Title Bar: Put the Money Under the Rubber, The Texas Highway Department 1917-1968, from the Texas State Library and Archives Commission


Dan Moody to Hal Moseley, March 20, 1926

Page 3 of 5

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Back to exhibit

Dan Moody to Hal Moseley, March 1926

Hon. Hal Moseley --3-- 3-20-26

he states by way of apology for a failure to present these matters
to you at a previous time that “insistence was made that the prop-
osition be rushed.”  In the face of this recommendation on the part
of the Highway Engineer, you not only advertised for bids, but you
let contracts providing for the immediate commencement of a second
course treatment on practically all the mileage covered by the Amer-
ican Road Company contracts, but nothing has been said and nothing
has been  done which would answer the question as to why there should
be such great haste about his matter in  the face of Mr. Kemper’s

It is coincidence that about the same time this report
was said to have been made, Mr. Kemper was relieved of his duties
as Acting State Highway Engineer and  that his connection with the
Highway Department had ceased.

You must be aware that the responsibility of the Highway
Commission is to the people of the State, and not to individuals
who may be interested in justifying contracts that have been con-
demned by the courts as fraudulent, nor even to the appointive power.
The only purpose of my letter of March 4th was an effort to obtain
your co-operation in conserving the public money, and this effort
has apparently been  useless.  I am inclined to the conclusion  that
the awarding of the contracts for the resurfacing of the roads for-
merly treated by the American Road Company was not for the econom-
ical and efficient maintenance of the State highway System, but
that such letting was inspired by individuals not officially con-
nected with the Highway Commission, who were willing that several
hundred thousand dollars of the public  money might be used for the
satisfaction of their personal wishes.  You will recall that, at
sometime in December, 1925, shortly after the conclusion of the
American Road Company case, a certain individual at interest and
with whom  you have had conferences since you became Highway Commis-
sioner, was quoted in the press as saying that the Highway Commis-
sion was then faced with the necessity of placing a second course
treatment on  the roads covered by the American Road Company.  He
was further quoted as saying that the surfacing would cost more
money than had been taken back from the American Road Company.  That
his prophecy was in error in  the first particular is shown by Kem-
per’s report.  That is prophecy was incorrect in the second partic-
ular is shown by the fact that you have contracted to have the work
done for less than  the American Road Company surrendered.  But this
is not to say that the prices for which you have let this work are

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Back to exhibit

Dan Moody to Hal Moseley, March 20, 1926. Attorney General to Mr. Moseley, 1925-1926, Texas Highway Department Records, Archives and Information Services Division, Texas State Library and Archives Commission.


Page last modified: November 14, 2011