The Newberry herald and news. (Newberry, S.C.) 1884-1903, 1902-03-18

that the roads vary from level, ma
cadamized, to billy, mountainous,
and muddy roads, and that, there
fore, the contract system is the only
just and equitable one. In reply to
this contention, [ will state what
every member knows to be true, that
on many of the worst roads to be
travelled the anxious bidder, under
the contract system, will, in his
anxiety for the contract, do as has
been done in the star route service,
submit a bid much below the amount
paid for service over better roads
and for less than the service will
actually cost. 1t may be said that
that is the contractors fault. But
that will not equalize the service;
nor better it, surely. Must we
have economy at the cost of total
ruin and destruction of the service ?
Is such proposition worthy of
the name of economy? A bet
ter plan than that proposed by
this bill would be to pay all carriers
$25 per mile, and a certain per cent
additional in all cases where the
roads to be travelled are of such na-
ture as to make the additional per
cent equitable, the route agent or
inspector being required to report on
the condition of the road.
This plan will pay the carrier on
a route of "a miles $500, which is
adequate, and will, in addition, guar
antee good service in every commu
nifty. But 1 contend that the per
cent for bad roads is not so neces-
sary as would appear at first glance,
for the reason that $25 per mile will
not, as a rule, be more compensation
to the carrier who travels good roads
than it will be TO the carrier who
travels rough roads. The opportu
mites to make money and to save
money will about equalize the differ
ence in the condition of the roads;
that is to say, the carrier who trav-
els good roads, the community being
populous, living will be higher and
expenses greater, while, on, the other
hand, his opportunity to make a
dollar will be greater; whereas the
carrier on bad roads will be able to
live for less, his expenses will be less,
and his money will buy more in his
thinly settled community.
As to the political phase of this
proposition, I fail to see much differ
ence between the two systems. The
party in power can use either for
political purposes, and if the Re-
publican administration uses it we
will have the same privilege when
we come into power. I have never
heard of any system, the civil service
included, that could not be manipu-
lated in the interest of the party in
power. I remember discussing the
civil service with an officer of the
government who had taken charge
of a bureau of one Of the depart
ments. l said to him: "Suppose you
had a chief of division or a clerk in
your bureau who was Objectionable
to you, what could you do under the
rules of the civil service, while he
performed efficient service, to rid
yourself of him?" He replied that
it would be easy to abolish the
Office held by the Objectionable
person, and after he was out re, es-
tablish it.
I unhesitatingly state that if I was
in charge of any department of this
government, with the responsibility
of good administration resting on
me, I would want employees in full
accord and harmony with me, and
would certainly feel kindly, there
fore, to the adherents of the party to
which I belong. If it seems desira-
bic, the party in power can manipu-
late the Offices under any system.
This we might as we'll concede now.
The rural service under the salary
system is about as free, and more So
perhaps, from political manipulation
as any other service of the govern
ment. | desire to say that every
appointee in my district, some