Morning herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1837-1840, 1839-06-14

--JUSE 3.-Stean,boat Lasc-Tne United SYate -
Woolsey-Second day Mr. Prescott Hall summed
up this case the part of the Captain and owners
OF the Providence and replied by the District
Attorney.
Judge Belts. in his charge to the Jury, said that
this case assumed both vel and Important aspect
1t was Of great moment to the me reliant and to the
navigator-to the traveller and the man of bust
ness In another point Of view, said his honor i. is
also important because has been commended that if
the impracticability Of this law can be proved. il
will be the bounden duty Of this court
it void. Not r
1t is in all recollections the great anxiety that
was manifested by Congress, well as by the pub.
lie, to add some security for human life ON board of
vessels propelled by steam power, and a commits
sion was appointed to inquire into the various
questions at issue between the owners and nayipa-
tors Of such vessels and the community at large
The object OF this enquiry to provide additional
safeguards for passengers and merchandise. Hence
AL steamboats, and vessels were to be enrolled anew,
their huls to be inspected and their boilers scrutn-
zed by competent examiners, and in other partic-
ulars something was to be taken from individual
right and power for the general good Congress also
prescribed iron rods and chains to be EMPLOYED for
the purpose Of steering boats in such portions of the
vessel as ropes had previously been used for that
purpose and they also entirely the use Of
rope The act does not require rods alone or chains
alone, bat permits the Of rods and chains united
in order to accomplish the end in view
II has been said that the act applies only to such
ree renee whatever to those employed on the rivers
and the opinion Of court of high standing and great
learning has been adduced to support this construc-
tion OF the law. That opinion this court cannot
adopt although has not had an opportunity Of giving
it much examination, but in the Mt this court
all boats steered by a wheel are compelled 10 dis
continue the use OF ropes, and to substitute chains
IN their stead The language Of the law is applica-
bic to all vessels propelled by steam il is general
and large application must be given its provisions
so to cover all boats subject to enrolment There
is however, one question of fact raised in this case
which makes il different from the others and that
fact is necessary for the jury to pass on II is
commended that compliance with the law Is irpos-
sible, and therefore the law is void Doubtless Con
grcss has no power TO destroy CONNER rec or wholly
to interdict navigation; but they have a similar
power 10 regulate IL throughout the Unien as vour
own state has 10 regulate the commu between
different parts Of IL. The legislature of this state
short time since passed law regulating the sre ed Of
boats on the North River under certain circumstau-
ces, and also providing against the use of certain
kinds Of fuel and without doubt such laws were
within their power TO pass without going beyond the
pale Of the Constitution the general good REQUIRED
II. But we are told that in this case Congress bv
passing the law, have iRterdicted the IL
certain portions Of the East River and IL is for IN.
jury 10 say IL, under the evidence il amounts To
more than putting the navgators Of steamboats, To =
very by this of chains
sr ropes, ana whilst permitting them to use tiller
does not go the length Of saying that there would be
a physical impracticability. Ii will he said his
honor, for you, then, to determine whether tb law
can be complied with for IL not, il is void and YOU
must find for the defendants. But if you should be
Of opinion that this law be complied with. then
your verdict must be for the United States subject
to the opinion Of this court and ofthe Supreme Court
Of the United States, on the great questions Of law
and constitutonaty, whicL have been raised in the
progress Of this trial.
The jury retired for short time and found a v.r-
dict for the plaintiffs, damages $500 and costs sub
ject To the opinion Of the court.
His honor then directed the Jury 10 be DISCHARGED
for the term.