benefit of the information in regard to the construction and maintenance of public roads possessed by the Federal bureau.

The CHAIRMAN. And that from an engineering standpoint?
Mr. NOBLE. Strictly.

The CHAIRMAN. And from the standpoint of administration?
Mr. NOBLE. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. To what extent do you think the Government should exercise control over construction and maintenance of roads upon which it expends money?

Mr. NOBLE. I should think that it ought to extend to the approval of plans, to the verification of accounts, as far as that may be practicable, the awarding of contracts for projects thus approved, and I hope it might extend to a general agreement for concurrent action between what I might call the two interests, state and national.

The CHAIRMAN. According to your idea there would be two entities, the State as a unit and the Federal Government?

Mr. NOBLE. Yes.

The CHAIRMAN. The States would deal with the road districts and the localities.

Mr. NOBLE. It seems to me that is preferable.

The CHAIRMAN. You have not determined in your own mind how far the Federal representatives would participate in either the expenditure of money or the maintenance of roads?

Mr. NOBLE. The matter of administration would have to be worked out a little farther than I have worked it out in my own mind. The Federal representative at any rate ought to have the power of veto on the expenditures of Federal money if he saw cause to exercise it, either by reason of defect of plan or in the method of administration. The CHAIRMAN. To carry out such a supervision, would it not require a large addition to the Federal bureau?

Mr. NOBLE. I should think the Federal bureau ought to be enlarged enough to have efficient inspection and examination of the work as it goes on. I hardly think it would be practicable to go very much further.

The CHAIRMAN. Would you advocate raising Federal road funds by a special tax?

Mr. NOBLE. I could not answer that, Mr. Chairman. I do not know whether that could be worked out.

The CHAIRMAN. Have you any idea as to what would be an equitable and practicable plan of apportionment of Federal aid among the different States?

Mr. NOBLE. I should think that something like an equal division would be about the only practicable basis.

The CHAIRMAN. There is such a basis then, in road mileage, area, and population in the 48 different States?

Mr. NOBLE. You mean the division of the fund between the different States?

The CHAIRMAN. Yes.

Mr. NOBLE. Account would have to be taken, not only of the mileage and population, but of the needs of the several sections. I should think a division of the country into sections and a division of the fund with some relation to traffic needs, and mileage of roads, and so forth, would have to be worked out.

The CHAIRMAN. Under a plan of equitable apportionment of Federal aid rendered to the different States, what would be the factors you would take into consideration? I understood you to say mileage of roads, for one.

Mr. NOBLE. Mileage of roads for one, volume of traffic for another, and, of course, the population to be benefited would be another factor.

The CHAIRMAN. Acreage or mileage in a State, the square mileage?

Mr. NOBLE. Yes; I think those are all elements.

The CHAIRMAN. Would it be practicable to determine, without enormous expense to the Government and the creation of a great bureau, what the volume of traffic is?

Mr. NOBLE. I should not think it would be practicable to go into the minutia of that to any great extent. I think it would have to be determined upon pretty broad lines.

The CHAIRMAN. In arriving at your method of apportionment between the States, what allowance would you give to area, miles of road, and population? Would you give them each an equal value?

Mr. NOBLE. I do not think that I want to answer that question, Mr. Chairman, without a great deal more study than I have given it. The CHAIRMAN. In your opinion, if the Government enter upon a policy of Federal aid, would the tendency be in the several States and localities to shift their proportion of the road burden upon the Federal Government?

Mr. NOBLE. That might be so; but I think that care should be taken always to see that the State should bear something like an equal proportion of that burden.

The CHAIRMAN. You think that would be a sufficient check?
Mr. NOBLE. I believe it would. I should think it would.

The CHAIRMAN. Of course, any Congress can change the action of any preceding Congress as to whatever aid might be rendered. Mr. NOBLE. That is true; and when the Congress no longer extends aid its representatives will no longer have control.

The CHAIRMAN. How is that? That the Federal Government would have the control?

