Savannah morning news. [volume] (Savannah) 1868-1887, 1882-06-22
Camn.lsory PiIotage Again.

Interest from the TACT That II virtually |
aeolishes compulsory pilotage at this |
port. aud on this account we have been
led % examine the general drift Of the
laws of the country, and Of the various
states Tearing on this subject IL may
be stats Z as an established principle that
compul sory pilotage is looked upon
IS oae OF the greatest possible safe
ruaras % commerce. This Is shown
Il the case Of e. garte Mcneil,
reDortel in 18th Wallace, United
states supreme Court Reports, in which
the ii5c liant, s duly licensed pilot Of the
po-t 81 New York. rendered ais services
10 the master Of bark on her way TO
tue Dor, Of New York, which services
we're refused, he tnereupon demanded
psvme-t Of what Is known as half
nl5taee.~ and his demands were like
wise ref1sed, 50 he brought action TO re
cover he same in the District Court OF
he Ulued States for the Eastern Dis
rrict % New YORK.
Ate, due hearing in the case, judgment
was reldered in the District Court for
The li5, Isn't. and an appeal wss taken to
the Supreme Court OF the United States.
and the court in rendering its decision
expressed itself as follows:
1T must be admitted that pilot regula-
lions ar regulations OF commerce. A pilot
q A. ruca 8 part OF the commercial ma
zine as TIE hull Of ship, aud the helm bY
uhseh r. Is GUIDED, and hslf-pilOtsge, as II
Is called. is a necessary and usual part OF
every sys EN- OF such provisions. Pilots are
q meritorious class, and the service In which
theF Az engaged is one Of great importance
TO the public Il Is frequently full OF hard
SHIPS. a1d sometimes OF peril, night ana
faT. Ia sinter and summer, ia tempest snc
Gala. they must be present at their proper
places, aud ready 10 perform the duties OF
their vocation They are thus shut out, Tor
The tlme being, frOm more lucrative pur-
suits. . coadned 10 single Held OF en-
pl0ymeni"
Thee are the views Of the United
s.aies supreme Court on the importance
Il an efficient system Of pilotsge and the
service required Of pilots. In this case
The appeal was dismissed. and the claims
II the lbcllant sustained.
The case Of Wilson vs.. McNsmee, Uni
Ted States supreme Court Reports, MI.
Otto. 1O2. presents the same principle,
and rc.iirms the decision of the above
cited se. In this instance McNsmee,
a licensed pilot, offered his services 10
I conduct a schOOuer from the port of New
York lie being the first pilot to do so.
HIS services were refused. He demanded
/ payment, rs provided by the laws of the
state Of New York. His demands were
not accet!ed TO, and he brought suit in
/ the State courts TO recover. The case
was heard in the several State courts,
and ia every instance judgment was rem
I dered for The plaintiff. Finallyan appeal
Was taken 70 the United States Supreme
l Court, and il was there decided that, &C
cordiDg TO the fourth section of the act
/ OF Congress, approved May :, 1888, 'all
I pilots in the bays, inlets, rivers, haTbOrs
aud ports Of the United States shall con-
/ tnue 10 be regulated in conformity with
the existing laws Of the States respective
7 IL wherein such pilots may be, or with
/ such laws as the States may respectively
| hereafter enact for the purpose, until
/ further legislation shall be made by Con
Cress" Il was also held that this law
was subsequently, affirmed by Congress
in an act passed February %, 1867, in
1 these words:
Nothing In this act contained, or IN the
l act Of which It IS amendstOrY, shall be con-
/ strued % anuul or affect any regulations
I established bY the existing laws Of any State
I reQuirin vessels entering or leaving a port
I In such State to take a pilot duly author
/ Ized By the laws OF such State, or Of State
l situate pOu the waters Of the same port"
In this case the very principle upon
which Judge Tompkins based his recent
decision-viz: The conflict of the United
States Constitution with State laws on
the subject Of pilOtage-was touched,
and the court after citing the laws above
/ quoted decided that while the COnstitu-
ton Of the United States, and the laws
passed hereunder, were paramount to
| State laws in matters relating to the
/ commercial msrine of the country,
sill as Tar as the pilotage laws of
aay State are concerned, they have
been adopted by Congress" as regulations
Of commerce. This same principle was
also rea-serted and reafirmed in the case
Of Cisco v. Roberts g Tiffany, New
York Reports, 36l, in which it was held
that state laws regulating port pllOtsge
are not superseded by the act of Con
gress prescribing pilot regulations for
steam vessels navigating the high seas"
that in the absence of Federal
u legislation. the States have the
right 20 protect their commerce
by exercising in the neighbOring seas
the power accorded for that purpose to
every maritime people," and that pilots
licensed for the port of New York by
State authority are entitled to offshore
I pilOtsge when they comply with the
regulations prescribed, by rendering
their services at sea 10 vessels about to
enter that port"
We might cite other decisions in this
/ connection. but we here see that the
I Federal courts AMI the courts of the
/ state OF New York all agree on the i'm
| portaEce. Of compulsory pilOtage, and
that the States have the right to govern
the pilotage Of their ports by State laws.
/ Hence Ii is clear that the State of Geor-
I ga has the right 10 control the pilotage
7 system Of her ports, and as she makes
that system compulsory, all vessels COM
ing into her ports must comply with
her pilotage laws. This principle
Judge TOmpkins does not deny. but
I he holds that as certain vessels engaged
I Ia coasiing between this State, South
I Carolina and Florida are exempt from
the penalties for q refusal to take pilots,
the clause Of the United States COnstitu-
lion which declares that no privileges
/ shall be accorded citizens of any enc
state which shall not be accorded to citi-
I zens OF all other States, our compulsory
I pilotage laws are unconstitutional and
void The sOundness of this decision is