 
 15 miles from the city, and which is connected with the city by two lines of electric 
 and a line of steam road, has established a truck service for transporting its lumber 
 from the wharf to its yard in the city, and claims that by doing so it has materially 
 reduced the cost of transportation. 
 
 It has become the custom of the merchants in the smaller towns surrounding Los 
 Angeles to have their goods transported by trucks from the wholesale houses to their 
 stores. They claim that they have not only secured a cheaper transportation, but 
 they avoid the necessity of two handlings by having the goods loaded on the truck at 
 the wholesale house and delivered directly to their stores at the point of destination, 
 thus avoiding the handling from the wholesale establishment to me car and from the 
 car to their stores. 
 
 So effective has our system proven in developing the handling of freight by auto 
 trucks that a good deal of freight is now handled in that way between the cities of 
 Los Angeles and San Bernardino, a distance of 65 miles, although only one-half of this 
 distance is covered by our county highway system, the remainder being over fairly 
 good road with a natural gravel surface. 
 
 Of course, in the matter of hauling produce to the city our farmers and dairymen 
 have found the improved highways of enormous benefit, as they not only greatly 
 increase the amount of load that can be carried, but also greatly shorten the tune for 
 transportation, by enabling them to use auto vehicles. I know of one instance where 
 a company has established an auto-truck service between the city and a seaside 
 suburb 16 miles away, where thousands of our citizens have seaside homes. It makes 
 with each auto truck four round trips a day, leaving on the first trip at 6 o'clock in 
 the morning and delivering its last load as late as 6 or 7 o'clock at night. 
 
 The harbor commission of the city of Los Angeles, of which I was a member for 
 several years, made a very careful investigation of the use of auto trucks for trans- 
 porting freight, witii the idea of encouraging this method of transportation between 
 the business center of our city and our harbor, 22 miles away. We found in the course 
 of our investigation that for the last three or four years there has been operated out of 
 Paris, France, for a distance of 100 miles, in competition with steam railroads, an 
 auto-vehicle service known as the "Renaud road trains," consisting of as many as 
 four or five truck units, pulled by auto truck and controlled by their brakes something 
 like our steam roads. 
 
 Two years ago the people of our State voted an issue of $18,000,000 of bonds for the 
 construction of two lines of highways extending throughout the full length of the State, 
 so arranged that either by the main lines or by short branches they could be connected 
 with the county seats of the various. counties in the State. Our State highways com- 
 mission has adopted a type of highway of a solid concrete base, finished with an oil 
 macadam surface. Construction upon portions of the State's system was begun some 
 months ago, and they have obtained bids for the construction under $18,000 per mile. 
 The highway is 16 feet in width, and it is believed that the type adopted will resist 
 the heaviest auto trucks used. The people of the State are looking forward to the de- 
 velopment of the State's system, with the conviction that it will have a great deal to 
 do with the adjustment of transportation rates, and will in many instances relieve them 
 of excessive rates now charged by the transportation companies. , , , , 
 
 I have no doubt that, if your plan for a national highway should be adopted and 
 carried out, it would be found to be of enormous advantage to every center of popula- 
 tion that it reaches, and to the country surrounding those centers within a radius of 
 100 miles, in facilitating the transportation of freight of all kinds. 
 
 Trusting that the foregoing information may be of some use to you m the great enter- 
 prise that you have undertaken, I beg to remain, etc. 
 
 If I may proceed for a few minutes, I would like to discuss the 
 question of the advisabihty of the Government appropriating money 
 forlthe construction of roads and then dividing it among the States 
 in the proportion that the population of each State bears to the 
 population of the United States, and then granting this aid on the 
 condition that the State will appropriate a like amount. This propo- 
 sition seems fair on its face, and it would seem as though it might be 
 an advisable scheme. But if we investigate it carefully, we will 
 readily see that in fact it is based on a false theory. I think we will 
 79558— PT 1—13 14 
 
