Legal Aspect of Fees. 
207 
on the tugs plying in a river which was a part of the navigable 
waters of the United States. It was therefore held to be an 
interference with interstate commerce. The court here virtu¬ 
ally held that the charge would have been a legitimate license 
fee, had the council imposed it with that intent; but, as the 
council had levied it with the understanding that it was a tax, 
its intent and interpretation must be accepted by the court. 
Essentially the same principles were laid down in the earlier 
case of Ruse vs. Gloverf where the legislature of Illinois, after 
having expended much money on locks and improvements in the 
Illinois River, passed a law levying a tonnage toll on vessels 
passing through these locks. The Supreme Court held that this 
exaction “was a compensation for the use of artificial facili¬ 
ties constructed, and not an impost upon navigation.” The 
tendency therefore seems to be in the right direction, at least 
in the decisions of some courts. This tendency is to construe 
as fees all charges which the legislative body intended to con 
form to the roughly measurable special benefit. 
B. FEES IN THEIR RELATION TO INTER-STATE COMMERCE. 
Almost all questions in regard to fees which have come before 
the Supreme Court of the United States for adjudication, have 
involved some phase or other of the regulation of interstate and 
foreign commerce. It would seem, at first blush, as though no 
fee would be of itself an interference with commerce. If the 
fee charged is a counter-payment, and does not exceed the value 
of the equivalent granted or furnished by the state, it becomes 
difficult to understand how such a charge can interfere with 
internal commerce. 
In the earlier decisions this was the view taken by the courts. 
In Osborne vs. Mobile * 2 the Supreme Court passed upon the 
validity of an ordinance which required an express company 
doing business beyond the state limits to pay a license fee of 
$500, and an express company doing business within state 
limits to pay $100; and charged a license fee of $50 to any 
nidXJ. S., 543. 
2 16 Wall., 479. 
