Mississippi Democrat. (Carrollton, Miss.) 1844-18??, 1846-08-19

their navigable waters; but not to those
whose navigable waters are embraced
within one, or farthest, two States. WHY
The former is embraced, and the latter not
they will next proceed TO consider, begin
ming with the case of rivers whose nayi-
gable waters are confined to single State.
They are not embraced, because. in the
first place, the power, as has been shown.
is restricted to the regulations of the eXter-
nal commerce of the States with each 9TH
er, to the exclusion of their internal. And,
IN the next, because the commerce OF such
rivers Is under the exclusive control of the
States within whose limits their navigable
waters are confined, except that no vessel
from another State, coming or going, can
be compelled to enter, clear, or pay duties,
under the provisions Of the constitution al
ready quoted and except, also, that ves-
sells from other States shall not be subject
to any regulation or law in navigating
them, to which the vessel, of the State to
which they belong or not, under the pro-
visions of the same instrument, which Sc.
cures to the citizens of each State, in all
others, "al the privileges and immunilies
TO which their own citizens are entitled. !"
With these exceptlons,the navigation of all
such rivers, as far as commerce is concern
ed, is as much under the control of the
State within which its navigable waters
are confined, as its canals, railroads, or
turnpikes. Indeed, these are subject to
the latter exception, and not 20 the for
mer, only because not applicable.
The case of river whose navigable
waters are confined TO two States, wheth.
err by dividing Or flowing through them, re-
quires more particular and full expIana-
ton. The provision of the constitution
already cited, which exempts vessels bound
to or from one State from entering, clear
ing, or paying duties in another, would
make all such streams, in effect, common
highways of all the State, and bring them
exclusively under the common highways
of all the States, and bring them exclu-
sively under the control of the federal 60
iyernment, as far as the power to regulate
commerce among the States is concerned;
as much so, indeed, as the Mississippi it.
self, were it not for another provision in
the same instrument. They alude to that
which provides that "no State shall, with
out the consent of Congress, enter into
any agreement or compact with another
State;" and which of course permits with
such consent) one State to enter into com.
pact or agreement with another.
To understand the intention of the fra
mers of the constitution for inserting this
provision, and its bearing on the point un-
der consideration, it is necessary TO view
it in connection with another provision OF
the Instrument, already cited. They re-
fer to that which prohibits the State from
entering into any treaty, alliance, or con.
federation, in any case whatever; plainly
because it would be both dangerous and
inconsistent with their federal relations 10
permit it. In order 10 prevent so impor.
iant provision from being eluded, the pro-
vision Immediately under consideration
was inserted, prohibiting the States from
entering into agreements or compacts in
any case whatever, except one State with
another State, or with foreign power; anC
to prevent the abuse even of that limited
power, the consent of Congress is requir
ed. Such is the prohibition, and the rea
son for it. The reason for the exception
is, that without it the prohibition would
substitute the federal authority for that o
the States, for the adjustment and regula
ton of all the various subjects in which
the several States may have mutual in
terest in adjusting and regulating, incu
ding such as the one under consideration
and thereby would give greater extension
and minuteness 10 the authority of th'
federal government than was desirable o
consistent with the objects for which j
was instituted. Under the exception it i
left to the States, when only two are int
rested in the navigation of river, or an!
other object, to take it under their exclu
sve jurisdiction and control by an agree
ment or compact between them, with tht
consent of Congress; as much as it would
be under that of one, if it was confines
exclusively to one instead of extending f
two.
The case IS different where three o
more States may be directly interested il
the navigation of river. Such cases ar,
| Withdrawn from the control of the States
and are embraced by the power of Con
gress to regulate commerce among tn
States, for reasons too obvious TO repeat
after what has been stated. 1t is onl,
necessary to add, in this connexion, tn
reasons are as applicable to the rivers fall
lug into the ocean and the lakes, including
their CULTS and bays, as to those falling in
to the Mississippi and its tributaries.
Your committee will next proceed t
consider whether harbors or canals aroun
falls or other distractions of the Missis
sippi, including its great tributaries, (mean
ing thereby those in whose navigation
+ three or more States are interested,) ar
embraced in the power, taking them i