Federal Aid.

—The Federal Aid road act, approved July 11, 1916, appropriated “out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for the fiscal years ending June 30, 1917, the sum of $5,000,000; for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1918, the sum of $10,000,000; for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1919, the sum of $15,000,000; for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1920, the sum of $20,000,000; and for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1921, the sum of $25,000,000.” In addition there was appropriated $10,000,000—$1,000,000 per year until 1926—for the survey, construction and maintenance of roads within or partly within the national forests in coöperation with the states in which these forests are located.

The Secretary of Agriculture was by the Act, after making a deduction of 3 per cent, to cover expenses of administration, authorized to apportion the remainder “among the several states in the following manner: One-third in the ratio which the area of the State bears to the total area of all the States; one-third in the ratio which the population of each State bears to the total population of all States...; one-third in the ratio which the mileage of rural delivery routes and star routes in each State bears to the total mileage of rural delivery routes and star routes in all the States....”

States desiring to avail themselves of the benefits of the act were required to “submit to the Secretary of Agriculture project statements setting forth proposed construction of any rural post road or roads therein.” If approved the states were further to “furnish to him surveys, plans, specifications and estimates therefor as he may require.” Only such projects as were “substantial in character” might be approved. “Items included for engineering, inspection, and unforeseen contingencies” may not be greater than 10 per cent of the total cost of the work. Upon the final approval by the Secretary of Agriculture of the plans, specifications and estimates and its certification to the Secretary of the Treasury the Act provides that there should be “set aside the share of the United States payable under this Act on account of such project,” not to “exceed fifty per centum of the total estimated cost thereof.”

A NATIONAL HIGHWAY IN THE MOUNTAINS OF MARYLAND

It was not the intention to take away from the states any right which they might enjoy for the construction work was to be done in accordance with the laws of the state within which a project lay but subject to the inspection of the Secretary of Agriculture. He also has power to pay to the states the amount of money set aside when a project has been satisfactorily completed and also to make payments on the same during the process of construction not to exceed the United States’ pro rata part of the value of the work done, and not to exceed $10,000 per mile of road exclusive of bridges more than 20 feet clear span.

The states snapped up this money greedily and the demand for more money became so great that in 1919 Congress appropriated $200,000,000 more, and still later, 1921, appropriated $75,000,000, and $15,000,000 for national forest roads. And still later, June 18, 1922, there was authorized an appropriation of $65,000,000 to be expended during the fiscal year ending June 30, 1923, and $75,000,000 for the succeeding fiscal year. At the end of five years after the passage of the Federal Aid road act, there had been completed under its terms 7469 miles of road and 17,977 miles additional were under construction. Texas ranked first in the number of miles completed, with 682; and Illinois had received the greatest amount of federal aid on projects completed and under construction, with $11,807,906; while Texas was a close second with $11,393,485.

While the mileage built by Federal and state aid is less in the more compact densely populated Eastern states, the cost per mile is much more as much more expensive types of roads are being built. In the West and South earth roads largely make up the mileage. It has been objected that these do not properly come under the wish of Congress when it provided that the fund should be used only in the construction of “substantial” roads. Earth road advocates argue that such features as grading, draining and straightening roads may be considered permanent, in so far as the road is ready for any type of surfacing that may be desired to be laid at a later date. Recognizing the merits of both contentions The Bureau of Public Roads issued, in 1922, a decision practically as follows:

The question of a more definite policy to be followed in connection with the approval of earth road Federal Aid projects which involve grading and drainage only, has for some time been under consideration, and it has been decided that hereafter such projects will only be approved on condition that The (State) Highway Department agree, in so far as it may legally do so, that within a reasonable time after completion of the improvement of the project as an earth road, it will place or cause to be placed thereon, an adequate and substantial type of surfacing.

By adequate and substantial type of surfacing is meant such type as will carry the prospective traffic with such maintenance expenses that the total annual charges will represent a reasonable expenditure for the public service rendered by the highway.

It seems, therefore, that the Government expects to assist in the financing of roads that appear adequate for the purposes intended.