The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1852-09-19

purpose of executing inspection laws. and the net pro-
ceeds TO be paid the federal treasury and not in
10 the State treasury But when you to the tonnage
duties TO be levied by the States it for the purpose
Of enabling the States 10 build light houses, improve har
bors and protect navigation The debate upon that prop
oson important IN understanding the object aud mean
ing OF this clause OF the constitution need not remind
senators that the book from which am reading blad
sons Debates in the Federal Convention, contains the
points OF discusslon and not the speeches In full The
object OF Mr.. Carroll and Mr.. McHenry in making the
motion was, that the States should have the power OF
leyyng tonnage duties Tor habor improvements. Then
the discussion proceeded
'Colone Mason in upport of this explained and urged
the situation OF lhs Chesapeake which peculiarly required
Mr. GouvEmNEuR MORRIS The States restrain
ed ed from laying tonnage as the constitution now stands
The exception proposed will imply The contrary and VIII
put the States In worse condition than the gentleman
[Coonel Masonl wishes
from laying tonnage duties depends on the extent Of the
power to regulate commerce.. These terms vague,
certainly be restrained by treaty He observed that there
other objects for tonnage duties, the support OF
seamen. Nc lie was more and more convinced that The
regulation OF in its Indiyisibe, and
ought to be wholly under one authority"
Here II will be remarked that doubled that ton
mage duties constituted the true from which money
TO be derived for river and harbor lmpro emens
The debate upon that subject clearly shows that men Of
all shades OF opinion looked to that source for the funds
whetheL the power 10 levy the duties and expend the
money should be vested in the federal government III
the State governments. The debate proceeds;
Mr.. SHERMAN The power of the United States reg
uate trade, being control nteerences OIL toe
State regulations when such nerferences happen, that
there is no danger to be apprehended from Ju
:" Mr. LAKGDoN insisted that the regulation of tonnage
was an essential part OF The regulation OF trade and that
the States ought to have nothing to do win H.
" On motion, that State shall lay duty tonnage
without the consent oil Congress-
" New Hampshire, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Della
ware Maryland, South Carolina. aye-6;
pennsyvania, Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia.
" "Conneccut divided"
Thus il will be seen that that clause of the constitution
conferrng the States the power 10 levy tonnage du
ties with the OF Congress, and not otherwise
incorporated the constitution with express reference
TO the Improvement OF navigation by harbors, light,
houses and other works deemed pertinent to that great
interest Ii will be seen, too, by following the debates OF
the convention from beginning TO end, that member
OF that convention looked 10 any other source from
which TO derive funds for those improvements except
tonnage duties. Ii will be that while all other du-
ties excluded from the States and If levied by
OF Congress, to be paid into the national sasu
Ty yet when they levied tonnage duties the moneys
be collected bv the States for the purpose OF nprov
log navigation Then, when trace that clause OF the
constitution such origin, showing that il
corpoa,ed Tor SPECIFIC purpose that that purpose was
avowed at the time; that all parties in The convention
agreed that 1t the true mode by which these improve
ments were TO be made, and that the only difference OF
opinion TO which government the power should
be vested in, there be any question to what
the true meaning OF the constitution am not surprised
that there difference OF opinion in regard 10 where
this power should be vested for the convention had
vested the right 10 regulate commerce supemely IN the
general government IL might we'll be imagined as Mr.
Madison said in debate that the power commerce
and navigation and indivisibe; and that those
regulations that should be adopted by the States might be
deemed 10 copc with such Congress should prescribe
Tor the regulation Of commerce. Hence, the
uon designed 10 accomplish two objecis-tbe hrs 10
ihoze tonnage duties Tor the improvement OF rivers and
habors, and the other 10 vest IN Congress exclusive
power over commerce-they compromised upon the pa-
cple that power vested in the federal government
condonay that Congress might consent to IFS exercise
by the States Thus the power navigation by the
Staes and that by Congress- recon.
ced lnasnuch the supreme authority, in the event OF
collision between the regulations was still in the fed
eal government Sir, insist that fair investigation OF
this subject and full understanding OF the debates OF The
federal convention, show tna this was the meaning OF
the trainers OF the constitution and that tonnage duhes
for the protection OF navigation the true and
sintional mode for constructing these improvements
The question might now arise, and may fairly be pre-
sened here whether tonnage duties shall be imposed BY
the federal government by the local authorltlesl
think il is clear that the power is conferred upon the
federal government and Congress has the right to exer
else IT. II sees proper, or II may avail itself OF the ex
press language OF the constitution and consent TO its
ercise by the State governments. The only question:
then, which propose TO discuss here day is whether
is not wise to give that consent and allow each State
to exercise the power II Il proper. Mark me- do
not TO make it obligatory any State OF this Union
that she shall exercise this power only wish 10 give
the assent OF Congress, and then leave any Stale al lib
ery TO do not she shall deem her interests may
require
II is little curious TO trace the history Of lsgisa
ton in regard TO rivers and barbors Immediately after
the adoption OF the constitution; and II any will take
the pains 10 20 through with that legislation up 10 the
present me be will find that Congress has adopt
ell any regular system this subject-thal our egss
ton has been irregular, partial inconsistent, and based
upon contradictory principles BY referring TO the acts
OF Congress- you will find that the first act passed upon
the subject oil rivers and harbors assumed this authority
to the federal government exclusively as have shown,
think, that Congress has right TO do under the
slitution. will read the act il is peculiar and is very
lighthouses beacons. buoys, and public piers" This
act passed the 7th OF August, 1882 and il pro-
ydes
That all expenses which shall accrue. from and after
the 18th day OF August 1850, in the support,
maintenance, and repairs Of all ght.houses beacons,
buoys and public pef,, erected placed sunk before the
passing ofhis act, the entrance oor within any bay In
let harbo port OF tho Uned States for rendering the
navigation thereof and safe, shall be defayed out oil
the treasury OF the United States PrOvdtd, rsrffhccss,
That Of the said expenses snail continue be de-
traYcd aer the piraton Of from the day aiore
ssd, unless such lighthouses, beacons bpoys, and public
United States by the State States respectively In which
the may be- together with the lands and teuemonts
tereunto belonging and together with the jurisdiction o
the same"
BY this act il will be that Congress then deter
mined that the federal government should Construct the
light houses buoys beacons, PIERS and other works ne.
cessary for the protection ol navigation; but II rested
upon this principle, that the States in which the works
should be situated should cede to the United States the
work. together with the land and lenements belonging to,
and the jurisdiction the work Upon that condition,
and that condition alone, did Congress determine that
for this purpose and II provided that that jurisdiction
should be ceded by time specified, which was about
year from The date OF the act Pennsylvania and
one two other States, ceded the jurisdiction over