thansromation
LIBRARY
TE
7_3
D 27

NATIONAL HIGH ways
V E R S U S
FEDERAL AID
BY C H A R L E S H E N RY DAVIS, C. E.
with the Assistance of stan LEY E. Bates, s. B.
WAS H IN G T O N , D. C., NOVE M BER TWENTIE TH
N IN E T E E N T H IRT E E N
UNIVERSITY OF MICHICAN |IBRARIES
*-* , -->
\ E
13
\) 2.7
Copyright, November 20, 1913, by the
NATIONAL HIGHVVAYS ASSOCIATION
Washington, D. C.
- -
ºnsuetºº
* ºn bºrrºs
º ºf
----- -----
º - - - º
º
l
INCORPORATED A.D. NINETEEN HUNDRED AND TWELVE IN THE CITY OF WASHINGTON,
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
A membership corporation which exists to favor, foster, and further the development of
NATIONAL HIGHWAYS and GOOD ROADS EVERYWHERE in the length and breadth of
these United States of America, and to secure the benefits – social, moral, commercial, indus-
trial, material, educational, and personal — in the progress and uplift of the American people
which follow in the train of easy intercommunication and transit between the great centers of
population and distribution and the great rural productive areas of the Nation, and will “bind
the States together in a common brotherhood, and thus perpetuate and preserve the Union.”
GENERAL COLEMAN DUPONT CHARLES HENRY DAVIS, C. E.
Chairman Board of National Councillors President







COUNCIL OF GOVERNORS
Pursuant to the By-Laws of the National Highways Association, the Trustees have
appointed for life a Council of Governors.
Appointments thereto have been accepted
by the Governors and ex-Governors of the following States: —
EMMET O’NEAL, Governor State of Alabama
GEORGE WILLIE PAUL HUNT, Governor
State of Arizona
JUNIUS MARION FUTRELL, Acting Governor
State of Arkansas
HIRAM WARREN JOHNSON, Governor State
of California
ELIAS MILTON AM MONS, Governor State of
Colorado y
CHARLES ROBERT MILLER, Governor State
of Delaware
PARK TRAMMELL, Governor State of Florida
JoHN MARSHALL SLATON, Governor State
of Georgia
Joseph MACKEY BROWN, Ex-Governor
State of Georgia
John MICHENER HAINES, Governor State
of Idaho
JAMES HENRY HAWLEY, Ex-Governor State
of Idaho
SAMUEL MOFFETT RALSTON, Governor
State of Indiana
GEORGE WASHINGTON CLARKE, Governor
State of Iowa
GEORGE HARTSHORN HODGES, Governor
State of Kansas
JAMES BENNETT McCREARY, Governor
Commonwealth of Kentucky
LUTHER EGBERT HALL, Governor State of
Louisiana
JARED YOUNG SANDERS, Ex-Governor State
of Louisiana
WILLIAM TECUMSEH HAINES, Governor
State of Maine
PHILLIPS LEE GOLDS BOROUGH, Governor
State of Maryland
JEUGENE NOBLE FOSS, Governor Common-
wealth of Massachusetts
WOODBRIDGE NATHAN FERRIS, Governor
State of Michigan
ADOLPH OLSON EBERHART, Governor State
of Minnesota
EARL BREWER, Governor State of Mississippi
ELLIOTT WOOLFOLK MAJOR, Governor
State of Missouri
HERBERT SPENCER HADLEY, Ex-Governor
State of Missouri
SAMUEL VERNON STEWART, Governor State
of Montana
John HENRY MOREHEAD, Governor State
of Nebraska
TASKER LOWNDES ODDIE, Governor State
of Nevada
ROBERT PERKINS BASS, Ex-Governor State
of New Hampshire
WILLIAM CALHOUN McDONALD, Governor
State of New Mexico
WILLIAM SULZER, Ex-Governor State of New
York
JOHN ALDEN DIX, Ex-Governor State of New
York
LOCKE CRAIG, Governor State of North Carolina
WILLIAM WALTON KITCHIN, Ex-Governor
State of North Carolina
LOUIS BENJAMIN HANNA, Governor State of
North Dakota
JOHN BURKE, Ex-Governor State of North
Dakota
JAMES MIDDLETON COX, Governor State of
Ohio
LEE CRUCE, Governor State of Oklahoma
OSWALD WEST, Governor State of Oregon
JOHN KINLEY TENER, Governor Common-
wealth of Pennsylvania
COLEMAN LIVINGSTON BLEASE, Governor
State of South Carolina
FRANK MICHAEL BYRNE, Governor State of
South Dakota
BENJAMIN WADE HOOPER, Governor State
of Tennessee
OSCAR BRANCH COLOUITT, Governor State
of Texas
WILLIAM SPRY, Governor State of Utah
ALLEN MILLER FLETCHER, Governor State
of Vermont
WILLIAM HODGES MANN, Governor Com-
monwealth of Virginia
ERNEST LISTER, Governor State of Wash-
ington
HENRY DRURY HATFIELD, Governor State
of West Virginia
JOSEPH MAULL CAREY, Governor State of
Wyoming
JOHN FRANKLIN ARTHUR STRONG, Gov-
ernor Territory of Alaska
WALTER ELI CLARK, Ex-Governor Territory
of Alaska
RICHARD LEE METCALFE, Head of the De-
partment of Civil Administration, Isthmian
Canal Commission
MAURICE HUDSON THATCHER, Ex-Head of
the Department of Civil Administration, Isth-
mian Canal Commission
GEORGE WASHINGTON GOETHALS, Colo-
nel U. S. A., Chairman and Chief Engineer,
Isthmian Canal Commission
CUNO HUGO RUDOLPH, President Board of
Commissioners of the District of Columbia
ROBERT EDWARD COONTZ, Governor Island
of Guam
WALTER FRANCIS FREAR, Governor Terri-
tory of Hawaii
GEORGE RADCLIFFE COLTON, Governor
Territory of Porto Rico
| 4 |
COUNCIL OF COMMISSIONORS
Pursuant to the By-Laws of the National Highways Association, the Trustees have
appointed for life a Council of Commissionors.
Appointments thereto have been ac-
cepted by the highway officials of the following States: —
VICTOR BOARDMAN ATKINS, Member State
Highway Commission of Alabama
JOHN CRAFT, Member State Highway Commis-
sion of Alabama
EUGENE ALLEN SMITH, Member State High-
way Commission of Alabama
LAMAR COBB, State Engineer of Arizona
REUBEN G. DYE, Chairman State Highway
Commission of Arkansas
CHARLES WARREN HIGHFILL, State High-
way Commissioner of Arkansas
ALBERT SYDNEY KILLGORE, State Highway
Commissioner of Arkansas
CHARLES DUCHESNE BLANEY, Member
State Highway Commission of California
NEWELL DYKE DARLINGTON, Member
State Highway Commission of California
BURTON AUGUSTUS TOWNE, Chairman
State Highway Commission of California
CHARLES JOSEPH BENNETT, State High-
way Commissioner of Connecticut
WILFRED LUZERNE GIFFORD, Member
State Highway Commission of Idaho
FRANK PIERCE KING, Member State Highway
Commission of Idaho
JOSEPH RUSSELL FULKERSON, Member
State Highway Commission of Illinois
LAFAYETTE FUNK, Member State Highway
Commission of Illinois
HENRY CLAY BEARD, State Highway Com-
missioner of Iowa
JAMES WILLIAM HOLDEN, Member State
Highway Commission of Iowa
WALTER SCOTT GEARHART, State Engineer
of Kansas
ROBERT CRAIG TERRELL, Commissioner of
Public Roads of Kentucky
WILLIAM EPHRAIM ATKINSON,
Highway Engineer of Louisiana
WILLIAM MADISON AYER, Member State
Highway Commission of Maine
PARKER LEROY HARDISON, Ex-Commis-
sioner of Highways of Maine
WILLIAM BULLOCK CLARK, State Geologist
of Maryland
PHILLIPS LEE GOLDSBOROUGH, Member
State Roads Commission of Maryland
ANDREW RAMSEY, Member State Roads Com-
mission of Maryland
IRA REMSEN, Member State Roads Commission
of Maryland
OVINGTON EUGENE WELLER, Chairman
State Roads Commission of Maryland
CHARLES MERRITT BABCOCK, Member
State Highway Commission of Minnesota
FREDERIC SOMERS BELL, Member
Highway Commission of Minnesota
CLARENCE IRVING McNAIR, Member State
Highway Commission of Minnesota
FRANK WASHBURN BUFFUM, State High-
way Commissioner of Missouri
ARCHIBALD WARHAM MAHON, Member
State Highway Commission of Montana
GEORGE ROBERT METLEN, Member State
Highway Commission of Montana
State
State
DONALD DOUGLAS PRICE, State Engineer
of Nebraska
WILLIAM MICHAEL KEARNEY, State En-
gineer of Nevada
EDWIN AUGUSTUS STEVENS, State Road
Commissioner of New Jersey
ROBERT PARVIN ERVIEN, Commissioner of
Public Lands of New Mexico
JAMES ADAMS FRENCH, State Engineer of
New Mexico
WILLIAM CALHOUN McDONALD, Chairman
Commission of Public Lands of New Mexico
JOHN NELSON CARLISLE, Commissioner of
Highways of New York
JOSEPH HYDE PRATT, State Geologist of
North Carolina
JAY WESLEY BLISS, State Engineer of North
Dakota
LOUIS BENJAMIN HANNA, Member State
Highway Commission of North Dakota
JAMES REED MARKER, State Highway Com-
missioner of Ohio
SIDNEY SUGGS, Commissioner of Highways of
Oklahoma
THOMAS BENJAMIN KAY, Member State
Highway Commission of Oregon
BEN WILSON OLCOTT, Member State High-
way Commission of Oregon
OSWALD WEST, Member
Commission of Oregon
EDWARD MANNING BIGELOW, State High-
way Commissioner of Pennsylvania
JOHN HENRY EDWARDS, Member
Board of Public Roads of Rhode Island
WILLIAM CLARENCE PECKHAM, Member
State Board of Public Roads of Rhode Island
JOHN FRANCIS RICHMOND, Member State
Board of Public Roads of Rhode Island
ROBERT BYRON TREAT, Member State Board
of Public Roads of Rhode Island
EBBIE JULIAN WATSON, Commissioner of
Agriculture, Commerce, and Industries of South
Carolina
WILLIAM DUKE BEERS, Secretary State Road
Commission of Utah
WILLIAM SPRY, Chairman State Road Com-
mission of Utah
CHARLES WINSLOW GATES, State Highway
Commissioner of Vermont
PHILIP ST. JULIEN WILSON, State High-
way Commissioner of Virginia
WILLIAM JACKSON ROBERTS, State High-
way Commissioner of Washington
JOHN ADAM HAZELWOOD, Chairman High-
way Commission of Wisconsin
WILLIAM OTIS HOTCHKISS, Secretary High-
way Commission of Wisconsin
FREDERICK EUGENE TURNEAURE, Mem-
ber Highway Commission of Wisconsin
JACOB HENRY VAN DOREN, Member High-
way Commission of Wisconsin
ADRIAN JEFFERSON PARSHALL, State En-
gineer of Wyoming
MAJOR CHESTER HARDING, Highway Com-
missioner of the District of Columbia
State Highway
State
[5]
s)
--->
**, ºn
J - J - - # Cºlº
<-e
-, * º sº OFFICERS ( , , - .
GENERAL COLEMAN DU PONT Chairman Board of National Councillors
CHARLES HENRY DAVIS, C.E. President
FREDERIC REMSEN HUTTON, M.E., SC.D., New York General Secretary
JUDGE J. M. LOWE, Kansas City, Mo. Vice-President
President National Old Trails Road Department
HON. JESSE TAYLOR, Jamestown, O. Vice-President
Director Organization Department
President Ohio Good Roads Federation Division
LUCIEN PETERS McCALLA, M.D., Boise, Idaho Vice-President
President Inter-Mountain Good Roads Department
H. B. VARNER, Lexington, N. C. Vice-President
President North Carolina Good Roads Division
DR. JOSEPH HYDE PRATT, Chapel Hill, N. C. Vice-President
Secretary North Carolina Good Roads Division
A. L. WESTGARD, New York * Vice-President
Director Transcontinental Highways
ELIAS VANDER HORST, C.E., New York Vice-President
Secretary to Board of National Councillors
FRANCIS HILL BIGELOW Assistant Treasurer
ARTHUR H. BLANCHARD, C.E., A.M., New York Consulting Engineer
TIMOTHY W. SPRAGUE, S.B., Boston, Mass.
Engineer to Board of National Councillors
WILL WARD DUFFIELD Engineer of Chart Construction
STANLEY E. BATES, S.B. Engineer Highway Publications
JOHN STONE ALLEN, A.B. Editor Highway Publications
C. H. CLAUDY, Washington, D. C. Director of Publicity
O. W. GRUENING, Des Moines, Ia.
Manager Northwestern Organization Department
WALTER AGNEW ALSDORF Manager Northern Organization Department
MORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS, Philadelphia General Counsel
By Consent — Depositories for Funds of the National Highways Association:
BANK OF AMERICA, New York
GERMANTOWN TRUST COMPANY, Philadelphia
SOUTHWEST NATIONAL BANK OF COMMERCE, Kansas City, Mo.
DES MOINES NATIONAL BANK, Des Moines, Ia.
WILMINGTON TRUST COMPANY, Delaware
BOISE CITY NATIONAL BANK, Idaho
CENTRAL NATIONAL BANK, Columbus, O.
[6]
AMALGAMATED ORGANIZATIONS
Realizing that vastly more effective work in the cause of Good Roads Every-
where can be accomplished by the coöperation of all Good Roads organizations,
and realizing further that real coöperation can be secured only through amalga-
mation, the following Associations have amalgamated with and become divi-
sions of the National Highways Association: –
NATIONAL OLD TRAILS ROAD ASSOCIATION
NOW NATIONAL OLD TRAILS ROAD DEPARTMENT
INTER-MOUNTAIN GOOD ROADS ASSOCIATION
Now INTER-MOUNTAIN DEPARTMENT
CANADA, KANSAS CITY, AND GULF ROAD ASSOCIATION,
Now CANADA, KANSAS CITY, AND GULF ROAD DEPARTMENT
OHIO GOOD ROADS FEDERATION
Now OHIO DIVISION
NORTH CAROLINA GOOD ROADS ASSOCIATION
NOW NORTH CAROLINA DIVISION
GREAT WHITE WAY ASSOCIATION OF IOVVA.
Now GREAT WHITE WAY DIVISION
PENNSYLVANIA GOOD ROADS ASSOCIATION
Now PENNSYLVANIA DIVISION
WEST VIRGINIA GOOD ROADS ASSOCIATION
Now VVEST VIRGINIA DIVISION
TEXAS GOOD ROADS ASSOCIATION
Now TEXAS DIVISION
[7]
Officers gº the
Alabama Good Roads Association
PRESIDENT
JOHN CRAFT, Mobile
SECRETARY
J. A. ROUNTREE, Birmingham
FIRST VICE-PRESIDENT
JOHN W. O'NEILL, Birmingham
SECOND VICE-PRESIDENT
H. K. MILNER, Birmingham
THIRD VICE-PRESIDENT
JOHN H. BANKHEAD, Jasper
FOURTH VICE-PRESIDENT
OSCAR W. UNDERWOOD, Birmingham
DISTRICT VICE-PRESIDENTS
First District
LEE McMILLAN, Gastonburg
Second District
D. R. COOK, Montgomery
Third District
J. B. LYONS, Opelika
Fourth District
JAMES SPROUELL, Anniston
Ninth District
Fifth District
C. E. THOMAS, Prattville
Sixth District
JOHN A. ROGERS, Gainesville
Seventh District
GARDNER GREEN, Pell City
Eighth District
J. E. PIERCE, Huntsville
HUGH McGEEVER, Birmingham
EXECUTIVE
State at Large
JOHN CRAFT, Mobile
JOHN W. O'NEILL, Birmingham
H. K. MILNER, Birmingham
JOHN H. BANKHEAD, Jasper
OSCAR W. UNDERWOOD, Bir-
mingham
J. A. ROUNTREE, Birmingham
First District
N. C. WINN, Demopolis
J. D. BLOCH, Mobile
Second District
P. J. COONEY, Marlow
B. J. BALDWIN, Montgomery
Third District
S. J. CUMMINGS, Seale
G. N. MITCHAM, Auburn
COMMITTEE
Fourth District
V. B. ATKINS, Selma
F. A. GULLEDGE, Verbena
Fifth District
J. W. OVERTON, Wedowee
J. A. WILKERSON, Autaugaville
Sixth District
W. P. SEED, Tuscaloosa
J. W. SHEPARD, Jasper
Seventh District
J. GAISSER, Russellville
W. T. BROWN, Ragland
Eighth District
CLARENDON DAVIS, Huntsville
W. E. SKEGGS, Decatur
Ninth District
J. F. KELTON, Oneonta
J. J. SMITH, Birmingham
[8] tº
87 - 86 85
- |rn T s :JJJºa - - ! º, tº -
Monary;Tº |Eº *} Nº. 1 | * S FRANKłin Ito.” HAMILTON) ſ
35 ! HARDIn | WAYNE Iron City º *. E 8 | E. N ||C o \, | S Lo ºlde ha ºoga º
- - - -T- ----- - - -- - -------- ºn- - -- -- ===-|35
- Pruitto --- ... " -- - - - - - - - - - - -ºº: ----- -
| Sº v. L. A U. "gº ". n T ! } Fisk - ridgeport ºn---
- J. A. O. K.
R. A. L. E. tº 2. º Z
- - lor Jacksonburg | LIME stoº, b|Hazel º S O N - Published . Direction
- -- º --
Mia- - º
Fo **'. Mc- Athens #º ſº. § wº
* º sº sº |NATIONAL HIGHWAYS
AS SOCIATION
º
© 4...";
ºw.
º,”: "º
º -
- GENERAI, CoLEMAN DU Pont
-- Chairman Board of National Councillors
º -
º º º - * ~...~ 2.
sº tº S S 5 *5. º - & c - o
º -Q º ſo º - - -
º ? & lºſińy Fºº" *\ſº
º % charles Henry DAVIS, C.E.
%% President
º 3 vs. Mooresville º
§3 ºf xº Vº - *** º ---
Sº -3°. I e \ºve º, -º 2.
§ sº ſº, º: Peca º: N ) % o
WASHINGTON, D. C.
November 1918
§
º
Fº
§s
h
º
no
º
º
i
S
º
§
ºG
ºH
º
*2
º
-
º
º
º
%
i
|
I
|
! & ©
—----L-- Russellville - ºn: r &/
R A N K L I N favºnor i "SA" " "...º.º.
LE GEN D.
w
aeº º.
tºlºg}__.ſº º
t = National Highways
Wilhite tºº
G p Winermont cº §§ º
º …º.º. r
C| U Lºll, M. A N/ º --" in Alabama
\\man Phelan uſ / º º National Highways
Johnson. º Wowº --- in adjoining States
anceville SW
º ºf a Lou nº Aiºiº. © County Seats – 34
- & State Capital
- -- Banºorºº I -
- " ...º.º.º.º.
***------ |-- Reic Blount Spris. Whitni.
|- % ... ººgº, Caldi, %
- lºor º tº
ºn- r º -- W
-
&-rº-'-5 \hat{ALsº
oo:*
.* an
-
$ & 32.8% shland! Wºlowº \ H. E. A.R.D
w &\@
$on
P
elhºn & RANDOLPH
Keystone CW º i
§bia. a. ov” |
&Q & P-
Calera
- º - * + %. - -
Ajemisºn - |L Tºy & - &
tº *, *... i “º, Gablettville
sº º A. c) | - Gº tº
Q Apex w
Sº º |
I Lanett & t
Wºo, - awarau
º º" * iver|View
3. º, ---> º ulah R. T. S.
wn {A}|ºli. Jestery H. A. R.
5 *ś"º. º,
-
utaw
H A L. E.
2.
º Greensboro I O
* 8. Pºsad, --- º NT"--ºve
ºtſ, ºn - & wo
2 * * 4 § §3. *(sº sº º cº
§[Pºpº, sº
% - cº
O - ſº º
º-º, sº
º - -- *--- -
ºr ~~ ºf ºx o º, …) | CHATTA
3 c. § 3 ºf ºz. Tº º HOOOHEE
O º
sº & v oº: \cs º & º
--- wº º down WV 2.
- o Snow …: Q º - -
º 1. o - ©Union Sprº. .
lºn of siºmº, B U L L O C. K.
Sellers
--. s.º. º. iTººl
---------- º - - _Stºddº; - gº--—
homasvill | *,
Rura --,
|
- &
| Butlerc,
- o
32 32
C.
1.--- -
º ! Clayton M H------
sm ºod: --- C)
Söunº º B. A. R. B. U. R. QUITM
; Troy - & Pront º -
* , Grove — 2-r' Luverine º Brunſºlidge r: ----
Winno Hill - -
Bºſton, º: /
cº ºy. "Yº * @ ſ' ---------
Chatom Leroy J. Monroeville /
º ººkso J. Ever
Cortelyou o º n o …'
* Sunflower º -
Toinette "ck º C O N E
Hawthorno
McIntosh
Malcolm
Calvert
º
-
|
-
--
--
-
& ‘Alamºſiº
º Peacock
-----
J
w
o l.
*| ||
*:º
------|--|
beville
(-)
º
º
ºn
S.
L|------
- i
Dillard i H. E. N. R. Y
- - º -
| Ozarkºłwellº scº
T
s
- º
F E E Newto º º &
Ağdalusia | <) sº
- | Sº Hil Y------
| Dothan º |
–A---|--------------, c.6. &
E N E v. A. Keytºn'ſ Houston | `-
Hodgeºville --------
Mºria
O
O
W
N
G.
T
O
N
K-
Mt. Vernon
º Chastang
Bucks
31
Geneva
|
STATE OF ALABAMA
S H. O. W. I. N. G
FIFTEEN HUNDRED MILES --
O. F.
NATIONAL HIGHWAY
* -º a PROPOSED BY THE
NATIONAL HIGHWAYS ASSOCIATION
w As HING to N. D. c.
ºu,. ºn. …ºran
F scale, 1 : 2,500,000 Hºº Du Pont
3oard of National Councillors
30 4. - - -
10 º 10 20 - 0 no CHARLEs HENRY DAvis, cº. FREDERIC R. Hutton, M.E., sc.D,
Statute Miles President eneral Secretary
L_
31
DECATUR
Cºlºr, 1013, ºr tº Mºllºw ºldºwº A3800ſºon, Washington, ſº tº , |
88 Longitude West 87 from Greenwich 80 85
a--a can aan - no rºle ºn... nºw won a
AP of Alabama, showing 1,500 Miles of proposed National Highways. These highways will directly
serve 1,543,335 inhabitants of the counties through which they pass, which is 72% of the total
population of the State. Abutting counties have a population of 555,830, which is 26% of the
total State population—being a total of 2,099,165 inhabitants, equal to 98% served and abutting on these
proposed National Highways. The present total road mileage in the State is 49,639, so that 3.02% in
National Highway mileage will serve directly or abutting 98% of the people.
Similar maps of other States are being prepared by the Association and will be issued as rapidly as possible.




























































