Morning journal and courier., 1881-01-14
Price Four Gents.
New York Pilot Laws.
A Lengthy Mitigation at Last Ended MT. Justice swayne's Decision in the wiIlson-McNamee Case.

A Lengthy Mitigation at Last Ended
 MT. Justice swayne's Decision in the
 winson-NcNamee Case.
 From the New York Herald.I
 The adventurous pilots of this port, wh> in the depths of winter venture hundreds of miles away on stormy seas to hunt up in- bound merchantmen, are much elated over the decision handed down yesterday by the United States Supreme Court, in which the constitutionality of the State pilot laws is finally settled For many years past the as- Sertion that the State laws regulating pilot age were unconstitutional has been made, and the question has been developed into sort of bugaboo. All doubt on this question is now set at rest by the following terse and direct decision handed down from the highest tribunal in the land by MT. Justice Swayne:
 This court holds, first, that the pilot laws of New York are valid and constitutional second, that the distance of the schooner from the coast when the pilot boarded her did not deprive the State of is jurisdiction that the pilot on board the schooner fifty miles of the coast had the same authority from the laws of New York to tender and demand employment, and the same legal consequences followed the refusal of the mas ter to take a pilot as if th evessel had been at point where the local jurisdiction was complete and exclusive.
 Probably no decision lately handed down by the Supreme Court of the United States dHtCbS SO VlId1ly bI0 SHlpplHB lnC0T6SI dS buis, which was hidden under the unpromising title, "Allston Wilson, plaintiff in error, vs. Sarah A. McNamee, executrix, ct al.' When, four years ago, McNanlee, then New York pilot, began a suit in one of the District courts in New York city on claim for $39 against Wilson, master of the schooner E.. E. Rachel for refusing to take him on board when he offered his services fifty miles of shore, the case was regarded as many others of the same kind, and no one saw it's future as cause ceEebre. But Wilson was one of those obstinate fellows who would not relinquish his dollars until the last hope of retaining them had vanished, and so he appealed the thirty y-nine dollar case, and jury had to be found to decide & question of fact to whether McNamee had really offered his ser vices, as he alleged. The jury decided that he had offered his services, and the court, with the fact clearly established decided that, under the laws of the State, Wilslon should pay the fee charged, and in addition the expenses of the suit. This did not suit the skipper of the Rachel, as he thought that the laws under which the court acted were not of the consti- tutional order, and it would be we'll to hear what the Court of Appeals had to say on the subject. So the Court of Appeals was sought, and the Court of Appeals affirmed the long line of decisions already rendered in favor of McNamee.
 About this time two important events transpired in the history of this famous liti- gation. McNamee piloted his last ship over the harbor bar and went cruis-- ing on the ocean of eternity, and his widow, as executrix, was obliged to continue the suit The second event was the appearance in the litigation of the shipping interest, which has for so long been proclaiming the unconstitutionality of the law under which the pilots are acting. Here was offered a perfect test case, which in the petty District Court had o1v 11ho nf litigation to the highest court in the State. They accepted the case and had it appealed to the United States Supreme. Court, to which tribunal two..important questions-to wit, tn of the pilot laws and the distance from the shore at which they were operative-were presented.
 Both questions are answered in the opinion 1f Judge Swayne