Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 2.djvu/386

 BROECK ». BARGE JOHN M. WBLOH. 379 �"the citizens of each state Bhall be entitled to ail privileges and immunities of citizens in the seyeral states." Although the statuts of New York does not provide, in tenus, that a canal-boat. of a given tonnage, owned by a citizen of New York, shall pay less wharfage than a canal-boat of the same tonnage owned by a citizen of another state, yet it is urged that the same resuit is accomplished indirectly, for the reason, that, when the canal-boat which does not navigate the canals of the state of New York, but cornes from another state, through another canal, is owned by a citizen of another state, and brings a cargo from another state, the extra wharfage she must pay must be added to the charge for carrying the cargo, effecting thus a discrimination against citizens of other states ; and that, in any event, such increased' charge would, in practice, be an extra burden on mercbandise coming from other states, or on canal-boats coming from other states. �The John M. Welch, it is admitted, came to New York through the canals named in the libel. Consequently, she does not fall within the exception of a canal-boat navigating the canals of the state of New York. Her exact tonnage is not stated, but it is inferred to have been 180 tons. At two cents per ton per day, her single rate of wharfage would, under the act of 1875, be $3.60 per day. If she were a canal-boat of 180 tons, navigating the canals of the .state of New York, her rate of wharfage, under section 6 of the act of 1860, would be the rate prescribed by section 212 of the act of April 9, 1813. 2 Eev. Laws of 1813, 429. That rate would be 87J cents per day, Under ail circumstances, whatever her tonnage, (if over 25 tons,) her wharfage rate would be higher under the act of 1875, if not navigating the canals of New York, than if navigating those canals. �In the case of The Ann Ryan, 7 Benedict, 20, the district court for the eastern district of New York held that the act of 1870 was valid, even though a regulation of commerce, in the absence of any statuts of the United States on the subject of wharfage, and that, while the act made discrimination in favor of the canal navigation of the state of New York, it made none in favor of the citizens of that state. ����