New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1898-02-25
GOOD ROADS ADVOCATED.
OPPONENTS OF THE H1GBIE BILL
PROMPTLY ANSWERED.
FARMERS SAID TO BE IN Favor OF THE MEAS
IRE WHEREVER A FAIR STATEMENT on

FARMERS SAID TO BE IN Favor OF ihr '
IRE WHEREVER FAIR STATEMENT OF
ITS PROVISIONS HAS BEEN MADE.
.,, Fab GA hearing on the Higbie-Arm-
.,rorg Good Roads bill was given by the Asse"io'S
Judiciary Committee and the Senate Conm'''e0 w
Roads and Bridges in joint session this ai'ei"
The attendance was large tho Assembly, "''"'
being uncomfortably crowded. 49, Lii
Mr. Armstrong explained the provisions OF the OH.
srd answered questions propounded by members o'
a large delegation OF Albany 'ounS
appeared in opposition 10 H.
Alexander Flansburg. OF Clarksvue. eaiu mo
represented tho Patrons OF Industry Oh 49,.
County which claimed a Membership VI -.
I 90 md 1900 He confined himself 10 s'a""e W"
tho organization which he Represented VINO
TO the bill 49,.
..,hI,,r,or Schultz Democrap opposed the
huI nm m. ground that il not only cost money pu'
crsated new offices He favored as suos"'"'o
his bill. It, ..ou,
Mr. wvckofr. former member Of Assembly rom
Onondaga County, appeared TO represent 'i'
m.rs. club and Pomona Grange, OF ononoasa
COUNTY in favor OF the bill He declared '"he -
was unouestionably in tho interest OF tho Ia, me.
q. q would enable them 10 secure good roaos an"
have the cities nay large proportion OF 'ne ~
pense All but per cent OF the STATE '"N 49,
come from other sources than the pochet' 20
farmers He said that wherever inc Dill udu "e'"
eypIained TO tho farmers so tnht IL was '"''' -"
derstood they were in favor Of ~ He o'eu case
IN Onondaga County where the nineteen CUM"
xnervsors and the nineteen city supervisors agree"
on q road Improvement and under inc county sSs
tenn twenty-five miles OF road were DUH on WHICH
the farmers paid about two-thrds OF Inc cost
Had they adopted the system advocated ny 'hls
bill the road would have cost them only one-'H'"
"a much or they could have built three times as
much road for the same amount as the twehIy-i.e
miles cost them. He thought that II there We W
be anv opposition the bill It ought 70 come Iro
Mr. Vroman Of Schenectady. showed how. &C
cordng TO the portion Of tho state tax whlGn NE
town OF News Scotland pays. H. under the hlsple
bill could secure piece OF ROAD whlcn nVN
costs g. 100 for $50 as It's share OF the cost Inc
rest of the cost would be borne by the CITY OF
Albany and BY the State OF large he sara he couiu
ONLY account for the opposition OF the farmers 10
the bill on tho assumption that they hab not OK
amined il. - - VI. r,,.,or
l. 4 w said that az wheelman and as a taxpayer
he was in favor Of the bill The only fault he had
TO find with T. that it did not 20 far enough;
So FAR az IL went II in the right direction and
should become a Law The l.. a. W. had mem
bership OF between ZOO and 10000 in the state.
and the great body OF unattached wheelmen. whose
interests were the same as the interests or tho
l., A. W. numbered close on half a million.
Mr. Powers. OF Canandagus, presented facts ana
figures on the of road-buiding TO disprove the
Exaggerated figures which had been given. He
placed the % mile of Inacadamlzed road.
built on an old roadbed at $685..