210 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 agree that whatever the Government does along the line of road con- 
 struction or of aid to road construction it ought to be with the view 
 of securing a system of interstate roads. This can not be done 
 under the above scheme. It is wholly contrary to such a system- 
 of roads. One of the bills introduced, for instance, provides for an 
 appropriation of $25,000,000, to be divided among the States as 
 above suggested, in proportion to the population. Under this scheme 
 New York would get $2,500,000; Pennsylvania about $2,100,000, and, 
 Massachusetts about $1,000,000 ; Nevada would receive about $25,000,. 
 South Dakota about $125,000, Virginia about $500,000, and Tennessee 
 about $500,000. Massachusetts has, in round numbers, about 8,000 
 square miles, Tennessee 41,000 square miles, Virginia 40,000 square 
 miles, South Dakota 76,000 square miles, and Nevada 109,000 square 
 miles. Certainly Tennessee and Virginia need as many miles of high- 
 ways per thousand square miles as Massachusetts. The same is true 
 of Virginia. Y&t under such a system Massachusetts, with only one- 
 fifth as many square miles as Virginia or Tennessee, would get twice 
 as much aid from the Government, or, in other words, would get two 
 times as much aid per thousand square miles as the two States 
 mentioned. Under the system proposed by me Massachusetts would 
 get a larger mileage to the thousand square miles than either Ten- 
 nessee or Virginia, yet each of these States would get a much larger 
 mileage. But, on the other hand, Massachusetts would in fact get 
 an equal advantage from it. For instance, 80 people out of a hun- 
 dred" m Massachusetts would reside within 10 miles of my proposed 
 highways, while only 50 persons out of a hundred in Tennessee 
 would reside within 10 miles of my proposed highways. 
 
 Massachusetts would contribute more to this fund in proportion to 
 the mileage of roads that she would receive, but this would be equal- 
 ized in the end by the reason of the fact that maintenance of the road 
 per mile would be a great deal larger in Massachusetts than in Tennes- 
 see. Reverting to the statement I have just made, that dividing of 
 the appropriations in proportion to the population would wholly 
 prevent the construction of a system of interstate highways, I want 
 to say that any real interstate road scheme must contemplate ulti- 
 mately at least three transcontinental highways from East to West. 
 Under the scheme to appropriate $25,000,000 and divide it as above 
 mentioned, I have called attention to the fact that Nevada eould 
 only get $25,000. As soon as she would appropriate a like amount 
 she would have $50,000. If we are to have three transcontinental 
 roads the central one of them must necessarily pass through Nevada, 
 which is at least 500 miles wide, and the $25,000 that the Government 
 would appropriate, together with Nevada's $25,000, would build about 
 3 miles across the State. It will be seen at once that such a scheme 
 would prevent the construction of such a transcontinental line. 
 
 A central transcontinental line would have to cross Wyoming. 
 Under the $25,000,000 appropriation, Wyoming would get only 
 about $35,000, providing she appropriated a like amount, making a 
 total of $70,000. This sum would build about 5 miles of road across 
 Wyoming out of a necessary mileage of more than 500 miles. What 
 is true of these two States in a measure is true of other States through 
 which such a transcontinental line would pass. / southern trans- 
 continental line must pass through Arizona and New Alexico. Under 
 such a scheme Arizona would get Federal aid of about .$50,000 and 
 
GOOD EOADS. 211 
 
 by appropriating a like amount a total of $100,000 would be available, 
 or enough to build about 7 miles of road out of a necessary 500 miles 
 of road. New ■Mexico would get about $75,000 out of the $25,000,000. 
 If she should appropriate another $75,000 a sufficient sum would be^ 
 aviilable to build 10 miles of road out of a necessary five hundred and 
 odd miles of road. At that rate it would take 50 years to construct a 
 road across the State. A northern transcontinental road must pass 
 through one of the Dakotas, Montana and Idaho with a similar result 
 as to mileage in each of these States as in the States on the central 
 or southern transcontinental line. To undertake to build any trans- 
 contmental line on any such scheme is wholly out of the question. 
 It can not be done. The scheme would fail in "the same way in many 
 other southern and western States. It is wholly subversive of any 
 national system of roads. 
 
 It is my conviction that we will never be able to get a system of 
 interstate highwa3^s unless the Government constructs the roails. 
 There is another argument that might be made in i:avt)r of an inter- 
 state system of roads and against dividing up any sums that (lie 
 United States may appropriate in proportion to population. 
 - The heavy centers of population are just as much interested in an 
 interstate system of highways as they are in an interstate system of 
 railroads. New Xork, Chicago, and Boston are just as much inter- 
 ested in a system of railroads throughout the country as they are in 
 a system within their respective States. Their prosperity depends 
 quite as much upon one as it does upon the other. Iowa needs as 
 many railroads per thousand square miles, as Massachusetts. It 
 would be just as sound logic to argue that if the Government of the 
 United States were to undertake now the construction of railway 
 systems that it should give the mileage to the different States in 
 proportion to the population. In such a case Massachusetts would 
 get one and a half times as many miles of roads as Iowa would, though 
 she has 8,000 square miles to Iowa's 55,000 square miles. In such an 
 event either Massachusetts would be immensely over supplied or Iowa 
 would not be one^fifth supplied. If Iowa were to be supplied with as 
 many miles of railroads as she now has and you were to give Massa- 
 chusetts one and a half times as many miles as Iowa has, you would 
 be piling steel rails on top of steel rails in Massachusetts. In inter- 
 state highways, as in interstate railroads, there must be some proper 
 relation between people to be supplied with such facilities and the 
 square miles to be covered. I think such a scheme is wholly imprac- 
 ticable and based on an incorrect theory. 
 
