HATCH V. WALLAMET IBON. BBIDGB 00. 33(5 �flows, and frord there to its roonth, a distance of 12 miles, it is navigated by sea and inland vessels, foreign and domestic, sail and steam, that go thence up and down the great Colum- bia, ont upon the Pacific ocean, and to ail the principal ports of the world. It is the harbor of Portland, the emporiam and financial center of the north-west, where the yaluable prod- uets of the country are gathered from far and near and stored for market and exportation, and the imports from sis- ; ter States and foreign countries are received and distributed, throughout the interior. In the near future we may expect a large increase of population at this place, and throughout : the country with which it maintains business relations, and the commerce of Portland will demand the free use of the harbor and water front, as far south as it eau be made useful. The present need of a bridge is to furnish a more convenir ent and certain means of crossing the river than a steam- ferry to the small population that live in East Portland and the neighboring villages, some portion of the passengers to and from Portland on the east-side railway, the rural popu- lation that live on the narrow strip of country between East Portland and the Columbia river, and the transportation of their limited dairy and garden products to the Portland mar- kets. It is not intended by this statement to suggest that there is no need of a bridge across the river at this place, but only that the interests which may be promoted by it are as a drop in the bucket compared with those that may be seri- ously inconvenienced or injured by it. With this brief sketch of the circumstances, I proceed to consider whether the act authorizing the building of the bridge is in conflict with the act of congress declaring it a free and commercial highway. The bridge is required to be built so "as not to injurionsly impede and obstruct the free navigation of the river. " But the defendant claims that the provision requiring the draw to be not less than 100 feet is equivalent to declaring that a draw of 100 is sufficient. My own impression is that the act ought to be construed as authorizii^ a bridge, which would not materiaUy interfere with navigation, and to this, end that the draw must be at least 100 feet, and as mueh ��� �
