RECOMMENDATIONS.

ILLINOIS.

CONVENTION OF SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY COMMISSIONERS-1893.

The committee on hard roads recommend

(1) That the members of this body do all they can, either collectively or individually, to assist the National League for Improved Highways in securing a National Exhibit at the Columbian Exposition, and in enlisting the railroads of the country in the improvement of wagon roads as feeders to their systems.

(2) That this body urge the legislature to create a State Highway Commission to revise and consolidate the laws relating to the construction and improvement of the roads and public highways of the commonwealth, and to consider the advisability and practicability of the county assisting in the construction of same, with power to prepare and present a bill providing for the construction and maintenance of highclass roads.

(3) That the individual members of this body do all within their power to persuade the citizens of the several townships to avail themselves of the option of the present law and change from the labor road tax to the cash system and to employ only skilled laborers in road-making.

(4) That there should be legislative enactment regulating the width of the tires of the wheels.

(5) That the members of this body do all they can to secure the submission at the next general elections of a road amendment to our constitution similar to the drainage amendment.

(6) That the thanks of this committee is expressed to Prof. Baker for his kindness and courtesy in assisting this committee to make out their report.

The report of the committee was adopted as read.

A. S. SCOTT, Chairman.
A. H. POPE, Secretary.

MARYLAND.

RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE MARYLAND ROAD LEAGUE-OCTOBER 27, 1893.

The report of the committee on legislation of the Maryland Road League has been approved by the organization. The report is accompanied by a bill, which is now in the hands of the executive committee, in its discretion to be submitted to the legislature at the coming session, and it is probable that the matter will be discussed at the road convention, which will be reconvened about the middle of next month. The report of the committee to the president and executive committee of the Maryland Road League is as follows:

In investigating the question of what legislation it would be well for this League to recommend to the next legislature your committee finds that the matter naturally divides itself into three phases, viz, the economic, the engineering, and the administrative.

Under the first head is included such questions as "How much money may be profitably spent per annum on the roads by the various counties or State?"

"Is it desirable that the State or counties, or either of them, should issue bonds for the immediate improvement of the roads, and if so to what extent?"

"Should the expenses of maintaining and constructing the roads be borne entirely by the counties or divided between the State, counties, and road districts?" and in this connection there naturally comes up for consideration the special plan of issuing county bonds indorsed by the State, which was formulated last spring. But the more attention the committee gave to these economic questions the more expedient it seemed to leave them entirely alone for the present, for several reasons. In the first place, your committee has no means of determining how much money would be required for the proper reconstruction of the roads.

This depends upon many factors-upon the number of miles which the business requirements of the counties demand should be reconstructed; upon the character of reconstruction which the traffic warrants, and upon the availability of the proper materials therefor.

It is evident, also, that if there is to be a division of the management and expense between the State, counties, and road districts, which is the plan pursued in many counties and recommended by many authorities, there must first be a mapping out of the roads and a division thereof into State, county, and local roads. Your committee has neither the expert assistance nor money necessary to collect this data and do this work. As regards issuing bonds or raising large sums of money in any way for road purposes, the present financial situation negatives any such idea. But even outside of the above considerations your committee does not think it desirable for the League to recommend any economic measures until the administration of the roads has been so improved that the money spent thereon redounds to the benefit of the taxpayers, and what is more, from the intercourse your committee has had with persons throughout the State interested in the matter it is not believed that the people would be willing to adopt any economic plan so long as the money at present spent upon the roads produces so little result, and in this the people are perfectly right. So your committee decided not to discuss or make a report on the financial side of the question except in so far as to affirm their belief that under any proper system of administration at the present cost the roads could be much improved, and to recommend that provision should be made for the proper investigation of this entire matter under the authority of the State by competent parties, who should make a thorough report thereon to the next legislature. If the law herewith submitted is adopted and properly executed, by that time the State and counties should be in a position to act properly and intelligently in the matter.

As to the engineering side of the question, involving the proper methods of constructing and maintaining the roads, your committee very soon found this to be a very difficult problem, involving such considerations as climatic influence, geological formation, materials, drainage, traffic, location, etc., far beyond their ability to pass upon; yet your committee further found the solution of this problem, as far as legislation was concerned, to be very simple; in fact, that but one solution was possible. Investigation and study of this side of the question leads but to the one conclusion-that the construction and maintenance of good roads require special expert knowledge not possessed by your committee, nor, they may say, by any one not especially trained and educated for the work; by no one, in fact, but the road engineer. This is the one thing as to which every authority agrees, and which experience not only in this State but throughout this entire country and Europe proves. The proof in this country is in the evident inefficiency of the mauagement by laymen, and in Europe by the fact that the roads there were equally as bad and the money spent thereon similarly wasted until their construction and maintenance was placed under the direction of skilled engineers. The problem thus transforms itself from "How to construct and maintain roads?" to "How to

provide by legislation for the application of expert knowledge and methods to such construction and maintenance?"

