One of the significant roles of highways in freight movement has been to serve “as extenders and connectors for other transportation modes.” One highway extension of rail service, now called “piggyback,” began in a primitive form in the 19th century when circus wagons and wagons carrying farm produce and livestock were transported on flatcars, starting and finishing their journeys on their own wheels.
As now used, the term piggyback service means transporting cargo by both rail and highway, in or on highway trailers and principally in van-sized containers. Beginning in the 1920’s and extending into the 1930’s, extensive experimenting with piggyback service was carried on in an effort to increase the use of motor vehicles in moving freight by overcoming the limitations imposed by poor roads in disconnected systems. Conditions of the time did not support the effort, and it was left to the future.
Uncertainty and Crisis in the States
Failure of the Congress to enact a new highway bill before January 1921 precipitated a major financial crisis in most States. Having no assurance that a Federal-aid highway bill would be passed, the States had to cut back severely on work underway and contemplated. Contracts in progress were modified or canceled. Requests for bid proposals were withdrawn. Clearly a capital program of this magnitude required the regular commitment of funds over the relatively long period from planning to the completion of construction.
The States, seeking new ways to bolster their revenues, had begun to look to the motor vehicle as a potentially productive source. As motor vehicles became more numerous on the highways and their damaging effects on lightly constructed road surfaces became evident during the war period of 1917–1918, the practice of graduating registration fees with the weight or capacity of the vehicle grew until it had spread to all States. By 1917 all States required motor vehicles to be registered at fees averaging a little more than $7.00 per vehicle.
In 1919 the State of Oregon levied the first tax on the sale of fuel for motor vehicles. The tax was adopted by other States because it proved at least a rough measure of highway use, was relatively painless to the taxpayer, and easy for the State to administer. But in 1921 this tax, which later became the prime revenue producer for highways, brought in only $5 million, compared with $116 million for registration fees.
AASHO Recommendation
Shortcomings of the 1916 Act began to be evident by 1919, and the annual report of the Bureau of Public Roads for the 1920 fiscal year contained recommendations made by the American Association of State Highway Officials for modifying some of the financial provisions of the law:
- Federal appropriations should be at least $100 million a year in order to carry out the program.
- The Federal-State 50-50 matching ratio should be modified to increase the Federal share in States where more than 10 percent of the area was public lands.
- The application of Federal aid should be restricted to those roads that would expedite completion of a national highway system.
- Federal appropriations for forest roads should be continued for 10 years at the level of $10 million a year.
The corner of Dearborn and Randolph Streets in Chicago, 1910.
The Federal Highway Act of 1921 provided for only a 1-year continuation of the cooperative Federal–State financing plan by appropriating $75 million for the 1922 fiscal year. But the next year, Congress began the practice of authorizing Federal aid for succeeding periods of 2 or 3 years. These funds were then apportioned to the States in accordance with
242
