GSO FEDERAL REPORTER. �police for the protection of commerce, etc., along the river front of the city, and the remaining $10,000 to be set apart and devotod excliisively to tiie pay- ment of the salaries of wharflngers, collection clerks, signal offlcers, and other employes on levees in connection with the depiirtment of commerce of said city; and many other minor matters and stipulations are provided for and agreed to, �(4) The total cost of the wharves and landings to the city of New Orleans, Becember 31, 1874, and for which its bonds were outstanding, was $1,044,000, and up to May 1, 1875, the city had expended for wharves and landings, in excess of all receipts for use thereof, $836,635. During the lease to Eager, Ellerman & Co., from July 1, 1876, to May 29, 1881, the said indebtedness was liquidated and paid at reduced rates, and the wharves kept in certain repair, from the revenues, which, at the rates then flxed, yielded about $230,000 aunually. The rates fixed by the contract with defendant are the same as in the contract with Eager, Ellerman & Co., except a decided reduction on ocean vessels, and a promised reduction on all shipping of 10 per cent, during thethird year, and 20 per cent, during the fourth and fifth years of the contract; and under this contract the revenues will be about $200,000 per year. �(5) The nature of the climate, and the currents and banks of the river in front of the city of New Orleans, necessarily render all wharves and levees perishable, requiring for them constant rebuilding and repairing. �The complainant attacks this lease or contract to defendant as being in vio- lation of the constitution of the United States, to-wit: Article 1, § 10, for- bidding any state. without consent of congress, from laying any duty on ton- nage. Article 1, § 8, granting to congress the power and authority to regulate commerce with foreign nations and among the several states and with the Indian tribes. Article 1, § 10, forbidding any state, without the consent of congress, to lay any import or export duties, except what may be absolutely necessary for executing its inspection laws. Article 1, § 9, no tax or duty shall be laid on articles exported from any state. �He also attacks it as being in violation of the aot of congress, approved April 8, 1812, admitting Louisiana into the Union. �He further claims that the rates of wharfage charges or dues under the lease and ordinance are excessive and unjust, nearly double the amount re- quired to keep the wharves in repair and make such new constructions as the needs of commerce may require, and that the charges and dues authorized by the lease and ordinance amount really to a diaguised tax or duty on tonnage for the purpose of maintaining electric lights, a police force on the levees, and one departmenl of the city government, all of which, if required at all, should be supported by the general public, and not burdened on commerce. �Such being the substantial facts and the allegations of the bill, raising a question under the constitution of the United States, there can be no doubt of the jurisdiction of the court. �The case may be further simplified by leaving out of consideration the eircumstances attendant upon the advertisement and adjudication of the contract or lease, the matter before this court being in essence ��� �
