The republic., 1851-04-11
Rom u. R;eA~s~s Nate.
Psnnsylvania against v1xgfnaa.

Rennsyivanla against v1xgfnAa.
The WRESTLING BsIDos.-Our apology for again
referring TO this subject will bc found In the inn
portance Of the proposition now pcnding in tho
Supreme Court Of the United States to abats .
bridge, the erection of which authorised by
the Legislature of Virginia. The fact that the
work itself s OF great value to the interests which
sought it's erection, that II constituted main argu
mcnt in favor of the railroad connexion through
the territory OF Virginia. is almost immaterial In
comparison with the magnitude OF the question.
whether tho power of the Federal judcature should
be invoked BY one State to destroy tho interests
established by another. We desire to call the at
tention Of our friends to the subject, that they
may inform the public mind upon the extent OF
ions upon the propriety of it's exercise.
We have at the close Of this article given
views upon the question Of the relative authority
of the Federal and State courts.
We have given heretofore an outline Of the Com
missioner's report, from which the following con-
illusions might be, we think, fairly decided:
!. That the Wheeling bridge does no. obstruct
tanned to navigate that part Of the river when
it was commenced.
3 That il is an construction" now only because
few boats have since been built at Pittsburg and
others may be built hereafter having very tall
chimneys.
3. That thesc tall chimneys perhaps add very
slightly 10 the speed of the boats. if the Conmis-
sioner's opinion 10 correct
4. That to raise the bridge out Of the reach of
those tall chimncys in the mode proposed by the
commissioner would cost about $20O,OO0, in addi-
tion to the expense already incurred.
1t may now be desirable to our readers to be in
formed of the nature of the pending proceedings.
and the grounds of law on which the complainant
urges the destruction of the bridge.
The Supreme Court Of the United States could
not have original jurisdiction Of case like this
except under provisions of the Constitution which
authorised Sts.e 1; TO ,s sue in the Got Tsis suit
sylvania, although the alleged injuries done to
private persons. She claims to be admitted a.
suitor chiefly because the freights the Ohio are
partly carried 10 or from her canal.
The suit il in chancery. There has been no trial
by jury. The decree asked for is the !" abatc-
ment' or destruction of the bridge.
In the frat instance, it was alleged that the
bridge, supposing it to be obstruction TO navi-
cation, was not cOnfOrmablc to the charter Of the
company. This was properly question between
this State, which granted the charter, and her cit
zens to whom it was granted and, at the last ses-
sion of the General Assembly, an act was passed
legalizing the bridge. No,o It 10 claimed that the
State Of Virginia has no authority TO erect such
structure over the Ohio.
1t will be remembered that Virginia ceded to the
United States the territory lying northwest of the
Ohio. Whatever controversies may have arisen
to the exact boundary thereby created, Virginia
retains the islands In that river. One Of those lies
opposite TO the city Of Wheeling, and the bridge
in question extends from the island TO the main
shore Of Virginia. An ordinance of Congress, in
1887, constituted the navigabe waters flowing into
the Mississippi public highways free to the citi-
zens Of the United States. Although this an
ordinance for the government Of the new territory,
and therefore it would seem not applicable to
streams within Virginia, it has been contended
that it disables her from erecting such bridge
that at Wheeling. although clearly that part the
river belongs to her.
Ito which no other State was party.) it was
agreed that the and navigation of the river op-
pOste TO those two States should be "free and con
mon" to the citizens of the United States. Wearc
not aware that any stress has been or can be laid
Oh this compact in this suit
The principal reliance of the complainant (iudg-
ing from the printed argument Of counsel) is upon
the provision Of the Constitution which conlers
power on Congress 10 regulate commerce among
the States. 1t ID not commended that Congress has
passed any law forbidding the obstruction Of COM
merce by bridges; but Gas we understand the ar
gument) that, under acts of Congress licenses are
granted to steamboats, to navigate the Ohio, and
that it is the implied will Of Congress that the navi
Of the Legislature the judicial departments il asked
to enforce by taking down all bridges, by whom
soever erected or authorized. which the judges may
regard az "obstructions' The links In the rea-
at the authorities cited, we may not exactly COM
prehend it. It strikes q very latitudinous
construction of the acts OF Congress, and ascrib
ing very unrestricted latitude of discretion to the
court.
A still more general right, under the law Of ma
tons, is limited at in the argument. If the law Of
nations governs the case however,, there can be no
doubt that 1t is perfectly competent for Virginia
to erect bridges and other public works upon her
rivers, notwithstanding another State might have,
by treaty otherwise, right to the free naviga-
tOn OF them. She might be bound ito leave the
navigation substantially open and free; but while
she treats her citizens like those of the other
States, and acts in good faith, il would be perfectly
lawful for her TO subject the navigation to such
reasonable conditions, restrictions inconve-
niences as she might think proper for the purpose
of promoting her own welfare by public work.
This discretionary power, essential to her own
dignity and prosperity. is incident to her soyo-
reiQntv. and re0Arded n nurrcudered hv
grant of right to navigate her streams.
We do not pretend 10 decide how far the same
principles are applicable to the pending cause We
design merely to state the grounds on which law
of this State is asserted to Be invalid. II must bo
question of the deepest interest to whether
Virginia retains any discretionary authority over
destroyed according to the caprice OF another State
or the varying fashions OF steamboat chimneYs.