89th Congress, 
 1st ^Session. 
 
 [ SENATE. ] 
 
 [15] 
 
 MEMORIAL 
 
 OP 
 
 THE PILOTS OF THE POUT OF NEW YORK, 
 
 PRAYING FOR 
 
 The repeal or modification of the act of March 2, 1837, concerning pilots. 
 
 December 16, 1845. 
 Referred to the Commiitee on Commerce, and ordered to be printed. 
 
 To the honorable the Senate and House of Repre.^entativcs of the people 
 of tlie United iStales of America in Congress assembled : 
 
 The memorial of the undersigned, on behalf of the pilots of the port 
 of New York, 
 Respectfully showeth : 
 
 That tlfu number of pilots now in commission for the said port is 
 eighty-five; that they own thirteen boats, which have cost them from 
 six thousand five hundred to eight thousand five hundred dollars each ^ 
 that they have attached to the said boats in all sixty five hands and up- 
 wards ; that some of the said pilots have been fifty years in the said service, 
 and that most of them entered it when, by the law of the Stale of New York^ 
 no individual could become a pilot until he had served an apprenticeship oi 
 five years; that this law had been in operation for nearly half a century, 
 and that your memorialists and those whom they represent, trusting to 
 the protection of such enactment, have applied themselves to the attaining 
 such requisite knowledge as might entitle them to the pilot's branch, and 
 h-ave served the necessary lawful apprenticeship, and have invested their 
 money in the purchase of boats, and are, in fact, interested in the same to 
 the amount of their whole worldly substance. And your memorialists 
 represent further, that in the year 1837 the legislature of the State of New 
 York passed an act shortening the term of apprenticeship to three years, 
 and otherwise modifying and altering the rules and regulations to govern 
 the pilot service for the port of New York. And your memorialists further 
 represent that, by the twenty third section of this act, " the earnings of 
 the pilots belonging to any boat" were directed to be equally divided 
 among the pilots of said boat ;" and provision was further made that no 
 pilot shall participate, unless authorized by the conmiissioners, in the 
 earnings of any others than those attached to the same boat; and for a 
 breach of this provision any pilot or pilots shall forfeit his or their license 
 or licenses." 
 Kilctiie & Heiss, prmi. 
 
[15] 
 
 2 
 
 Your memorialists further represent, that, by the act from which the 
 section aforesaid is quoted, provision was luade for ihe wants of the port 
 of New York in respect to pilots, arising from its increased connnerce and 
 its increase in time to come, by empowering the commissioners heretofore 
 named to administer the reqrnsite oaths to |)ilots, and to license ail per- 
 sons now licensed to act as pilots by the way of Sandy Hook, including 
 those called deputy pilots, as they may deem competent after examination ; 
 and also every other person of lull age and good moral character making 
 application theretor." Your memorialists further represent, that by these 
 enactments all the heedom and compeiiiion iu their callijjg desirable or con- 
 sistent with a dne regard to the lives and property of their fellow-citizens 
 have been secured, and the objections in this respect, which were urged 
 at a prior period, removed. And your memorialists further represent, that, 
 on the second day of March, 1^37, the following act of Congress was 
 passed : Be it enacted, That it shall and niay be lawful for the master or 
 commander of any vessel coming into or going out of any port situate 
 upon the waters which are the boundary between two States, to employ 
 any pilot duly licensed or authorized by the laws of either of the States 
 hounded 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 represent, that this act was passed by both branches 
 of the national legislature on the said second day of March, 1837, (that 
 being the last day but one of the session,) and also under other circum- 
 stances unfavorable alike to a calm judgment and a dispassionate exa-'iii- 
 uation of the rights of your memorialists under the constitution of the 
 United States and laws of the State of New York. 
 