NATIONAL HIGHWAYS
VERSUS
FEDERAL AID
National Highways or Federal Aid — which shall it be?
Two Widely A great many persons — some even who are well versed
Differing Plans on the subject of roads — still use these two terms synony-
mously, in spite of the fact that they represent two widely
different schools of thought. Notwithstanding that each looks to the National
Government for help in the solution of our great road problem, these two methods
of government action are as far apart as the poles.
- That it is essential to the development of this Na-
Good Roads a tion to have our 2,300,000 miles of public roads im-
National Necessity proved has come to be a universally accepted fact.
We have taken a very long time to wake up to this
fact, to be sure, but at last the awakening has come.
- -

A COMMON SPECTACLE – ABANDONED FARM ON A BAD ROAD
--- That the National Government must be
Government Must Lead looked to for leadership in the working out of
in This Movement the road problem is another fact. Nowadays,
this is also given almost unanimous acceptance,
and thus arises the question, National Highways or Federal Aid? — for it must
be one or the other.
Now there is a third fact, none the less true than the two preceding, and one
which is gradually coming to be recognized. This fact, briefly stated, is that
joint control and joint appropriations for roads do not produce good roads. And
by joint control and joint appropriations is meant nothing else than the much-
talked-of “aid " (or “reward ”), whether it be County, State, or Federal aid.
To demonstrate this fact, we need but to refer to
State Aid the well-known fact that State after State, having tried
Found Ineffective out State aid, has given up this practice and adopted
State Highways, roads built, owned, maintained, and
controlled by the State authorities without reference to the local units of coun-
ties and towns. Twenty-five years ago there was not a State in the Union which
maintained a system of State Highways, whereas now the large majority have
established State Highway Commissions, most of them with the direct control
over a certain system of through routes termed State Highways.

