New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1860-04-21

Rut This sb,ideement unless It in conflict wits
the c. institution or law Of the United States -
fair between the Government OF Delaware ana 70 CIV ~
~ which this Court can take no cogDizznoe II
or. y bad passed any act which bose upon she ese
:. 70 execution OF the powers Com nerce, tss
obs4 Of VIII 'ch was to Cyntrol State egsiaaon ova
tbsss nsv;gsble creeks over which the tide nows-Te
feel moi mnob difficulty In saying that sooeie
CT Ia,v bsfso IN conflict with such act woalA
be void. But CopQ-sss has passed no sucn sSs.
The Iepupnaney of the law Of Della aware win zoe
Constitution placed entirely on iS rePognaoSy 81.
the power 10 regulate commerce "isn ofsen u'e,a s
and among the several States-a io"er Wncn mas ~
been exerclsed 80 to affect the question. lac sss
principle bad been affirmed IN Sturgs aRs Cfo"m
sbieId, "a Wheat 1888 and in Moore agt- houston, "
Wheat. u; and since the PasseDser cases G nss PES
again reiterated in the Pilot Gaze, Cooley agts Is
Board Of Warcens Of Poladelphia ~ How. ~
The application Of the rule the present case psn
We will concede, for the purpose OF Gao srgdmenh
that the transportation OF slaves from ole
State TO another Is act OF international State cop
merce which may be legally protected and rsgaas4
by Feceral Legislation. Acts have been passefto
regulate the cosstiDg trade tina. these sasss h'd
been in tfansitu between Virginia and Texas, IN
coasting vessel, at the time the habeas corpus was
served they could not have been iuierfered MRn
while passing through the navigsble waters OF free
State by the authority of law OF such cta'e' Do'
they were rot thus in transit at that Tune.
Congress have not passed any act to regu'ase CON
between the States when carried on BY land or
otherwise than in coasting veseels. Bot conceaag
that Ia order to fac ate commerce among the oaoa,
Congress has power TO provide for precisely sucp
CAGE az the preSenthe case of persons, whose trtns
poItaEion ia the subject Of commercial intercourse,
beng carried by coasiiDg vessel 70 conyeLiens port
in another State, with view Of being there landed,
for the purpose OF being again embarked on
fresh coastng voyage TO third port, which was to DO
their final destination
The unexsrceed power to enact su ID law 90 rego-
late such transt would not affect the DO yer OF the
States TO deal with the status Of all persons within
their Territory in the meantime and before the exist
ence Of such law, II would be q avD regulate
commerce carried ON party by land and partly by
water-a subect upon which Congress has not thought
proper 10 act at all. Should it do hereaftr it nigh.
bmn and curta the authority of the Safes to executs
such an act the present in d case in which L should
interfere with such paramount legislation Of Congress.
repeat the re mark that the law of the State under
consideration has aspect which refers directly 70
commerce among the States. IL would have large
snd important operation upon cases falling within It's
provisions, and having no connection with any con-
merca enterprise 1t is then far the commercial
clsuse is concerned generally valid bat ia the OF
supposable Federal legislation, under she power CON
ferred upon Congress TO regulate commerce, crcun-
stances might arise where it's execution, By freeiog
slave cargo landed shores, in the cOurse Of
inter State voy age would interfere with the provisions
of an act Of Congress.
The present state of Federal legislation, however,
does Lot il my opinion raise any cor feet between 1t
and the laws Of this State der consideration. ,oa
the whole case, have to the conclusion tbat
there is nothing in the National Constitution or tho
laws of Congress preclude the State aoicial autso
ties nom declaring these slaves, lhus introduced into
the territory of this State free, and setirg them at
liberty according TO the directions Of the statutes re-
ferred TO.
For the foregoing reasons ] am in favor Of affirming
the judgment of the Supreme Court.