STATE OF NEW-YORK. 
 
 No- 25. 
 
 IN SENATE, 
 
 February 6, 1845. 
 
 MESSAGE 
 
 From the Governor, transmitting a memorial from 
 the Pilots of New- York. 
 
 Executive Chamber, ) 
 Albany^ Feb. 3, 1845. ] 
 
 TO THE LEGISLATURE. 
 
 I herewith transmit a memorial from the pilots of New- York, which 
 has been placed in my hands by a committee from the body of the 
 pilots, with a request that I would cause it to be laid before the Le- 
 gislature, and invoke its consideration of the subject of it. I deem 
 it but just to that class of public commercial agents to comply with 
 their request. 
 
 Without entering upon the discussion of the questi'on, as to how far 
 the Constitution of the United States has made the regulation of pilots 
 and pilotage one of Federal, or of State jurisdiction, it is sufficient 
 for my purpose to remark, that the only action of Congress, upon the 
 subject, from the establisliment of the Federal Government up to the 
 year 1837, was, by a law passed on the 7th day of August, 1789, to 
 refer the whole matter to the legislation of the States, until its fur- 
 ther action. 
 
 The loss of a couple of vessels, with numerous lives, in or near 
 [Senate, No. 25.] 1 (3 t.) 
 
\jj<l'f 2 [Senate 
 
 the harbor of New-York, during the early part of the winter of 1836 
 -7, gave rise to many and aggravated charges of negligence and 
 abuse against the New-York pilots, and an application was made to 
 Congress to interfere, by what was claimed to be its proper constitu- 
 tional authority, and break up what was charged as a monopoly en- 
 joyed by those pilots, under the then existing State law, leading to 
 the negligence and abuses complained of. 
 
 Congress did interfere, and, on the third day of March, 1837, pas- 
 sed a law declaring that " it shall and may be lawful for the master 
 and commander of any vessel coming into or going out of any port 
 situated upon waters which are the boundary between two States, io 
 employ any pilot duly licensed or authorized by the laws of either of 
 the States bounded by said waters, to pilot any vessel to or from said 
 port, any law, usage, or custom to the contrary notwithstanding." 
 
 Long before the establishment of the Federal Government, the 
 State of New-York, as a Colony, and as a State, had made the pilot- 
 age of the port of New-York, a subject of legislative regulation, and 
 after that time up to the passage by Congress of the act of 1837, 
 before referred to, it had been subject, and only subject, to its ex- 
 clusive legislation. This, with the extensive, and constantly increas- 
 ing commerce of that port, had naturally raised up a body of pilots, 
 who made piloting vessels into and out of that port their profession 
 or calling, and who depended upon that business for the support of 
 themselves and their families. The rigid provisions in reference to 
 their qualifications and skill, which had, for a long term of yearsy 
 characterized our legislation upon the subject, had made it a profes- 
 sion difficult and expensive in the acquirement, and it was the policy 
 of those laws to give it commensurate value, by confining the busi- 
 ness, as in other professions, to pilots duly and legally licensed. I 
 believe I may say, that as a body of men, during all this period, the 
 pilots of the port of New-York, would bear a favorable comparison 
 with the pilots of any other port in the Union, or in the world, wheth- 
 er as to their fidelity and skill as pilots, or their patriotism or respec- 
 tability as citizens. 
 
 The unfortunate loss of the vessels referred to, at New- York, in 
 1836-7, produced great excitement throughout the country, and the 
 blame was charged upon the pilots of that port. It was charged that 
 
No. 25.] 
 
 3 
 
 the monopoly they enjoyed of the business of piloting vessels, had 
 made them negligent and indifferent, and that the pilot stations were 
 not properly or faithfully supplied, during the inclement and danger- 
 ous seasons of the year. 
 
 Acting under the impression that these charges were justly made 
 against the pilots, as is believed. Congress passed the law of 1837, 
 which has been quoted, having for its object to introduce competition 
 from the adjoining State of New Jersey, to break up the supposed in- 
 jurious monopoly, and to secure vigilance on the part of the pilots. 
 
 It cannot fail to be seen that this legislation on the part of Con- 
 gress, was very partial in its application, only affecting the pilots of 
 those ports and harbors, the waters of which embraced a boundary 
 betw^een States. No portion of the pilots of many entire States were 
 at all affected by it, and only those employed at particular ports, in 
 any State. This mode of exercising a federal power, within the lim- 
 its of the Constitution, has been broadly questioned. The power, if 
 it be federal, is universal and equal over the whole Union, and if 
 put in exercise at all, it may well be questioned whether that exercise 
 should not also be universal and equal. The latitude of a harbor, the 
 depth of its water, or the number of its islands, might, it appears to 
 me, be made tlie rule of application, with as much show of principle, 
 as the fact that a boundary between States passes through it. 
 
 So also the principle, that Congress can make a law of one State 
 operate in another, or give to a license, granted by the authority of 
 one State, force in another, appears to me to be equally unsound and 
 dangerous. It Is assuming that Congress may, as a raode of exercis- 
 ing a federal power, adopt the legislation, existing or prospective, of 
 the States, and give to it federal extension and supremacy, instead of 
 legislating itself to carry the power into effect. These objections 
 appear to me to exist against the law of Congress of 1837, without 
 questioning the full power of Congress to legislate itself as to the 
 whole subject of pilots and pilotage, a power the existence of which 
 it is not my purpose to admit or deny, upon this occasion. 
 
 The same casualties which awakened the attention of Congress to 
 this subject, also excited the legislation of the State to investigation 
 and action upon the same subject. 
 
4 [Senate 
 
 The result of the investigation instituted was to show, as I believe, 
 to the satisfaction of all, and to produce the universal admission, that 
 the charges against the New-York pilots were wholly unfounded, and 
 that the loss of the vessels was in no way attributable to any negli- 
 gence or fault on their part. This disposed of the ground upon 
 which Congress was, undoubtedly, induced to attempt this partial ex- 
 ercise of its authority over the subject of pilotage. 
 
 The State legislation consequent upon this excitement of feeling, 
 was an entire new law for the licensing and government of the pilots 
 of the port of New- York, which was passed on the 12th day of April, 
 1837, but little more than a month after the passage of the law of 
 Congress of that year. This law opened materially the regulations 
 for licensing pilots, and increased the restraints and responsibilities 
 upon those who should take a license, and enter upon the business ; 
 while the monopolizing features of the former laws were entirely re- 
 moved, and the fullest competition opened and invited between the 
 pilots attached to every different pilot boat. The terms of appren- 
 ticeship necessary to entitle the apprentice to a license were materi- 
 ally shortened, and at the discretion of tlie commission constituted, 
 persons who had served no apprenticeship could be licensed upon ex- 
 amination. Every pilot's license was to be renewed annually ; every 
 pilot was to give a bond with sureties, to be forfeited and paid, in 
 case his carelessness, or want of skill, should damage the vessel or 
 property entrusted to his care, and rigid provisions were enacted for 
 the constant occupation and supply of the pilot stations, in which 
 every boat was to take its regular turn. Other provisions of a rigid 
 and onerous character upon the New-York pilots, are also found 
 throughout this law, and the charges for piloting every vessel in or 
 out of the port are specifically fixed. 
 
