The Madisonian. [volume] (Washington City [i.e. Washington, D.C.]) 1837-1845, 1838-06-19

Il had been purposely rendered as general as posi-
Bile, avoiding minute details. He hoped too many
minute amendmen.s would not be made as this
would eopa I'd The success Of The bill in The Senate.
Mr.. TiLLTNGHAST modified his amendment
so as TO except ferryboats and steamboats, Of less
than sixty tons from the necessity Of providing
yawls,
Mr.. HOFFMAN opposed the amendment Such
provision was not necessary or desirable on The
Hudson.
Mr.. LEGARE suggested constitutional objec-
ton To IL; the General Government having no right
TO exact the proposed penalty within The States.
Mr.. TILLINGHASTsa said that the constitutional
objection ii there was one, applied equally 10 the
clause compelling s.eam-y vessels navigangthe ocean
10 supply themselves with these boats. He did not
concur as to the danger OF employing them, but
thought they would, al any rate give an additional
chance Of escape, and wished the experiment TO be
tried,
The question the amendment was divided
The requirement of boats for vessels navigating the
lakes was agreed to. That for vessels on tidewa-
teTswas rejected.
Mr. JONES, Of New York, offered an amend
ment requiring that the person employed as an in
specor of steam boilers must not be personally ne-
rested in their manufacture, and must be put oath
10 the discharge OF his duty
This amendment was agreed to.
Mr. FILLMORE moved an amendment requiring
every boat to be furnished with certain number of
fife-preseryers.
The amendment opposed by Messrs. BID
DIE, HAAIER, and THOMAS, and subsequently
Mr. HOWARD noticed an Improvement on board
the steam fiigae Fulton in which there wasa dou-
bic safety valve, one Of them being locked up from
all access and conrived Of itselfto let of the
steam although the captain might be disposed i'm
properly to retain it.
Mr. EVANS thought that the bill did not sufi-
cienily provide for competent skill and knowledge
the part the engineer Of the boat and suggested
an amendment appointing board before whom they
must pass an examination.
Mr. CORWIN demonstrated against multiplied
ton of amendments. The subject required much
practical knowledge, which the House did not pos
seSs. and he thought il best 10 avoid unnecessary
detail.
Mr.. SERGEANT thought the bill went as far as
was practicable prudent to 60. The principle Of
the bill was not TO guard against all the dangers Of
human life, but only against those which pecu-
liarly incident 10 The Of steam, and these consist
ed in explosions and CONGREGATIONS. The use Of life
preservers might be desirable, and so might various
other means Of safety, but they applied well TO all
other vessels as TO steamboats,, and opened very ex
tensive field for legislation.
After some further remarks in objection 10 the
amendment Of Mr.. Evans, the question was put on
that amendment, when Il was rejected.
Mr.. AfCRIGG moved an amendment NOT dis
tincty heard, and which shared the same fate.
Mr.. RANDOLPH moved an amendment requir-
ing certain number of buckets TO be kept constantly
filled with water ready for use but before any ques-
ton was taken, the hour Of recess arrived.
EVENING SESSION
AT half past two the Speaker took The chair, and
the House again resolved itself into a Committee Of
the Whole, MIR. Davee in the chair, ON the steam
boat bill
Mr.. RANDOLPH wished TO make the bill as per-
feet as possible before il should be reported. He
moved an amendment the effect Of which was 10
restrict the obligation keep fire engine on board
the boats, 10 boats propelled by high pressure
gines. This was intended to create local disinc
lion between the boats on the Western waters, and
those plying between neighborng cities. Heidi This
in accordance with the statements contained in
tain memorials upon the subject, which had been
sent TO the House from New Jersey, &c.
Exceptions 10 this amendment were taken by
Messrs Fillmore, Marvin, and Robinson, and twas
rejected.
Mr.. ROBERTSON moved the following amend
| ment:
g Prorided That nothing in this act contained
| shall be held to apply &c steamboats, employed in
plying between port place in any State 10 another
port place in the same State and not engaged in
commerce with any foreign nation, or among the
ea,s as sieSmSoa any Or pemPayed on board f he
| same"
Mr.. r. had no great confidence in the power Ollie
gislaiion to reach this case But he willing that
all that could be- should be done BY Congress within
the limits of their constitutional authority He offer
ed this amendment to protect the rights Of the States
against the interference Of the Federal Cove rnment.
| Mr. UNDERWOOD made some remarks in OPP
position TO this view Of the question and was replied
10 briefly BY Mr.. Robertson. The latter denied the
| right of Congress TO regulate commerce in the diff
! terent States of the Union
Mr. SERGEANT proposed an amendment TO the
amendment offered by Mr.. Robertson so as to render
the law applicable TO such steamboats, as are under
the jurisdiction Of the laws Of the United States
| Mr.. POPE begged gentlemen to forget for mo-
| ment that they were lawyers, and not file special
| demurrers ard pleas, and bills of exception but pass
this very important and useful bill, pretty much il
was reported. He showed that this process of hold
ing boats 10 the jurisdiction OF the different States in
which they navigate likely TO be full of embar-
| raSsment and difficulty especially with regard 10
boats that ply through The waters Of several States
I He hoped the bill would be passed in the form in
| which it had been reported.
Mr.. BIDDLE and Mr. HAMER opposed the
amendment TO the amendment very briefly.
Mr. TOUCEY urged that there were three kinds
OF commerce, with regard TO which Congress had
right TO legislate: Isl. Commerce with foreign ma
| tionS. I'd. Commerce between the States And,
Sd. Commerce with the Indian tribes. There then
was, 4th, commerce within the States, with which
Congress had no right TO interfere by legislation He
would be in favor OF an amendment 10 this effect;
and offered such one.
Mr.. TlLLlNGHAsT said that Congress had
| long exercised control over coasting navigation
Mr.. ROBINSON stated that all vessels over 20
tons were subject 10 the control and legislation of
Congress, and sailed under license imposed by a
| law Il the United States.
MIR. MENEFEE cited the opinion Of the Supreme
Court, in the celebrated case of Ogden vs. Gibbons
in support Of those general views of the power OF
Congress over navigation, as an incident TO com
merce. .
| Mr. MOVES suggested that single line. added
TO the first section OF the BILL to restrict the ope-
ration OF the bill TO such vessels as are required TO
| have license under the laws of the United States
would answer all the purposes And he had read at
the Clerks table an amendment which, when in
/ order, he would move, 10 that effect
\ Mr. MENEFEE defended and sustained the ap-
plicability of the opinion of Judge Marshall (above
cited 10 which he had before referred 10 the cues
/ ton under consideration.
n. A 4 -