CONSTRUCTION OF GRAVEL ROADS.
Mr. Ristine's bill [S. 22] to amend Section 5,097 of the code of 1881, being read the third time. See page 39 of the Brevier Reports-
Mr. RISTINE insisted this act has been a great advantage to Counties. This bill proposes to allow a tax of 1 1/2 per cent. for the repair and construction of good roads. The present law is a dead letter in many Counties for the want of more funds.
Mr. MARVIN'S constituents objected. Under the present law over $9,000,000 in bonds can be issued by County Commissioners. There should be a limit to this thing. He opposed putting $20,000 more of this kind of burden on his constituency.
Mr. GRAHAM also objected to this proposed increase of tax for road construction purposes. The roads constructed under the law of 1877 are most of them worn out. Unless there be a fund to keep gravel roads in repair there had better be no gravel roads at all. One hundred thousand dollars is sufficient for any County to use for such a purpose. The curse of to-day in Indiana is special taxes. It makes tax outrageous an burdensome. And there is great danger of the Counties being made primarily liable for the expense of such improvement. There is no good reason for increasing the liabilities of Counties one-half. Another objection is the County Commissioners have the right to locate these new roads.
Mr. HILLIGAS asked careful consideration of this bill. It is justice to limit by per centum the right to issue these construction bonds. Hence this bill ought to pass; there is justice in the proposition. It is the highest prerogative of people to encounter their own real estate in order to secure good road facilities.
Mr. HENRY also hoped the bill would pass, it being an equitable provision. Two years ago there was not a mile of free gravel roads in the County of Madison, while now there are roads complete and in process of construction to the amount of $90,000. So there can be no more built without an increase of taxation. There is nothing in the argument about increasing indebtedness.
Mr. MAGEE opposed the bill. The result would be some portions have bad, while other portions of the County have good roads. Probably no county in the State has better material for roads than Cass County. Another bad result would be that in five or six years the County finds herself indebted to a large amount, and worn-out roads. As a legal proposition the County can be held responsible for these bonds in many instances. The plan is not a fair and equitable one. It is better to proceed carefully and cautiously in this matter. If the people want gravel roads and have the right kind of spirit, they will form corporations and build the said roads under the laws of the State.
Mr. RISTINE replied to objections: The bill requires no County to build a single road or to increase its indebtedness. The Courts have already passed upon the main features of this law.
The bill finally passed the Senate by yeas, 31; nays, 12.
Then came a recess till 2 o'clock.
