The Prince George's enquirer and southern Maryland advertiser., 1912-03-29

| the only way it can be effectively don'
where the amount of money for per
manent improvements is so small
Thus Vansville, Laurel and Bowie o.
the First road district which have 81
far been sligbted will under a contlnu
ance of the present system receive the
bulk of the money during the coming
year whereas if the system be changed
unless proper provision is made, they
will lose the share of the 1910 and l9l-
road money justly due them.
As a second proposed change of note
he suggests the abolishment of the
office Of permanent County Engineer
and given as his reasons the following
''unless we can have a competent
engineer, such as our present one, II
would be for enconomy' and If the
services of an engineer be only requir'
ed at certain times or in certain
emergencies than it would seem that
proper economy would require that we
abolish the office" and as an economical
substitute he provides that the board
having supervision be empowered to
employ an engineer whenever necessary.
Despite Mr.. Marbury's sneering illusion
I have little fear that in attacking this
provision my purpose therein will be
misunderstood. | wish however to
preface nv remarks with the state
ment that | believe this provision was
made in compliance with bona tlde
complaints of the uselessness OF the
office. The public generally, l believe,
has tolerated the engineer as sort OF
necessary nuisance but this, in respect
to the Office at least, is due solely to
Ignorance of the functions of the engl-
neer. 1t is true that for the purpose
of surveying some isolated road, the
establishment of grades or the prepara-
tion.of bridge plans engineer could Ee
temporarily employed and the work
achieved at much expense and still save
some of the engineers salary. But
the office means much more than that.
AS briefly as it can be put the engineer
of any undertaking is the expert busl-
ness manager thereof. In addition to
the accumulation of engineering data
of every description the engineer under
the present system gives closest
scrutiny to every item of expense and
is responsible directly for every ex-
penditure for which value is not re-
ceived. To perfect system over SO
large a territory whereby the utmost
economy is achieved is a task, the
necessity and difficulty of which, can
not be well understood perhaps except
after careful investigation. 1t is in
lust this respect that Mr.. Whitley and
his colleague are again at fault. Even
his conciliatory reference to the pre-
sent engineer does not arise from any
direct information that he possesses.
For all he knows, may be the worst
engineer in the State of Maryland.
The uncertainty of his ground is shown
in his own provisionary argument II
the services of an engineer be only re-
ouired at certain times" etc. II he is
Going to abolish the Office of engineer
for fear that it will be filled by an in
competent, why not abolish all otneI
county offices for the same reason and
let us stop paying taxes? AS matter
of fact. and experience should have so
shown the public before this, the only
way by which the people can hope TO
get full value for their road taxes is by
having in charge an engineer to get his
entire time to a careful scrutiny OF the
expenditure of the money, and to heip
plan such expenditure on basis OF
comprehensive engineering data. 1t
cannot be done by increasing the salary
of a clerk of some county Office and
turning over to him the keeping OF the
accounts. No better proof of the In
adequacy of that antiquated system
can be asked than the present at
tempt of at least four counties of this
very state to change to law to pro-
vide for an engineer:
But these two changes which ne
claims are the object of the proposed
amendments really do not divuige their
purpose at all. They are merely the
snares put out to distract the attention
of the reader from the real cat in the
bag. 1t is when he tells us of the pro-
vision whereby the actual responsible
ity of control of the roads is put back
in the hands of the Board of County
Commissioners that the real purpose
of the amendment is divulged, and its
weakness shown. Since my first ac-
ouaintance with the Board of County
Commissioners my opinion OF them mas
undergone several changes and cannot
believe that it is they who are trying
to regain control of the roads even
though it would mean $4,000 year
more on their salaries. 1t is incon-
ceivable that any honest man Wouio
seek toincrease his salary for practical
ly no service at the expense OF the man
who actually does the work on the
roads. With all due respect Tor our
County Commissioners they are not
and could not be collectively good road
supervisors; putting in the time they DO
they could not know the roads OF their
districts nor could they better know the
desires of the people or more equltably
distribute the work. These are mere
words and phrases of Mr.. Whlteley, s
meaning nothing. That the appoint
ments of the Directors under the pre-
sent law without other change might
better be made by the County Commls-
sioners than by the Governor would ap-
pear more reasonable and perhaps de-
sirable in the absence of political motive
but in this case there is no such honest
purpose. A very fair and benifical
change on the other hand would have
been to increase the compensation OF
the Directors to 1000 per year. The
work they are called upon to do is ex-
pert, tiring, involves much expensive
travelling and is attended with much
responsibility. Yet they are paid but
a meager $40 per month, full third OF
which, or more, goes for their travel
ing expenses alone. If the public
wishes to economic in its road work
they want the very best men for road
foremen that they can get. The cheap
est man like the cheapest article is sell
dom the least expensive to get: Its a
fact that from the present Directors
the public has received at least 81. SO in
value for every $1.00 paid them.
In conclusion, / wish to try to make
clear my motive in writing these let
ters. Most of the people will have to
take my simple statement that there IS
and that they are written solely from
as sense of public duty. I am not seek
ing something from them but am try
ing to give them something. am try
ing to show them, what, from my nee
essarily intimate knowledge of the
facts, I know to be true, that Mr..
Marbury and Mr. Whitley are attempt
ing blindly to amend law into which
+ho1, howe novar fsirjy or carefully