 The proposition that the Government should distribute its appro- 
 priations for highways in the States in proportion to the population 
 of the States could not be defended on any ground. It would be just 
 as logical to contend that the Government should establish rural mail 
 routes in the different States in proportion to the population." For 
 illustration, Massachusetts has 7,568 miles of rural free delivery and 
 star-route service. Tennessee has 39,946 miles of rural delivery and 
 star-route service. So, if we should distribute $25,000,000 annually, 
 as proposed in one or more of the bills introduced, for good roads and 
 distribute that amount in the States in proportion to the population, 
 Massachusetts would get about $1,000,000 on account of her 7,500 
 miles of rural mail service and Tennessee would get $500,000 for her 
 
212 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 40,000 miles of rural mail service. To put it in another way, Massa- 
 chusetts would get $10 a mile for rural service as opposed to Ten- 
 nessee's $1 . Such a scheme would have but little more basis to stand 
 upon than would the proposition that the Government should dis- 
 tribute its appropriation for rivers and harbors in the different States 
 in proportion to their population. 
 
 As I have said, the States under my bill which have the largest 
 population, such as New York, Massachusetts, and Pennsylvania, 
 would not get the mileage in proportion to the population that many 
 of the States would with a less population and fewer large cities, but 
 this is equalized hi a large measure by the fact that the cost of main- 
 tenance of the roads in such States would be very much heavier than 
 in the States of lesser population. But, in addition to this, we can 
 not vote appropriations for public improvements and distribute them 
 in the States in proportion to thepopulation. No such a proposition 
 has heretofore been advanced. The farming sections and the interior 
 of the United States have been paying then- proportion of the hun- 
 dreds of millions of dollars that nave been expended by the United 
 States Government in the improvement of rivers and harbors, in the 
 construction of large public builidngs in the large cities, in the con- 
 struction of forts and shipbuilding plants, and for the maintenance 
 of them. To be sure, the improvements in a sense are for the benefit 
 of all the people, but the large cities and heavy centers of population 
 get a special and peculiar advantage from the expenditures of these 
 moneys as opposed to the communities and States where the moneys 
 are not expended. So, if the large cities of the United States con- 
 tribute in this instance a little more than their share toward the 
 building of interstate highways that will be of special benefit to the 
 interior and farming communities, they have no ground for com- 
 plaint. Under this system which I propose most of the larger States 
 would get on an average of about 450 miles of the highest class of 
 road to be maintained by the Government. Is this not fuUy of as 
 much advantage to the State as though it were paying one-half of 
 the sum and 900 miles were to be constructed ? It gets the 450 miles 
 without cost. In fact, it gets more than that, because it receives a 
 dollar for every dollar that the improvements on its roads will be 
 worth to the Government in improvmg such roads. In many States 
 it will be a large sum wliich the States will have for the improvement 
 of their roads. Is it not a far better proposition all around for the 
 Government to expend whatever money it proposes to set aside for 
 the State in the construction of roads and not to divide the responsi- 
 bility for the economic use of the money with State officials ? It is 
 ordinarily hard enough to prevent fraud and graft where you can 
 center responsibihty on oneliead. It can not be done where respon- 
 sibility is divided between the United States Government and the 
 States. If the Government is going to spend hundreds of millions 
 of dollars on State roads some Government official ought to be held 
 responsible for everything concerning the construction of the roads 
 to the end that the Government would get a dollar's worth of first- 
 class road for every dollar it expends. My bill provides for about 
 18,000 mUes of actual road construction, including branch roads. 
 It provides for branch roads to every city of a population of 20,000 
 providing the city can be reached by 50 miles of roadway, and in 
 case such city can not be reached by the construction of over 50 
 
GOOD BOADS. 213 
 
 miles of the necessary roadway to connect such city, the Government 
 shall build 50 miles provided the city or State will build the additional 
 mileage. There are only about one-half dozen cities in the United 
 States of 20,000 population or more that would not be reached with- 
 out the city or municipality constructing any mileage. There are 
 230 cities in the United States with a population between 20,000 and 
 100,000 people. Two-thirds of such cities are on the main trunk 
 highways. The salient features of the system are these: 
 
 Every city of over 100,000 population is on a main trunk highway. 
 
