HATCH /Z7, WALLAMST BEIDGE 00. 783 �sel, and the tra'ffio between them was the beginiiing of Ore- gpn's commerce. ; Out of this commerce grew the town of Portland. But destroy or materially restrict or impede the free use of this harbor, or the approaches tb it, and so far you destroy the town and injure the commerce of the eountry. The injunction, ought to be allowed. �SAwyER, G. J. I have very little to add to what the dis- trict judge has said. I fully concur with him in the conclu- sions that he has reached. It is very clear that, under the admitted law of the case, the act admitting the state into the union which provides that the navigable waters of the state ' shall be free and common highways; and in view of the decision of the supreme court in the Wheeling Bridge Case, 13 How. 518, in which it was held, under a similar act, that any obstruction to the navigation of the Ohio river was un- lawful, except by the consent of congress; and the judiciary act of March 3, 1875, giving this court jurisdiction of a euit arising out of an act of congress,T— that this court bas authority to restrain the defendant from placing any structure in thia . river which will obstruct its navigation. �The only remaining question, then, is whether the bridge now being constructed by the defendant will be such an ob- struction. To my mind the testimony clearly indicates that the bridge is and will be an unlawful obstruction to naviga- tion. And I thinli this must be apparent to every person familiar with the subject, or even of general intelligence. If it is at ail a material obstruction, it cornes within the inhibition of the statute, and is unlawful. It was argued by counsel for the defendant that the commerce of the country is not ail carried on up and down or upon the river, and that the corn- ' merce and convenience of the people which cross it must be taken into consideration in determining the propriety of' bridging it. It may be of importance to the cities uptoh' either bank of the river that they should have communica- tion by means of a bridge; but these are considerations to be addiessed to another tribunal than this. court. They should be addressed to congress, where, upon an application for per- ��� �
