The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1879-11-17
MR., BEHAN'S PLAN,

i Administrators Hahan the head af tho HI
reau of Commerce. III aur city government,
haa a rlan fnr Tie erection oF tho much y
needed levne shada. without the outlay or a
cent by the city. and without imposing a
cent Of tax for their malntnnaHra upnn the
shipping ~ the produce. lfa plan IN n
word II this Tho wharf leasaea arc now col
leeting enormous revenues from, The shipping
| under the provisions nf contract with thu
city. which obllgaH them to devote certain
| large pert thereof to tho redemption Of a
stated number 81 wharf bonds pcr ann,im
II Is now proposed, IL View " the improprl-
aty NJ giving any ono not OF bonds tho pref
aienre over TIM others, and In consideration
of the fact that tho validity of these wharf
| hnnas u aerinualy questioned, that the nrnre-
aaIh leaseoa nhal ba authorized 10 cease sat-
ting aside portion Of the revenues for their
ratilement AMI stlaii. tn#tHtttl. tIertsAe that
amount ~ the erection Of tho projected leyee
sheds These Hhctlu. 80 nrertod tn ha In like
manner with tha wllarvea Themselves. Tho
property Of the city and to be FREQ ~ the
| shipping and tho merchandise M have bnen
heretofore tho open wharvna. In thla way.
Mr- Behan anya. n worry d#lrahle. II
not absolutely Indispensable. facility Will be
given "a our commerce, without imposing u
single additional burden thereon.
We confeaa that the ncheme 10 most fascl-
Mating. II would. indecd, be killing two
highly valuable birds with ono stone n we
could simultaneously frcn oursclvca from, tho
grlevons obligation Of tho wharf honda, md
secure for tho commerce Of tho port much
needed accom- mediation all without expense
In any quarter Mr.. Nehen has act out with
d praianw urthy end In Wow. and has built M
most attractive theory. 1,ut there are dill
cultics. Ir we declare that the wharf
bonds arc Invalid, or oven that tho city III UNI
der no obligation % levy apeclal charges for
thcir redemption. how arc we to enforce the
present tarin Of wharfage dues II II
already d question whether thnHn duca could
tn collected II tho owners of tho shipping
chose to resist. The Supreme Court has do
clared that no port haa tho right 10 impose Y
tax upon commerce further shan ts actually
necessary for tho proper maintenance OF the
wharves. II s rresumnblo. therefore. that
thoae persona who my ne bills presented ny
tho wharf lessees do 50 In ignorance Of the
facts. or because they prefer that TO tho ex-
ronse and trouble OF litigation. Collecting
the present dues, then. lii thiH precarlous
fashion. how could we count upon collecting
them nj nil II we once formally rcpudiated
tho basis OF tho tariff the wharf bonds?
There ID nothing to excuse tho oneroua rates
now charged. except the imperative and IL
rcmedahlo necessity of redeeming tho wharf
bonds. II we refuse to recognize them, We
destroy tho pretext for tho large majority
lcvee dues ana can make so legitimate claim
for tho revenue.
Again, VIZ SEQ that MI Behan's scheme con
templates the pcrpe'nation Of the wharf lcs-
secs, who are to be relieved OF tho obligation
OF taking up The fixed number Of wharf bonds-
an obligation which has become trlfle oncr-
ous-and are to be allowed. instead, to devote
such surplus of the wharf revenues TO tho
erection OF the levee sheds? Unless our
memory fails us, the chief argument used by
the lessees and their friends was the
absolute necessity of paying these wharf
bonds. The whole fabric Of this 70
markable sale of public franchises
was predicated upon the vital Importance OF
retiring the bonds and the utter ruin which
the city would suffer In case OF failure to do
So It was shown that Messrs. Ellermann
We're the only persons who could save the
city. and upon this theory they received the
contract. Now. II 1t be discovered and an
nounced that the wharf bonds be invalid or
doubtful or. at least, that the city is not
bound to make special provision for their re-
demption, what becomes of the contract Of
the lessees What further excuse is there for
maintaining these gentlemen In possession OF
the only valuable franchise the city still re-
tains II one premise Of the contract be fala-
cious, the whole instrument is null and void,
and the franchise ipso facto, reverts to the
city. @
These points deserve and require considera-
ton BY the Council. Mr.. Behan's plan Is in
trinsfcalIy beautiful. but it is surrounded and
hemmed In by difficulties Granted that we
need the levee sheds: granted that these