 The pilots cheerfully accepted of the terms, and energetically en- 
 tered upon their difficult and dangerous duties under the new law, and 
 soon found others — strangers to them, to the law of their State, and 
 free from its restrictions and responsibilities — acting as their compe- 
 titors. If they attempted to enforce against these competitors the 
 prohibitions of the law of the State, the act of Congress of 1837, and 
 a license from a neighboring State, were interposed, and proved to be 
 effectual exemptions before the municipal courts. In this way, pilots 
 
N0.25.J 
 
 5 
 
 who were under no obligation to supply the pilot stations, had given 
 no bond, had served no apprenticeship, had undergone no examina- 
 tion, and restrained by no legal regulation of charges, were found to 
 occupy a position of equality with them, at their own docks and in 
 their own harbor. 
 
 Nor were they, as a universal, or even a general rule, citizens or 
 inhabitants of another State, but residents of the same city with them- 
 selves, who having taken a license from another State, were entirely 
 at liberty to be pilots in fair w^eather, and landsmen in foul, if that 
 should be their pleasure — entirely at liberty to follow the profession 
 of pilots during those portions of the year when the hazards are least 
 and commerce is most full, and to leave the stations to the regularly 
 licensed pilots of the State, at all other times, in case they should find 
 that course most pleasant or profitable. 
 
 Such has continued to be the state of things, since the passage of 
 the act of Congress of 1837, and the State law of the same year ; 
 and it appears to me, that under regulations so unequal, the New-York 
 pilots have just cause for complaint. They claim that either the law 
 of Congress should be repealed, and all the pilots of the port subjected 
 alike to the provisions and restrictions of the State law, or that the re- 
 strictions of the State law should be removed from them, and they left, 
 like the pilots who carry the licenses of other States, under the simple 
 enactment of the law of Congress. To my mind this demand seems to 
 be just, and I know of no body to which our own pilots can so properly 
 appeal to do them this justice, as to the legislation of their own State. 
 
 The New-York pilots have, for years, applied in vain to Congress 
 to repeal its law, and now they come to their own Legislature and ask 
 of it to lend them its weight in the renewal of that application, or to 
 so modify its own legislation as to place them upon an equality with 
 others, imder the law of Congress. My own impression is, that if 
 the Legislature should consider it wise and prop.^r to invoke the atten- 
 tion of Congress to the inequality and injustice caused by the law of 
 1837, and to the dangers to the commerce of the port of New-York 
 of a repeal of the State law, and an abandonment of all the pilots of 
 the port to the loose and indefinite regulations of the act of Con- 
 gress, the consequence would be a repeal of that act, leaving again the 
 whole subject to the regulation of the Legislature of the State, where. 
 
6 
 
 [Senate 
 
 for about half a century after the adoption of the Federal Constitution, 
 it so safely reposed. In any event, I think the petitioners entitled to 
 the careful attention of the Legislature, and respectfully request that 
 attention for them. 
 
 The memorial is accompanied by an argument of the questions of 
 principle, which the petitioners suppose to be involved in their appli- 
 cation, and I take leave to present it to the Legislature, with their 
 petition. 
 
 SILAS WRIGHT. 
 
MEMORIAL 
 
 In presenting the annexed memorial, the pilots of Ne^-York sub- 
 mit the following considerations to the Legislature, expecting to esta- 
 blish that the act of Congress of the 4th of March, 1837, is a mani- 
 fest infraction of the federal compact, impairing, if not effectually un- 
 dermining, the sovereignty of the Slates. 
 
 The course of legislation by the Federal and State Governments 
 has placed this subject in a condition of confusion and disorganiza- 
 tion wholly incompatible with the importance of it. 
 
 The power of the Federal Government to legislate arises from the 
 exclusive grant in the Constitution that Congress shall " regulate com- 
 merce with foreign nations, and among the several States, and with 
 the Indian tribes. " 
 
 The States exercise the same power of legislation under their ac- 
 knowledged rights to regulate their police, their domestic trade, and 
 to govern their own citizens. 
 
 It would therefore appear that the government of pilots is one of 
 those subjects over w^hich the United States and the individual States 
 must, of necessity, exercise concurrent or co-ordinate jurisdiction. 
 The States under our political system may exercise their imperfect 
 right until it comes practically in collision with the actual exercise of 
 the same congressional power. As soon as such collision occurs, the 
 right of the State, being subordinate to that of Congress, must be sur- 
 rendered, and yield to the more absolute power, under the 6th article 
 of the Constitution of the United States. This Constitution, a)id the 
 laws of the United States inhich shall be made in pursuance thereof^ and 
 all treaties made, or which shall be made under the authority of the 
 United States, shall he the swpreme law of the landP 
 
 It is well known, that under the confederation, the regulation of 
 commerce was committed to the respective States, each for itself; and 
 in the exercise of it, and the acknowledged rights of sovereignty, the 
 States respectively, as necessity required, adopted a pilot system co- 
 extensive with their territorial limits, and on the high seas. 
 
 At the first session of Congress, begun and held at the city of New- 
 York, on Monday, the 4th of March, 1789, (the first day the Consti- 
 
8 
 
 [Senate 
 
 tution commenced its operation,) Congress was employed in filliiig 
 out, by legislation, the distributed grants, which became the subjects 
 of its jurisdiction, and on the 7th of August following, passed an act 
 adopting the pilot systems of the several States in the Union, in gene- 
 ral terms — " That all pilots in the bays, rivers, inlets, harbors, and 
 ports of the United States, shall continue to be regulated in confor- 
 mity with the existing laws of the States respectively, wherein such 
 pilots may 5e, or with such laws as the States may respectively here- 
 after enact for the purpose, until future legislative provision by Con- 
 gress." By that act the laws of the States were engrafted on the 
 legislative code of the Federal Government for the regulation of pi- 
 lots, and in virtue of the prospective authority of that act, the State 
 of New- York continued to legislate on the subject until as recently as 
 the 12th of April, 1838; without interruption, until the 4th of March, 
 1837 — a period of about fifty years. 
 
 The disasters during the winter of 1837, suggested to Congress the 
 necessity of providing more adequate laws, to prevent the recurrence 
 of similar misadventures. To accomplish that object, on the 4th 
 of March an act was passed, consisting of a single section, in 
 the following words : " An act concerning pilots. Be it enacted, 
 that it shall and may he lawful for the master or commander of any 
 vessel coming into or going 6ut of any port situate upon waters which 
 are the boundary between two States, to employ any pilot duly licensed 
 or authorized by the laws of either of the States bounded on the 
 said waters to pilot any vessel to or from said port, any law, usage or 
 Custom to the contrary notwithstanding." In the exercise of the sove- 
 reign political power of this State, laws have been enacted for the 
 licensing and government of pilots of the port of New-York, requi- 
 ring those appointed, not alone to possess suitable qualification, but to 
 furnish sufficient security for the faithful discharge of their appropri- 
 ate duties ; likewise visiting delinquency and misconduct with pains 
 and penalties. Confiding in the protection implicitly guarantied, on 
 the faith of this State, they invested their fortunes in the purchase, 
 building and equipment of vessels necessary for the efficient execution 
 of their office, when precipitate legislation opened the enjoyment of 
 the exclusive privileges conferred on them, to the citizens of an ad- 
 joining State, to he exercised within the territorial confines of their own. 
 It is not that Congress has legislated within its appropriate sphere, 
 that they complain, but that in such legislation its constitutional au- 
 thority has been transcended, and the sovereignty of their State has 
 been invaded to their exclusive prejudice. 
 
