New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1883-05-01
UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT.
OPINIONS OF PUBLIC INTEREST RENDERED YEsrER-



WASHINGTON, April 30.-A decision was
rendered by the supreme COur5 Of the United
day In tue case OF The Parkersburg and OHIO Rvor
Transportation Company. appellants, against the city
OF Parkcrsburg W. VA aud others This arises
Of the following OF facts The city OF Parkersburg
W. Va built a wharf and established certain rates Of
wharfage which the Petersburg ONO TranspOrta-
tion Company complained of as being extoronate and
being merely pretcxt for evyng duty of tonnage.
The company thercupon nlcd bill In the Circuit Court
Of the United States to restrain proceedings in suit
brought In the State Court for the purpose Of collecting
the wharfage and have the wharfage ordinance
clared illegal and void The Court holds first,
the ordinance It's face imposed charges for
wharfage only, the Court Will not entertain
AN averment that they in reality intended as
wharfage, but duty OF tonnage; second that
wharfage a charge for the wharf made by the
owner thereof by OF ront or compensation, while
duty of is tax duty charged for tue priy
ege OF entering trading lying in port or harbor
can be imposed ouiy by the Government; third.
that whether charge is wharfag e duty OF tonnage
il question not OF intent. bur OF and law fourth
that although wharycs ar related 10 commerce aud
CATION aide and cOnyeuiences yet. being local
their and requiring special regulations fOt par
tcular places tie control OF them ia the absence of
ssional legislation on the subject belongs TO the
in which they are stuatod ntth, that suit will
lie in the Circuit Cuur5 OF the United States relief
AGAINST cxOrOant wharfage q case arising under the
Constitution or laws OF the United states even though 1t
he alleged at the wharfage was intended as duty OF
tonnage Tue decree OF tue Court below in favor
G. u nv
Justice Bradley, Justice Harlan dissenting
decision also renderei tod ~ In the admiralty
Of W. III. Ellis. master. and Others against the Allan
tic Mutual Insurance Company, and others:
appeal from tue Circuit Court OF the United states
the Dist let OF Louisiana. This admiralty
brought and owners OF the ship Tornado TO
freight money on cargo whic burned and
sunk the said ship before the latter had
voyage The Court holds that where a vessel before she
breaks ground for voyage is 80 injured by lire the
cost OF her repairs woua exceed Ter value when re-
paired rendered unseaworthy and inca aoe
OF earning freight contract for the transportation OF
cotton by her to foreign port evidenced by
bill OF lading containing the ard
customary exceptions and providing for the payment
OF tue freight money the delivery of toe cotton at
that port thereby dissolved, 30 that the shipper
not liable for part or the freight money, any
OF the expenses paid by the vessel for COMPRISING
storing cotton fhe decree of the circuit Court il az
nrIned with costs. Opinion by Justics Blatchford.
decision was by the Court today i'm another
admiralty case, william r. sinclair ct al against Be-
trce NJ Cooper, widow, ct al. which also by
District Of Louisiana The of tnis case aud tue do
csOn Of tue Court are follows: On April l5 1879
the ship COnemara WAS tOwed by steam tug down the
Mississippi River from NewOrleans on her Way TO Jy-
dashed To her side In the night, while most of the
ships officers were drunk, Passenger her
arising 4s from fire Which ' Saa Broken smoke 0Ss
In the He the alarm the officers aud crew
OF the ship and OF tue tug and the officers crew
ana two passengers OF tue tug working together aud by
means OF steam pump and nose upon the tug and un-
aided by the officers and OF the ship put out the
lire In twenty minutes. The Court holds First That
thls was salvage SERVICE and that the ON
board the ship well tho owner officers crew and
passengers Of tue tug were ented to share IN the sal
wage money. Second rhat a decree vi salvage by u
circuit Court In admiralty not to be altered by this
Court Tor excess Ia the amount awarded unless Tue
oess Id 80 great That upon able view
iaots ound tue award cannot be justified by rules OF
Jaw appDcaOlo 10 the The award below
vl4,l9S, or per cent OF value of snp aud CARGO
Deoroo ahrined Win oosts Opinion by Justice Gray