The times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1897-1901, 1900-01-04
FOR ROAD IMPROVEMENT
A Bond Project TO Enable Alexandria
County TO Build Highways.
The Special Committee of the Hoard
of Development Discusses the New
Law onficting Opinions Regard
ing the Increase of Local Indcbt-
cdncss - The Supervisors Report.

board of development OF Alexandria county
met in the Corcoran Building yesterday
and adopted a report TO be submitted TO
the association. The committee was re-
Gently appointed by the president Of the
association TO make a careful examination
of the new law-"to authorize the board
OF supervisors of Alexandria county to
borrow money by the issue OF bonds 10
repair and improve and increase the public
roads of said county, and to authorize the
qualified voters of said county TO vote on
the question" Favorable consideration of
the project to bond the county will be
urged by a majority of the committee,
and minority report adverse TO the prop
osition will be made by two members The
meeting of the full board will be held at
the rooms of the Washington Board of
Trade. 1910 G Street northwest, on the
18th inst.
1t was shortly after O'Clock when
Chairman Augustus Davis called the com
mittee TO order. He stated that be had re-
ceived instructions from President Lothrop.
of the board, that the committee make a
report Of the bonding question at the next
meeting of the full organization. He said
the question was an important one to Al
eNandria county; that he should ask sug-
gestions from all present, especially from
members of the committee. IL was apparent
that other persons connected with the
board of development we're present, but
they took no part in the proceedings.
Chairman Davis told the committee further
that he was opposed TO the entire bonding
proposition. He did not believe. he de-
clared. that Alexandria county was to be
greatly benefited by assuming debt of
$3.50, GOO. simply Tor the purpose Of improy-
ing the public roads. The speaker stated
that he would offer a resolution later. in
the meeting expressing his views in the
matter.
A roll call was demanded at this point.
resulting in the following members report
ing present: Augustus Davis, Chairman;
W. W. Douglas and James L. Clements.
from Arlington district; DR.. J. Taber John-
son, G. c. Boteler. and e. y. Saegmuller,
from Washington district and A H. era
ham and c. Rucker. from jefferson dis
trict Mr.. Frank Hume. the remaining
member of the committee, was absent
Next in order the committee took up Ter
consideration the bonding bill.
II was noticed that County Supervisor
d. n Rusk. OF jefferson district, vigor-
Gus opponent of the neaslre.@was absent
from the meeting Chairman Davis stated
that he had received letter from Mr.
Rusk explaining his absence. and giving
arguments against ihe proposition. The
letter from Mr. Rusk vas then read, 1t
says. in part:
II am opposed 10 bonding the county II
is now bonded for S2O.0o0 and We are be-
hind in our county levy about $1,000. Our
taxes are heavy and assessments are high.
II appears to me had better improve
s.rs= doh
No one can deny that our roads are i'm
proving under the present system. and
all roads accounts are paid As the law
now stands the money for roads is spent
with the people whereas If We bond the
county. three-fourihs OF the funds will 20
to the bondholders. Regarding the bill
now before the people, ] can only say it
is most unfortunate. The measure says
we shall not bond the county for any puT-
pose until three fourths Of the money has
been paid; therefore. we are barred from
securing funds in cases OF emergency. With
the most careful handling of our finances
1t will take over thirty years to settle
this large debt now TO be incurred. allow
ing an interest rate Of 3 per cent"
When the chairman called for remarks
and resolutions. several gentlemen sub
mitted their views. Mr.. James +. Glenn
ents, secretary Of the board offered reso-
luton declaring 1t TO be the sense Of the
mee ing that t1e bonding bill was heartily
endorsed by the committee. This motion
resulted in a lively debate. Chairman Davis
offered counter proposition. His Iesolu-
ton called for adverse action and IN ad-
verse report by the committee on the en-
tire matter.
Immediately Mr. Clements addressed
those present on his motion He said the
county was in desperate straits for proper
road facilities. Mr.. Clements appealed to
the chair to recall its resolution. but with
out effect. Then a long controversy arose
as to the right Of procedure OF the con-
licting motions. Finally the Davis reso-
luton was lost by vote OF } TO g. and
Mr. Clements then asked the adoption of
his motion. An amendment offered by Mr..
Douglas TO the Clements proposition was
lost and the vote then REQUIRED TO the
resolution endorsing the bonding PROPOSE
ton In its entirety, the motion, submitted
by Mr.. Clements being finally carried. Mr..
Douglas then stated that he should file
minority report. After the preparation of
the report by Secretary Clements an adj
journment was carried, there being no
further business before the committee.
In connection with the proposed bonding
OF Alexandria county for the Improvement
OF the roads, the chairman OF the board
of supervisors Of the county has prepared
a brief. giving details OF the new bill and
such other data regarding the subject as
may be of interest to the citizens. Among
the subjects treated at length in the pup
LEGATION, which will soon be scattered about
the county are remarks as follows:
Under our present road system. or
rather lack OF system, much money is I'M
avoidably wasted. Even the roads which
have been put into good condition do not
receive proper attention, unimproyed
roads call for the money available. and
thus, instead OF improving, they slowly
become worse again. Under our present
system this result is inevitable We have
about sixty miles OF roads in the county.
According TO estimates Of competent en-
gineers, the III improved roads can be
graded and macadamized for about Sl3O.
900. To this amount we have added SEQ
900, so as 10 be perfectly sure Of having
enough 10 properly improve all the roads.
The money available for road purposes
in the county amounts TO between $4,000
and S14 600 per annum. This is derived
from the road levy and money obtained
from liquor licenses.
at is intended by the board that an au-
diting COMMITTEES be appointed by the
Judge, consisting OF three citizens, one
from each district. This committee is 10 ex-
anime the accounts and all work done.
This, we believe, will insure the careful
and competent management Of the fund for
bonding purposes"