The Mount Holly news. [volume] (Mount Holly, Burlington Co., N.J.) 1891-1942, 1912-12-31
Our County Roads.

At the present time the roads of this
county and the name of the next Super
visor are topics that are being pretty gen.
much interest. Considerable has been
said about the efficiency of Joseph L. Hill
ton, the present incumbent, and figures
have been quoted to show that he has been
secured state funds in sums for the bene-
fit of this county. Col. Stevens, the state
commissioners, is quoted as saying that he
distributed so much money in this county
because he considered Mr.. Hilton the best
supervisor in the state.
In taking into consideration the amounts
given as stated we must remember
that Burlington county has many miles
of improved roads, although the state re-
ports do not seem to agree on the number.
The report of 1909 says that we have 1884,
143 miles; the report of 1910 shows the
same number; and the report of 1911, show
ing we built 80 that year, cuts down
the total to 187.723 miles. But, at that.
we lave more miles of improved roads
Lthan any other county, Middlesex being
next with 1874. $40. Hence it would seem
to stand TO reason that Burlington county
is entitled to a large share of state money.
But did it get more in proportion to its
miles of road than other localities did 2
In 1910. according to published figures,
Burlington county received $25, 020 rs,
which for its 1877 miles of road, was $133.-
80 per mile, and Morris county, in the
same year, with 76 miles of road, received
from the state Sal. sos. so, or $500 IL per
mile. In 1911, the published figures are
$31, 205. 90, but the official report of the
State COMMISSIONS fails to show but $16.
S59. 81. However. take the larger amount
and Burlington county got about $167 per
mile for its roads, while Hudson county,
with ia miles, received state aid to the
amount of 1907 per mile. So it would
seem that there might be other supervisors
than the gentleman from Burlington
county.
The statement published in three of the
COQull PuPCl6 onOWAn6 tAdb OOSCPu Il
Hilton has been such a valuable, efficient
official, has laid great stress on the money
he has been able to get for this county but
the comparisons given here show thai
other counties have been favored more
than we have. The statement referred tC
was in the shape of an open letter to the
members-elect of the new Board of Free
holders asking them to appoint MI. Hill
ton his own successor. The matter wa.
all threshed out before the nomination
and election of the gentlemen who wer,
successful. 1t was an issue In the cam
paign. 1t was not, and is not, as claimed
the clamor of politicians for politica
reasons, but was a general demand upor
the part of the people of the county tina
there should be a change In the office o.
Supervisor of Roads. The candidates
pledged themselves to make that chang,
and they are morally bound to stand b.
that pledge. If the clamor to remove Mr.
Hilton comes on a political basis, how
about the great desire to keep him IL
officer Are not certain politicians usinl
every effort In that direction And ar
they not actuated by the desire to main
tain the political ring and organization
that the people have decided against
The issue was fairly Joined before tn
nomination and election and the peopl
look to the members of the new board t
carry out the desires expressed to them o
the point Of election of a County Super
visor of Roads.