 Every capital in the United States is on a main trunk highway. 
 
 Every seaport in the United States over 20,000 population is on a 
 main trunk highway. 
 
 Over two-thirds of the people of the United States will reside on 
 one of the highways or within 10 miles of one. 
 
 I have most carefully examined the above statement in connection 
 with the following States. In this, as above, I count every resident 
 of a city as living within 10 miles of a road located through it or by 
 it. I Imow I am not overstating the fact when I say that the per- 
 centage of residents of each of the following States will reside on or 
 within 10 miles of the proposed highway within the State: Indiana, 
 over 60 per cent; Missouri, over 59 per cent; Ohio, over 65 per cent: 
 Pennsylvania, over 74 per cent; Illinois, over 70 per cent; New York, 
 over 80 per cent ; Massachusetts, over 80 per cent ; New Jersey, over 
 80 per cent; Connecticut, over 80 per cent; Khode Island, over 90 
 per cent; Montana, over 70 per cent; Washington, over 75 per cent; 
 Oregon, over 70 per cent; California, over 75 per cent; Colorado, over 
 70 per cent; Maryland, over 70 per cent; Delaware, over 70 per cent. 
 
 While New York has a much larger population than Tennessee, and 
 while it will have about the same mileage of roads, yet it will be 
 observed that over 80 per cent of the people of New York live within 
 10 miles of such a proposed road, while only 50 per cent in Tennessee 
 live within a like distance. I think neither State can say they are 
 unfairly treated by my bill. In fact, in New York 6,000,000 of its 
 people live in cities of over 20,000 people, through which my proposed 
 system will pass. The same comparison with New York can be made 
 with the majority of other States. I have tried to devise plans that 
 would be absolutely fair to all the States and the Nation, and I have 
 been wholly unable to find one that is more equal or just to all the 
 people than the one I present. 
 
 There is another theory of Government aid to States in the con- 
 struction of roads; that is to offer aid to each State in an amount 
 equal to that which the State is willmg to appropriate regardless of 
 population and to divide the supervision or construction and main- 
 tenance with such State. I think nearly every one that has tried to 
 work out a theory of Government aid has started with some such 
 
 I would like to add, if I may, some observations on the advisability 
 of raising the funds for the construction out of an increased tax on 
 tobaccos I advocate an increase of the mternal-revenue tax on 
 tobacco for the purpose of raising the necessary fund for the construc- 
 tion of roads for the simple reason that tobacco is a luxury and bears 
 but a small part of the tax it ought to bear for the purpose of running 
 the Government. Our low tax on tobacco was not brought about by 
 any scientific method of placing a tax upon it, as I will show in a 
 
214 
 
 GOOD KOADS. 
 
 minute. "^Thether you raise the necessary revenue to construct a road 
 system from the internal-revenue tax on tobacco or not, the increased 
 rate should be adopted and the tax on some necessary of life reduced 
 a like amount. This admitted luxury, tobacco, bears a less tax than 
 almost any other commodity in comparison with its value when sold 
 on the market. Compared with any other luxury, one might say it 
 is not taxed at all. 
 
 Two years ago I had occasion to review the tax on tobacco in the 
 House, and I went very thoroughly into the question, and I am going 
 to quote very freely from the remarks I then made, so the data I give 
 will bear date as of 1911. What I then said is essentially true now. 
 If I were to get a statement from the Treasury Department giving 
 the amount of revenue that would be received under my proposed law 
 for last year and the amount actually received last year, the compara- 
 tive figures would be about the same. I desire to quote freely from 
 the speech I then made. 
 
 The internal-revenue tax on fermented liquor is the same to-day 
 that it was at the highest point during the Civil War. It has never 
 been lowered 1 penny. It was doubled during the Spanish War, but 
 when that war was over the tax was restored to the point of the CivU 
 War. Our war tax on distilled spirits was for a short time reduced 
 from an average of about $1.50 to 60 cents a gallon in 1868. 
 
