The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1919-08-28

II ~ssss 49, - g%r1t -
'gouss. the cittsa AnA tevfna ms Iat-
tier. from tAs most rs,nets rArts 81 n J
to Richmond 10 protoat,v he sala.
your chambers Of commerce and
city councils and other civic orxMni.
1Ations took UP the hu& and the cry.
All this time the counties. hecau1e
they are not organized, have been
! compelled to stand Idly BY, unable to
! Representatives in this house 70 SAFE
guard the interests OF their con-
stituents. We cannot expect the
representatives from the cities to d.
The bill as now drafted provides
that hve per cent OF the proposed
levy OF twelve cents lin the original
bill fifteen? on general property be
not expended on the state highway
system but, under provision Of
companion bill, be spportioned to the
one hundred counties OF the state for
county roads or state highway feed.
ers."
Delegate J, Sinclair Brown, OF Roa-
noke county. urged that the house
Of enacting legislation framed by the
Virginia Good Roads association
and 60 home.
We have thus far shown the peo-
pie Of Virginia that we can come
here and do what we set out to do.
regardless of what the senate may
do" he said.
Delegate Charles F. Smith. Of Din
wfddie. declared that he did not pur
pose going back to his people and tell
ing them that he did so -and-so simply
because the Virginia Good Roads as.
ISOLATION or any ether organization
desired it.
DENIES ALLEGATION.
The delegate from Dinwiddie de-
MED that the counties were trying to
put anything over" on the cities
declared, is authority for the state
ment that some parts of the state
will not reap the benefits Of the pro-
posed state highway system for ten
or twelve years.
What is the farmer going to do In
the meanwhile. while he is helping 10
bear the burden of the proposed sys-
tenn p he wanted to Know.
Floor Leader Willis, of Roanoke
city, declared that the question was
not whether to levy more taxes nor
whether the counties or the cities
were going to pay more taxes.
Ia 1T is merely question of division
of that tax which II has been de-
termined we shall levy" he said. at
lis question of preferred mileage.
Is the state highway system or those
roads leading into it the more i'm
po-tant? The question Is whether the
main trunk line leading from point
to point or those highways otherwise
feeders are the more essential"
1t is.proposed by advocates of the
substitute for the Ozlin bill that
100000 be appropriated for. the
county highway system. Fortifying
n iv~A~ al vrytth uNut q
from Roanoke city reminded the
county representatives that the most
each county could expect was 5000.
and he could not see where they were
~oing to get very far" on such PAL
try sum.
He appealed to the patriotism OF his
fellow members to do what they came
county delegates could hope to do un-
der the provisions of the bill would
be to carry back home a sop OF
$4,000, he said.
do not be swerved from a great
purpose" he urged. Advocates of
! this bill would cripple the great state
highway system"
county, argued earnestly for adoption
OF the amendment.
! :, . Delegates Hall from Norfolk city.
moved that the impending question
be put There was a counter motion
to reconsider. AT this juncture Dele
gate Gilmer. OF Pulaski, moved that
I. adtQprnment be taken until today.
! Cries OF NO" came from the county
representatives. 1t was necessary to
call for a recorded vote to determine
| the question Of adjournment.
! : The bill will appear on the house
/ calendar today under the head OF I'M
! finished business and is expected to
j be disposed Of before adjournment.