STATE AND LOCAL INDEBTEDNESS 47 
by certain features that distinguish it from the preceding 
period. After the close of the World War Missouri gradually 
became aware of the fact that, if the highway system of the 
state were to keep pace with developments in other states, 
an extensive construction program would have to be under- 
taken at state expense. Accordingly a constitutional amend- 
ment authorizing $60 million of state highway indebtedness 
was submitted to the voters, and it was approved Novem- 
ber 2, 1920. The current period in Missouri's debt history 
might be said to have begun with the approval of this amend- 
ment, but since the first bonds were not issued until Sep- 
tember, 1922, that date has been taken as marking the actual 
beginning of the period. The current period differs from 
the preceding one principally in that recognition is given to 
the benefits that can be made immediately available through 
recourse to public borrowing. Although borrowing has been 
confined mainly to the highway function, the volume of 
indebtedness that has been incurred for this function alone 
implies a radical change in the system of financing state 
activities, as compared with the preceding period. The 
principal reason for this fundamental change is found in 
economic development, particularly in the changes occa- 
sioned bv the growth of motor vehicle transportation. 
ConsTiTUTIONAL LIMITATIONS OF STATE AND LOCAL 
INDEBTEDNESS 
The present constitution of the State of Missouri was 
adopted in its original form by a vote of the people October 
30, 1875, and went into effect one month later. During the 
half century and more from 1875 to the present, numerous 
amendments have been approved, several of which have 
involved a liberalization of the highly restrictive debt policy 
of the state as laid down in the fundamental law. The third 
period in the history of Missouri's indebtedness began not 
many years before the date on which the constitution was 
adopted, and that period as a whole was characterized by a 
successful liquidation of the state’s bonded indebtedness. It 
is not surprising, therefore, to find that the constitution of 
1875 provided that the credit of the state should be care-