[10]
Furthermore, it is a significant fact that those States
State Highways which now have the greatest percentage of improved
Effective roads are those which maintain such a system of State
Highways, even though the mileage of this system
itself may be relatively small. For example: Massachusetts has 8,463 miles of
improved roads, while only 904 miles, or 10.7% of these, are State Highways.
Thus we see what a great encouragement is given to the building of good
county and town roads by means of such State Highways.
Nor is this encouragement anything but
State Highways Encourage what might logically be expected if one would
Road Improvement but stop to consider the matter. The State
Highways constitute the main trunk lines to
which the county and town roads are feeders. One could not expect the feeders
to be improved if the main roads were not; but, on the other hand, would natu-
rally expect the more important routes to come first, after which the branch
lines would speedily follow.
Now let us apply the foregoing principles to the Nation as a whole. In the
same manner that we outgrew county and town roads and have progressed to
State Highways for the main inter-county routes of travel, we have now like-
wise outgrown even these State Highways when it comes to our main arteries
of traffic, which have come to be distinctly interstate in character.
The coming of the automobile, and more especially
Influence of the the motor-truck,- that vehicle which is destined to revor
Motor-Truck lutionize hauling in the rural districts if given but half a
- chance,—is in a large measure ºresponsible for this evo:
****** - -----
º
rº- -
- tº ** ---
-
- º - - -
| | || º
NO ABANDONED FARMS ON THIS RoAD

[11]
HOW MONEY IS WASTED, DUE TO INCOMPETENCY OF
UNTRAINED ROAD OFFICIALS
A MUD ROAD WOULD BE BETTER THAN THIS

[12]
lution. In spite of the cry put up by many people that we should not build long
roads which the wealthy “speed bug ‘’ can race over, but that we should build
only short local roads for the farmer, nevertheless, “a
“A Condition — condition — not a theory” — as Cleveland used to say,
Not a Theory” “confronts us.”
The automobile and the motor-truck have come to
stay, and we must keep pace with them. The motor-vehicle has conclusively
proven itself to be not primarily a rich man’s plaything, but an actual economic
necessity to our present-day needs of transportation, and we must, therefore,
bring our road-bed up to the same degree of perfection as our improved rolling-
stock.
It is impossible at the present time to place an
The Motor-Vehicle upper limit to the future usefulness of the motor-
and the Farmer vehicle for any purpose. It is certain, however, that
it is only in the first stages of its development, and
that the future will see it adapted to a limitless number of uses, particularly in
the rural districts. Even now, farmers all over the country are employing the
motor-truck in dairy farming, and thus greatly enlarging the areas within which
such farming is profitable. The same is bound to become true of all other farm
products, and thus we see how, with the increased distances which are profitably
traveled by the motor-vehicles, our main routes of travel are becoming inter-
state in character.
Now it should be quite apparent to all that forty-eight States constructing
forty-eight different kinds of roads in forty-eight different and uncorrelated
directions cannot build any comprehensive and related system of main highways
covering the whole country — no matter how excellent the efforts of the indi-
vidual States may be. To prove this fact, let us refer again to County Highways
and State Highways as illustrated by two typical examples; namely, the States
of Michigan and Massachusetts. Road maps of these two States are shown upon
accompanying pages.
The roads of Michigan have heretofore been built only
Michigan and by counties and towns under the old-fashioned system of
State Aid State Aid, or reward for improving the roads. No State
roads exist whatever, and the result of this system is strik-
ingly shown on the map; namely, little pieces of improved roads scattered all
over the State – roads beginning nowhere, going nowhere, ending nowhere!
Some counties have a few good roads, but they bear no relation whatever to the
roads of any other county, thus giving rise to the utmost confusion of roads
imaginable.
Contrast this with the excellently designed system
Massachusetts and of improved State roads shown on the map of Massa-
State Highways chusetts. These roads furnish easy and direct means
of communication along the most important and most
traveled routes throughout the State – roads beginning somewhere, going
somewhere, ending somewhere, according to one carefully designed plan. Can
there possibly be any argument between these two systems?
In fairness to Michigan, we are glad to say that they have recently repudiated
State aid and are about to inaugurate State Highways; and it is therefore con-
[13]
servative to predict that we may at an early date see that State gridironed with
as complete a network of good roads as that of Massachusetts.
Now when we come to the matter of our Gov-
The Two Alternatives ernment taking a hand in road affairs we have
of the Government precisely the same alternative, only upon a much
larger scale. We may adopt Federal “aid " to the
States and obtain as a result a confusion of roads beginning nowhere, ending
nowhere. Furthermore, we will have a few of the States using the government
bonus judiciously with regard to their own individual State; but the large ma-
Houghtº
~~| F.
Tºrſ ſ | ºtºvº arº
Go G. E. B.", c |- H.--— ****
was guerre
R C m !--- -
* |
*— v c e
| -r
º
—l-
~ſ
sc-oo-cºrrkº-
! tu
w
-
sº
o r
O -y
+
NATIONAL HIGHways Associtiºn
Gºal-º-º-º-wam Gu Pont
----------------------- º
cºa-L-Hºw Davis c. e.
*-autºt-et-
--Tº--- * IT- ~
4.--C ** | *
|-> wrono 0.5Cº0A C.
EEnze - CRA
- 7. .*** *::: *E* - * 70
* - - -
Q - T '. - -º- - C.
stºrºiºkoscowojoseºwi os go 7.
* *** -
ROAD MAP -
OF º * - -*.
MICHIGAN
showing
ºt - —# *
what state AID. DoEs
WHAT FEDERAL AID WOULD do 3:...'s stil, wºund -
namely jºrwºooººººººº. *Hºº ºss
ROADS Lu *Hºº-º-º: £1..?. --
- `T- - c qual_*:
- +. ºu-ºº! – º Tuscº a ni L.A. C.
BEGINNING NOWHERE Y sº
iº or ---º-TT —
ENDING NOWHERE < * = n : - *P' -- +. º *::::ſ
º = * ºur tº
- -º- ** : * Vº -
10. *E*.*. 40. - o "". A cLintº N. *** **ś
*-i- º-h - --- *"
** + – i º
* ...l. ºw: | *
... : e a won ºngº aw
**** * * * * * * * *- : *** Fº º
- ** ** | -
*....” ** T- *"
! - |- * - A * Ş º ºr.
cal Houm.
ºl.cº. - |
* -e ºscº ---
º - --- *
list ºstriº", "yºut....... sº
I *!-- Al
MICHIGAN REPUDIATES “ROADS BEGINNING NOWHERE,
ENDING NOWHERE ''
MICHIGAN NOW CLAIMS “ROADS BEGINNING SOMEWHERE,
ENDING SOMEWHERE.” GOOD !














































[14]
£161 · 11，
Ģ**r-r--r--r--r--r--rm
！∞ºz. oz. si ol º 0 º
→sºn|w.aeſo rataeſs
\!
2%，±，±H NABINOS 5D NICIN3
dwraes…！»， mae'n∞
ataewae
cun，
od sawaewaelº，…w.u.s.w. Hae
….……ſtº
！!！!！! HAWE, WOS ĐININNIÐ Eº
SCIVO!！!
oq t’TINA SAw WAHEDIH TwNOI. LvN LVHM
sulltsin hovssv ſw aelo zivi： Givoaei
！！！！！！!！！！！！
avº
+
5
ș
NOO·|
º quae
rnºsoan.،
monºwae lºwº.
----2
wºººoo,）
m.
ſaen<
→ ∞-no.praes，
----------+----
• o swawo ………+++.---*****
nou wioossw ſsawawaelº nº Nollºw，
…o…， …，m，
UMaenaeuae -
|O
|-|-•·ſae·
wae yWwae…
|-w●32\r，laeae …………×
caelu， leor，，
Ii z-\
mw = N1 N O W. & 3 \\
[15]








