The Wheeling daily intelligencer. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1865-1903, 1880-02-12
OPINION. OF THE uTY sOLIcTToR

City Solicitor, VIM. Erekine, 70 whom
had been referred the question whether
..ha p.;J,o con,ns M, ,v.. ort;,,ad N keen
tle t'itNse pay "1e eA' ~ ~ AssF
up zane street Or not, gave tne iolloWlng
opinion the oil subject to Council. This
Question has been coming up periodically
~. 800. ana ,.a ,h;nI 4 ,os, cIoo,l, and
iot ysa,9' anu "" ~, .uA =. q, Nv s., 49, ~
Satisfactorily setueo py tne soncltoF'
The wharfage ordinance was also CUES
toned by certain river men, as they claim
ed II conflicted with the Federal Constitu'
ton. This, also, is passed on by the Soil
citor.
tn N. Manor and Council of The Citv of
JEheelin1:
GRsTLHMRS-At your last meeting two
questions were referred To me for report,
VIZ:
First-Is the Wheeling and Belmont
Bridge Company under obligation to keep
Zane street In repair?
Second-Are the proposed amendments
to the Wharfage Ordinance constitutional
The Wheeling and Belmont Bridge
Company was Incorporated In 1916. Sub
seouently the wooden bridge was built
and certain ferry franchises were obtained,
all OF which became the property OF
Daniel Zane and Ebenezer Zane. In 1877
this property was held by trustees, Henry
Moore being trustee for Ebenezer Zane,
and Daniel d. List beingtrustee for Daniel
Zane. On January 81, 1S47, an agree
ment was made between these parties on
the one part and VIM. Paxton and others
the other part for the sale Of the property
to Paxton and others, who were to reor-
ganize the Bridge Company. II was not
sale, but an agreement to sell. There
was to be included in the proposed sale
right Of way sixty.six feet wide across the
Island from the western terminus OF the
bridge TO be erected TO the eastern termi-
nus OF the wooden bridge, and 1t was
agreed that the said Paxton and others
(either in their proposed corporate capac.
ity or otherwise as they should elect
should be bound to said Moore and List,
Trustees, to keep the way in good condi'
ton and repair for all time. Afterwards,
oil March 10th, ISL, an act OF the Legis'
lature was passed reyiving and keeping in
force the former charter OF the Bridge
Company-with the said Paxton and 9th.
ers named as stockholders, having power
TO appoint . board OF managers. After
wards, on September 2Vth, 1917, all the
conditions precedent to the proposed sale
and conveyance having been complied
with, the. said TRUSTEES and Daniel Zane
united IN o deed conveying TO the
Wheeling and Belmont Bridge Com,
pany lnot 70 Paxton and others a
: individually the wooden bridge and adj
lacent or appurtenant lands, aii the
ferry rights and property and certain LANDS
! on the east side OF the Island, tor new
bridge aDutments, &C., and Alright Of way
| sixty.six feet wide across the Island in
terms as follows: o.
"Also the right Of way ier said bridge
company, and all persons, vehicles, Of
other things passing over either or both o.
aaid bridges, or any ferry hereby granted
along and over the following described
tract oil land, part OF said Island, contain:
ing three acres, three roods and twelve
perches, more or less, and bounded as fol
. lows.u Here follows In the deed the
courses and distances, comprising what Il
now Zane street. Sand the right at al
times to enter upon the said tract OF three
acres, three roads and twelve perches, ovei
which a right OF way Is hereinbefore
Z granted for the purpose OF making, repair.
( ing and keeping in repair, a good and
sufficient rood aud way over the same:by
i macadamizing or otherwise, as 10 said
, bridge company or It's assigns shall seem
expedient.h t'.-i1 ffs'=a
II After this deed was made and recorded
the same ground was dedicated to the pub,
, lie by the plats LAYING off the island addi
tons TO The CITY, and was called Zane
/ street. ~
l am not able to see that the Bridge
Company is in any way required to keer
the street in repair. :
AS 10 It's right 10 enclose by fence. Ger.
tain portions Of Zane street in front Of q
brick bouse at Inc east and nj the wesl
bridge, l have not found. that It has such
a right; and Ihaye not learned other wise
than as may be inferred from the resolu,
ton OF Council referring the question tc
me, that It has claimed such right.
AS to the Wharfage Ordinance, Iunder.
stand that the question raised is as ia
whether the provision therein. recurring
the rates ofwharfage to be estimated by
the ton would be tax on tonnage, and
therefore within the terms of the prohibi.
ton OF the Constitution OF the United
States.
Heretofore the ordinance has classified
vessels, prescribing a fixed sum for YES.
sells OF from one to two hundred tons
burden, and another sum for vessels Of
from two to three hundred tons, and
SO on for larger vessels, SO that the
tonnage OF the vessel has always been
the basis OF calculation in fixing the
wharfage, The change in this respect
making the rate so much per ton has been
made partly for brevity, partly to make 1t
correspond with the systems of other
cities, and partly because 1t is more lust
than plan by which vessel of 10l tons
would pay the same toll as q vessel Of 100
tons. ~ ~ ~
Although questions about'wharfage tolls
have frequently been before the Courts |
have NOT found That the constitutional
question here suggested has been squarely
raised or decided until recently.
| IN thu rasa nj tho North uaStarn TTr;on