132 
Urdahl—Historical Survey of Fee Systems. 
ment of the law regulating ferries. Thus we find in New York 
laws, passed at the eighth session, a regulation to the effect 
that “ each ferry license should be grantedJlor an annual rental, ” 
which was in its essence a license fee. The law prescribed 
what tolls should be collected besides numerous police regula¬ 
tions. Soon the power to make all these regulations was trans¬ 
ferred to the local authorities. Then comes the inauguration 
of the great movement which has resulted in public ownership 
of highways and bridges, but which is not yet completed as 
regards ferries. The change from private ferries to free public 
bridges has however been carried out wherever the cost has not 
been too great. 
H. TONNAGE DUTIES IN THE NATURE OP FEES. 
It is the state tonnage duties of this period 1 that reveal most 
clearly the dependence of the early commonwealth on colonial 
institutions. These were duties, levied with the consent of 
Congress, on vessels entering certain harbors or water-courses, 
and were, originally at least, intended as payments for the use 
of improvements made or to be made in such rivers or harbors. 
They were, perhaps, only partially in the nature of fees, because 
they were at times levied to pay for improvements which were 
about to be made. The service would only be actual, in case 
the vessel returned to the harbor, and in that way received 
benefit from the improvements. The significance of these duties 
lies in the fact that they illustrate how the states had been ac¬ 
customed, while they were colonies, to pay for their harbor im¬ 
provements in this way. So very naturally they resorted to 
the same methods after the Union had been formed, although 
the federal constitution expressly prohibited it. 2 These charges 
all disappeared, as soon as the federal customs and tonnage 
duties became firmly established. 
1 R. I., 1790, to deepen channel at Providence; Mass., 1798, to improve 
the Kennebeck River; Pa., 1805, to improve the Delaware River; Va., 1804, 
1826, to improve the James River; N. C., 1824, to improve Appatomax 
River; Ga., 1787, to improve Savannah River; Md., 1783, to improve Balti¬ 
more Harbor; Md., 1793, to improve harbor and pay health officer of har¬ 
bor. 
2 The constitutionality of these duties was not questioned because the 
consent of congress was obtained in each case. 