----- º
º
- - - - - -
THE TYPICAL COUNTY LINE – WHERE GOOD AND BAD ROADS MEET
jority will waste this additional money without producing good roads, even as
most of the counties of Michigan have not produced good roads.
On the other hand, if we adopt a Nation-wide system of National Highways
we will not only cover our country with a network of good roads, just as the
State of Massachusetts is effectively covered by a network of good State roads,
but we will see good roads spring up everywhere, due to the impetus given to
highway construction by States, counties, and towns.
Furthermore, these roads will necessarily have a uniform excellence of con-
struction and maintenance, having, as they will, the highest highway engineer-
ing talent obtainable to direct and carry out this work, which is possible only
in our great government projects. Thus the Government will lead the way and
make an example for all to follow in the attainment of Good Roads Everywhere.
There are a few persons who still hold to the mis-
A Matter of taken notion that National Highways will place in the
National Concern hands of the Government a matter of purely local con-
cern. We believe the facts above outlined have clearly
demonstrated that roads, and particularly those roads which are now truly
interstate routes, constitute a purely National concern. But to still further
demonstrate this fact, it may not be amiss to outline the general scope of Na-
tional Highways in their relation to existing State Highways and county roads:
First, the National Government should con-
National Highways a struct a system of highways extending over the
Primary System entire country and embracing those routes which
are now, or will come to be, through routes of
travel, and interstate in character. Such a system is shown upon the center
page of this pamphlet. This map has been presented after a long and pains-

[16]
so, o o o Mill Es
N AT I O N A L
H I G H W A YS
5 O, O O O NM I L E S
N AT I C N A L
H I G H VVAYS
5 O , O O O NM 1 L E S
N A T | O N A L
H G H w A Ys
POPULATION serve D &SO FER CENT OF TOTAL U. S. FOFULATION
POPULATION ABUTTING 1 5 PER CENT OF TOTAL U. S. FOFULATION
TOTAL 75 FER CENT
Fofºu LATIo N serv ED eo PER CENT OF ToTAL U. s. FoEULATIoN
FOFULATION ABUTTING 1 s PER cFNT OF ToTAL U. s. FoEULATION
TOTAL 75 PER CENT
5 O , O O O NM I L E S
N A T | O N A L
H | G H VV A YS
FIFTY THOUSAND MILES OF NATIONAL HIGHWAYS
PROPOSED BY THE
NATIONAL HIGHWAYS Association ſº
FREDERIC REMSEN HUTTON, M.E. SC.D.
GENERAL SECRETARY
GENERAL COLEMAN DUPONT
CHAIRMAN BOARD OF NATIONAL COUNCILLORS
CHARLES HENRY DAVIS, C.E.
PRESIDENT
ºº:: M9. º
*... - $ § ſe --- r: § º e tº: § ; : .. e §: s: & *ś 3. • *~.. - sº * º § *2% §§ -- S * AJ Y º ź. º - RQº . º § zºº º: § à º º '.
- - tº #. ::3%3. & º Šºšº...ºft. tº º ...; 㺠("*" º' ºº Aºû º
SHOVVING FOFULATION SERVED AND AEUTTING O º . § § ºśī33. *ś. º *** * * : iºſº. Yº a.º. º
* . * x •:". º: • . .'s * § §§§ s” 3. :: ; §ss. “º ; § * te lºs e § º *... º.º.º. 3. § tºº W. ; *...* Kºź - º §§ § º ; § º gº §s
P O F U L A T | O N F O F U L A T I O N F O F U L A T I O N *s .# - *
* DIRECTLY t TOTAL - DIRECTLY TOTAL DIRECTLY f TOTAL tº: §ssº
STATE TOTAL SERVEſ) APUTTING | Served & Abutting STATE TOTAL SERVED *UTTING | Served & Abutting TOTAL SERVED *UTTING | Served & Abutting §§ º &
Per- Hor- Per- Por- Per- Per- Per- Per- STATE Per- i’er. Per- Per- ‘r, §3. §
Number CCInt Number | cent | Number cent | Number | cent Number | Cent Number cent | Number | cent | Number cent Number Cellſ Number | cent Number | cent Number | Cent Å. .W.
ALABAMA 2,138,093 || 100 1,157,359 || 54 || 648,525 31 | 1,805,884 || 85 MAINE 742,371 || 100 557,121 || 75 41,599 || 6 || 598,720 | 81 0KLAHOMA 1,657,155 100 565,152 || 33 286,525 | 17 | 851,677 50 AW
- Fº
ARIZONA 204,354 || " 169,591 || 78 || 30,765 | 15 190,356 | 93 MARYLAND 1,295,346 || " 482,774 || 37 || 50,040 || 4 || 532,814 || 41 0REGON 672,765 | " 444,495 | 66 || 65,963 || 10 || 510,458 || 76 *wciscº
ARKANSAS 1,574,449 t; 899,997 || 57 559,300 || 36 | 1,459,297 || 93 MASSACHUSETTS 3,366,416 1. 2,656,312 79 || 144,337 4 2,800,649 || 83 PENNSYLVANIA 7,665,111 { } 5,754,325 || 75 |1,031,369 || 14 6,785,694 | 89
CALIFORNIA 2,377,549 || " | 2006,040 | 84 || 136,890 || 6 || 2,141,930 || 90 MICHIGAN 2,810,173 | " | 1,686,996 || 60 | 372,397 || 13 || 2,059,393 || 73 RHODE ISLAND 542,610 | " 485,673 | 89 || 56,937 || || 1 || 542,610 | 100 O $.
COLORAD0 799,024 iſ 246,308 || 43 18,797 2 265,105 || 45 MINNESOTA 2,075,708 [4 928,357 || 44 68,475 3 996,832 || 47 SOUTH CAROLINA 1,515,400 {{ 800,338 || 52 363,548 24 | 1,163,886 || 76 O
CONNECTICUT 1,114,756 {{ 969,676 87 96,719 9 || 1,066,395 96 MISSISSIPPI 1,797,114 {{ 620,564 34 || 264,820 | 15 885,384 || 49 SOUTH DAKOTA 583,888 ! { 194,038 || 36 | 122,574 || 2 | 316,612 || 57
DELAWARE 202,322 {{ 202,322 || 100 202,322 100 MISSOURI 3,293,335 !ſ 1,878,011 || 57 310,781 9 || 2,188,792 | 66 TENNESSEE 2,184,789 i{ 1,263,360 57 || 513,632 24 1,776,992 || 81
FLORIDA 752,619 ! { 751,139 || 64 86,926 12 838,065 || 76 MONTANA 376,053 {{ 253,380 67 95,416 || 25 348,796 92 TEXAS 3,896,542 il 1,720,488 || 44 530,540 || 14 2,251,028 58
GEORGIA 2,609,121 | " | 1,029,830 39 || 541,545 21 1,571,375 | 60 NEBRASKA 1,192,214 || " 534,828 45 || 307,018 26 841,846 || 71 UTAH 373,351 | " 264,115 || 70 || 44,923 || 12 || 309,038 82 O sawta §
* ARA
|DAHO 325,594 i. 163,186 || 50 15,667 5 178,853 || 55 NEWADA 81,875 ſi 62,137 || 75 6,613 8 68,750 | 83 WERMONT 355,956 ti 310,848 || 87 33,963 10 344,811 || 97
ILLINOIS 5,638,591 il 4,178,333 74 || 810,917 | 14 4,989,250 | 88 NEW HAMPSHIRE 430,572 {{ 391,621 | 91 38,951 9 430,572 || 100 VIRGINIA 2,061,612 {! 1,178,541 57 || 352,689 || 17 | 1,531,230 || 74
|NDIANA 2,700.876 | º 1,638,256 60 | 639,265 24 2,277,521 | 84 NEW JERSEY 2,537,167 ſt 1,362,982 53 || 421,504 || 17 1,784,486 || 70 WEST WIRGINIA 1,221,119 {{ 829,292 || 67 || 314,121 26 1,143,413 || 93 C)
|OWA 2,224,771 f 1,015,651 45 || 577,490 26 1,593,141 || 71 NEW MEXICO 327,301 £4 225,356 69 12,008 4 237,364 | 73 WASHINGTON 1,141,990 {{ 887,467 78 || 144,604 || 12 1,032,071 90
KANSAS 1,690,949 ! { 714,753 42 || 330,714 || 20 1,045,467 62 NEW YORK 9,113,614 {{ 6,107831 67 || 653,163 6,760,994 || 74 WISCONSIN 2,333,860 {{ 783,591 || 33 122,879 5 906,470 38 try
KENTUCKY 2,289.905 Hi 982,158 || 43 º 533,867 || 23 1,516,025 | 66 NORTH CAROLINA| 2,206,287 sº 1,133,754 || 51 || 459,346 21 1,593,100 | 72 WYOMING 145,965 it 122,375 83 16,982 | 12 139,357 95
LOUISIANA 1,656,388 ºt 1,124,628 67 | 189,009 || 11 1313,637 78 NORTH DAKOTA 577,056 {{ 154,065 27 | 153,467 27 307,532 54 DIST, OF COLUMBIA 331,069 !! 331,069 || 100 331,069 || 100
OHIO 4,767,121 § { 3,219,399 || 67 |1,103,309 || 23 || 4,322,708 || 90 Şa
- T C T A L’s
Population of the United States. . . . . . . 91,972,266 — 100 per cent - • { 2 * ...
* e - - - - ºš 1NE
Population Directly Served . . . . . . . . . . 55,428,882 – 60 per cent FENSACOLA gr. August
Population Abutting * * * * * * * c e e s e e 13,713,889 *- 15 per cent * -> R"
Population Served and Abutting . . . . 69,142,771 – 75 per cent 4 M = x , §ºusºut
© PUBLISHED UNDER DIRECTION
D Es I G N AT I o N OF NAT I o N A L H I G H v A Ys - §§act - OF THE
1. NORTHERN 11. LAKE - MoUNTAIN PACIFIC 21. BISMARCK - PIERRE 31. CONNECTICUT VALLEY 41. MEMPHIS - FLORIDA 5 1. RICHMOND - CHARLESTON & LEGEND º NATIONAL HIGHWAYS ASSOCIATION
à §n | 3. §ºzona # É; HILLS P ND 33. Fº* $ºf # N;º T # §º -Čºro NOTE: § Pºlº, GENERAL COLEMAN DU PONT
- NORTHWEST BURLINGTON - PORTLA . DETROIT - GRAND RAPIDS . NEBRASKA - TEXAS - - : ; º: Liº 34°EACH
# §r. # gººgaRounas 24. gº." 34. FLORIDA WEST COAST 44. NEW HAMPSHIRE # #: º MONTANA ...º.º.º.º. ººcanons ^y POPULATION IN COUNTIES DIRECTLY SERVED Sºś Pºś4 chairMAN adaRD of National councillors
- UGET - GULF 25. CHICAGO - COLUMBUS 35. HARRISBURG - ERIE 45. NEW YORK - SCRANTON . I OLEDO - MACKINAC -- : §.
6. PACIFIC 16. ROCKY MOUNTAIN 26. CHICAGO - DETROIT 36. HUDSON - ADIRONDACKS 46. OHIO – WABASH 56. UTICA - OGDENSBURG orsº º: S POPULATION IN COUNTIES ABUTTING sº. CHARLEs HENRY Davis, c, E.
7. APPALACHIAN 17. SANTA FE 27. CHICAGO - MACKINAC 37. JEFFERSON CITY 47. PHILADELPHIA - ATLANTIC CITY 57. WASHINGTON - ANNAPOLIS TION IMPROVEMENTS IN Location witH1N ... PRESIDENT
8 CANADA - GULF 18. SOUTHWEST 28. CHICAGO - ST LOUIS 38. LOUISVILLE - NASHVILLE 48. PHILADELPHIA - BUFFALO 58. WEST VIRGINIA - INDIANA - EACH STATE. () *
9. GREAT LAKES - ATLANTIC 19. TEXAS - ATLANTIC 29. CLEVELAND - CINCINNATI 39. MAINE - QUEBEC 49. PITTSBURGH - CLEVELAND 59. WISCONSIN -- - SCALE OF MILES .
1O GREAT LAKES GULF 20 ATLANTA - AUGUSTA 3O. COLUMBIA RIVER 40. MASSACHUSETTS - VERMONT 50. PITTSBURGH - ERIE 1OO O 1OO 200 soo 400 500 ego was gº D. C.
- L––. l | JULY 1913



























