Williams news., 1919-04-18

support, but note they did not stop there. To again quote MT. Woolfolk as reported in the Coconino Sun.
 ''It was member Woolfolk's opinon that the proposed road could not be put to any use in the world other than that of the pleasure seeker and not dol ucts of the mine, farm or indus ucts of the mine, farm or indus try would ever be hauled over it.
 It was this attitude to which the News and the people of Williams took such strong ex- ception. It shows very plainly that the supervisors do not ap- preciate either the feasibility or the importance of this south road.
 But get back to the super visors' statement.
 In the statement of assessed valuation, the Saginaw is put in as follows: east side, $9O,0O0 and west side S1O,OOO. Evident ly the Saginaw and Manistee must be located in Flagstaff instead of in Williams. What do the supervisors take us for! If the remainder of tic valua- ton is arrived at in this way we cannot fe that it is really accurate. and fair apportion- ment.
 With the Saginaw Company operating where we can hear it daily and the great bulk of it's machinery and it's large stock of lumber here under cur eyes and still the property beng put in the estimate as 9 tenths in the East side of the county, what can we expect of the re- nainder of this estimate. Per haps we are still in Flagstaff, but don't know it A careful ex- animation of the record by Williams men will be necessary to put these matters clearly before the residents of the west side.
 Then we are told that we have received 78.5 per cent of the road money spent in the county during the last four and one half years. The staggering sum $220, ,O0O was spent in the west side during this period. Si63, ,OO0 of this amount was state money spent on the state highway from Flagstaff to Williams. Naturally this state highway was first started from Flagstaff and eventually, if it was ever to span the county it must be continued across the western part of the county. The part from Flagstaff to Belle mont having been completed in former years, 1t was natural that during these last four and one half years the West end must receive it's turn at state road funds on this road state road. To charge this amount up as beig ex- pended for the west side was unfair. It was spent on a road needed for the county and for the state-a state road. And don't overlook the fact that this mon ] ey was state money, not raised 1 By the. east side paying 64 per cent of the county taxes.
 Deduct the $163 ,UOO from the $220,0O0 and you have S57.OOO of county funds spent on the west side. And where were these county funds spent i. We still lack the figures but if 1 we are not mistaken, the bulk of this$57 7,00O was spent on the state road.
 The statement does not spec fly. Whatever was spent on the state road is not rightly charg- ed against the west side. It was spent for the benefit of all the county and of the state. The benefit that the west deri- yes from this state highway. is by the east, and by eve " town on the Old Trail route is benefited in a larger measure just as Flagstaff benefited more when construction was going on at the other side of the he county.
 What did the west side re- ceive for purely west side roads