The New Orleans bulletin. [volume] (New Orleans [La.]) 1874-1876, 1875-07-06

could probably require q reasonable corn
pensation for the expense of building and
maintaining her wharves. In accordance
with this suggestion, on the 18th of January
last the Council adopted the ordinance fixing
aud regulating the charges for wharfage,
levee and other facilities by the city OF New
Orleans to commerce. The point Of the de-
that the wharf duty Of so much per tonnage
was levied by the city ON all vessels that came
to the port, whether thsy occupied wharf o.
not
The above ordinance attempts to conform to
the decision, and at the same time levy q
charge Of fifteen cents per ton on all vessels
engaged in the Gulf trade which use the city
wharves. We do not undertake to say that
this ordinance is also illegal
If the amount be unreasonable, it seems
that the. Common Council should be appealed
to.
The true way to encourage the steamship
line with Mexico is to assign them perma-
nent place for q wharf, in convenient looa-
ton, and make the rates very low. Trade
and travel by this route are of great impor-
lance to New Orleans, and should be en-
couraeed in every way.
As far as these illegal exactions by harbor-
masters and portwardens are concerned. il
seems to your committee that the Governor
of the State, who appoints these officers, and
who is specially charged, as Chief Executive,
with the prevention of offenseS and illegal
acts, might properly be Appeared to. If he
should prove unable or unwilling to put q
stop to such exactions, it would seem that the
courts might be successfully called upon to
interfere. Adopted.
Third-the harbormaster's exaction of three
cents per ton is evidently illegal, for the same
reason, being "duty of tonnage" forbidden
to be levied by s ate without the consent OF
Congress. The decision in Cannon's case
seems to dispose OF this, as we'll as the de-
cision in the case of the portwardens, & Wal
lace. p. 81.
Fourth--The port warden's charge of SIS,
| "service or no service" was declared illegal
for the same reason, in case of Steamship
Company vs.. Portwardens, 6 Wallace, p. 81,
above alluded to.
Judge Kennard said that as the Chamber
was interested in all shat tends to the benefit
of the State and city, he would state that the
Louisiana and Psci6os Railroad Company wal
working very strennously and Very success
fully, and the prospects were that the road
would be under way.
Col. Burwell, with few remarks, submitted
the following resolutions:
RESOLVED, That the president appoint q COM
mittee of nine to ascertain, by any mode Of
information accessible, and report
/. Whether the government of Grea,
Britain would approve that her emigrani
agricultural labor shall take the direction OF
the cotton planting zone Of the United States
and especially to that portion thereof lying
in the alluvial basin Of the Mississippi, and
chiefly within the States of Louisiana and
Mississippi.
q How far the capital. manufacturing
commercial and shipping interests of Grea
Britain are disposed to cooperate in such
emigration and location as tending to secure
to those interests q permanent, uninterrupted
and adequate supply of cotton staple bes'
adapted to the wants of the world, as we'll q
to the machinery and skill employed by Eng
land in the manufacture thereof. tt
The resolutions were adopted.
A motion to adjourn prevailed.