taking study of the needs of all parts of the country, gathered by a most thor-
ough correspondence and personal investigation. The routes follow either the
best existing roads or lines where the best grades and alignment can be secured
consistent with serving the greatest number of people. The entire length meas-
ures only fifty thousand miles (a little over 2% of our present total mileage), and
yet over 60% of our entire population is directly served by these routes — the
whole country really served! -
However, it is not supposed that this location is perfect in all respects, and
is put forth merely as a tentative scheme, calculated to promote discussion and
thus aid in a final determination. But whatever final location and mileage is
fixed upon, it is essential that they should be built, maintained, and owned by
the National Government.
- Similarly, each State should construct a secondary
State Highways a system of highways similar in principle but differing,
Secondary System of course, in detail to that of Massachusetts. These
highways, which would be feeders to the National
Highways and which are essentially inter-county in character, should be built,
maintained, and owned by the State.
Again, each county should take care of a tertiary
County Roads a system of roads which would bind together all parts of
Tertiary System the county and act as feeders to the State Highways.
These roads should be built, maintained, and owned
solely by the county.
Thus by this threefold road system there would be
Advantages of obtained a separate and distinct field of endeavor for
Threefold System National, State, and County road officials, and likewise
a certain definite object for National, State, and County
DEPRECIATION – OR THE HIGH COST OF BAD ROADS

[17]
road appropriations. No one would encroach upon, or be hampered by, either of
the others. Consequently, the efficiency of each would be vastly increased, and
the scope greatly enlarged.
And, as a final result of National Highways, we will not only procure our
much-needed system of trunk-line highways, but will also speedily and eco-
nomically obtain Good Roads Everywhere through the leadership and impetus
given to the construction of State Highways and county and town roads. The
other system – Federal Aid; joint appropriations, construction, or control —
will obviously only prolong the present abominable chaos, and at the net waste
of millions of dollars annually.
The plan above outlined is precisely similar to the sys-
France as an tem worked out in European countries, and notably in
Example . France,” which Nation sets an example to the whole world
in the excellence of her roads.
Thomas Jefferson — the father of the Democratic
A Principle Laid Party and Principles in our country — had the right
Down by Jefferson idea nearly a century and a quarter ago, when he
advocated and caused the National Government to
construct the old National Pike, to bind the rapidly expanding West to the
older States on the seaboard. Should we not follow in the footsteps of this great
statesman, and bind all of our States together by means of not one, but many,
National Pikes?
CHARLES HENRY DAVIS, C.E.
President National Highways Association
Washington, D.C.
Presented at the
Seventeenth Annual Session of the
ALABAMA GOOD ROADS ASSOCIATION
Mobile, Nov. 20, 21, 22, 1913
* See Appendix C.
[18]
APPENDIX A
The good roads movement in the United States to-day is of more far-reaching
importance than almost any other government undertaking. It has a much
wider influence than the great Panama Canal can ever have. No matter coming
before the next Congress will have a greater effect upon the business of the coun-
try during the next decade than the policy which shall be adopted with refer-
ence to roads. In view of this fact, should we not devote all our energies to in-
vestigating the question thoroughly and completely, that we may make no mis-
take, but adopt the best possible method of accomplishing the desired end? The
National Highways Association has studied the question most thoroughly, and
its conclusions are set forth in the previous discourse. Nevertheless, the Asso-
ciation believes that neither its plan nor any other plan should be determined
upon until after a thorough and painstaking study of the question by the Govern-
ment itself, by means of a special expert Commission, thus following the prece-
dent established in the case of the Panama Canal and all other great government
projects.
With this object in view, the following bill has been drafted: –
A BILL
For Congress to Create a National Highways Commission and
Prescribing Its Powers and Duties
* *
PROPOSED BY THE NATIONAL HIGHways Association
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United
States of America in Congress assembled:
SECTION 1. That a commission is hereby created, to be called the “Na-
tional Highways Commission,” to investigate, collect information, and report
to Congress on the Highways of the United States, together with recommenda-
tions as to the proper policy of the National Government in respect thereto
(whether by the establishment of a system of National Highways or by Federal
Aid in the building of State Roads or otherwise), and as to the most appropriate
legislation to carry such policy into effect.
SECTION 2. That the National Highways Commission shall consist of a
Chairman as the executive head in responsible charge thereof, and of thirteen
additional Commissioners as an “Advisory Council.”
SECTION 3. That the President, by and with the advice and consent of
the Senate, shall appoint said Commission as follows:
First. That the Chairman shall be or have been an Engineer by education
and profession, and shall be a man of executive and business experience.
Second. The Chairman shall be appointed by the President.
Third. The thirteen members of the “Advisory Council " shall be appointed
by the Chairman, by and with the advice and consent of the President, and shall
be respectively qualified to represent the following interests in the body politic:
(1) Agriculture, (2) Commerce, (3) Construction, (4) Economics, (5) Education,
(6) Engineering, (7) Finance, (8) Legislation, (9) Maintenance and Traffic,
(10) Materials and Machinery, (11) Military, (12) Transportation, (13) Travel,
Touring, and Recreation.
(This enumeration is merely tentative; the intention is to name
all of the general interests of the country, which are directly con-
cerned in the development of a system of National Highways.)
[19]
THE MAGIC OF DRAINAGE
ºn
-
WATER – THE MASTER
| - -
WATER—THE SERVAN


