The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1904-03-03

that the State shall also contribute
similar sum for like purpose TO
the taxpayers in general the annual
appropriation of $3.50, 600 would be
pretty stiff proposition The annual
bonus of $3.50, 600 which the tax would
supplement would need to be of very
certain and continuing benefit, and
the first questions the thrifty and cal
culatipg Vermonter would ask would
be, What present or ultimate advant-
age would he derive from the
measure? What are the "outs" of
the proposition?
| Men competent to investigate and
judge fear that there is a large sized
Ethiopian in this wood pile; that the
practical effect of the bill, in opera
ton, in its ultimate drain on the
national treasury, would rival the
river and harbor bill, and possibly
call for as much money as the pension
roll. The prophets go further and
see the possibility of direct tax on
the people to provide the enormous
SUMS required by this road bill.
Here is proposition to give
State certain sum of money from the
national treasury; the proposition in
cludes, further, the condition that the
State shall contribute like sum.
But this is not the complete PROPOSE
tion. Vermont and the other New
England States. and the older States
of the north, have been building
roads for century or longer They
have road systems, perfected or in
process of perfeotiDg; they have many
good roads and some of them miles of
highways of the best methods of con-
struction. The sums the Brownlow
bill proposes to devote to road build
ing in those States, in no very remote
PERIOD would leave no work of the kind
to be done The West, the South, the
territories, on the other hand, have not
been thus taxing themselves for build
ing highways. Their public roads are
century behind the times To these
sections the Brownlow proposition ap-
peals, and in the interest of the
States in question the measure is be-
ing pushed in Congress. When public
road building had reached its limit in
Vermont, for example, the work
would be just begun in Texas. The
expenditures from the national treas
ury would be still going on in that
State, and would continue indefinite.
ly. By way of illustrating the prac-
tical working of the measure, the fact
is cited that one county of the Lone
Star State has bonded for 5000, 900 for
road construction. There are $50
counties in the State. If all the
counties should adopt the same plan,
it would call for an expenditure of
$50, 900, 000 This is suggestive of
the possibilities of practically limit
less expenditure that lurk in this cap
tivating scheme. Besides Texas there
are other great States and territories
into which the golden flood would be
pouring from the national treasury,
and Vermont would have to contribate
her proportion to resuppfy its resour-
ces, though receiving no government
aid.
1t the United States government
may embark in the work of rural road
building III the States, why not also
N the cities? Why Dot, also, in
bridge building Why not in side
walk construction-for there could be
10 discrimination on the side of road
ways for horses and automobiles
against the foot traveller? Why not,
llso, engage in every socialistic
cheme for bleeding the general
for local uses?
Because of what seems to be tenn.
'orary benefit, ought Vermont to
avor-and be petitioning her repre- ,
to support-a proposition
which in the future may turn out to
e a fatal disadvantage to her people2 ,
reflection ought to convince them ,
hat the principle embodied in the j
'rownlow bill, once accepted and
anctioned by law, the calls will be
ndless in other States for appropri. {
tions for work which Vermont, at /
Ter own expense, has done within her
wn borders-and the doing of which
J the proper function of the State, t
nd not the national, government. !
his view of the matter might be t
trongly re.enforoed by consideration r
+ the abuses and opportunities for c
eruption this prodigal scheme, in t
eneral and detail, presents.