 It is admitted that the regulation of commerce includes that of navi- 
 gation, and that the authority of Congress, though limited to speci- 
 fied objects, is plenary as to those objects; but it is denied that the 
 sovereignty of Congress permits an invasion of the sovereignty of a 
 State, in matters known and acknowledged to pertain to State sove- 
 reignty. Had Congress assumed the task of regulating the pilot sys- 
 tem in all its branches ; had it conferred on the Executive of the 
 Federal Government, the appointment of pilots, and assigned to 
 those thus appointed the limits within which to exercise their func- 
 
No. 25.] 
 
 9 
 
 tions, your memorialists would have been sensible that such regulation 
 was in the exercise of a constitutional power ; but finding that under the 
 excitement of local prejudice, Congress has overstepped constitutional 
 bounds, and delegated to a sister State the right of appointing muni- 
 cipal officers to perform their functions within the territorial limits of 
 this State, they claim the restraint of such authority, and that the in- 
 tegrity of the State be asserted against such infringement of its sove- 
 reign rights. The Federal Government has full power to appoint its 
 own officers to discharge their duties every where, but has none to au- 
 thorize the exercise of the municipal jurisdiction of our sovereign 
 State within the confines of another, and thus perpetrate consolida- 
 tion in its most hideous deformity. 
 
 It is a well settled proposition " that the Federal Government can 
 do no act on the navigable waters within the limits of the United 
 States, w^hich, or a corresponding act to which, it cannot do on land 
 within the same limits." If therefore, the navigable waters belong 
 no more to the Federal Government, and are not otherwise affected 
 by the union than the land itself, and the act of 1837 is within the 
 scope of federal legislation, in authorizing the municipal officers of 
 the State of New-Jersey to discharge their duties on the waters of 
 the State of New- York, it may with equal propriety authorize the 
 former State, or indeed any member of the Union, to appoint officers 
 indiscriminately to perform the duties of their office on land, within 
 the same limits. That doctrine is wholly repugnant to the idea of 
 sovereignty. Such control deriving validity from a sovereign power 
 necessarily implies a diminution of the sovereignty of New- York, 
 to the extent <^ that control, and an investment of that sovereignty 
 in the State of New- Jersey, to the same extent as that control is im- 
 posed. The jurisdiction of a State within its own territory is exclu- 
 sive and absolute and is susceptible of no limitation not imposed by 
 itself. In adopting the Federal Constitution, the States invested 
 Congress with the power to regulate commerce, but did not contem- 
 plate that Congress should delegate that right (as in the present act 
 exercised) by authorizing one State to license officers to perform the 
 duties of their appointment within the territory of another. 
 
 The Congress of 1789 w^as in part composed of those illustrious 
 statesmen who framed the Constitution, and the act of that date may 
 be regarded as a contemporaneous legislative exposition of that in- 
 strument. That Congress well understood the limit of Federal and 
 State sovereignty ; and moving with caution and circumspection, did 
 not venture to trench on State sovereignty, but " exabundentia cau- 
 tela" avoided it, and limited the laws of the respective States to the 
 pilots of the respective States, the act declaring " That all pilots, 
 &c. &c., shall continue to be regulated in conformity with the exist- 
 ing laws of the States respectively wherein such pilots may 6e." 
 
 Though the terms of the act of 1837, invests masters of vessels 
 with authority to employ certain pilots, yet the aim, object and 
 spirit of it is to confer the power in the pilots to act rather than on the 
 masters to employ them, as is sufficiently expressed by the title of the 
 single section act. It is " An act concerning pilots." Nor is it an 
 
 [Senate, No. 25.] 2 
 
10 
 
 [ Senate 
 
 act for the regulation and government of pilots^ but designed to ex- 
 tend the field of operation, heretofore denied to the citizens of the 
 State of New-Jersey, by conferring on them, in common with the 
 pilots of New-York, the right of piloting vessels on the exclusive 
 waters of this State ; for exclusive the waters are, as regards the 
 municipal relations of this State ; of exercising the sovereignty of 
 New-Jersey within the State of New-York, their only power to -^.ct, 
 springing from the commission of that State ; that commission being 
 an essential portion of the sovereignty of the State that grants it, 
 proceeding from such sovereign power, and following those in whom 
 it is invested beyond the confines of such sovereignty. The expres- 
 sion in the act " that it may be lawful by obvious legal intendment 
 is, that it was unlawful before, or is a grant of power not before pos- 
 sessed, as, if it were lawful before the act of 1837, the legislative 
 declaration to that effect was wholly superfluous. The act of 1837 
 accomplishes two purposes. First, it deprives the State of New^-York 
 of the exclustve authority to appoint pilots for her own waters ; and 
 second, authorizes the State of New-Jersey to participate equally in 
 that right, notwithstanding the supreme court of the United States 
 has adjudged that the licensing of pilots is embraced in the power of 
 a State to regulate her police, her domestic trade and the government 
 of her own citizens. That it was unlawful before that act, for the 
 pilots of New-Jersey to perform their functions in the waters of New- 
 York, is a notorious fact, well understood by the citizimb of New- 
 Jersey, as well as New-York ; so well understood by the former, that 
 it has never before been seriously claimed. All the right arises under 
 the act of 1837, and is now enjoyed in most successful activity — a 
 right to do that which was before prohibited, and cautiously guarded 
 against by the act of 1789 — a right to invade the sovereignty of this 
 State — a right to New- Jersey to employ her citizens without the con- 
 currence or approbation of New-York, even against her will, in a 
 pursuit which those citizens alone of New-York can be engaged in, 
 who are licensed by that State to which they owe their allegiance — a 
 right by which the emissaries of a foreign State, armed with the com- 
 mission of their sovereign, are exempted from the operation of the 
 laws of that State in whose confines they execute the duties of their 
 office ; are unrestrained by the salutary regulations established in pur- 
 suance of such laws, and rendered amenable alone (if it all) for mis- 
 conduct, to that State whose sovereignty they represent, and from 
 which they derive their official existence. Is this consistent with 
 State rights and State sovereignty, or does it not more strongly savor 
 of consolidation ? If this blending of jurisdiction is compatible with 
 sovereignty, that boasted independence is but a theory. 
 
 It has been well said that the act of 1837 " has occasioned seri- 
 ous difficulties in the operation of the pilot system of the United 
 States, and brought about a collision of jurisdiction, first between the 
 United States and the States respectively, and next between States 
 bordering on each other, and bounded by navigable waters, as speci- 
 fied in the law. The collision of jurisdiction between the United 
 States and the States, is rather prospective in its practical operation ; 
 
No. 25. J 
 
 11 
 
 but it is a collision, in principle, on the threshold. It compels one 
 State to admit and tolerate, within its own jurisdiction, the action and 
 functions of a municipal license issuing from another State. It au- 
 thorizes one sovereign State to invade, in this manner, the waters, 
 territories, and jurisdiction of another. The assumption of this au- 
 thority by Congress will, we think, be allowed to be a collision of 
 jurisdiction between the United States and the States. It carries vio- 
 lence on the face of it. It requires the authorities of New-York 
 (State and ci-y,) to recognize pilots acting under commissions from 
 the State of New-Jersey, and to admit them on a footing of equality 
 with their own pilots, within their own jurisdiction. The conse- 
 quence already is, that the State of New-Jersey, having little naviga- 
 tion, issues commissions or licenses to pilots, not so much because the 
 State needs their services, as because these pilots need the profits of 
 employment under the jurisdiction of New-York. New-York hav- 
 ing a vast interest at stake, has found it necessary to enact an ex- 
 tended code of pilot regulations, prescribing apprenticeship, qualifica- 
 tions, &c.,all w^hich are disturbed, trampled on, and may be rendered 
 of no effect, by enforcing upon them New -Jersey pilots, acting under 
 New-Jersey authorities. 
 