 In 1872 it was raised to 70 cents a gallon; in 1875 it was again raised 
 to 90 cents a gallon; and in 1894 it was raised to $1.10 a gallon, and 
 the tax has remained at the last figure ever since 1894. The tax on 
 distilled liquors since 1894 has been about as high as the average tax 
 during the CivU War. The tax on tobacco from its highest point 
 during the Civil War has been lowered from year to year until it is now 
 but a small fraction of that tax. The changes have been quite numer- 
 ous, and I have prepared a table showing the rate and date of each|law 
 reducing the same. Smoking and chewing tobacco and snuff in each 
 law are fixed at the same rate, there being one or two exceptions in 
 relation to snuff, which I will not notice, so I will speak of them as 
 tobacco. Cigars and cheroots have been taxed by each law at the 
 same rate, and I will speak of them together as cigars. Cigarettes by 
 each law have borne about one-half of the rate of cigars, so I will not 
 especially mention them. I am discussing only the internal-revenue 
 tax. I am not taking into consideration at all import or tariff duties. 
 
 Date of enactment. 
 
 Tobacco 
 
 (per 
 pound). _ 
 
 Cigars (per 
 thousand). 
 
 1864 
 
 Cents. 
 
 15-35 
 
 30-40 
 
 30-40 
 
 32 
 
 20 
 
 24 
 
 16 
 
 8 
 
 6 
 
 12 
 
 9.6 
 
 6 
 
 8 
 
 1 $8. 00-$40. 00 
 
 1865 
 
 10.00 
 
 1866 
 
 4.00 
 
 1868 
 
 5.00 
 
 1872 
 
 6.00 
 
 1876 
 
 a. 00 
 
 1879 
 
 6.00 
 
 1883 
 
 3.00 
 
 1890. . 
 
 3.00 
 
 1898 
 
 3.60 
 
 1901 
 
 3.00 
 
 1902 
 
 3.00 
 
 1909 
 
 3.00 
 
 
 
 
 1 According to value. 
 
GOOD KOADS. 215 
 
 Now, we will observe that from the highest point during the war, 
 40 cents a pound, tobacco has been reduced to 8 cents a pound. 
 Cigars, at the highest point of the Civil War, were $8 to S40, accord- 
 ing to the value, per thousand; they were reduced to $3 a thousand 
 in 1883, and they have remained at that ])oint all the time, except 
 during the Spanish War, when they were slightly raised. 
 
 So it cleai-ly a})pears, while the tax on whisky or distilled spirits 
 is about the same as that of the Civil War tax, and the tax on fer- 
 mented liquors, beer, and ale is equal to that of the highest Civil 
 War tax, our tax on tobacco has been reduced from time to time 
 until it is but a fraction of the Civil War tax. Our present tax is not 
 one-fourth of what it was during the Civil War and up to 1872; two- 
 iifths of what it was from 1872 to 1 875 ; one-third of what it was from 
 1875 to 1879; one-half of what it wp,s from 1879 to 1883. 
 
 While the foregomg table shows that our tax on tobacco is but a 
 pittance compared with what it was during the 20 years following 
 the Civil War, and the tax is insignificant compared with the tax 
 on other luxuries, it does not give one a full idea of what a small 
 iid valorem tax it really is. 
 
 If we were to increase our tax on tobacco 100 per cent, it would 
 equal the tax in effect from 1879 to 1883; if we were to increase it 
 300 per cent, it would equal the tax in effect from 1875 to 1879; if 
 we were to increase it 250 per cent, it would equal the tax in effect 
 from 1872 to 1875; and if we were to increase it 400 per cent, it 
 would then equal the tax in effect from 1864 to 1872. 
 
 Our present tax on a 5-cent cigar is 6 per cent of the retail price. 
 Our present tax on a 25-cent cigar is 1.2 per cent of retail price. 
 Our present tax on a 50-cent cigar equals six-tenths of 1 per cent at 
 retail price. 
 
 Our tax on sugar represents about 36 per cent of the price of 
 retail sugar in the city of Washington. The tariff is almost five 
 times as much on a dollar's worth of sugar as the tax on a dollar's 
 worth of smoking tobacco or on a dollar's worth of 5-cent cigars, 12 
 times as much as the tax on a dollar's worth of 10-cent cigars, 30 
 times as much as the tax on a dollar's worth of 25-cent cigars, and 60 
 times as great as the tax on |1 worth of 50-cent cigars. 
 
 When one of our millionaires buys a dollars worth of 50-cent cigars 
 he pays the Government six- tenths of 1 cent revenue; when he buys 
 a dollar's worth of 25-cent cigars he pays the Government a revenue 
 of 1.2 cents; when he buys a dollar's worth of two-for-a-quarter cigars 
 he pays the Government in revenue 2.4 cents. When his gardener 
 buys a dollar's worth of nickel cigars or of smoking tobacco he pays 
 the Government a revenue of 8 cents; when his washerwoman buys 
 $1 worth of granulated sugar at the market price in Washington — 
 5^ cents a pound — 36 cents is extracted from her on account of our 
 tariff on that necessary of life. 
 
 gnuff common, ordinary snuff — sells for about 75 cents a pound 
 
 and pays a tax of 8 cents a pound, or a tax equal to 10 per cent of its 
 retail price. Would it not be good, decent legislation to tax this 
 not altogether delicate and refined luxury 36 cents per pound and 
 thus raise our revenue $10,000,000 a year, and put the revenue where 
 needed so badly — building of Government roads. Let the woman or 
 man who wants to use snuff pay as large a percentage on the retail 
 price as the poor woman does who has to buy sugar for herself and 
 her children. 
 
