Los Angeles herald., 1910-05-10
SUPERVISORS TO
PROBE HIGHWAYS
Retort DiScourteous Hurled at
Advisers in Report of
Roads Board
DECLARE CHARGES VICIOUS
Expert Engineers to Pass on the
Work, and Accounts Are
to Be Audited
DECLARE CHARGES VICIOUS

The highway commission replied to
the charges Of the good roads advisory
committee yesterday in a carefully
worded report to the board of super
visors. AS a result the board will in
vestigate the entire highway project
with the aid OF competent engineers
procured from the outside, will audit
the accounts of the highway commits
sion and frame the charges OF the
good roads advisory committee. The
action was taken on motion OF Super
visor Pridham, after short argument
with Supervisor Eldrigde, who favored
the selection of the engineers by the
highway commission.
Pridham named expert engineers
we'll known in California as competent
to pass upon the condition of affairs
in road building in Los Angeles county.
The highway commissions report
was tame compared to what had been
expected. Instead of loud denial of the
charges the report simply stated that
the advisory board had been mistaken
in it's figures, and had not taken into
consideration the fact that members
of the highway commission had had
no previous experience in road build
ing. In their report the commission
was careful not to enter into an ar
gument but appepared willing to sub
NIT both their construction work and
figures for examination by the board.
BOARDS ENGINEER BARRED
Supervisor Eldridge showed a marked
preference to having the highway
commission themselves select the en-
gineers who were to examine their
work.
The suggestion was blocked by a
quick move Of Pridham's, who sprang
to his feet and in a plain speech made
the motion that carried the inspection
Of the good roads work to other hands.
Pridham in his remarks called atten-
ton to the fact that the advisory
committee had been organized at the
suggestion of the supervisors them
selves, that this committee was COM
posed of the backbone of the solid
business interests of the city and that
inasmuch as they had originally been
called on for advice their opinion
should be treated with consideration.
1--WE also appointed the highway
commission" continued Pridharn, land
rely on them to carry out the good
roads project. We rely on them to give
us the best roads possible for the
money We have had confidence in
this committee and in it's engineers,
and we cannot afford to sit down and
have the commission slandered with
out knowing the charges made against
1t are untrue.
1.-THE investigation should be made
by disinterested persons. The highway
commission was not the proper body
to refer the advisory committees re-
port to. 1t was in the nature of re-
ferring the accuser to the accused.
II move that we employ competent
engineers, we'll known in road build
ing, to make an investigation and tell
us the best methods of road build
ing. -
NAMES INVESTIGATORS
"I have had referred to me for this
work such men as Mr.. Campbell, city
engineer of Riverside; Mr.. Ward of
Ventura county, who, L am told, is an
experienced road man; Mr. Boyer,
street superintendent of Pasadena;
Mr.. Mcclure, commissioner of public
works in Berkeley, and Mr.. Fletcher,
engineer for the San Diego county
highway commission"
'I move we amend this by including
an investigation by the board" said
Eldridge hurriedly. II accept" said
Pridham, and the motion was adopted,
after which the highway commissions
report was formally filed.
The communication of the highway
commission reads as follows:
following report covering the communi-
cation of the advisory committee, filed,
with you April 30, and which you have
referred to us for this purpose.
1--WE have to say that we have care
fully read and studied this communica-
ton, and have taken time and pains
to digest it, AS a result, it apepars
clear to the chairman, at least, of this
commission, to whom the other mem
bers have detailed the duty of writing
this report, that no public benefit will
be derived from a debate on the ques-
tions raised in the spirit and along the
lines laid down by the advisory COM
mittee.
1.-THE tone of the communication
throughout. as in the case of former
one from the same source, is distinctly
discourteous and evidently intended to
provoke extended returns in the same
vein. This we decline to be drawn into,
for it is certainly desirable to remain
temperate in the discussion of a mat
ter of the public business such as this
also to eliminate personal attack and
criticism as far as possible.
ATTACKS ADVISERS
"If the motives of the majority mem
bers OF this committee are indeed en-
tirely lofty and ingenuous-directed
solely to the public welfare-and not
prejudice and pique on account of
their failure to secure a controlling in
fluence in the management of the good
roads undertaking, then, to say the
least, they have been badly imposed
upon in the assembling and presenta
tion of their so-callCd data. Some at
tention has already been drawn by
others than those in our office in that
section of the press which is disposed
to be dispassionate and impartial in
the matter, to the double weakness of
this communication in its crude, un-
governed tone, and in its many palpa-
BILE distortions of facts and figures
For example, consider the following:
Quoting from the first communica-
ton of the committee:
"'We say that the first cost mile of
roads already constructed is excessive.
because a careful study of the work
already let shows that sixty-fve miles
of completed miles will aggregate $751;
900, or at the rate of $13,550 a mile.
Quoting from the second communica-
tion, which purports to give data prov
ing the above allegation:
"'Our statement that sixty-fYe miles