30 BULLETIN 136, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
for engineering and supervision. ‘There is no reason why highway 
building should be made an exception to this rule. At least 5 per 
cent of the bond issue may well be set aside for engineering and 
supervision alone. Money spent to hire a competent engineer ' to 
make preliminary investigations before bonds are issued and to plan 
and supervise construction will be well spent. It is not uncommon 
to find counties that will repeatedly postpone the sale of bonds in 
order to obtain an increase of 1 per cent in a bid for $100,000 or less. 
and then proceed to construct the roads in a most haphazard and 
ill-planned manner. 
Benefit to nonabutting property owners planning the 
highway system or the main market roads, as mentioned above, it 
will be found necessary to omit many rence the improvement of 
which is greatly desired by abutting landowners. The fact that 
such property holders must pay a tax for the bond issue is only an 
apparent injustice, for if the highway system is well planned the 
entire county will feel the benefits of the improvement. As a rule, 
main market roads reach the majority of producing areas, and when 
they are improved all land values tend to increase. ; 
The fact that cities and larger towns are frequently taxed for bond 
issues to build highways outside of their own limits is sometimes made 
a point of debate in bond elections. It is argued that because a large 
part of the county wealth is within the corporate limit of such cities 
and towns, highway bond money should also be used to construct 
their streets. It is even urged that the expenditure should be made 
proportionate to the assessed valuation within the city limits. If 
the proceeds of highway bond issues were distributed in this way 
their purpose in many cases would be defeated. The primary object 
of the county highway bond issue is to build county market roads and 
not to improve city streets, although a high percentage of the assessed 
valuation may be city property.? It is now known that the expendi- 
ture of city taxes on country roads is a sound principle and that it is 
one of the best features of State aid for highways. In Massachusetts 
the city of Boston pays possibly 40 per cent of the total State highway 
fund, but not a mile of State-aid highway has been built within its 
limits. New York City also pays about 60 per cent of the cost of the 
State highway bonds. Some State laws prohibit the expenditure of 
proceeds of State highway bonds within corporate limits of cities or 
towns. The improvement of market roads results in improved 
marketing conditions which benefit the city. Most cities are essen- 
tially dependent upon the surrounding country for their prosperity 
and development. The development of suburban property for resi- 
1In the general bond act of September, 1913, by the State of Tennessee the employment of an engineer 
by the county commissioner is made mandatory. In Virginia the law provides that counties building 
roads under a bond issue shall employ an engineer either appointed or approved by the State highway 
commissioner. 
2 For arguments concerning the benefits of good roads cf. Farmers’ Bulletin No, 505. 
