Constitutional Whig. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1824-1832, 1824-03-12
IMPORTANT OPINION

IMPORTANT OPINION
Ofhe Supreme Court Of tie United States
ON THE STEAM BoAT CAUSE,
Delivered by Chief Justice MARSHALL, March 9,
1924.
Gibbon VS.. Ogden
This is a writ of errorto decree of the high
est court of law or equity in the State of New
s York, affirming a decree pronounced by the
Chancellor of that State.
The Legislature of New York has enacted Sc
veral laws for the purpose of securing to Robert
r. Livingston and Robert Fulton the exclusive
navigation of all the waters within the iurisdic-
ton of that State, with boats moved by fire or
steam, for term of years, which has not yet ex-
PRED and has authorized the Chancellor to a
ward an injunction, restraining any person what
ever from navigating those waters with boats of
that description.
This bill was filed by Aaron Ogden, claiming,
as assignee of Livingston and Fulton, suggesting
that Thomas Gibbon, the plaintiff in error, was
III possession of two steam boats, the Stoudnrer
and Bcllona, which were actually employed in
running between New York and Elizabethtown
in New Jersey, in violation of the exclusive pri-
vilege conferred on the plaintiff, and praying an
injunction to restrain the SAID Gibbon from using
the said boats, any others propelled by fire or
steam, in navigating the waters within the terri
tory of New York.
he iuJuuCtiOli having Deen awarded, the an
swer of Gibbon was filed, in which he stated that
the boats employed by him were duly enrolled
and licensed, according to the act of Congress,
tocarryont the coasting tradeofthc United States.
and insisted onhis right in virtue of that license,
to navigate the waters between Elizabethtown
and New York, the acts of the Legislature of
New York Notwithstanding.
The Chancellor perpetuated the Injunction,
being ofopinon that the acts comforting the pri-
vilege were not repugnant to the Constitution
aud laws of the United States, and were valid.
This decree was affirmed, in the Court for the
trial ofimpeachments aud correction of errors,
which is the highest tribunal before which the
cause could be carried in the State.
The plaintiff IN error contends that this decree
is erroneous, because the laws which purport to
give the exclusive privilege it sustains, are re-
pugnant to the Constitution and laws of the u
nited States.
They are said to be repugnant-
dst. To that clause in the Constitution which
authorizes Congress to regulate commerce.
ID. To that which authorizes Congress to pro-
mote the progress of science and useful arts.
The State of N. York maintains the constitute
onaity of these laws; and their Legislatures their
Council of Revision, and their Judges, have re-
peatedly concurred in thisopinion. Unsupported
bygreatnames--bynam which have all the titles
reconsideration that virtue, intelligence, &ofce,
cison of this question without feeling a just and
real respect for that opinion which is sustained
by such authority; but it is the province of this
Court while It respects, not to bow to 1T impli-
city; and the Judges must exercise, in the ex-
animation of the subject, that understanding
which Providence has bestowed upon them, with
that independence which the people of the Uni
ted States expect from this department of the
government.
As preliminary to the very able discussions of
the Constitution, which we have heard from the
bar, and as having some influence on its con.
struction, reference has been made to the poll
tcal situation of these States anterior to its for
nation. 1t has been said, that theYwere sove-
reign; were completely independent, and were
connectedw with each other only by league. This
is true. But, when these allied soveregns con-
verted their league into goyernment-when
they converted their Congress of Ambassadors,
deputed to deliberate on their common concerns,
and to recommend measures of general utility,
into Legislature empowered to enact laws on
the most interesting subjects, the whole charac-
ter, in which the States appear, underwent
change, the extent of which must be determin-
ed by fair consideration of the instrument by
which that change effected.
This instrument contains an enumeration of
powers expressly granted by the people to their
government. 1t has been said that these pow
ers ought to be construed strictly. But why
ought they to be so construed Is there one
sentence in the Constitution which gives coun-
tenauce to this rule In the last of the enume-
rated powers, that which grants, expressly, the
means for carrying all others into execution,
Congress is authorized GO to make all laws which
shall be necessary and proper" for the purpose.
But this limitation on the means which may be
used, is not extended tothe powers which are
conferred: nor is there one sentence in the Con-
stitution which has been pointed out by the gen.
Hcmen of the bar, or which we have been able
TO discern, that prescribes this rule. We do not,
therefore, think ourselves justified in adopting it.
What do gentlemen mean by strict construc-
tom If they contend only against that enlarg-
ed construction which would extend words be-
yond their natural and obvious import, we might
question the application of the term, but should
not controvert the principle. If ,hey contend
for that narrow construction which, III support
of some theory not to be found in the Constitn-
ton, would deny to the government those pow
ers which tue words Of the grant, as usually un-
derstood, import, and which consistent with
the general views and objects of the instrument,
so that narrow construction which would cripple
the government, and render it unequal to the
objects for which it is declared to be instituted,
and to which, the powers given, as fairly under
stood, render it competent, then we cannot per-
eiye the propriety of this strict construction, nor
adopt it as the rule by which the Constitution IS
TO be expounded. As men, whose intentions re-
cuire no concealneut, generally employed the
words which most directly and aptly express the
IDEAS they intend to convey, the enlightened pa
triots who framed our Constitution, and the peo-
pie who adopted it, must be understood to have
,,crIa an fbeir natural oDd g.