 And your memorialists further represent, that great excitement pervaded 
 the community at this pedod, growing out of the destruction of life and 
 property by the loss of the ships Bristol and Mexico, and thai these dis- 
 astrous wrecks were unjusdy attributed to the negligence of the body 
 with which your memoiialists are connected. Your memorialists further 
 represent that the fcilsity of this charge (under the belief and consequent 
 excitement thereupon the act now sought to be repealed was passed) has 
 been repeatedly disproved, both by the affidavits of the survivors of the 
 shipv/recks referred to, exonerating the pilots from the calumnies of which 
 they have been made the victims, and also by the presentment of the 
 grand jury of New York, who, after a patient examination, for the purpose 
 of ascertaining how far these shipwrecks were attributable to any culpable 
 neglect on the part of the pilots, arrived at the conclusion that both in the 
 case of the Bristol and Mexico these casualties might have been avoided 
 by the exercise of a suitable degree of caution on the part of the officers 
 and crews of these vessels." 
 
 Your memorialists further represent, that neither at the period of the 
 passage of the law of the United States, or of the law of the State of New 
 York hereinbefore referred to, nor at any previous period, had there been 
 any question in regard to the exclusive right of the State of New York to 
 legislate upon the pilot service connected with the port and harbor of 
 ISew York ; that the lands on both sides of the said harbor are parcel of 
 and subject to thr jurisdiction of said State, and nearly all the navigation 
 in and out of sai I harbor is to and from the said port of New York ; that 
 by the compact between tlie States of New York and New Jersey, in 
 regard to the territory and jurisdiction of said States, confirmed by the 
 
3 
 
 [15] 
 
 act of Congress of June 28, 1834, exclusive jurisdiction was given to the 
 State of INew York over the waters of the bay of New York, of the Hud- 
 son river west of Manhattan island, over the lands covered by water to 
 Ihe low water mark on the New Jersey shore, over Bedlow's and Elhs* 
 islands ; and that by the said compact, so ratified as aforesaid, New Jersey- 
 was excluded from any jurisdiction over the waters situate as aforesaid, 
 except those flowing above low water mark upon the New Jersey shore. 
 
 Your memoriahsts further represent, that the respective boundaries and 
 jurisdictions of the said States of New York and New Jersey, together with 
 the unconstitutionality of the act of Congress of March 2, 1837, of which 
 your memoriahsts complain, will more fully and at large appear by refer- 
 ence to the memorial of the pilots of the port of New York to the legisla- 
 ture of the Slate of New York, and to the message of his excellency the 
 governor of said State in transmitting the same, hereunto annexed. And 
 5^our memorialists further represent, that under the act of Congress of 
 March 2, 1837, a board of pilot commissioners has been established in the 
 State of New Jersey ; that a number of pilots are now in commission from 
 the said Stale, engaged in piloting vessels in and out of the port and har- 
 bor of New York ; which is, as your memorialists respectfully submit, 
 unjust and oppressive to the pilots of the port of New York, detrimental 
 to the navigation in and out of said port, and an interference with the 
 legislation of the State of New York as the same has been exercised 
 without dispute for upwards of half a century. 
 
 And your memorialists represent, in support of said assertion, firstly, 
 that by the said act of Congress a body of men who have entered a pro- 
 fession laborious in itself and requiring a long and rigorous probation, 
 and have expanded their prime of life and neglected all other opportu- 
 nities of gaining a livelihood, trusting to the protection of their State* laws 
 in a matter where State jurisdiction had never been questioned by the 
 general government; who have incurred expenses and educated families 
 upon the faith of their regular earnings under such laws ; who are, many 
 of them, now old and worn out in ^he service and totally unfit for any 
 other employment, having large families dependent upon them for sup- 
 port, find themselves suddenly deprived of their occupation by a body of 
 men who have served no apprenticeship, invested no money, and are 
 irresponsible, in most instances, either as to reputation or property. And 
 your memorialists represent, that all of the New York pilots, excepting 
 twenty five, were branch pilots before the act of Congress complained o^ 
 and that the twenty-five referred to had served their apprenticeship; and 
 they respectfully protest against an enactment which nullifies the juris- 
 diction of the State of New York as to the interests of her citizens to the 
 emoluments of individuals inhabiting a neighboring State. 
 