Mr. NOBLE. I say, when the Congress no longer extends aid to the State the department of the Government having charge of the bureau of highways probably would not continue to have active participation in the control of the highways of the State.

The CHAIRMAN. Do you predicate your position on the assumption that the Federal Government is to have control of those highways to the construction or maintenance of which the Federal Government has made any financial contribution?

Mr. NOBLE. Probably only to the extent of extending aid or withholding it, depending upon how the work is administered in the several communities. I think that would be rather effective control.

Mr. SHACKLEFORD. In the case of joint control between Federal and State authorities, if they did not agree, how would it be determined?

Mr. NOBLE. I presume that if the arrangements were not satisfactory to the representatives of the Federal Government, the Federal Government would not participate.

Mr. SHACKLEFORD. And the desire of the State and the local people to have the participation on the part of the Government would undoubtedly cause them to yield?

Mr. NOBLE. I think so; always depending upon the intelligence of the parties.

Mr. SHACKLEFORD. It would, in effect, result in giving supreme control to the Government wherever it participated, would it not? Mr. NOBLE. So far as the Federal aid is concerned.

Mr. SHACKLEFORD. I say, the disposition of the States and the people locally to get the extra fund, would in most cases cause them to yield to the Federal authority in any point of disagreement, with the result that the Federal authorities would, in fact, control.

Mr. NOBLE. I do not see any reason why the State authorities could not proceed, if they wished, on any basis not satisfactory to the Federal bureau, at the sole expense of the State; but the consideration you speak of will, of course, be a strong incentive to joint action.

Mr. SHACKLEFORD. It will give the Federal bureau large persuasive powers, to say the least?

Mr. NOBLE. I think that is so.

Senator SWANSON. It would be largely dependent upon who is anxious to build the road, the Federal or the local authorities, as to who would yield.

Mr. NOBLE. I should say, Senator, that the Federal authorities would be in position to demand and probably secure satisfactory highway construction. I should not think it would go very much further than that.

Mr. SHACKLEFORD. Is it your opinion that this movement for good roads will result in State-highway improvement being established by the various States and legislation for the improvement of the roads much more advanced than we now have.

Mr. NOBLE. I should think so.

Mr. SHACKLEFORD. What would you think of the probability of these State highway commissions equipping themselves with bureaus of competent engineers to give instruction in road building?

Mr. NOBLE. I should hope it would result in that. It would tend that way very powerfully.

Mr. SHACKLEFORD. As to the use of roads, is.it your opinion that highways will serve as successful competitors to railroads in long transportation lines, or as long-distance mail routes?

Mr. NOBLE. I do not see my way clear to answer yes to that proposition. I think it ought to tend to develop districts that are hardly within reach of the railroads.

Mr. SHACKLEFORD. What I had in mind was two thoughts in connection with road building, one to build some long cross-continent or so-called ocean-to-ocean highways, and another thought, probably the most useful service the roads could perform would be leading from railroad points into the country, and serving the people who have not the facilities to carry the mail, carry the people, and to carry the farm products back and forth to the railroad stations and to the markets generally. In your opinion, which of these would be the most desirable?

Mr. NOBLE. I think that depends so much upon the condition of each case that a general answer is impracticable. I think the matter should be left generally to the determination of the local authorities as to what roads should be improved, with the general thought that the money ought to be expended in such a way as to benefit to the greatest extent the community through which the road passes. That might result sometimes in the construction of trunk lines, and other times it might result in the development of branch lines, but whatever will do the community most good should be the controlling consideration.

Mr. SHACKLEFORD. You are not prepared to say now whether you think a highway would successfully compete with a railroad as a long-distance transportation line, or as a long-distance mail route? Mr. NOBLE. I do not see how it can be expected to so compete.

Mr. SHACKLEFORD. If you were to build certain roads, as we suggest, the money to do that would be taken out of the Treasury of the State and of the Federal Government which has been raised by taxation on all of the people. What do you think of building some of the roads for some of the people by taxing all of the people to get the funds?