 The principle, as will be seen, is precisely the same as if Con- 
 gress had passed a law^ to enforce every State to give full credit and 
 scope of action to commissions or licenses issued by any other State ; 
 such, for example, as lawyers', doctors', tavern-keepers', pedlars', or 
 any other licenses usually derived from municipal authorities. Was 
 it ever supposed that Congress had this power l 
 
 The power^granted to Congress by the Constitution to regulate 
 commerce among the several States," is a very different thing from 
 a power to impose the municipal authorities of one State upon those 
 of another, as is the effect of the law of Congress now under consi- 
 deration. This is the single principle, the exact shape and definite 
 action of this law, viz : to enforce the authorities of one State on 
 those of another — a principle, as cannot be denied, of disorganization 
 and aggression. 
 
 " Congress shall have powder to regulate commerce between the 
 States," etc. The fair interpretation of a law is a reasonable one. 
 One of the first and fundanirental principles of our state of society is 
 the sovereignty of the States within their own jurisdiction, as to " all 
 powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, or 
 prohibited by it to the States ;" and the question now before us is, 
 whether this power " to regulate commerce between the States" would 
 authorize this law of 1837 1 We think not— first, because the juris- 
 diction assumed is personal as to the subject of it, and therefore mu- 
 nicipal. It is the government of the agent of commerce, which lies 
 in the jurisdiction o^' a State, and does not afiect the terms or condi- 
 tions on which the material of commerce shall pass from one State to 
 another. By this law the State of New-Jersey may and does p;ish 
 its jurisdiction over persons into the State of New-York, and coin- 
 pels the latter to admit such jurisdiction by surrendering its own, so 
 
12 
 
 [Senate 
 
 far as the regulation of the personal conduct of pilots is concerned in 
 their professional capacity, and as to the terms of qualification. 
 
 " To regulate commerce between the States" — to prevent one State 
 from embarrassing or impeding the commerce of another ; to pre- 
 scribe, if necessary, the terms on which the material of commerce 
 shall pass from one State to or through another ; to equalize the 
 terms of commercial intercourse ; to maintain the obligation of con- 
 tracts throughout the Union ; to provide a standard of common cur- 
 rency, etc., but it would be preposterous to suppose that this power 
 was intended to authorize Congress to compel the State of Georgia 
 to recognize a pedlar's license obtained from the municipal authori- 
 ties of South Carolina, or to surrender jurisdiction over a stage dri- 
 ver's functions because he happened to take up his whip in a neigh- 
 boring State. Peddling on wheels or on foot is commerce, doubtless, 
 as much so as shipping ; but we apprehend that a nullification tem- 
 per would be extremely prone to rise, if Congress should attempt to 
 force a pedlar's license, granted by one State, upon another. The 
 pilot is a pedlar — that is, he is the agent of a peddling voyage, and 
 carries in his pocket a municipal commission which is the warrant of 
 his occupation, as much as the driver of a pedlar's wagon. We be- 
 lieve it will be admitted as sound doctrine, that when a man passes 
 from one State to another, his personal accountability is transferred 
 to the latter. He cannot be amenable to both jurisdictions at the 
 same time and for the same acts. The reason is, because the laws of 
 the State left behind cannot follow or reach him — cannot lap over. 
 Even if he is a criminal flying from justice, he cannot be overtaken 
 by the authorities he has violated ; but they are compelled to resort 
 to another power, provided by the federal compact. Jurisdiction is 
 sacred, and it is absurd to suppose that the law of one State may 
 prescribe the terms and modes of personal acts or functions performed 
 in another State. The professional functions of pilots are purely per- 
 sonal acts." 
 
 It is conceded that an officer or agent of the United States must 
 be admitted and entertained by the States in the discharge of his ap- 
 propriate functions, and that for these duties he comes under the ju- 
 risdiction of the authority from which he derives his commission. For 
 all such purposes, the jurisdiction of the United States comprehends 
 all the States. But it will be seen that the entrance of a commission 
 or license of the Federal Government into the jurisdiction of the States 
 for such purposes, is a very different thing from the entrance and ac- 
 tion of a commission or license of any one of the States into the terri- 
 tories of another. We are not aware that such a thing can possibly 
 be, in any propriety, or by any known right ; and yet this is precisely 
 the case authorized by this law of Congress. Nor would it be suffi- 
 cient to say that the New-Jersey pilot enters the waters of New- 
 York as an agent of the Federal Government, because it is not a fact. 
 He is an agent of the State of New-Jersey, so far as the immediate de- 
 rivation of his authority is concerned, which, we conceive, is all we 
 have to consider. A commission or license of New-Jersey is forced 
 upon the State of New-York. 
 
No. 25.] 
 
 13 
 
 If Congress had assumed jurisdiction over pilots in toto, made the 
 necessary regulations, and ordained their licenses to issue immediately 
 from federal authorities, this collision of State jurisdiction would have 
 been avoided. 
 
 Admitting that Congress had original jurisdiction in the case, yet 
 the jurisdiction was in the state of a non-user ; was vacated so far as 
 the action of the Federal Government is concerned ; was conceded, 
 indeed, and sanctioned by the formal acts of this government, in favor 
 of the States ; and there never was a symptom that Congress inten- 
 ded to assume it till 1837, when it was suddenly, and we may add, 
 violently taken, without even the courtesy of a notice served on the 
 parties concerned. The pilot regulations formed apart, in some States 
 a large part, of the municipal code of those which had ports ; and the 
 State of New-York, at the very moment of the passage of this law of 
 Congress, in 1837, was revising its own laws on this subject, and in 
 just thirty-nine days thereafter adopted a new code, consisting of two 
 acts and fifty-two sections, many of those sections being chapters in 
 themselves, the authority and effect of which was destroyed by this 
 act of Congress, so far as the scope of the latter extends ! Is not this 
 a most remarkable collision of jurisdiction ? It was doubtless proper, 
 and was naturally to be expected, in view of the history of the past, 
 if Congress meditated such an assumption — we will not say usurpa- 
 tion — of power — although it cannot be called re-sumption, for they 
 had never before used it — it was proper, we say, that a notice of such 
 purpose should have been served on the States, and that time should 
 have been allowed the State authorities to accommodate their own 
 position to this#new position of the Federal Government, so seriously, 
 extensively, and vitally affecting themselves. We say vitally, for it 
 is impossible not to feel that it is an invasion of State sovereignty. 
 But it affected their convenience and paralyzed the arm of their autho- 
 rity, besides leaving them open to privateering incursions from neigh- 
 boring States, acting under commission of those States, with the au- 
 thority of the United States to back them. 
 
 The design of the act of 1837 was to break up what was averred 
 to be a combination among the pilots of New-York, impairing the 
 fidelity and usefulness of the service, by letting in upon them the pi- 
 lots of New-Jersey, with a view of introducing a fair and salutary 
 competition. 
 
