Richmond times-dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1914-current, 1922-01-25
v. |. LEE TELLS OF
BIG PROFITS MADE
ON ROAD BUILDING
Clarke County Engineer
Criticizcs Routing of Win
chester Stretch.
DECLARES EXPENSE OF
ENGINEERING TOO HIGH
Committee Denies Animosi,y
or Political Influence
in Hearing.
ISSUES INITIAL STATEMENT
sounds N"f~ Calling for FnIr p,,,
nm" H"ru"stn Mnss of Account
Ing Information.

win sweeping denial that i, ,s
"''"d''h hE anirn"sity or politics n
Joint legislative iuvcstirattng com.
mite. opened general iny.s,ira.
ton Of state highway affairs vos,.
""E win testimony To tho effect that
one contract for road construction
Yielded pr"ht in excess Of 40 nor
cent. Five other witnesses h.ar. In
W." sessions criticized the Highway
Department. several in no uuc,r,.i,
terms. hut their testimony was moro
IN III" nature Of personal npini,n
than evidence
criticism of the business admins
'rati"n and engineering efficiency OF
'he state Highway Department was
"h"red freely. the most concrete II.
I"s'raiior coming from W. l. Lee.
! Snbc"ntra"tor. and 4. q. I.ayman.
'l":H Of the Ashbv DiStrint road
board. IN Rockingham County. Ma
J"r Ice declared that the prof,s on
IN" Job. which was awarded AT a
contract price or s5o353.' would he
approximately s:O.70o after allowing
for depreciation on machincry aud ~
monthly salary I" himself OF $3.50 a
month for seven months
Other criticism cane from b,hncy
Harrison. an engineer of clarke
County. who gave /, ms his pcrsopa,
opinion that poor engineering was
shown in tn" routing Of six mite
stretch between Winchester and The
Clarke County line. citing the num-
hnr Of a
cid"uts that already hay, resulted
What h" described as an unduly
large outlay for guarding the work
after the contractor had failed. was
not from his personal knowlcdg"
hut merely h"arsay. although he was
certain that S'5 was the amount paid
FOR tho Waterman. Mr. Harrison
thought ais" that the engineering
expense Of $1,000 a mile was cxces-
sive.
Meet BrhInd Closed Doors.
TIL. morning session was con-
cludcd At 10 o'clock in ord"r that tn.
committee members could attend the
sessions OF their respective houses
Before adjournment an executive ses-
sion was held. at which n lengthy
resolution setting forth the motives
uf the committee. was drawn up and
adopted This resolution. IL was de-
ciarcd. was 10 set AT rest all sprcu-
latiou. miSconstriction aud miscon-
ccpiion ,as Ia the motives of the
proponents ot tn" Investigating rcso-
luton.
"Al intimati"ns in newspapers and
elsewhere 10 the contrary, we spcci-
81 Il 4, Io l;st
stood that ;he members of this com
mittrc have and feel no personal
animosity or hostility towards the
Highway Commissioner. ar unfair
prejudice To the workings OF his
d"partm"nt.' the statement said
Continuing. IL declared that ANY at
tempt on tho part OF any individuals
To take advantage nf this invcstiGa-
tion for personal or political reasons
Ia discrcdit the department or any
individual connected with 1t will he
discuuntenanc"d. Neither do we in
tend to lend curse YES knowingly to
the conccalmcnt OF anything i'm CON
nection with he department which
should he revealed by thorough in
vestiGation simply hecaus" |, nigh,
he construed by partisan friends OF
the department as discrediting to the
management"
Outlines Probe Purposes.
The committee declared that II is
the purpose of the investigation to
secure first hand information OF the
policies. activities and management
of the Highway Department for the
information and guidance Of the Leg
islaturc !n pending road legislation.
III defects exist" says the state
mcnt. either in the laws governing
the department or In the management
of the department. under those laws.
any prepared Legislation should he
considered with the fullest knowI-
edge OF the facts. II there are de-
fects. these defects should he cor
rccted. If blunders have 3cen made
by the Highway Commissioner or the
Highway Comm Ission in the exercise
of their powers and the performance
OF their duties. such changes In the
organization OF the department as
seem wise should be made to avoid
future blunders rs far as Is humanity
possible"
At the afterno IN session three more
witnesses were heard.
II. a. s. Hamilton, H. F.. MaRruder
and D. II Smith. all OF Albemarle.
~ n,