Mr. NOBLE. I do not know how any public improvement can be carried out that does not really involve that same condition. Some people are benefited more by harbor improvements than others. I do not think the burdens are ever equally distributed.

Mr. SHACKLEFORD. They could not be equally distributed.

Mr. MADDEN. I really do not know whether I understood Mr. Noble to say that he thought that the Federal Government ought to be empowered to inaugurate road building within the State or whether he intended that it should be left entirely with the State.

Mr. NOBLE. It seems to me the initiation ought to be left with the State, that the proposition to improve any particular road ought to emanate from the State, and that it ought to be approved by the national representative before national aid was extended.

Mr. MADDEN. Do you believe that the State should have exclusive jurisdiction over the character of a road that would be built to which Federal aid would be granted?

Mr. NOBLE. I do not. I think that the Federal authorities ought to have an equal voice and I think that Federal aid should not be extended unless, in the view of the Federal representative, the method of construction was proper.

Mr. MADDEN. Do you believe that there ought to be more than one class of roads to which the Federal Government should grant aid? Mr. NOBLE. I should say yes without being able to discuss that matter in detail.

Mr. MADDEN. Have you given enough thought to the matter to justify an expression of opinion as to what the cost per mile of road would be at the minimum to which the Government should give aid? Mr. NOBLE. No; I am not prepared to answer that.

Mr. MADDEN. Have you given this matter sufficient thought to lead you to believe that your conclusion that the Government of the United States should contribute 50 per cent is a just conclusion? Mr. NOBLE. I think that it is a practical conclusion, Mr. Madden. Mr. MADDEN. What makes you believe it is practicable?

Mr. NOBLE. Because it seems to me that the idea of an equal division will meet with approval. It would become practicable to meet the State authorities on that basis.

Mr. MADDEN. If the Government should contribute one-half of the cost then your judgment is that the Government should take half of the control?

Mr. NOBLE. As long as Federal aid is continued. During the period of construction I think they should have the authority to supervise the accounts or to examine the accounts to satisfy themselves that the money is being properly expended and withhold any further Federal aid if those conditions are not met.

Mr. MADDEN. Is it your judgment that the Federal Government should grant aid toward the maintenance of roads, once the roads were maintained up to a fixed standard of efficiency? In other words, would you recommend a contribution out of the Federal Treasury of any money toward the maintenance of highways within the various States as a going proposition rather than at the end of a given period when the roads have been maintained?

Mr. NOBLE. As long as the provisions were apparently adequate for the maintenance of roads it seems to me the Government might safely participate as a going proposition.

Mr. MADDEN. Would not that involve a large expenditure for a managing and inspecting force at the capital of the Nation, auditing and all that?

Mr. NOBLE. I do not know what that expense would be. I do not think, on the whole, any money is saved by the withholding of such funds as would be necessary for inspection and examination. I think that is a very important part of the proposition, that more money can be lost by failure to do those things than it is likely to be expended in doing them. More money is lost by inadequate supervision than by over supervision every day.

Mr. MADDEN. The State being the political entity of which the Nation is made up, would you think that force requisite to lay down all the engineering pieces of road building and management, and inspection should be at the expense of the State rather than at the expense of the Federal Government?

Mr. NOBLE. Perhaps it will answer your question if I should say that I think the function of the Federal representatives should be rather in the way of approving methods and of sufficient inspection to be sure that satisfactory results are being obtained. I should anticipate that the details would be more largely in the hands of the State representatives; daily details, so to speak.

Mr. MADDEN. Did I understand you right if I understood you to say that you believed that roads within the State should be, in a measure, constructed by the States themselves and in a measure by the Federal Government, so that roads constructed by the Federal Government could be used as samples upon which the State could base its method of construction?

Mr. NOBLE. I do not think that I actually said that, but I think the Federal supervision ought to accomplish about that. I think that the roads that are built under specifications approved by the United States representatives and under such examination as it would be feasible to give them, ought to result in the type of roads, whatever the class may be, that you refer to.