 It appears that the supreme legislative authority of the State of 
 New-York, in the right of its own sovereignty, in the good faith of 
 the act of Congress of 1798, and in accordance with all usage in 
 these United States, took upon itself to revise and amend the laws of 
 the State for the regulation of pilots, in consequence of the public ex- 
 citement respectino; the loss of the Bristol and Mexico, and simulta- 
 neously with the action of Congress on the same subject, for the same 
 object. It is evident, from an examination of the law of New- York, 
 that no pains or expense were spared to obtain all information that 
 could be of use, and that the committee charged with the duty of re- 
 porting a bill, performed their task with great fidelity. Two separate 
 acts were prepared, one of forty-four, and the other of eight sections, 
 
14 [Senate 
 
 in all fifty-two, altogether of such extent and particularity as to con- 
 stitute a proper pilot code. The twenty-third section of the first act 
 strikes at the principle of combination complained of as the great evil,, 
 and is a full and sufficient remedy, if faithfully administered by the 
 board of commissioners. It is as follows : 
 
 " The earnings of the pilots belonging to any one boat shall be 
 equally divided among the pilots of said boat ; and no pilot shall par- 
 ticipate, unless authorized by the commissioners, in the earnings of 
 any others than those attached to the same boat ; and for breach of 
 this provision, any pilot or pilots shall forfeit his or their license or 
 licenses." 
 
 By this section, and others provided for its proper execution, eve- 
 ry pilot boat has a separate interest, is barred from combination by 
 heavy penalties, and forced into competition with all other boats. 
 
 As a matter of fact^ however, we have the published testimony of 
 the board of commissioners that no such combination among the 
 New-York pilots has existed " for several years past." Moreover, 
 they say " that the competition existing among the New-York pilots 
 is equally, if not more strenuous, than that existing between them 
 and the New-Jersey pilots. We know this to be the fact from the 
 report-books of the last three year's standing, and from every day's 
 observation- We have before us reports made by them (the pilot 
 boats) against each other, for infringements made on each other's 
 rights, which of course we have to adjust. The date of this evidence 
 is 1840. The commissioners also certify that whatever reform has 
 been effected " has been the result solely of the State law of 1837," 
 meaning to the exclusion of the influence of the law of Congress. 
 
 The understanding established by the act of Congress of 1798,. 
 between the Federal Government and the States, upon this subject, 
 was the result of experience and the dictate of good sense. In the first 
 place, it appears to have been seen and admitted — that is the natural 
 inference from the transaction — that the regulations of the pilots 
 within the bounds of the States, is properly and necessarily a part of 
 State jurisdiction. Next, as it was a matter of great importance that 
 it should be attended to, this act of Congress, of 1798, may properly 
 be viewed in the light oif a declaration on the part of Congress, as to 
 the right of sovereignty in this particular, and a full concession there- 
 of to the States ; and on the part of the States a tacit pledge, and 
 therefore, an understanding or covenant, that they, the States, would 
 faithfully perform this part of their duty. They had done it before, 
 and they have done it ever since. It was a usage of more than half 
 a century, never challenged, and was solemnly ratified in 1798, by 
 the very party, to wit. Congress, which broke in upon it, and disturb- 
 ed, not to say violated it, by the act of 1837. 
 
 It is evident, that the States only are competent to attend to this 
 business, not to touch the question of right. Look at the two acts of 
 New-York in 1837, and to the act of Congress of the same year. 
 The former is an extended and able pilot code, providing for all the 
 necessities of the service, as suggested by the whole history of New- 
 York navigation. It creates a branch of municipal polity of great 
 
No. 25.] 
 
 15 
 
 dignity and consequence, well adapted to its purposes. It shows that 
 all concerned in it, understood the subject, and commendably dis- 
 charged their duty. Whereas the contemporaneous law of Congress 
 evinces, not only a want of consideration, but great ignorance of the 
 subject. There is but one single, solitary principle in it, and that, 
 most unfortunately, is a principle of mischief — of two-fold, tri-fohi, 
 manifold mischief — a naked principle of aggression in the first stage, 
 giving birth to and authorizing nothing but aggression in all other of 
 its stages and forms. The moment this law came to operate in the 
 State of New-York, or in any other State, it struck at the sovereign- 
 ty of that State, suspended its authority as to the matter in question, 
 and forced upon its jurisdiction the action and use of a commission or 
 license (municipal) of a foreign State. It is, moreover, a violation of 
 the pledged faith of Congress — a faith as solemnly pledged as in any 
 part or parcel of the Federal Constitution, and is a matter of record 
 in the journals of that body, and incorporated with its laws. We 
 venture to suggest, that such a hasty act, we are disposed to say, er- 
 ror of legislation— for such it evidently was — is not to be found in 
 our annals. We are confident it cannot be persisted in by Congress, 
 after mature reflection. Are they prepared to say to this country, 
 that they will sustain such a wanton invasion of State rights 1 We 
 say wanton, for what possible good can result from it? There is posi- 
 tively nothing but evil, without considering the breach of faith, and 
 the collision of jurisdiction. The regulation of the pilots of our wa- 
 ters, must be either in the care of the United States or of the States. 
 
 The jurisdiction cannot possibly, certainly not, conveniently, be 
 divided. We t^iink it cannot possibly. It must be entire in one case 
 or the other. The State of New-York has evinced its fitness and 
 competency, by its elaborate and well adapted laws of 1S37 ; where- 
 as Congress has laid down but a single rule, and that a disorganizing 
 one. 
 
 But we think it certain, that the States will not submit to this as- 
 sumption of power over their heads, in violation of immemorial usage, 
 and of compact. It is a perfect novelty, an unheard of event, that a 
 municipal commission or lieense of one State should be forced, with 
 all its powers and privileges, upon the jurisdiction of another State, 
 to suspend and nullify the authority of that State! And yet this is the 
 naked principle, as well as the sum and substance of the law of 
 Conrrress of 1837. It contains nothing more, and nothing less. 
 There is nothing but mischief, portentous mischief, in the act. 
 
 In the same manner as lawyers, doctois, and other professions, 
 obtain licenses to practice, uftder the municipal regulations of their 
 respective States, granting them pe'culiar and exclusive privileges, as 
 a compensation for the expenses of their education and their devotion, 
 thus qualified to callings having in charge, professionally, the welfare, 
 fortunes and lives of the community ; so also the pilots of our ports 
 and harbors, having qualified themselves by a long course of training 
 and at great expense, are licensed by municipal authorities, and are 
 endowed thereby with certain exclusive privileges, in the use of which 
 their services are intimately connected with the wealth, happiness, 
 
16 
 
 [Senate 
 
 and lives of the community. It is scarcely possible to name a more 
 important function, in the ordinary walks of life, than that of pilots. 
 They have constantly in charge immense wealth and many lives of 
 our citizens. Nor can they transfer the use of their talents and ac- 
 quirments to another place, or to another State, if they are injured. A 
 pilot of New-Orleans might as well go to the moon, as to New-York 
 or Boston, and vice versa ; for he is only qualified to act where he is 
 acquainted with the pilot grounds. His talents are of no use to him 
 any where else. 
 