[20]
Fourth. Vacancies occurring in the Commission shall be filled in the same
manner as hereinbefore provided for original appointments.
Fifth. Any member of the Commission shall be subject to removal by the
President for inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office.
SECTION 4. That the Chairman shall receive a salary of
dollars per annum and each other Commissioner a salary of
dollars per annum. -
SECTION 5. That the powers and duties of the Chairman shall be:
(In this section should follow an enumeration of powers and
duties in sufficient detail to indicate the extent to which the Com-
mission is required to investigate and to give the Chairman the
fullest possible power to carry out such investigation. The follow-
ing points in particular should be covered:
(1) Executive direction of work. .
(2) Appointment and removal of employees.
(3) Providing offices, laboratories, etc.
(4) Collection, tabulation, and publication of information, in-
cluding experimental work, surveys, etc.
(5) Obtaining information and co-operation from govern-
mental departments. *
(6) Incurring necessary expense. .
(7) Preparing and submitting a complete final report with
recommendations.)
SECTION 6. That the duty of the “Advisory Council ' shall be to assist
the Chairman as he may direct and to advise with him at his request or on their
own initiative.
SECTION 7. That the term of office of the Commissioners and their succes-
sors appointed hereunder shall end upon the delivery of their final report to the
President, but not later in any event than , 19 tº
SECTION 8. That for the purpose of carrying out the provisions of this
Act, there is hereby appropriated the sum of dollars, out of any
money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated.
SECTION 9. That this Act shall be known as the National Highways
Act; and shall take effect upon its passage.
The bill above outlined is designed to accomplish the following main objects: —
(a) The gaining of complete and reliable information, within a reasonable
time, as a basis upon which to determine a policy and to frame proper legislation.
(b) The gaining of this information through a broadly representative Com-
mission, whose work will necessarily evoke discussion and crystallize public
opinion. -
(c) The concentration of the authority and the responsibility of the Com-
mission upon a single capable man, carefully chosen, subject to removal for cause,
and ably supported by an “Advisory Council’’ representing all related activ-
ities (following therein the precedent that has proved so successful in the case
of the Panama Canal).
No matter what one's own personal view of the matter may be, can any one
believe that such a Commission will not determine upon the best possible solu-
tion of the road problem?
And will not the report of such a Commission be therefore a plan upon which
all can unite? We think so. Do you?
[21]
STUDIES IN CULVERT DESIGN
WHICH IS THE CHEAPER 2

[22]
The following tables are appended hereto as a matter of interest to show the
many points of view held by our law-makers.
APPENDIX B
things! They are submitted without comment.
The first table contains those bills advocating National Highways, while the
second contains those advocating Federal Aid.
The tables likewise show other