It is evident that it would not be sufficient merely to authorize the county commissioners to employ engineers.

The commissioners are already authorized by statute, in their discretion, to commit the roads and bridges to experts, but unanimously refuse to do so, probably for the reason, among others, that they do not feel warranted in incurring the resulting expense. It is likewise not worth while to recommend that they should be compelled to employ engineers. They probably would not consent to it in the first place, while, if such a law were forced upon them lack of funds would probably compel them to employ inefficient men and no good would be attained. And yet it evidently would not do to commit the roads to the care of State engineers so long as the counties pay the bills. Under these circumstances it suggests itself to your committee that it would be desirable and proper that the State should create an engineering department and place its services at the command of the various counties. It would not be proper to compel the counties to commit their roads to the control of the State engineers, but there certainly can be no objection on the part of the counties to the acceptance of a free offer by the State to furnish them with proper expert assistance.

While as regards the State, even if it should not have any other use for its engineering department, it could well afford to maintain it for such purposes alone, since the condition of the roads is a State rather than a local matter after all. But without regard to any assistance that the State engineering department might furnish the various counties in the administration of their roads, your committee consider it necessary, as suggested in the first part of this report, that the State should create such a department for the purpose of investigating the entire matter and reporting thereon to the next legislature. Your committee therefore recommend that the legislature should create a State engineering department upon the following line: As the duties of the department are of an entirely technical character it should be under the absolute control of a first-class civil engineer, who should have both the power and responsibility. If the right man could be obtained, and your committee believe that the governor would be only too glad to appoint such a man, it would be his pride to see the roads of Maryland improved under his direction and his influence for good would be felt throughout the entire State, and his investigations and recommendations would be of the utmost assistance to the legislature of 1896 in perfecting the road system, so that Maryland should become renowned for its good highways. As good men can not be obtained cheap, we recommend that the State road engineer should receive $5,000 per year and should be appointed for the term of four years. That he may be in a position to investigate this road question and report thereon to the next legislature, and at the same time furnish the necessary assistance to the counties, it is necessary that he should employ assistant engineers and other help; so we recommend that he be authorized so to do, with the consent of the board of public works, to the extent of the annual appropriation. The number of assistant engineers he will need can not be told in advance, as it will depend largely upon the demands made upon him by the county boards, but he should certainly be empowered to employ sufficient assistant engineers to answer the possible call of every county in the State.

It would not be necessary to detail an engineer for each county, since one engineer could be attached to the boards of two or three adjacent counties. It would be the duty of the engineer and his assistants, whenever called upon, to furnish estimates and specifications for contract or other work by the counties, and, if necessary, to supervise the work itself, since only in this way would the counties derive the proper benefit from their services. His services could also be utilized by the State for other purposes.

While, as above stated, we think it wise to leave his powers unrestricted as far as possible, yet there certainly should be some control vested somewhere over his

expenditures, so we recommend that this control be vested in the board of public works, and that no money should be paid out on account of the department except as approved by it.

After some thought we have fixed the minimum appropriation for this department at $25,000 per annum. The State could well afford this, since it is a small amount in comparison with the benefit the State would derive from the improvement of the roads. The State could indeed afford to authorize a much larger appropriation since the money could not be expended without the consent of the board of public works, and such board could be relied upon to prevent waste.

A department of this kind has been found of great value in other countries, and we are sure it will approve itself to the people of this State, no matter what system of administration be ultimately adopted.

As regards the administration of the roads in the counties, so long as the counties are to bear the entire expense thereof, it is evident they must retain the entire control. One thing became evident to your committee at once, namely, that the system of administration by numberless supervisors must be abolished, and in this, we think, the people of the State will generally agree. If there is one thing certain about the roads in Maryland it is that they are not properly repaired at present, and if there is one thing certain about repairs in general it is that they must be regular and not sporadic, and done according to some general system and not as the caprice of a farmer-supervisor may direct.

But having decided to abolish the present supervisor system, the question is, "who is to take immediate control of the construction and maintenance of the roads?"