216 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 The Commissioner of Internal Eevenue, at my request, in 1911 
 gave me in detail the amounts of smoking and chewing tobacco a,nd 
 snuff, cigars, and cigarettes that were withdrawn for consumption 
 for the year 1910, so that I might determine what the revenues of 
 the Government for the fiscal year ending 1910 would have been if 
 the internal revenue law of 1875 and the internal-revenue law of 
 1879 were in force. 
 
 The internal revenue that we would have received f9r the amount of 
 tobacco consumed during the fiscal year 1910 if the internal-revenue 
 tax of April, 1879, had been in force would have been, in round num- 
 bers,|138,000,000, as opposed to $58,000,000 actually received under 
 the existing tax. If the internal-revenue law of 1875 had been in 
 force on the tobacco consumed during the fiscal year 1910, instead 
 of the Government getting $58,000,000 it would have collected 
 $178,000,000. It must be borne in mind that the tax in this law of 
 1879 was not reduced because it was too high, or because there was 
 any demand for the reduction of it by anyone interested in the indus- 
 try or by the consumer, but because the Government found it neces- 
 sary to reduce its income — to check its increasing surplus. "Why 
 should we not restore the law of 1879 when we need the revenue so 
 much for the construction of good roads ? 
 
 The law of 1875 reduced the war tax 25 per cent; the law of 1879 
 further reduced the tax to about 50 per cent of the war tax. So there 
 could be no excuse for the third reduction of 1883, which again re- 
 duced the tobacco tax to one-fourth of the Civil War tax, except the 
 desire to still further reduce the revenue. 
 
 Mr. Beveridge, in his great speech on tobacco in the United States 
 Senate in 1899, and to whom 1 am indebted for much information, 
 said: 
 
 To bring home to us more clearly the grotesque littleness of our present tax compared 
 with that of other countries, I have had computed a table which I shall insert in my 
 remarks, showing what our revenue would be if we taxed tobacco as these other coun- 
 tries taxed tobacco. 
 
 For example, if we taxed tobacco at the same rate that England taxes tobacco, we 
 would get $380,086,000. If we taxed tobacco at the rate that Austria taxes it, we 
 would get 1202,884,000 every year; at the rate that Hungary taxes it, $169,498,000 
 every year. If we taxed tobacco at the rate that France taxes tobacco, we would get 
 $436,585,000 of revenue every year from that single source of taxation. If we taxed 
 tobacco at the rate that Italy taxes tobacco, we would get $447,675,000 every year. 
 
 Our internal-revenue tax on tobacco yielded last year $57,889,000. 
 
 Over one-half of the tobacco consumed in Great Britain is imported 
 from this country and bought in the open market, and when it reaches 
 England it is taxed 74 cents a pound, which the consumer pays; we 
 furnish France with over haK of the tobacco consumed by the French 
 people, and this tobacco pays a tax when it reaches France of 85 cents 
 a pound; we furnish Italy with practically all the tobacco that 
 country consumes, and when it reaches Italy it pays a tax of 93 cents 
 a pound. 
 
 It might be well to observe that probably the French and English 
 people pay no tax which is less felt and about which there is less 
 complamt. 
 
GOOD EOADS. 217 
 
 THE TAX ON TOBACCO WAS REDUCED IN 1879 JAND AGAIN IN 1883 
 BECAUSE THE GOVERNMENT DID NOT NEED THE REVENUE. 
 
 It may be asked by those who do not recall the history of the 
 reduction of the tax on tobacco in 1879 and 1883 why these reductions 
 were made. I want to recall the fact that they were made in order 
 to prevent a large surplus in our Treasury. 
 
 During the preceding years the income of the Government had 
 been exceedmg its expenditures by a large amount. The Gov- 
 ernment was collecting more revenue than it needed to meet its 
 fixed charges, and the question was, What tax should the Gov- 
 ernment reduce in order to prevent a further accumulation ? 
 
