White Pine news weekly mining review. [volume] (East Ely, Nev.) 1910-1920, 1913-04-06

condition as to be able to meet this
unusual disbursement without an en-
barrassing deficit. While this Is pre-
sented as a more or less decisive rea-
son for disappearing these bills, there
are certain other objections which
appear to me as worthy of special dis
cussion.
IL is obvious that whatever money
Is expended by the state in road con-
struction must be contributed by the
taxpayers in the several counties II
the state expends 100000 in road
construction, unless 1t is divided in
the approximate ratio of each coun-
tvs taxable property, any county
which gets less than it's pro rata, or
no part thereof. is contributing to
road construction In other counties
from which it derives no direct BEN
| fit On the other hand, any county
which gets more than its pro rata
! thereof would be the beneficiary at
the expense of the taxpayers of other
counties. Under the provisions of the
three bills mentioned, appropriations
are made for roadwork In certain
counties. leaving other counties re-
ceiving no appropriations and the tax
payers of which would Indirectly con-
tribute for road work to be perform
ed In the former. In my message to
the legislature, in discussing the
proposed transcontinental automo-
bile highway from the Atlantic to the
Pacific, and the likelihood of its pass
ing through Nevada IL our people
awakened to the necessity of extern
awakened to the necessity of
extensive highway construction, !
stated: 1T Is obvious that the
counties through which such road
may be built will be the chief bene-
fciaries OF It's construction. and for
which reason | recommend the pass
age of a general act enabling any
county to bond itself for its pro ratio
OF such costs and otherwise meet the
terms and conditions likely to be inn
posed by the government and con-
ftrlbuting associations"
Road Bills Approved.
In compliance with the foregoing
recommendation. assembly bill No.
800 passed both houses of the legis-
lature and was approved by me March
2e. Under its provisions any county
in the state can undertake as much
or little road work as its taxpayers
are willing to perform. either by a
direct tax or by issuing of county
bonds. In respect to the issuance of
county bonds for road improvement,
the investment board. of the state
school funds, under the provisions of
assembly bill No. 249, approved by
me March 22, are authorized to dis
pose of any of the bonds now owned
by the state school fund and convert
the proceeds into county bonds. un-
der certain restrictions. Thus coun-
ties desiring to issue bonds for road
Improvement would likely find the
state ready and willing to take them;
the interest practically being return
ed to the counties in support of the
public schools. Thus, under the pro-
visions of these two acts last men
toned, a complete modus operandi
for counties to undertake the i'm
provement of their roads and high
ways Is at hand.
While under the provisions of the
three bills under discussion the $780,
900 aggregate appropriations would
mean serious drain In the state
treasury. this amount when divided
among the IL counties would not
make sensible impression upon the
good roads problem in any one OF
such counties. An average state aid
of $500 to each county, 1t will
readily appear to those familiar with
the cost of good roads, is utterly in
sufficient. and without being supple
mented by county appropriations
from FIVE to ten times greater, would
lin effect be wasted.
In conclusion, one additional rea-
son SENS to me to weigh against state
aid for public roads In this state. as
lagainst the matter being handled ex-
lclusively by the several counties.
lOnce such precedent Is established,
land state appropriations for road
work In counties would become, not
unlikely. very similar to the public