FOURTH ANNUAL YEAR BOOK- PART I. 47 



offifials and to the people, outlining and explaining the merits of that bill, 

 what the measure meant. There were practically only two changes in 

 the previous bill; one was that you pay your taxes in cash and that 

 that tax goes into a separate fund which can be used as any other fund, 

 only for road purposes; the other was doing away with your road super- 

 visors. The road supervisors in these counties would naturally object 

 to any plans that would remove them. I think a large number of the 

 supervisors are good men; some of them are not. 



I want to say to you that we are spending nearly three millions of 

 dollars in Missouri under the supervision of fifty-two road officials, and 

 the system has been carried on for the last thirty, forty or fifty years, 

 and it isn't giving us any good roads either. Therefore, I am in favor 

 of the present law" that pays the tax in cash. You have noticed that in 

 •a. large number of the counties the books are kept in a haphazard shape. 

 You couldn't go into your counties previous to this law and find out 

 where the funds went. No fund should be appropriated by the tax 

 payers of this or any other State, unless you know where that fund 

 goes and for what purpose it is used. 



Now. as to the bill that should be enacted by the coming legis- 

 lature — I am speaking now from experience; going about these different 

 States, investigating their laws, and having seen what they are doing 

 in these different States. New York is spending nearly two millions a 

 year; that is, the State itself is spending out of its own funds nearly 

 two millions to aid the counties in that State in' road building. I want 

 you gentlemen to understand it don't make one bit of difference to me 

 whether you take the pro or con side of this bill; but I am just as 

 anxious to see Iowa put on her statute books a progressive road law at 

 this session as I am to see Pennsylvania appropriate six and one half 

 millions f^r road purposes. 



I believe, gentlemen, we are on the right track when we ask you 

 to pupport the State Aid Bill. It is a bill that provides that a certain 

 fund out of the State treasury be divided among the several counties 

 in proportion to their population or assessed valuation — it is assessed 

 valuation in New York — providing the counties and neighborhoods shall 

 put up an equal amount. What I mean is this: The State of New 

 York appropriates two millions a year — we will say for uinety-nine 

 counties — that will be divided in proportion to their population. The 

 county making the first application is the first one served. Now, if 

 you should allow the State Aid Bill to pass and do not make your appli- 

 cation, you will not get any money. The county that did make the 

 application would get the money, that is, pro rata to your county. But, 

 if you make an application you must do this: the county in which that 

 road is located must put up 25 per cent; the toworhip must put up 15 

 per cent, and the man abutting on the road pays the balance, 10 per cent. 



Now, what do we get? We have the State putting up one half. 

 Who pays one half? Every man' that is taxed on the State of Iowa: 

 every man that represents a corporation. Out of the State treasury 

 you put up half. Now, the county which has the road and which it 

 benefits mostly, puts up one third. The plan of the State putting up 

 half, the counties 25 per cent, the township 15 and the man who owns 



