The Cairo bulletin. [volume] (Cairo, Ill.) 1872-1878, 1877-10-04

ant, The city OF Cairo be forever cnjoned
IRON taking, receiving or collecting any
wharfage compensation from any steaun-
boat, ilatboat, keelboat or any other
craft for landing, mooring or receiving
or discnarging any freight or passengers
on the wharf or landing opposite the
city Of Cairo and between Leyee
street III said city and the Ohio river:
| aud also that defendant, her ser.
wants and agents be perpetually cnjolled
from collecting or attempting to collect
from the compliments (laylor d Par.
sons or their servants or agents any line
or penalty for demanding or receiving
any sum or sums OF money or any ,g' 4
able thing OF the agent, master. own r.
owners of any steam boat or other B, g..
craft for the privilege OF landing o. a.
ing at the wharf OF Cairo within S.. Y
limits"
Ihird.--U pom q careful rcadr nd
consideration Of said proposed ore ICE,
IN connection with the opinion q SUI
preme court in SAID case of Ensm -.
J m People, &c, and the record nal
/ bill, answer oil city AMI final j. .rt
AMI decree for perpetual injul. .... in
said case Of Taylor d Parsons -. II he
City OF Cairo, which decree ana iune-
ton are stIll in full force and res adttR.
ieata as between sand Taylor y p.usons
and the city, It's agents anu SEW ants. |
am OF the opinion t4at the former case
settling as it does the law OF this state in
regard TO private Gharis, riparian Wuers,
and their right to make reasonable
charges and collect them Tor the use OF
such wharls and their soil bordering upon
the river; and the latter case settling as Il
does the ownership Of Taylor & Parsons in
and the river front and WharIs 20 the Port
Of caro- are conclusive as against 1.-THE
legality OF said ordinance anu the right
OF the city TO pass the same"
It's not claimed by the city that il has
ever since the rendition Of said derrrc.
etc, in suit OF Taylor and Parsons Us. the
| city OF Caro- by condemnation or pur,
| chase, Invested the rights Of Taylor d
| Parsons in respect TO said river front or
wharls or any part thereof; and without
| such purchase or condemnation, said de-
cree 50 long rs 1t remains in iull force
| as 1t does according 10 the well rccOgLi.
Zed principle OF law that where cpnpe,
tent legal tribunal has once by It's juig.
ment or decree, settled the claim, and
rights Of parties, those rights, a> between
| the parties 10 the suit are r.y-dRjudjcQtu
eslOps the city from denying Taylor d
Parsons OwnerhiD OF the river front
| and wharis at the port of Cairo, rs also
those private rights OF property which
pertain 10 such owncrshiD-Onr Of
utl f,,
ger case is the right to charge and collect
reasonable compensation tor the Use of
their property from vessels, etc, landing
al and Using the same or such sum a BY
contract, may be agreed upon between
sIid OWucIs ot said property and
masters, etc., of said vessels.
While "likG the use Of other property
ana service, the charges must not be IN.
| reasonable or cKOrDltantly high;' yet
| the rg4sOnableness OF the charge is Il
Ques ton 10 BE- settled either by agreement
| between the owners Of the river front
and steamboat owners, or by the courts.
| and not arbitrarily by the city council OF
| the city Ot Cairo. Neither the council,
nor the legislature Itself, can dyesl
private rights rs aljudicattl and
determined By tue courts, which
are alone the cXpOunders OF the
constitution and laws; and the power Of
the city 40 Tx the rate Of Wharfage
and dockagc,' construed with reference
to the other provisions OF the charter, Us
well as constitutional legislative power
and adjudicatel private rights, was only
intended to, and can only be held to app
ply TO public Wharls owned by the city
| and not private wharts, which are the
private property of others; and the
further power ito regulate aud control
theusc OF public and private landing
places. whurlS, docks and leYers,' SIM
ply relates to the use. not the wnarts
| themselves, and has reference only to
such reasonable police regulations as
effect the use and violate no private
rights OF property.
In conclusion, without elaboration, bit
taking the law is fad il, my opinion Is
against the LEGALITY OF said ordinance, y
| because it violates private rights Is csIa0-
| lishcl by the adjUdicatcd cases and prln-
| cipIes hcgeiubciOYe briefly referred to,
and there /, no power in the council to
pass the same legally and constitution.
ally; aud my opinion IS against "ihC
| night Of the city council 10 pas the
| same not only because OF want Oh
| power, but also because 50 10 10, would
| be in contempt OF the ntcl states ,ir-
cult court, whose injunction is 81 IL
torce as Aforesaid pelpetually grooming
| the city, her servants. etc, from ven
"attgmptirg 10 collect from lay x
| Parsons any fine or penalty TOR Gcu nd
ing or receiving any sum or sur OF
mo ey, etc, OF any water craft lyr the
privilege Of Ian ling at the VIII Of
Cairo within said city limits. II .1W Of
the decisions already made, q city
owns no public wharf OF Its oW! .U' all
the Cairo whsyls are Taylor & rDrs0n'S
private property; and it being Presumed
that your honorable body would not
pass an ordinance except with the intcn-
ton OF trying to enforce its penalties, the
! passage OF the ordinance would be
deemed first step towards "au.mpting
| TO collect etc., rs aforesaid and subject
your honorable body to a charge of con-
tempt, etc. Respectfully yours,
WN. b. GILBERT,
Corporation Counsel.
! On motion OF Alderman Paticr, the re-
port was received, ordered printed and
referred together with all papers connect
ed herewith to finance committee.
The finance committce reported that
they had received from +. I. Parker, city
treasurer, general city orders, special
levee certificates, &C., redeemed during
the month Of September, all OF which
they had this day destroyed by burning,
and in amounts as follows, viz;
General city orders, IS
SPECIAL leyeG ccrtliicatcs,,,u..... l,G5l 40
Interest paid on NboYc....""..,, POI SO
Bond No, 1853 authorized by ordi.
nance No. IS, approved July
Goth, 1863, and due Sept. Isl,
l q