The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1883-05-01
SUPREME COURT DECISIONS.
A Case of Interest to River Towns and
Wharfmasters.

A Case of Interest to River Towns and
Wharfmasters
WASHINGTON, April 30.-A decision was
rendered by the Supreme Court Of the United
State to-day in the case of the Parkersburg
& Ohio River Transportation Company, APP
pellant, against the city of Parkersburg, w.
Va, and others. This case, which is one OF
considerable importance to all cities and
towns along the Ohio and Mississippi rivers,
arises out OF the following state OF facts: The
city of Parkersburg, W. Va, built wharf
and established certain rates of wharfage,
which the Parkersburg & Ohio Transports
ton Company complained of as extortionate
and as being merelya pretext for levying
duty on tonnage. The company thereupon
filed bill in the Circuit Court of the United
States to restrain proceedings in suit brought
in the State court for the purpose of
collecting wharfage, and to have the wharf
age ordinance declared illegal and void.
This court holds, first, that as the ordinance
on its face imposed a charge for wharfage
only, though these charges might be unrea-
sonable and exorbitant, the court will not
entertain an averment that they were in
reality not intended as wharfage, but as
duty on tonnage An inquiry into the Sc
cret intent of body which imposes charges
is inadmissible; whether it is one thing or
another must be determined by the ordl-
nance or regulation itself. Second, that
Wharfage is charge for the use of
a wharf made by the owner thereof.
by way of rent or compensation,
while a duty on tonnage is a tax or
duty charges for the privilege of entering, or
trading, or lying in port or harbor, and can
al, bxrf1 ,an orfNf,Na ant
that whether a charge for wharfage or
duty on tonnage is a question notsof intent,
but of fact and law. Fourth, that although
wharves related to commerce and naviga-
ton as aids and conyeniences. yet, being
local in their nature and requiring special
regulations for particular places, control OF
them lin the absence of congressional legis-
lation on the subject) belongs to the States
in which they are situated. Fifth, that
suit will not lie in the Circuit Court of the
United States for relief against exorbitant
wharfage as a case arising under the constitu-
ton or laws of the United States, even
though it be alleged that the wharfage was
intended as a duty on tonnage The DEGREES
of the court below in favor OF the city of
Parkersburg is therefore affirmed Opinion
by Justice Bradley, Justice Harlan dissent
ing.
The First National Bank of Xenia, O., VS..
D. n. Stewart and others, administrators.
This was a suit brought by the admin
istrators of Daniel McMilen to
recover from the bank the proceeds
of thirty shares of the banks own capital
stock deposited by Mcmillan as collateral
security for loan, and sold by the bunk to
satisfy McMllan's indebtedness to it. The
court below charged the jury that if they
found from evidence that the bank stock was
delivered by Mcmillan to the bank as col
lateral security for the loan of money made
by him at the time, his administrators were
entitled to recover the amount of the pro-
ceeds, with interest from the time of sale,
for the reason that the bank was prohibited
by the currency act from thus receiving its
own stock. This court holds that the adj
ministrators in this case cannot recover The
judgment is reversed with costs, and the
case remanded, with Instructions to award
new trial.