 And your memorialists further show in illustration, that the New Jersey 
 pilots are admitted without apprenticeship; and that in consequence of 
 such facility, as your memorialists are prepared to prove, persons adjudged 
 incompetent by the New York board of pilot commissioners have pro- 
 cured licenses from the State of New Jersey, to the manifest prejudice, as 
 your memorialists submit, of foreign and inward bound vessels, who can- 
 not be supposed to distinguish between a good pilot and an ignorant one, 
 and which may be commuted at any time, owing to such a state of things, 
 io the care of ignorant and unskilful persons, who, tempted by the rates 
 of pilotage as they have been fixed, upon the understanding that a pilot is 
 
r 15 ] 'c^h^^ 4 
 
 to serve an apprenticeship, may assume to belong to a profession for which 
 they are not qualified, and endanger life and property in the confidence 
 that they cannot be made answerable therefor. 
 
 Your memorialists respectfully suggest, that the idea of throwing the 
 business open to competition, which has procured the passage of the 
 present law, ought to be received with the following qualification, namely^ 
 that no one should be allowed to enter a calling which is to involve the 
 security of life and property of others, without some securily given that 
 the public shall be safe. In all professions where the skilfulness and un- 
 skilfulness of the practitioner will operate to his own loss or emolument 
 merely, competition, of course, will insure diligence; but your memo- 
 rialists submit, that if the profession of medicine or law were thrown open 
 to competition, and the unlearned or the patient obliged to receive the 
 first physician or attorney who oftered his services, such a law would at 
 once be condemned as arbitrary and unwise; and yet such is the eflfect 
 of the present act of Congress. A captain of a foreign vessel coming to 
 the port of New York is obliged, by law, to take the first pilot who ofterSj 
 and he has no securily that the pilot so offering is fit to be trusted, either 
 from knowledge or habits. 
 
 And your memorialists humbly submit, that justice, and a due regard to 
 the interests of all parties, demand that the present act of Congress in re- 
 lation to the pilots of the port of New York shou'd be repealed or modi- 
 fied in such manner as the interests of the public, the rights of individuals, 
 and the integrity of State rights require; all which is respectfully sub- 
 mitted to your lionorable body as being no more than the rights of the 
 State of INew York and her citizens require. 
 
 And your memorialists further represent, that a petition was presented 
 to the House of Representatives in 1842, in which the difficulties of navi- 
 gating the Mississippi and Ohio rivers were fully set forth, and in which 
 the frequent accidents occurring from the employment of incompetent per- 
 sons as pilots were also stated. The petitioners, therefore, prayed for the 
 passage of a law by Congress regulating the pilotage of steamboats upon said 
 rivers. And your memorialists further represent, that this petition was re- 
 ferred to the Committee on Commerce, who, after a due consideration of 
 the subject, reported that, in their opinion, " the subject should be left, as it 
 always had been, to the legislatures of the States, whose powers in rela* 
 tion to it are ample, and who have convenient access to that local informa- 
 tion which is indispensable to enlightened legislation upon a matter in- 
 volving the right? and interests of several classes of citizens." And your 
 memorialists further represent, that there exists at this time no law of the 
 Slate of [New York for the governojent of the pilot service required with- 
 in the jurisdiction of the said State, the same having been repealed during 
 the present year; and that there is now no other regulation of the said 
 service, except the loose and indefinite act of Congress of March 2, 1837. 
 
 Your memorialists further represent, that some further legislation in ad- 
 dition to the said act is necessary, both for the protection of the rights of 
 your memorialists and the interests of the public ; and that this necessity is 
 rendered evident from the fact that a self constituted body of individuals 
 in the city of New York have organized themselves into aboard of pilot 
 commissioners, for the purpose ot examining and issuing certificates and 
 licenses to pilots; that this board consists of five persons, one of whom is 
 chosen by the honorable the Secretary of the Navy, under what law or 
 
5 
 
 [15] 
 
 ty what authority your memorialists have been unable to ascertain ; and 
 that the object of said board, as stated in its published constitution and 
 rules, is "to prevent improper persons from acting as pilots, deeming it 
 important to the interests of humanity and commerce." 
 
