Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1824-03-16
IMPORTANT OPINION
Of the Supreme Court Of the United STATES
ON THE STEAMBOAT CASE
IConciuded.|

tConciuded
The acls of Congress, passed in 1856 and 1913, =
empowering and directing The officers OF the general
government to conform to- and asss, in the execution
or the quarantine and health laws of state proceed
IL is said, upon tile rea that these laws constu
ti0na. IL is undoubtedly true, that they do proceed
upon that idea and tue cons,uouaiiy Of such laws
has Aever, SO las as we ate informed, been denied
But they do not imply ackuo wiedgment ,hat a
state may rghliuliy egniate oomineI ce with foreign
nations, or among The states for they do not imply
that such laws exercise vi thai power, en-
acted with view to ii. On the contrary, they are
ueated ~ quarantine aud health laws, are SD denoui-
inaIed IN The acts OF Congress, aud considered
flowing from The acknowledged power of state, TO
provide Tor the health OF It's ci,zens. But, rs il was
apparent that some Of he provisions made for This
pr pose, aWd IN virtue Of this power, might interfere
with, aAd Ie affected by The laws Of the United
o,htos, made Tor the regulation OF commerce, Con
g'rss, IN that spirit OF harmony aud Cancellation which
ought always 10 characterize the conduct OF govern
ments standing in he relation which Of the un-
ion and those ui the States bear TO each oihrr, has
directed us officers To aid in the execution Of these
laws and has, ia some measure, adapted IT'S own le-
gsaIon 10 ths object, by uiaking provisions in ait
oil those OF the states. But in making these pros-
sions the opinion is unequivocally maniIesled that
Congress may co"lroI Tie state laws, far may
be necessary TO cunrol them for ihc regulation OF
Commerce.
The act passed in 1908 prohibiting the inn
portation of slaves into any state " hich shall
itself prohibit their importation, implies, it il
said, an admission that The states pussrssed the
power tn exclude or admit them from which
1t is inferred that they possess the same pow
er with respect To all other articles.
Ifthis inference were correct, If this power
was exercised, not under any particular clause
in the constitution, but in virtue of a general
right over the subject of commerce, to exist
As long as the constitution itself, il might now
be exercised. Any state might now import
African slaves into its own territory. But, il
! nhV l,.t th..p nf fafn
this subject, previous TO the year 1908, consii-
tutes an exception To the power of Congress
To regulate commerce. and the exception is
eXpressI Il in such words a. Ia manifest clearly
the intention 10 continue the pre-cxistDS right
of the states TO admit or exclude for limited
period. The words are, I" the migration or
importation nf such persons rs any of the
state existing shalt think proper tn admit.
shail NOT be prohibited by the Congress prior
~ the year 1905" The whole object ofthe ex-
cep,ion is to preserve the power to those states
which might BIZ disposed To exercise it, and its
language seems 90 The court to convey this idea
unequivocay. The possession of this parti
cular power, then, during the time limited in
the constitution, cannot he admitted To prove
the Possession of any other similar power.
II has been said that the act Of August z,
1881 acknowledges concurrent power in
the states 10 SftfIts The conduct of pilots, and
hence is inferred IN admission Of their CON
current right with Congress tS regulate com
merce with foreign nations, and amoag the
states. But, this inference is not, we think,
justified by The fact.
Although Congress cannot enable state TO
legislate, Congress may adopt the provisions
OLA state on any subject. When the govern
ment ofihe Union was brought into existence,
il found system for the regulation of its pi
lots in full force in every state. The act which
has been mentioned adopts this system, and
gives il The same validity as If its provisions
had been specially made by Congress. But
the act, it may be said, is prospective also, and
the adoption Of laws to I've made in future pre-
supposes the right ia the maker to Iegslate
on the subject.
The act unquestionably manfests an in
tention to leave this subject entirely TO the
states, until Congress should think proper to
Enterprise: but the very enactment Of such a
law indicates An opinion that il was necessary
that the existing system would not be applics-
BILE to the new state of things unless express
ly applied 10 it by Congress. But this section
IS confined to pilots within the bays inets,
rivers, harbors and ports Of the United States, p"
which are, of course, in whole or in part, also
within the limits Of some particular state.
The acknowledged power Of state TO regu-
late its police, its domestic trade, and To govern
ITS own citizens, may enable it to legislate on
this subject to considerable extent; and the
adoption Of its system by Congress, and the
application oft TO the whole subject Of COM
mercP, does not seem 10 the court TO imply
right 10 The states so to apply it oftheir own
authority. But,the adoption Of the state system
being temporary, being only "until further le-
gislative provision shall be made by Congress- y
shews concinsiyely an opinion that Congress
could control the whole subject, and might
adopt the system of the states, or provide one
Of its own.
4 state, it IS said, or even a private citizen,
may construct lighthouses. But gentlemen
must be aware, that, if this proves power in
state to regulate commerce, il proves that
the same power is in the citizen States, or in
diyiduaIs, who own lands, may, If moi forbidden
by law, erect on those lands what buildings they
please but this power is entirely distinct from
that Of regulating commerce, and may, we
presume, be restrained, ifexercised so as 20
produce u public mischief
These acts were cited;at the bar for the pur-
pose OF shelving IN opinion in Congress that
The states possess, consequently with the lcgis-
lature Of the Union, the power TO regulate
commerce with foreign nations and among
the states. Upon reviewing them, we think
they do not establish the proposition they
were intended TO prove. They shew the opin
ion that the states retain powers euabing then
TO pass the Laws to which alusion has beer
made, not that those laws proceed from III,
particular power which has been delegated &c
Congress.
II has been conteuded by tbs counsel FOL
Vol ?, p. So. ard vol. 8, .Iqs
Vol 8 p. sac.