NATIONAL HIGHWAYS
Referred to
Committee on
APPROPRIATING
Total Per Annum
$50,000,000 || $10,000,000
100,000,000 10,000,000
100,000,000 10,000,000
1,000,000 | . . . . . . . . . .
75,000 | . . . . . . . . . .
(% cost) | . . . . . . . . . .
100,000. In 1912
3,000,000 || “ 1913
5,000,000 || “ 1914
2,000,000 || “ 1915
2,000,000 | . . . . . . . . . .
100,000 | . . . . . . . . . .
35,000 | . . . . . . . . . .
250,000 (9% cost)
e e º º ſº tº e º & C 24,000,000
1,000,000 | . . . . . . . . . .
500,000 | In 1913
5,000,000 || “ 1914
15,000,000 || “ 1915
500,000 || In 1913
5,000,000 || “ 1914
15,000,000 || “ 1915
500,000,000 or more
e e º 'º tº e & © tº e 60,000,000
60,000,000
Agriculture and
Forestry
Appropriations
Post-Offices and
Post Roads
Agriculture
& 6
Post-Offices and
Post Roads
Agriculture
Agriculture and
Forestry
Agriculture
Post-Offices and
Post Roads
& 6 & 6 6 & 66
Agriculture
Ways and Means
Agriculture
Date Author No.
3-11-1908 || Gallinger S. 6057
6–19–1911 |Sutherland S. 2822
6–19 “ Howell H. R. 11876
8–10 “ Cullom” S. 31.97
12-16 “ McKellar* | H. R. 16096
1-15-1912 | Borland H. R. 17919
1-15 “ Francis H. R. 17931
4-11 “ Owen S. 6271
4–24 “ Hobson* H. R. 23718
5- 9 “ Gore* S.J.Res. 106
8- 1 “ Taylor H. R. 26082
8–17 “ Littlepage | H. R. 26330
8–20 “ Carlin.” H. R. 26354
1–17–1913 | Borland H. R. 28.188
1–17 “ Francis H. R. 28231
1-28 “ Hobson H. R. 28471
2-10 “ Warburton | H. R. 28721
3- 1 ** § 6 H. R. 28869
*Surveys and Reports only.
[23]
FEDERAL AID
Date Author No. APPROPRIATING Refersed to
Total Per Annunn Committee on
11-19–1903 || Brownlow H. R. 4508 || $24,000,000 || $8,000,000 Agriculture
12- 4-1907 || Latimer S. 480 24,000,000 8,000,000 *. and
orestry
3- 3-1910 | Bankhead |S. 6931 500,000 | . . . . . . . . . . 6 & 6 & 6 6.
2–17–1911 | Frazier S. 10839 1,000,000 | . . . . . . . . . . & 6 & 6 & 6
4- 4 “ Flood H. R. 62 (Surplus) 25,000,000 Ways and Means
4- 5 “ Sheppard |H. R. 1708 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Agriculture
4- 6 “ Bankhead |S. 174 500,000 | . . . . . . . . . . Agriculture and
Forestry
4-10 ** Campbell |H. R. 2928 24,000,000 8,000,000 Agriculture
4-11 “ Hughes H. R. 4019 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 &
4-13 ** Adamson | H. R. 4714 (Surplus) 50,000,000 Ways and Means
4–20 ** Cox H. R. 6308 || 30,000, 10,000,000 Agriculture
4-20 “ | Swanson S. 1388 50,000,000 10,000,000 Post-Offices and
Post Roads
5- 1 ** Swanson S. 1891 100,000,000 | 20,000,000 “ “ “ “
5- 4 ** Austin H. R. 8667 50,000,000 10,000,000. Appropriations
5–18 “ Hobson H. R. 10009 500,000 | . . . . . . . . . . Agriculture
5–18 “ Hobson* H. R. 10012 500,000 | . . . . . . . . . . 6 &
5–18 “ Hobson H. R. 10010 100,000,000 | 20,000,000|Post-Offices and
Post Roads
6-16 “ Anthony H. R. 11726 5,000,000 | (34 cost) | Appropriations
6-21 “ Simmons |S. 2846 1,000,000 | . . . . . . . . . . Tabled
6-21 “ Byrnes H. R. 11969 1,000,000 | . . . . . . . . . . Appropriations
7- 5 “ Swanson S. 2935 100,000,000 | 20,000,000 Tabled
7–22 “ . Howard H. R. 12739 (Surplus) (% cost) || Ways and Means
7-26 “ French H. R. 12825 ,000, 2 www3 Appropriations
8–10 “ Shackleford |H. R. 13491 || 100,000,000 | . . . . . . . . . . 6 6
8–11 “ Shackleford | H. R. 13501 Class # º per mile Agriculture
& 6 C 20 66 & 6
66 D 10 6 & & 6
8–16 “ Linthicum H. R. 13709 || 25,000,000 | . . . . . . . . . . Interstate and
7,000,000 || In 1914 Foreign Com-
8,000,000 || “ 1915 InterCe
10,000,000 || “ 1916
12- 4 “ Griest H. R. 14128 (% cost) | . . . . . . . . . . Agriculture
12–12 “ Russell H. R. 15472 (% cost) . . . . . . . . . . . 6 &
12–16 “ Prouty H. R. 16097 ,000, In 1912 6 tº
10,000,000 || “ 1913
15,000,000 || “ 1914
20,000,000 || “ 1915
30,000,000 || “ 1916
12–19 “ Chandler H. R. 16283 (Surplus) || 25,000,000|Post-Offices and
Post Roads
12-19 “ Chandler H. R. 16284| 100,000,000 | 20,000,000 Agriculture
12–20 ** Oldfield H. R. 16443 100,000,000 | 20,000,000 6 6
1- 5–1912 Shackleford | H. R. 17018 clºs; *; per mile & &
6 6 C 20 6 º' & 6
& 6 D 10 $ 6 6 6
1- 5 “ Anderson H. R. 17013 || 30,000,000 (% cost) & 6
1–13 ** Taggart H. R. 17821 (2% of cost) | . . . . . . . . . . & 6
1-15 “ Hobson H. R. 17928|| 100,000,000 2,000,000 66
1-17 “ Bell H. R. 18162 (Entire cost) | . . . . . . . . . . Post-Offices and
Post Roads
1-22 “ | McGuire H. R. 18491 || 100,000,000 20,000,000 Agriculture
*Surveys and Reports only.
[24]
FEDERAL AID
Date Author No. APPROPRIATING Referred to
Total Per Annunn Committee on
2–26–1912 | Ferris H. R. 20837 | . . . . . . . . . . (Surplus) ||Ways and Means
3- 5 “ Underwood” H.J.Res.262 $25,000 | . . . . . . . . . . Rules
3–26 “ Hensley H. R. 22347 * 20,000,000 Agriculture
% COst
3–29 “ Goeke H. R. 22592 Class A $80 per mile |Post-Offices and
“ B | 40 “ “ Post Roads
6 & C 20 6 & 6 &
& 6 D 10 & 6 6 &
3–29 “ Cox H. R. 22579 (Surplus) 50,000,000|Ways and Means
3–29 “ Shackleford | H. R. 22581 Class # *; per mile | Agriculture
6 & C 10 6 6 6 &
3-29 “ White H. R. 22583 (Surplus) 50,000,000 Ways and Means
3–29 “ Neeley H. R. 22585 (Surplus) 25,000,000|Post-Offices and
Post Roads
3–30 “ Byrns H. R. 22646 Class # *; per mile | Agriculture
6 6. C 10 & 6 6 &
3–30 “ Rubey H. R. 22652 (Surplus) 25,000,000 Ways and Means
4- 2 “ Burnett H. R. 22.768 Class A $30 per mile ||Post-Offices and
& 6 É ; & 6 & 6 Post Roads
4- 2 ** Raker H.R.22773 Class # *; per mile | Agriculture
& 6 C 10 & 6 ( &
4- 3 ** Powers H. R. 22830 || 75,000,000 (3% cost) 6 &
4- 5 “ Hanna H. R. 22909 Class # *; per mile 6 &
6 & C 15 6 6. & 6
4- 6 “ Shackleford | H. R. 22952 Class A $25 “ “ & 6
$ 6 B 20 & 6 & ©
& 6 C 15 6 & & 6
4- 8 “ Byrns H. R. 22998 Class A $30 “ “ & 6
6 ($ B 20 6 6 6 &
6 & C 10 & 6 6 &
4–25 “ Langley H. R. 23770 24,000,000 8,000,000 & 6
4–26 “ Sims H. R. 23826 10,000,000 | . . . . . . . . . . Post-Offices and
Post Roads
4–29 “ Myers S. 6600 (% cost) | . . . . . . . . . . Agriculture
1- 7–1913 | Swanson S. 8003 | . . . . . . . . . . 25,000,000|Post-Offices and
Post Roads
1-22 “ Moon H. R. 28356 Class * *:: per mile “ “ “ “
6 6 5 & 6 & 6
& 6 C 50 6 6 & 6
1-29 “ Jackson S. 8305 (% cost) 10,000,000 “ “ “ “
2–14 “ Madden H. R. 28760 | . . . . . . . . . . 25,000,000|Agriculture
*Surveys and Reports only.
A BEAUTIFUL SOUTHERN HIGHWAY

[26]
s
APPENDIX C
FACTS CONCERNING FRENCH HIGHVVAYS
Departmental P m
Designation National Highways interºund viº Rºads
Highways
Designation of Corresponding American
Roads . . . . . . . w a e
National Highways
State Highways
County Roads
Mileage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24,000 160,000 185,000
Arºmate cost of construction per $10,000 $6,500 $3,500
Aºi º ºr * $275 $150 $100
Width of road . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16%’ to 23/ 10' to 20' 10/ ,
Fund . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . National Treasury Départment Funds
Built, maintained, and controlled by . . .
National Government
Departments
Local Road Tax
'4'
Parish or Commune
f
3.8
POOR ROAD – Plodding, straining every muscle,
Mud and water to their knees,
Two miles an hour is rapid going,
Plowing through such roads (?) as these!
ºf .
. . . .
GOOD ROAD-There is life and health and pleasure
In the sunshine and the air;
Two fast horses and a surrey
And - Good Roads Ererywhere!


| 28
s
APPENDIX D
HIGHVVAY STATISTICS OF THE SOUTHERN STATES
- - Total Road Improved | Percentage Roads per #. Population ...;
State Year Mileage Mit. lººd º S º,. e ºr. º: d
Alabama . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1912 49,639. 4,642 9.35 .95 .09 43.07 460.60
Arkansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1909 36,445 1,085 2.97 .68 .02 43.20 1,451.10
Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1910 17,954 2,070 11.53 .31 .04 41.92 363.68
Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1909 82,230 5,978 7.27 1.39 .10 31.73 436.45
Kentucky . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1909 53,744 10,115 16.60 1.32 .25 42.60 .226.39
Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1911 24,962 534 2.14 .51 .01 66.36 3,101.85
Maryland ë e tº 1909 16,773 2,142 12.77 1.36 .17 77.23 604.74
Mississippi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1909 39,619 342 .86 .85 .01 45.36 || 5,254.72
Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1909 || 107,923 4,755 4.40 1.55 .07 30.52 692.60
North Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1911 48,285 3,450 7.15 .92 .07 45.69 639.50
South Carolina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1912 44,500 5,880 13.22 1.44 .19 34.05 257.72
Tennessee . . . . . . . . 1909 45,913 5,353 11.66 1.09 .12 47.59 408.14
Texas . . . 1909 128,971 4,896 3.80 .49 .02 30.21 795.86
Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1909 43,399 1,903 4.38 1.02 .04 47.50 | 1,083.35
West Virginia . . . . . . . s • * * * * * * 1909 32,109 591 1.84 1.33 .02 38.03 2,066.20
Total 772,466 53,736 6.96 .86 .06 39.47 567.44.
GOOD ROADS – GOOD SCHOOLS – KNOWLEDGE – PROSPERITY

[30 J
SMALL ROAD TAX – NO SAVING
FAIR ROAD TAX – NO LOSSES


[31]