 Our protected interests objected to a reduction of duty on imports 
 and were successful in preventing a reduction of the taru'f. The 
 internal-revenue tax on tobacco was adopted as the easiest and most 
 satisfactory way of reducing our large and then growing surplus. This 
 was the sole reason for the reduction made in tBs tax at both of these 
 dates. It was not because the Government or Congress regarded 
 the tax as too high; it was not because the consumers of tobacco 
 were objecting to the tax; it was not because the farmers who raised 
 the tobacco demanded or requested it. It was done in each instance 
 solely for the purpose of cuttmg down the revenue. It was cut down 
 for this express purpose, and this amounted to a notice to the world 
 that it would be and should be restored whenever the Government's 
 needs required. No man can complain if the Government restores 
 this tax when it should be restored. 
 
 Who would complain if the tax of 1883 or 1879 on tobacco were 
 restored ? 
 
 The Hon. Green B. Raum, then Commissioner of Internal Revenue, 
 protested against the reduction of the internal-revenue tax on 
 tobacco in a special report to Congress. After stating the amount of 
 money required by the Government and the amount of its 'revenue, 
 he showed that we were collecting from $70,000,000 to $80,000,000 
 more than we needed, and then says: 
 
 It is an old and sound maxim that no more revenue should be raised than is necessary 
 for an economical administration of the Government and a gradual reduction of the 
 public debt. 
 
 Therefore it becomes obvious that a reduction of from seventy to eightjf millions in 
 the annual revenues of the country could be safely entered upon; and, in my judg- 
 ment, such a reduction is urgently called for. I respectfully offer some suggestions 
 for your consideration in this regard. 
 
 The great bulk of internal-revenue taxation is derived from distilled spirits — about 
 nine-tenths of which are used as a beverage — malt liquors, tobacco, and cigars. These 
 are not articles of necessary consumption, but are articles of luxury, the taxes upon 
 which are readily paid by the consumers, and no one need consume them. 
 
 I am strongly of the opinion that so long as the principle of deriving part of the 
 revenue of the Government from internal taxation is retained, these articles and the 
 dealers therein are proper subjects for taxation. There is no demand on the part 
 of consumers of these products for the remission of the taxes imposed upon them; 
 there is no public sentiment calling for their repeal. On the contrary, the general 
 current of public opinion seems to be in favor of their retention. 
 
 This is a strong argument against the reduction of the tax in 1879. 
 His advice was not heeded, and the tax on tobacco was reduced from 
 24 to 16 cents a pound, and again in 1883 to 8 cents. 
 
 In the annual report of Gen. Raum for the fiscal year ending June 
 30 1879 the report bearing date November 24, 1879, referring to the 
 
218 GOOD EOADS. 
 
 reduction of the internal-revenue tax on tobacco in this report, he 
 
 says : 
 
 Experience has Bhown that no material advantage has inured to the consumer (of 
 tobacco) in the reduction of price by reason of the reduction of the tax. 
 
 One of the arguments that has been raised against increasing 
 the internal-revenue tax on this luxury is that it will injure the farmer 
 who raises it. The opponents of the increase of this tax — those who 
 do not desire the Government to obtain any other large source of 
 revenue which will enable Congress to reduce the tariff — warn us 
 solemnly and with great unction that if we raise the tax on tobacco 
 the farmer will be greatly affected, if not ruined. To one who has 
 not made a study of this c[uestion this argument may seem very 
 plausible, but in fact nothing is further from the truth. History 
 shows us over and over again that a large or small tax on a luxury of 
 this kind has no effect on the price of the raw ingredients used in the 
 production of such luxuries or on the amount consumed. 
 
 The history of tobacco since America was discovered, when to- 
 bacco came into use, shows conclusively that the tax on tobacco has 
 nothing whatever to do with the price paid to the farmer. The aver- 
 age price of tobacco on the farm has been quite as high when our 
 internal-revenue tax has been one, two, three, four, five, and six times 
 as high as our present tax. Whenever we have made the heaviest 
 reduction in our internal-revenue tax on tobacco the price of tobacco 
 on the farm has not been increased a fraction of a cent. 
 
 In 1S79 we took off 8 cents a pound. The farm price of tobacco 
 prior to that time was 8 cents per pound. Did the farmer get this 
 8 cents that was removed from the internal-revenue tax? Not at 
 all, though the tax removed was equal to the price of the farm product. 
 
 In 1883 we again reduced the internal-revenue tax on tobacco 8 
 cents per pound; the then prevailing price of tobacco on the farm 
 was about 8 cents a pound. Did this increase the value of the tobacco 
 on the farm ? Not a particle. The farmer did not receive one penny 
 advance, nor a fraction of a penny advance, for his tobacco. 
 
