The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1879-04-22
WHARF BONDS.
AnAu oUTloOH ron THEM-TRE coal
OIL STORING.

The members OF the city administration held
an lapparently) interesting private session yes
terlay In the Mayors Parlor, as usual we
say apparently because the opinion is derived
only from information received from outside
i persons and the surmises Of the reporter him
eelf. who very naturally, was not admitted 10
the secret seanee OF our city fathers The coal
oil question 1t seems was disposed OIL ana the
ordinance adopted. which is to be finally passed
at the regular session OF the Council, But the
most important subject discussed was the wharf
bonds.
Tbe subject comes up In the shape Of eireu-
lar over the signature OF Fl. Ellermann. the
wharf lessee. In which is given a history OF bis
lease Of the wharves, q system for which. by the
way he claims superior advantages over al
others to secure good wharves along the river,
ct the least expense to the city.
Mr. Elarmaln reates that he contracted
with the city to keep The wharves In good COR
ditiop and repair for four years and seven
months, dating from the twenty ninth 81 June.
1875, under certain conditions already too we'll
known to need repetition and makes the FOL
lowing exhibit: Up to the first Of April, 1879. he
had redeemed. according to the terms OF his
contract sss2. 900 Of wharf bonds Issued BY the
city, paid On the same tsa.52 AZ Interest; paid
claims oil steamboat owners to the extent OF
sgi sss 10; extiuguiehed the Indebtedness OF
the Liverpool Steamship Company. the
Urom we'll Steamship Company and the Mis-
alssippl Valley Navigation Company to the
amount Of s2s ass ~; paid to the city for polio
ing aud lighting the river. front. etc. $50, and
| eSpenuad on constructions SAT $40 SO; In
fact, expended In all, to the first oil Anril In.
Whilst his receipts have amounted to
| only -...... ,t....'.' sttts.t- ssboaf w
|
Jaevinp deficit Of Observation-Disclosures gb 1884 CT
| In order to avoid further loss. and with the
| Ellermann suge esta q new arrangement BY
| which be shall be relieved from redeemtng the
remainder 81 the sss2.oeo wharf bonds outstand-
ing at the signing Of his contract tsay $500 e1ol.
and shall pay directly to the city an equitable
price for the privileges OF collecting the wharf
dues. besides keeping the wharves la repair.
| etc.
In support Of the unadyisabllity OF the city
undertaking to collect The wharf revenues
the atement that during the four. years and
nine months ending on the first OF May. 1875
Che city paid the following amounts:
Bonds. 81 % ooo @
| Cash expenditures 993 416 90
Interest on bonds ..,.....ss.'..+.sts 2oi ,o54 o.
Total S213Ss Ats a
Collected for wharf fees 1271 .s3a "a
Excess Of expenditures .ss6s.e Gas u
The proposition Of Mr. Henry Esrmann
\ means, therefore, In plains WORDS. tHat tne
| holders OF wharf bonds shall be Ignored entire-
" In any new arrangement that may be made
| Indeed he INDUCES In some comments against
re attitude Of some Of the .bondholders who
ms 1ifest unwllingneas TO give up their bonds
at the rate stipulated In Mr.. EllermaBn's con.
tract with the city. which was originally fixed al
seventy i've cents on the dollar. bat subse.
uuently reduced by the last city administration
to fifty cents on the dollar.
| The Idea Of ignoring the wharf bendholders
IL Il OF a new one. however, with Mr.. Ellermann
Some time ago the DEMOCRAT published Ii q
the sense 81 ct least portion Of the city ad
minisratioD that the Issue OF the wharf bonds
| or large proportion Of these securities. was d
doubtful legality aud 1t might be necessary &
sift the matter which had already too long re-
mained INFESTED.
It is therefore probable that the COMMITTEES o
the whole induigsd In q lively discussion oI
the subject yesterday, Or to speak more aecu
rately, It Is said that it was discussed at con
siderable length. and very strong arguments
bonds and Of allowing the bondholders to brini
the matter before the courts themselves. This
: would In nowise involve the wharf lessee 70
his contract to retire the outstanding bond
Ia with the city and he has no relation In tn
matter with the bondholders. A day or twt
more may reveal some new facts eonesrniHl
this question.