 Besides, it is to be considered, that the public authorities never 
 call a lawyer to account for losing his case, or a doctor for losing his 
 patient, unless there is suspicion of crime ; whereas, a pilot is liable 
 to penalties for every loss of property and life under his charge, and 
 is obliged to give bonds. Other professions are rarely limited by law 
 in their charges ; but pilots always are. The rules of the service are 
 many and strict, and the vigilance of authority great, because great 
 interests are at stake. The pilots of every port have grown up un- 
 der their own system, and are compelled to rely upon the uniform 
 maintenance of that system for their own livelihood, and that of their 
 dependent families. Whereas, this new law of Congress, of 1837, 
 takes them by surprise, invades their rights, takes away the small 
 profits of their profession, and blasts their prospects of living. 
 They are entirely powerless, and are compelled, unresistingly and 
 unjustly, to submit to the incursions of foreigners, acting under 
 the commission or license of foreign States, thus enforced by the su- 
 preme authority of the nation, to take away the earnings and bread 
 of those who had consecrated their lives to this service for the sake 
 of the pledged benefit. These invaders of right, having never served 
 an apprenticeship, nor conformed to the rules of qualification, as es- 
 tablished by the municipal authority of the jurisdiction thus entered, 
 are enabled by act of Congress, to jump over these laws, set them 
 at defiance, and can afford so to underbid the lawful tenants of the 
 ground, as to expel them even from competition — as to expel them 
 altogether ; and the next thing will be a combination of foreigners, 
 under foreign licenses, in possession of the pilot grounds of New- 
 York. This will be the inevitable result. The service must neces- 
 sarily be depreciated in its character, and all the experience of the 
 local authorities lost, in the loss of their power of control. The 
 evil is immense. It is not only a great injustice, but there is a pub- 
 lic and authoritative sanction given to the spirit and to acts of disor- 
 ganization, and great wealth and many lives are put in jeopardy. 
 
 Next, we have the testimony of the board of commissioners put 
 over the pilots of New-York city. They state, first, that the new- 
 law of that State has proved eflfectual for purposes of reform, so far 
 as it was required. Next, to the point and fact of competition be- 
 tween the pilots of New-York ; and, lastly, a very touching certifi- 
 cate to the excellence of their character, and to the fidelity of their 
 service. 
 
 " A more valuable, capable, deserving and enterprising class of pi- 
 lots, the world does not produce ; they almost daily board vessels at 
 
No. 25. 1 
 
 17 
 
 sea, from fifteen to fifty, one hundred and fifty, and two hundred 
 miles from the Hook ; and in some instances, they go up to Nan- 
 tucket and St. George's Bank. It is heart-rending to see these inva- 
 ders of our State rights, board vessels along side the dock, and carry 
 them to sea, to the exclusion of our pilots who have served a regular 
 apprenticeship, and who have such an immense capital afloat. If 
 they have for once erred, they have been sufficiently punished for it, 
 and have made ample atonement by their unexceptionable conduct, 
 and a probation of nearly four years. The General Government, as 
 well as the State, may be assured that they need be under no appre- 
 hension of neglect of dut}^ among them," &c. 
 
 And this testimony from the commissioners appointed by the State, 
 to see that the pilot regulations of New- York are observed and exe- 
 cuted : 
 
 "This board," they say themselves, "is composed of men who 
 have sailed from this port as long, if not longer, than most men 
 who have made the sea their profession ; and w^e have found, from 
 our experience of from thirty to thirty-five years, that we were never 
 at a loss for a pilot, except when a great influx of arrivals took place 
 and the pilots were all engaged, which has some years past been the 
 case, and caused a small detention. Since that, the defect has been 
 remedied by an increase in the number of pilots ; which increase has 
 been such, and shortly w^ill be greater, by the expiration of the in- 
 dentures of apprentices, that they will scarcely be able to pay ex- 
 penses. This board would, as a matter of impartial justice, beg of 
 Congress either to cause a repeal of the laws w^hich do now allow 
 the Jersey pil(fts to pilot in our waters, or place them under the same 
 restrictions as those to which our pilots are subjected. 
 
 " The State of New-Jersey having so little commerce, found no 
 occasion for legislating on the subject of pilots, till this act of Con- 
 gress of 1837, and then her object could not be legitimate as a moral 
 question, because it was only to depredate on the rights of her neigh- 
 bors, New-York, Pennsylvania and Delaware. Immediately, men 
 could come from Rhode-Island, Connecticut, from the west, from 
 any where, from foreign ports even, and take out licenses for pilot- 
 ing from the New- Jersey authorities, however slender their qualifi- 
 cations, and be entitled to all the privileges of New- York pilots. 
 
 "The State of Mississippi only waited to see if the operations of 
 New-Jersey, under the act of Congress, w^ould be tolerated, and out 
 came her act, in February, 1840, to license forty pilots to act in the 
 mouths and passes of the Mississippi. She even went to Congress 
 with petitions for an alteration or extension of the law, to be the 
 more secure of her end. Next, perhaps, we shall hear of a State 
 having no navigable border, taking her men from the plough to pi- 
 lot the shipping of our ports. 
 
 " The city of New-York is already supplied with nearly a hundred 
 pilots of her own, regularly trained and well qualified, who have a 
 capital of §100,000 afloat in their boats — a property which, on ac- 
 count of the perils to which it is exposed, cannot be insured at any 
 
 [Senate, No. 25.] 3. 
 
18 [Senate 
 
 rate which the pilots are able to afford. Neither are those boats fit 
 for any other service, any more than their masters." 
 
 Let us now further examine the practical effect of the act of 1837 ; 
 to do so, a reference to the boundaries of this State, and its territo- 
 rial jurisdiction and the pilot laws since 1731, becomes necessary to 
 ascertain the extent of her limits, and the jurisdiction w^hich has ever 
 been claimed for her, in regard to pilot regulations. Before the 
 compact between the States of New-York and New Jersey, respect- 
 ing their territorial limits and jurisdiction, ratified by the act of Con- 
 gress of June 28, 1834, the boundary of New-York on New -Jersey 
 was as follows : from a " rock on the west side of the Hudson river, 
 in the latitude of forty-one degrees north, marked by said commis- 
 sioners ; thence southerly along the west shore at low-water mark of 
 the Hudson river, of the Kill Van Kull, of the sound between Staten- 
 Tsland and New-Jersey, and of Raritan bay to Sandy-Hook." Be- 
 fore the compact of 1834, the boundary of New-York extended to 
 low-water mark throughout its border on the State of New-Jersey. 
 The compact of 1834 does not vary that boundary to affect this 
 subject. 
 
 " Article \st. The boundary line between the two States of New- 
 York and New-Jersey, from appoint in the middle of Hudson river, 
 opposite the point on the west shore thereof, in the 41st degree of 
 north latitude, as heretofore ascertained and marked, to the main sea, 
 shall be the middle of the said river, of the bay of New-York, of the 
 waters between Staten Island and New-Jersey, and of Raritan bay to 
 the main sea, except as is hereafter otherwise particularly mentioned. 
 
 " Jlrticle 2d. The State of New-York shall retain its present juris- 
 diction over Bedlow's Island, Ellis Island, and shall also retain ex- 
 clusive jurisdiction of and over the other islands lying in the waters 
 above mentioned and now under the jurisdiction of that State. 
 