As regards the finances and general control, there is no difficulty. It evidently should be left where it is now, with the county commissioners, but it would evidently be just as improper and useless to impose upon them the details of management. They certainly have no time, and probably as little desire, to undertake such duties. Under these circumstances the plan approved by the greater number of authorities, and successfully employed in England and elsewhere, recommends itself to your committee, namely, to commit the administration of roads and bridges to a county board to be appointed by the county commissioners, who, subject to the right of the county commissioners to determine the amount of the expenditure and what roads and bridges should be opened or closed, should have entire control of their construction and maintenance. In order that this work should be properly done it is, of course, necessary that the boards should be to a certain extent permanent, should consist of residents of the county who would take an actual interest in the matter, and that they should have the benefit of expert advice and assistance. In order that the first condition should be attained, we recommend that the boards should consist of three members to be appointed for three years, one member going out each year. As to the second requirement, from our knowledge of the residents of the various counties we are sure that three good men can be obtained in each county who will be only too glad to give their services free of charge for this purpose and who would take a pride in seeing the roads improve under their care. We therefore recommend that these boards serve without pay, liberal provision being made for their expenses. As regards the third requirement of expert assistance, this gave us a good deal of trouble, since it is absolutely essential and yet apparently impossible to make the counties provide it. But the prior portion of our report shows how we have met this difficulty.

The various county boards should be authorized to call upon the State engineering department for advice and assistance, without expense to them, unless they desire surveys, etc., to be made, which should necessitate additional expense to the department. In this way county boards would be furnished with the best possible engineering assistance, such assistance as no county in the State could afford to avail itself of at its own expense, without any cost whatever. It was by this system of local

boards, with engineers attached, under highway act of 1862, that England managed to obtain the good roads that it has to-day, and we feel sure that if these boards be created in this State and avail themselves of the advice and assistance of the State engineering department, there will be a wonderful improvement in our roads without any additional expense.

In addition to these general conclusions, we find that there are certain things admittedly favorable to and others equally detrimental to good roads. In the first place, it is necessary, no matter what the repairs may be or how they may be made, that they should be constant as far as possible, and the roads should be constantly kept in repair, not merely put in repair once in a while; prevention is better than cure. We therefore recommend that the county boards be encouraged to employ working corps, who should continually keep the roads in repair. It is evident, however, that this needs money, and can not be done if the farmers are allowed to work out their road taxes as the humor seizes them; we therefore recommend that the right to work out the road taxes be abolished. In the third place, it is the experience of all who have engaged in road-making, etc., and it is the consensus of opinion among authorities that, as a rule, roads and bridges can be better constructed or reconstructed by contract than directly by the local authorities, provided proper safeguards be thrown around such contract and proper expert assistance had in granting them and supervising the work. Such also is sometimes the case with reference to repairs.

We therefore recommend that the county boards be directed, under proper restrictions, to have the more important work, such as construction and reconstruction, done by contract, except by consent of county commissioners, and be authorized to contract for repairs, with such consent. We think in this way the best possible results will be obtained.

There is one other thing in regard to roads, as to which there is no doubt, namely, that all important roads, wherever economically feasible, should be stoned.

For this purpose, however, it is necessary that stone of a certain character should be procured and should be crushed to a minimum size, which, in many cases, requires an immediate outlay of money greater than many of the counties, if left to their own resources, will feel warranted in making.

We therefore further recommend that the state engineer be allowed to provide such crushed stone and to furnish it to the county boards at cost. We are sure that it will pay the State to encourage the counties to put it on their roads, and once having used it, the counties will continue to employ it where feasible.

Your committee have given this matter their best thought and have considered many other phases of the question, regarding which they do not feel willing at this time to make any recommendations. Whenever they have thought the advisability of a recommendation doubtful they have withheld it, and have only included in this report such recommendations as they think the experience of the past and the unanimous opinions of experts approve beyond question.

In order to complete their work, and in accordance with their instructions, they have formulated these suggestions into a "bill," which they herewith hand to the executive committee, in its discretion to be submitted to the next legislature. Respectfully submitted.

OCTOBER 27, 1893.

THE PROPOSED LAW.

HENRY W. WILLIAMS,

Chairman.

The following is the bill to be acted upon by the next legislature:

AN ACT for the more perfect construction and maintenance of the roads and bridges in this State. SECTION 1. There shall be appointed by the governor of this State, with the consent and approval of the senate, on March 1, 1894, and every fourth year thereafter,