256 ANNUAL REPORT OF THE "Off. Doc. 



ei'ty, tlnis creating an annual permanent road fund. 1o bo paid over 

 by the Htale Trinisurer to the eounty treasurers in proportion to 

 tlie liuniber of miles of road in ea<;h county, and b}' them to be 

 })aid over to the supervisors of each township in proportion to the 

 number of miles in each township— no township to receive a sum 

 larger than the amount raised and expended on the public roads 

 of that township annually'. Up to the present time the great 

 burden of constructing and maintaining the public roads has been 

 and is now borne by the farmers and land owners of the State, and, 

 as a result, their acres are taxed almost beyond endurance. Hence, 

 arises the opposition and indifference that is manifest among a large 

 class of our farmers when any public road improvement is advo- 

 cated that means an addidonal tax to their already overtaxed acres, 

 and, as the public roads are for the use and benefit of all the people, 

 it is unfair to expect the farmer and land owner to assume to bear 

 the increased burdens of public road improvement that the new 

 and present conditions demand, and we consider it only fair and 

 just that all classes of property and industries, some of which are 

 paying a great deal less than their share of taxes, should contribute 

 their just and equitable proportion toward their construction. 

 This plan, which seems so just and right, and which passed the 

 House as the amended road bill in the session of 1901, would create 

 a permanent annual road fund of nearly' or quite two millions of 

 dollars, and would place the plan of '^State aid" on a firm and 

 strong basis, and beyond the necessity of the Legislature to make 

 annual appropriations for the public roads, as well as beyond the 

 corrupting influences that eminate from securing such appropria- 

 tions. We are, therefore, unalterably opposed to any plan that does 

 not tax all kinds of property for road purposes — are decidedly op- 

 posed to the placing of our public highway's under the control of a 

 centralized State commission. 



We regret that the act passed by the Legislature of 1901 appro- 

 priating hfty thousand dollars for the erection of an agricultural 

 building at the State College failed to become a law because of the 

 veto of the Governor, and we most respectfully urge the members 

 of the Board to renew their efforts to secure the passage of a like 

 appropriation for the erection of a building at the State College, 

 so much needed, where agriculture, including dairying and forestry, 

 can be taught in all of their branches; and we also urge that an 

 additional appropriation of i!?10,000 be secured, if possible, for the 

 ]>ub]ication and distribution of bulletins and leaflets to the schools 

 and farmers of the State for which there is so great a demand. We 

 also desire to state, as we have done in the past, that we deem it 

 of the utmost importance that our State College be better — far 

 better — provided for, both in buildings and equipments, for the 