 And yonr memorialists further represent, and humbly submit to your 
 honorable body, that this object, in which the whole community are in- 
 terested, cannot be attained under the system and regulations above re- 
 ferred to by your memorialists ; tluit destruction of property has already 
 occurred in consequence of the incompetency of persons assuming to act 
 as pilots without the previous training and practical acquaintance with the 
 waters of the harbor and port of New York of your memorialists ; that a 
 .state of confusion in the pilot service, better conceived than described, has 
 arisen from the want of that proper and undisputed regulation which had 
 existed for half a century ; some persons acting under licenses granted by 
 ihe State of New Jersey; some from licenses gr<.nted by the selfconsti- 
 UUed board of commissioners already referred to by your memorialists ; 
 some acting under old commissions, and some without any pretence of 
 authority whatever. 
 
 Your memorialists, therefore, humbly pray, that the Congress of the 
 United States may terminate a state of things so injurious to the interests 
 of the community, either by the repeal of the huv of March 2, 1837, and 
 ihe leaving of the regulation of the pilot service to the States respectively, 
 or by such further legislation as shall make the act aforesaid general in its 
 operation, and remove the objections aad remedy the evils hereinbefore 
 set forth by vour memorialists. 
 
 JNO. MAGINN, 
 Prest. N. Y. P. Association. 
 
 Edwd. Hdpe, Secretary. 
 
 STATE OF NEW YORK. 
 In Senate, February 6, 1845. 
 
 Message from the Governor., transmitting a memorial from the pilots of 
 
 New York, 
 
 Executive Chamber, Albany. February 1845. 
 
 7b the Lpgislatiire : 
 
 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 hefore the legislature, and 
 invoke its consideration (^f the subject of it. 1 deem it but just to that 
 class of public commercial agents to comply with their request. 
 
 Without entering upon the discussion of the question 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 establishment of the federal government up to the year 1837, 
 was, by a law passed on the 7ih day of August, 17 89, to refer the whole 
 matter to the legislation of the States, until its further action. 
 
[15] 
 
 6 
 
 The loss of a couple of vessels, with numerous lives, in or near the 
 harbor of New York, during the early part of ihe winter of 1836-'37, 
 gave rise to many and aggravated charges of negligence and abuse against 
 the New York pilots ; and an appHcation was made to Congress to inter- 
 fere, by what was claimed to be its proper constitutional authority, and 
 break up what was charged as a monopoly etijoyed by those pilotSy 
 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, passed a 
 law declaring that "it shall and may be lawful for the master and com- 
 mander of any vessel coming into or going out of any port situated 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 
 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 pilotage 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 lh37, before referred to, it had been 
 subject, and only subject, to its exclusive legislation. This, with the 
 extensive and constantly increasing commerce of that port, had naturally 
 raised up a body of pilots, who m-ide 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 refer- 
 ence to their qualifications and skill, which had for a long term of years 
 characterized our legislation upon the subject, had made it a profession 
 difficult and expensive in the acquirement, and it was the policy of those 
 laws to give it commensurate value, by confining the business, 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, whether as to their fidelity and skill as pilots, or 
 their patriotism or respectability as citizens. 
 
 The unfortunate loss of the vessels referred to, at New York, in l836-'37j 
 produced great excitement throughout the country, and the blame was 
 charged upon the pilots of that port. It was charged that 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 dangerous 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 ha? 
 been quoted, having for its object to introduce competition from the ad- 
 joining State of New Jersey, to break up the supposed injurious monopoly, 
 and to secure vigilance on the part of the pilot* 
 
 It cannot fail to be seen that this legislation on the part of Congress 
 was very partial in its application, only affecting the p lots of those ports 
 and harbors the waters of which embraced a boundary between 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 limits 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 ques- 
 
7 
 
 tioncd 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 the rule of application, with as much 
 show of principle as the fact that a boundary between Slates passes 
 through it. 
 