 Article Sd. The State of New-York shall have and enjoy exclu- 
 sive jurisdiction of and over all the waters of the bay of New-York, 
 and of and over all the waters of the Hudson river lying west of 
 Manhattan Island, and to the south of the mouth of Spuytenduyvil 
 creek, and of and over the land covered by the said waters, to the 
 low-water mark on the westerly or New- Jersey side thereof, subject 
 to the following rights of property and of jurisdiction of the State 
 of New-Jersey, that is to say — 
 
 " 1st. The State of New- Jersey shall have the exclusive right of pro- 
 perty in and to the land under ivafer lying west of the middle of the 
 bay of New-York, and west of the middle of that part of Hudson 
 river*which lies between Manhattan Island and New-Jersey. 
 
 "2d. The State of New -Jersey shall have exclusive jurisdiction of 
 and over the wharves, docks and improvements made and to be made 
 on the shore of said State, and of and over all vessels aground on 
 said shore, or fastened to any such wharf or dock, except that the 
 said vessels shall be subject to the quarantine or health laws and laws 
 in relation to passengers of the State of New-York, which now exist 
 or which may hereafter be passed. 
 
 " 3d. The State of New Jersey shall have the exclusive right of re- 
 
f 
 
 ll No. 25.] 19 
 
 gulating the fisheries on the westerly side of the middle of the said 
 waters, provided that the navigation be not obstructed or hindered." 
 
 The other provisions of the compact relating to the division of ju- 
 risdiction and right of property of the Kill Van Kull, the sound be- 
 tween Staten-Island and New-Jersey, lying w^est of Woodbridge 
 Creek and the Raritan bay, need not be transcribed, as they are not 
 invoked in the consideration of this question. 
 
 From the portions quoted from the compact, the jurisdiction and 
 property is thus distributed : 
 
 The State of New- York has exclusive jurisdiction over the waters 
 of the bay of New York, of the Hudson river, west of Manhattan 
 Island, and ovor the lands covered by water to the low water mark 
 on the New^-Jersey shore, and over Bedlow's and other islands men- 
 tioned. 
 
 New-Jersey has the exclusive right of property in the land under 
 water^ west of the middle of the bay of New-York, and west of the 
 middle of the Hudson river, opposite Manhattan Island. That State 
 has also exclusive jurisdiction of the wharves, &c., &c., on the shore 
 of that State, and over vessels aground on her shores, ov fastened to 
 her wharves^ subject to the health and passenger laws of New- York, 
 and has also the right of regulating the fisheries on the westerly side 
 of the middle of the w^aters of New-York bay and Hudson river, op- 
 posite Manhattan Island. 
 
 In other w^ords, New-Jersey has no jurisdiction over the waters of 
 New- York bay, or Hudson river, opposite Manhattan Island, except 
 those flowing ahove low-water mark on Jersey shore, but all that juris- 
 diction is excliisively vested in the State of New-York. 
 
 The right has been claimed for New-York and maintained, to legis- 
 late exclusively on the subject of pilots, as far back as the year 1694. 
 The act of the colonial assembly of New-York, found in Livingston 
 and Smith's laws, passed in 1731, provides for the appointment of 
 pilots. The first section is as follows : " That all and every per- 
 son nominated and appointed by the president or the governor, &c., 
 &c., by and with the advice and consent of his majesty's council for 
 the colony, to be pilot or pilots between Sandy-Hook and New-York, 
 shall be the pilot or pilots from the port of New-York to Sandy- 
 Hook, and from Sandy-Hook to the port of New- York, and to and 
 from these places. 
 
 The sixth section provides that if any person or persons, not ap- 
 pointed in the manner before mentioned or deputed by those so au- 
 thorized as aforesaid, shall presume to take upon him or them to pilot 
 any ship or vessel going into or coming out of the said port of New- 
 York, shall forfeit and pay the sum of ^£3. The first section of 32 
 George II. passed March 7th, 1759, contains the same prohibition, 
 under the increased penalty of £b. 
 
 The statute of February 19th, 1819, in the 22d section, maintains 
 the same exclusive jurisdiction. It is as follows : " That the branch 
 pilots, the deputy pilots, &c., &c., shall be the only persons employed 
 ' in the pilot service, to and from the port of New-York, by the way 
 of Sandy-Hook." So the 9th section of the statute of 12th April, 
 
20 
 
 ( Senate 
 
 1837, enacted in the face of the act of Congress of 4:th March of the 
 same year declares, that " any person not holding a license as pilot^ 
 who shall pilot or offer to pilot' any ship or vessel to or from the port 
 of New- York by the way of Sandy-Hook, shall be deemed guilty of 
 a misdemeanor^ and on conviction thereof be punished by a Jine^ not 
 exceeding fifty dollars, or imprisonment^ not exceeding one month : 
 but no such penalty shall be incurred by piloting or offering to pilot 
 any vessel which shall have been in sight of Sandy-Hook, with the 
 usual signal for a pilot, and shall have waited two hours without one 
 having offered ; nor shall this section apply to the captain or master 
 belonging to any vessel acting as pilot thereof by virtue of this act." 
 
 The expression " 7iot holding a license as pilot^^ manifestly refers 
 to the license granted in pursuance of the laws of this State ; and the 
 law of 12th of April, 1837, is palpably in collision with the act of 
 Congress authorizing others than those holding such license, to pilot 
 vessels to or from the port of New-York by the way of Sandy-Hook; 
 consequently, if the act of Congress is constitutional, the statute of 
 New-York is a dead letter, under the 6th article of the Federal Con- 
 stitution. Was it becoming the dignity of this State that her Legis- 
 lature should, advisedly^ pass a law that was without force or effect, 
 and is it not the paramount obligation of the State to vindicate that 
 law, in the assertion of her sovereign rights? — a law only to be sustained 
 by overthrowing the conflicting legislation of Congress, and establish- 
 ing its unconstitutionality. 
 
 The legislation by New-York has always been exclusive and co- 
 extensive with the jurisdiction over her waters, until February 8th, 
 1837, when the State of New- Jersey, passed a law, the preamble of 
 which is as follows : " That whereas the commerce of New-Jersey 
 requires every facility and aid usually extended to maritime States, 
 and whereas at this time there are no licensed pilots for the safe con- 
 duct of onx increasing commerce^ rendering us wholly dependent upon 
 a neighboring State, Therelore, &c., &c." In truth that act was pas- 
 sed that it might be adopteil by Congress, as it was, within the short 
 period of twenty-four days, more for the purpose of giving employ- 
 ment to the citizens of New-Jersey, within the jurisdiction of JVew- 
 Yorkj than on account of her increasing commerce ; and we now find 
 New-Jersey pilots navigating vessels (not under any pretence of juris- 
 diction over the waters from that State to the high seas,) through the 
 narrows, to and from sea ; through the East river, to and from Cor- 
 lear's Hook and the Navy-Yard, Brooklyn ; they even take them from 
 the slips and w^harves of the city of New-York, at the extreme points 
 of that city, whether in the East or Hudson rivers ; they also leave 
 them at quarantine, and take them thence. How, it is asked, can it 
 be said that the port of Tompkinsville, at quarantine, is a port " sit- 
 uate upon waters which are the boundary between two States 
 
 The act of 1837 uses the term " ^or^," not port of entry ^ and it is 
 well known that the court of admiralty recognizes Tompkinsville, 
 Williamsburgh, Sing-Sing, Newburgh and other small places, as ports, 
 and has frequently so held under the admiralty jurisdiction of the lien 
 
No. 25. J 
 
 21 
 
 law of material men of this State, equally with the port of New- 
 York. 
 
