The Portland gazette. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1818-1824, 1824-03-16

~ seamen continued VI board Tor several days
ID save a. much Ivy possible oi theshiP and her
tackle, and succeeded III saving such part q the
rigging, spaFs, &C As would have suihced "a pay
the wages Oi the mariners WHO remained on
board Il was contended that they were not en-
titled 10 wages, GA the authority Of the maxim,
that 81 freight is the mother Of wages Lord
Stowell considered the case al large, citing the
various authorities lie then remarked that the
modern practice Of all maritime states departed
from the application ithis rule, where enough
Of the vessel was saved 10 be applicable % the
wages, 10 which effect he cited certain maritime
ordinances Of France, spain, and Holland, and
the naval code Of Denmark lie added, " the
Court had been informed on good authority that
a similar impro .emeut Of the rule obtained ini
America, country which had OF late years very
successfully turned il attention 70 the under
standing Of maritime law, although there, mol
more than ia our own books and decisions,w were
there any recorded cases, III which the doctrine
had been specifically recognized" The Lon
don Courier adds TO its report OF this case, A
gentleman sat onhis Lordships right hand dur
ing the delivery OF this sentence. We under
stood him to be the Hon. Mr. Jackson, one OF
the Judges OF the United States Of America.
The opinion Of C. Justice Marshall, giving the
decision of the Court against the constitutional
ty of the laws of the State Of New York, gran
ting monopoly for Steam Navigation, in their
waters has been reported in the National Intelli-
gencer, but its great length prevents US from
giving any thing more than an Abstract, which
we have taken from the Washington Republican.
STEAMBOAT CONTROVERSY.
The interest excited BY the decision Of the
Supreme Court, in the Steamboat controversy,
has induced Us to give the following very brief
and imperfect view Of the opinion delivered, to
crafty our readers
In delivering the opinion Of the Court in the
case Of Gibbon as. Ogden, the Chief Justice
went into a minute and elaborate discussion Of
the points taken in the argument He consider
ed that the circumstances of the case were pc
culiar-The Legislature of New-York had pas
sed not merely one act but severaI-they had
been sanctioned by the Council of Revision
they had been supported as within the censti-
tuition by the Supreme Court-Chancellor-a
by the Court of Appeals, and no tribunal could
approach a question which had already been
decided by such authorities, without difidence
and reluctance. II was, however, the duty Of
the Court, to meet and TO decide the point ac-
cording TO the best Of its intelligence, and from
that duty it could not, and would not shrink.
The learned Judge went into an examination
Of the clause of the constitution giving to Con-
gress the authority to regulate commerce. He
Showed that according to the ordinary accepta-
ton Of the term and the construction uniformly
placed upon it, commerce embraced navigation,
and that Congress, therefore, had a right to
regulate navigation with foreign nations, and
among the several states That there were ma
ny regulations clearly within the authority of the
individual states, which had bsen considered as
affecting commerce, and which unquestiOnably
did so, but which were merely matters of police;
such were health laws-Guarantine regulations
the laws relating to ferries, and many others.
But that the regulation of commerce, as such,
was exclusively within the power of Congress !;
that it could not be a concurrent power resi-
ding both in the federal and state governments,
but from the very nature OF the power it must
reside exclusively in the former.
He then proceeded to examine the provisions
Of the act of Congress, in relation to the coast
ng trade. and Showed that the provisions Of that
act recognized and confirmed the right Of the
citizens Of one state TO carry on navigation and
commerce with another state. That the license
mentioned in the act was in reality license,
and gave authority to the vessel carrying il To
eater the ports specified in it or, if general to
enter the waters and ports Of the United States
without restriction. That there was no direct or
indirect exclusions of vessels navigated by steam
from the operation OF the act, but that such YES
sells were clearly entitled 10 the benefit of its
provisions.
The conclusion, therefore, to which the
court had arrived, was, that the appellant had
a right, under the coasting act, 10 proceed,
without molestation, on the voyage in the
prosecution of which he was engaged, and
that the acts of New York, under which the
Injunction was issued, were unconstitutional,
and the decision Of the court which had been
appealed from, was therefore erroneous, and
must be reversed.
Ia speaking Of the act Of Congress :" for the
enrolling and licensing Of Steam Boats" the
Court say
+" This act authorizes steam boat employed,
or intended TO be employed, only in a river or
bay of the United States, owned wholly or 10
part of an alien, resident within the United
States, to be enrolled and licensed as if the
same belonged to citizen Of tue U. States.
" This act demonstrates the opinion ofCon-
gress, that Steam Boats may be enrolled and
licensed 10 common with vessels using sails
They are of course, entitled to the same priv.
ileges, and can no more be restrained from
navigating waters and entering ports which
are free TO such vessels, than if they were
waited on their voyage BY the winds, instead
of being propelled BY the agency Of FIRE.
The one element may be as legitimately used
as the other. for every commercial purpose su-
thorized BY the laws Of the Union, and the
act Of a state, inhibiting the use Of either te
any vessel having license under the act Of
Congress, comes, we think, 10 direct collision
with that art"