University of Virginia Library

Precedents for Federal Aid.

Let it not be said that internal improvement may be wholly left
to the enterprise of the States and of individuals.

It is interesting to note that in the early days of our country's
history Congress did appropriate money for the purpose of building
roads. In 1806 Congress authorized the construction of a road
from Maryland, known as the Cumberland Road, and various appropriations
for it were made from time to time, aggregating about
$7,000,000. In 1811, 5 per cent of the sales of public land in Louisiana
were given by Congress to that State for the building of roads and
levees; in 1816 a like amount of a similar fund was given to Indiana
for roads and canals; and in 1817 a like sum was given to my own
State, Mississippi, for this purpose; in 1818, 2 per cent of a similar

fund was given to Illinois for roads; in 1819, 5 per cent to Alabama;
in 1820, 5 per cent to Missouri; and in 1845, 5 per cent to Iowa.

Congress also appropriated money for a road from Georgia to New
Orleans, and one from Nashville, Tenn., to Natchez, Miss., as well
as many other public highways.

I think it has been thoroughly shown that Congress not only has
the power but has frequently exercised the power to contribute to
the construction of roads; however, this bill does not authorize the
construction of roads, but simply provides for the payment of a
fixed rental on all roads used by the Federal Government in carrying
the mail, if the road comes up to a certain fixed standard. It is
but right that the Government should pay for anything that it uses,
and in doing this it will encourage the people in the States to improve
their roads.

I realize, Mr. Chairman, that there has been so much written and
spoken upon the subject of good roads that there is little, if anything,
new to be said. If I needed any excuse for speaking on this
occasion it would be that it ofttimes requires a repeated statement
of facts to get it firmly fixed in our minds and to arouse us to the
necessity for action.

As I have said, a good deal of opposition to this measure comes
from Representatives of city districts. It is a mistaken idea that no
one but the farmer gets the benefit of good roads. Every citizen of
this Republic will derive direct benefit from the improvement of the
roads of the country, because the products of the farm must be
conveyed over country roads to market, and the consumer must bear
a part of the burden that is laid upon the producer because of bad
roads. Even the railroads are interested in good wagon roads, because
of the fact that in many sections of the country, owing to bad
conditions of the roads, the farmer is forced to convey his products to
the market at such time as he may be able to find the roads suitable
for travel, thereby placing most of the agricultural products for
transportation within a limited time. The farmer is also interested
for the same reason; that is, that he is forced to sell his products
within the same limited time.

We have heard much comment upon the fact that people are leaving
the farm and congregating in the towns and cities. One cause
of this has been the bad condition of the roads. In my judgment,
there is nothing that will tend more to the upbuilding of the country,
making farm life more attractive, than the improvement of the
road. There is no phase of life, either social or economic, which is
not affected by good roads. The value of lands, the attendance of
children at school, the social relations of the community are all affected
by roads. Good roads-make social intercourse and communication
between farm and town less difficult, thus destroying the isolation
of farm life, especially in the winter season. They increase
the productive area by making lands that have not been cultivated
more accessible. They increase values of property, reduce the cost
of transportation, cause greater interest to be taken in farming,
thereby increasing the general prosperity of the country.