 The average price of tobacco from 1875 to 1883 was 7.7 cents per 
 pound. The internal-revenue tax on tobacco for the first four years 
 ■oi this time was 24 cents a pound; for the last four years it was 16 
 -cents a pound. 
 
 The average price of tobacco from 1885 to 1895 was 8 cents a 
 pound, while the internal-revenue tax on tobacco was only 6 cents a 
 pound as compared with 24 cents and 16 cents a pound from 1879 to 
 1883. 
 
 The average price of tobacco from 1895 to 1905 was 7.2 cents a 
 pound, with an internal-revenue tax of only 6 cents a pound; the 
 farm price was one-half a cent a pound less than from 1875 to 1883, 
 when the tax was 24 and 16 cents a pound. 
 
 The average price of tobacco on the farm from 1900 to 1905 was 
 7.1 cents per pound. 
 
 It will be seen that the farm price during these five years was six- 
 tenths of a cent less a pound than it was from 1875 to 1883, when 
 the revenue tax was 24 cents and 16 cents a pound. 
 
 From 1865 to 1872 the tax on tobacco was 32 cents a pound, the 
 highest tax ever placed by the United States on tobacco. During 
 these years while this tax was in force the average price of tobacco 
 
GOOD BOADS. 219 
 
 was 9.8 cents per pound on the farm, the highest average price in 
 the history of this country except during the war. 
 
 From July, 1898, until May, 1901, the tax on tobacco was doubled; 
 that is to say, it was raised from 6 cents to 12 cents a pound. In 
 1901 it was reduced from 12 cents to 9 cents a pound, and in 1902 
 it was restored to the pre war tax of 6 cents a pound. 
 . The farmer received as large a price during the years the Spanish- 
 American War tax was in force as he did the three years preceding 
 the war or the three years following the war. 
 
 If we compare the prices of tobacco for the years mentioned it will 
 be observed that the farm price of tobacco was as high and even 
 Tiigher when the revenue taxes were the highest. 
 
 We ship our enormous surplus abroad. The price of tobacco 
 raised in this country is controlled by the price abroad, as is our 
 cotton. The price is fixed by the law of supply and demand. The 
 tax of 74, 85, and 93 cents levied by the countries who consume the 
 major portion of tobacco that we export no more determines the price 
 of the raw article than does our tax of 6 cents a pound. 
 
 HENRY S. SPACKMAN. 
 
 The CriAiiijrAx. At the request of Senator Swanson the following 
 letter from Mr. Henry S. vSpackman, of Philadelphia, to Mr. Wm. E. 
 Carson, of Rivertoii, Va., will be incorporated in the record: 
 
 Philadelphia, Pa., January 28, 191S. 
 Mx. Wm. E. Carson, Riverton, Va. 
 
 Dear Sir: Replying to your request for information covering the use of hydrated 
 lime in connection with road buildiag, I would eay that while from my study of tests, 
 showing the effect of tlie addition of hydi-ated lune to concrete, I believe such an 
 addition would improve cement roads and increase their durability, I can find no 
 record of any tests bearing directly on this subject. 
 
 The deterioration of concrete roads, so far as noted, has been attributed to two 
 causes, viz: 
 
 (a) Penetration of water through the concrete foundation to the subbase, resulting 
 either in a settlement and breaking and cracking of the concrete, or an upheaval 
 through frost action. 
 
 (6) To the formation of cracks through contraction and expansion of the concrete. 
 
 Numerous tests prove beyond question that the addition of from 10 to 15 per cent 
 of hydrated lime to Portland cement concrete will not only increase its impermeability 
 but also increase its strength under compression, both of which should improve con- 
 crete material for road use. ^ 
 
 Considering next the expansion and contraction, I know of no investigation to 
 'determine the effect of an addition of hydrated lime on this factor, but believe if it 
 ■ did not materially affect the coefficient of expansion under temperature changes, it 
 would prove beneficial, as it is recognized that concrete expands to a greater extent 
 ■from variation in the moisture content than from changes in temperature, expanding 
 when wet and shrinking when dry, in the same manner as wood, and I believe that 
 the addition of hydrated lime would tend to keep a more uniform moisture content 
 in the concrete. 
 
 I hope you will be successful in your effort to secure careful tests by the Govem- 
 •ment to determine the value of the addition of hydrated lime to concretes used in 
 road making as I believe such an investigation would be of great value to the tax- 
 payers and to engineers in general. 
 
 Very truly, yours, Henry S. Spaceman.