 Can this claim of New- Jersey be justified on the ground that these 
 waters are a common highway ? that the right of navigation belongs 
 to every citizen of the United States 1 True, it is a highway ; but it 
 is equally true that the control and regulation of a highw^ay, wit/wi 
 the body of a State j is the province and prerogative of the sovereignty 
 through which it passes ; nor is that reg2^/«^2o?i incompatible with the 
 fi'ee enjoyment of such highway. Every vessel on waters within the 
 territory of a sovereign State, is subjected to the municipal regula- 
 tions of that State. It might with equal propriety be claimed, that 
 because the streets of the city of New-York are common highways, 
 the State of New-.Tersey has the right to issue licenses to her citizens 
 as drivers of hackney-coaches. The right of enjoying the highway 
 for the purposes of navigation is far different from the exercise of mu- 
 nicipal authority over such highway ; nor can such municipal autho- 
 rity be exercised conjointly by two States, especially at this port. 
 
 The quarantine or health laws. of New-York form an important part 
 of her legislation ; the importance of it to the welfare of her citizens 
 and the prosperity of the State is too well known to need comment. 
 In the execution of those laws the aid of her pilots is constantly de- 
 manded, under severe penalties, in hailing vessels approaching her 
 ports, and admonishing them of the requirements of those laws. How 
 stands the collision of jurisdiction on this subject ] What right has 
 this State to impose upon the pilots of New-Jersey the performance of 
 the same duties, which are enjoined in every statute, to be observed 
 by her own pifots l Congress has not confided to New- York juris- 
 diction over the pilots of New-Jersey. There is no guarantee that 
 New- Jersey may find it proper or expedient to notice this measure of 
 precaution ; it is not now a duty in her present statute^ establishing 
 a pilot system. This is the practical effect of the act of Congress. 
 
 It is repeated, that Congress has the right to committhis wrong di- 
 rectly, by appointing her own officers, as a regulation of commerce, 
 but may not indirectly, by merging the jurisdiction of both States in 
 each other. 
 
 The municipal jurisdiction of the State of New-Jersey thus exerci- 
 sed, is entirely repugnant to the second title of the Revised Statutes, 
 treating on " the sovereignty and jurisdiction of New-York." That 
 title declares that " the sovereignty of this State extends to all places 
 w^ithin the boundaries thereof, &c., &c., but the extent of such juris- 
 diction over places that have been or may be ceded to the United 
 States, shall be qualified by the terms of such cession." The second 
 section declares that " it shall be the duty of her Governor and of all 
 subordinate officers of this State to maintain its sovereignty and juris- 
 diction." 
 
 It is, in conclusion, respectfully submitted that Congress has au- 
 thorized an invasion of the sovereignty of New- York by New- Jersey, 
 through hasty and ill-advised legislation. It is an usurpation of au- 
 thority not to be submitted to — inconsistent with the dignity of the 
 State — and, if acquiesced in, may soon be followed by other, and, if 
 
22 
 
 [Senate 
 
 possible, more flagrant encroachments. The laws of this State have 
 jealously guarded her integrity, in making it the duty of her officers 
 ^^to maintain and defend its sovereignty and jurisdiction." As citizens 
 of the State, we claim to be protected in our rights thus trampled un- 
 der foot, and confidently hope that measures may be taken to secure 
 to us the uninterrupted enjoyment of our franchise, and effectually to 
 check the pretensions of a neighboring State, sustained though she be 
 by the sanction of Congress. In vain have we sought redress at the 
 hands of those who inflicted the wrong, but now confidently believe 
 that the subject is so presented as to require the vindication of the 
 supremacy of the State, and involves a more serious question than the 
 protection of the humble pilot. Establish our rights, and our duty 
 will follow ; but " misera servitus est, ubi jus est vagum ant incog- 
 nitum." 
 
 Respectfully submitted. 
 
I 
 
 PETITION 
 
 Of the Pilots of New-York, by way of Sandy- 
 Hook. 
 
 TO THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF NEW-YORK 
 
 The Memorial of the Pilots of the Port of New-York, by the way 
 of Sandy-Hook, 
 
 Respectfully Represents : 
 
 That they J^ave been duly licensed in pursuance of the provisions 
 of the laws of this State, to pilot vessels to and from the port of 
 New- York, by the way of Sandy -Ho ok. 
 
 That in faith of the protection of those laws, they have embarked 
 their fortunes in the purchase, building, and equipment of pilot boats 
 necessary and proper to the efficient and useful discharge of the ap- 
 propriate duties of their office. 
 
 That on the 4th of March, 1837, Congress passed an act entitled 
 " An act concerning pilots" in the following words : " Be it enacted 
 that it shall and may be lawful for the master and commander of any 
 vessel coming into or going out of any port situate upon Avaters 
 which are the boundary between two States, to employ any pilot duly 
 licensed or authorized by the laws of either of the States bounded on 
 the said waters to pilot any vessel to or from said port ; any law, 
 usage or custom to the contrary notwithstanding." 
 
 And your memorialists further show that under and by virtue of the 
 said act, and under and by virtue of an act of the State of New-Jer- 
 sey entitled An act to establish and regulate pilots for the ports of 
 Jersey city, Newark, and Perth Amboy, by the way of Sandy-Hook," 
 passed the 8th of February, 1837, and under and by virtue of a sup- 
 plemental act of the State of New-Jersey, passed the 13th of Febru- 
 ary, 3838, the pilots licensed and commissioned by the State of New- 
 Jersey, have been, and now are engaged, in piloting vessels to and 
 from the city of New-York, and the city of Brooklyn, and Tomp- 
 
24 [Sen 
 
 ATE 
 
 ^dnsville in the county of Richmond, by the way of Sandy-Hook, 
 on waters within the exclusive territorial jurisdiction of the State of 
 New- York. 
 
 And your memorialists further show that such actings and doings 
 of the pilots of New- Jersey are in absolute derogation of the rights 
 and interests of your memorialists, guarantied to them by the laws of 
 the State of New-York, and in manifest violation of the sovereignty 
 of the State of New-York, inasmuch as the said act of Congress 
 sanctions and authorizes the raunicipal authorities of the State of 
 New- Jersey to exercise the sovereign power and authority of that 
 State within the territorial confines of the State of New-York. 
 
 Your memorialists therefore humbly pray that your honorable body 
 will adopt such measures as may seem meet and proper to try and 
 determine whether the aforesaid act of Congress does or does not 
 transcend the legislative power of the Federal Government, and 
 whether the acts exercised under its sanction, and under the autho- 
 rity of the laws of the State of New-Jersey by the citizens of that 
 State, are or are not in violation of the sovereignty of the State of 
 New-York, and in contempt of her laws. 
 
 And your memorialists will ever pray, &c. &c. 
 
 James Burger, Richard Blake, 
 
 John T. Kelso, J. Livingston, 
 
 John Hyer, Thomas Vail, 
 
 Jno. Maginn, Henry J. Bullinger, 
 
 John Martino, Isaac S. Vanderbilt, 
 
 Jarvis P. Cahert, Stephen Martino, 
 
 Corns. Hope, Jr. Henry M. Wheeler, 
 
 John Henderson, John Fredell, 
 
 James H. Smith, Wm. P. Turnure, 
 
 Robt. W. Johnson, Josiah Johnson, 
 
 John L. Turnure, Maurice D. Weaver, 
 
 Kuyler E. H. Dibble, John Dean. 
 
 SEYMOUR DURST