Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1872-04-08
TIE FERRY AID THE nRIpGE.

VIZ III u loCA thai III 1AGAAA HAAAh
and Hopefield Ferry Company are OPP
posed 10 the enactment of the charter
for the bridge company, which would
span the Mississippi at this place.
Messrs. OvertOn and ClsybrOOke having
enlisted in their interest the members Of
Congress from the middle districts of the
State, and representing the ferry COM
pany, ask that the exclusive privilege be
conceded, in the act of Congress charter
ing the bridge company, Of transferring
in either direction all freights and pas
sengen while the process Of constructing
the bridge goes on, and the venerable
ferry company would also have conceded
to 1t the exclusive right to make such
transfers between Arkansas and Tennes-
see for ever, save TO the extent hat the
bridge company may accommodate the
public. 1t is understood that Senator
Cooper viii oppose the enactment Of the
bridge compsny's charter in the Senate,
unless amended as required by the ferry
company, and thus the scheme Of bridge
building will be defeated or certainly
postponed. A letter from one of the
owners of the Memphis and Hopefeld
ferry, addressed to a member of Con-
gress, states that the ferry company
should have the exclusive right, by act
Of Congress, during the process Of con
structing the bridge, to transport me-
.chanics, materials and employees be-
tween Memphis and Hopefeld. The
ferry owner continues:
If the object is 70 construct a bridge, the
amendment proposed cannot be objected 70
but # the intention is, by 8 bin OF act Of Con-
gress, TO take away our ferry rights and priyi-
lsges.tt Is wrong 70 do 80, ss those under whom
we claim and we, the present owners Of the
ferries between Memphis and HOPeheld, have
owned, exercised and enjoyed the rights and
ferry property for upward Of nhy years. On
the Tennessee shore at Memphis, We derived
our title from General Andrew Jackson, Gen
eral James Winchester, and the Hon. John
Overton, formerly one Of the judges Of the SUI
preme cour Of Tennessee. They were the
original proprietons OF Memphis, and reserved
the right Of ferriage, and exercised 10 as early
Is $50, when they laid OF the town Of Mem
phis on 3 hye thousand acre grant. I and
others, who are my associates, own the six
thousana acres lying on the Mississippi river, /
adjoining the i've thousand aere tract on
which Memphis is located. On The Arkansas
shore, on which Hopeheld is situated, We
owned some six miles OF land fronting on the
river, IN which we have reserved our rights Of
wharfage and ferriage. We have owned this
property double as long as is necessary TO
elaim a grant by prescription, but We have
grants and i~ndisputable title from the states
d Tennessee, North Carolina aud Arkansas, as
also from the United States, from which we
purchased a portion Of the lands. For nearly
forty yeaHs, Mr.. John OyertOn, myself and our
associates, have, with q considerable outlay of
capital and heavy expense, kept steam fer
to accommodate the public,
crossing az Memphis, when, owing to the
sparsely settled country west Of the Missis-
sippi, the amount Of tolls recsived did not
delrsy the expenses Of operating the boats.
when the business Is beginning 70 pay
Us, 10 take away by legislation OF destroy our
property, Is unjust, or 70 involve US IN expen-
siye litigation Is burdensome and oppressive,
when IA justice We should, by national legis-
laton, be protected, so sstO reihsfate and re-
imburse Us for losses already sustained. We
are well aware the right OF being the pre-
ferred ~ferry-keepers belongs TO the states. and
We have the authority, both from tennessee
and Arkansas 70 b. he fery-keepers md
we can and win supply any number Of boats
necessary TO accommodate the public de-
mand. Such has been our policy 10 fully sup
ply the public requfrements. We WIN lease
the property, IL desired by the p~artta
20 build q bridge. We make No
objection whatever to their constructing a
bridge, a. n superior mode Of passing over q
river, as an inferior should yield 10 a superior
is q s~elf-evident truth; but We DO protest. II
he name Of liberty, law, right and Justice.
against the idea Of pTopriety In taking away
be lawful and rightful ownership Of the .
Of mentorious citizens and confer.
ring the right or OEsrship apon other citizens
less, or at best, no more deserving or worthy,
and clothing the transfer win lie sancity Of
8 congressional or national law. AsI have
already stated, We have no objection to a
bridge, as a superior and better mode Of cross
ing 8 river, but in justice to myself ana In be-
hslt Of my associates, 1 do object being the
riparian owners, and thereby being me pre- i
ferred ferTy-keepers In conformity and in ae-
oordance With the laws Of most Of the Ameri-
can states rs Wei a. OF England and most OF
EUROPE 70 taking away OF destroy
ing the ferry Of those VIC are the legal ana
rightfui Keepers and confer, by statute,
that right or p~FivileEs upon those who have
legal, Just or equitable claim whatever, sx-
what is proposed 70 be conferred By the
second section Of the congressional bridge
bill, No. sa.
We omit the name Of the writer Of the
foregoing letter, but It serves to show
the basis Of right ON which the ferry
company relies to sustain It's exclusive
II occurs to US that Congress
should leave the question between the