 So also the principle, that Congress can make a law of one State oper- 
 ate in another, or give to a license granted by the anthoriiy of one State 
 force in another, appears to me to be equally unsound and dangerous. It 
 is assuming that Congress may, as a mode of exercising a federal power, 
 adopt the legislation, existing or prospective, of tlie 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 oc- 
 casion. 
 
 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. 
 
 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 negjigence or 
 fault on (heir part. This disposed of the ground upon which Congress 
 was undoubtedly induced to attempt this partial exercise of its authority 
 over the subject of pilotage. 
 
 The State legislation consequent upon this excitement of feeling was 
 an entire n^.w law for the licensing and govermnent of the pilots of the 
 port of New York, which was passed on the I2.th 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 t»ilots, 
 and increased the restruints and responsibilities upon those who should 
 take a license and enter upnn the business; while the monopolizing fea- 
 tures of the former laws were entirely removed, and the fullest competition 
 opened and invited between the pilots attached to every different pilot 
 boat. The terms of appr.*nticeship necessary to entitle the apprentice 
 to a license were materially shortened, and, nt the discretion of the 
 commission constituted, p rsons who had se:"ved no apprenticeship 
 could be licensed upojj examination. Every pilot's license was to be re- 
 newed 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 entrtisted to his care, and rigid provisions were 
 enacted for the constant ocrupation 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 tlie charges for piloting every vessel in or out 
 of the port are specifically fixed. 
 
 'J'he pilots cheerf illy accepted of the terms, and energetically entered 
 upon their dirticult and datigenuis duties under the new law, and soon 
 found others— strangers to theoj, to the law of their Slate, and free from 
 its restrictions and n?sponsibilities — acting as their competitors. If they 
 attempted to enforce against these competitors the prohibitions of the law 
 
[15] 
 
 8 
 
 of the State, the act of Congress of 1837, and a license from a neigh- 
 boring State, were interposed, and proved to be effectual exemptions 
 before the municipal courts. In this way, pilots who were under no obli- 
 gation to supply the pilot stations, had given no bond, had served no 
 apprenticeship, had undergone no examination, and, restrained by no legal 
 regulation of charges, were f )und 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 inhah- 
 - itants of another Siate, but residents of the same city with themselves, 
 who, having taken license from another State, were entirely at liberty to be 
 pilots in fair weather and landsmen in foul, if that should be their pleasure 
 —entirely at liberty to follow the profession of pilots during those por- 
 tions of the year when the hazards are least and commerce is most full, 
 and to leave the stations to the regularly hcensed 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 18 )7,and the State law of the same year ; and it ap- 
 pears to me that, under regulations so unequal, the ^ew 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 restrictions 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 1 know of 
 HO body to which our own pilots can so properly appeal to do them this 
 justice, as to the legislature of their own State. 
 
 The i\ew York pilots have, for years, applied in vain to Congress to re- 
 peal 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, under 
 the law of Congress. My own impression is, that if the legislature 
 should consider it wise and proper to invoke the attention 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 Congress, the consequence 
 would be a repeal of that act, leaving again the whole subject to the reg- 
 ulation of the legislature of the State, where, 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 legis- 
 lature, and respectfully request ihat attention for them. 
 
 The memorial is acconjpanied by an argument of the questions of 
 principle which the petitioners suppose to be involved in their applica- 
 tion, and I take lea\e to present it to the legislature, with their petition. 
 
 SILAS WRICHT. 
 
9 
 
 [15] 
 
 MEMORIAL. 
 
 In presenting the annexed memorial, the pilots of New York snbmit 
 the following considerations to the legislature, expecting to establish that 
 the aci of Congress of the 4th of March. 1S37, is a manifest infraction of 
 the federal compact, impairing, if not effectually nndermining, the sove- 
 reignty of the States. 
 
 The course of legislation by tlie Federal and State governments has 
 placed this subject in a condition of confusion and disorganization wholly 
 incompatible with the importance of it. 
 
 The power of the federal government to legislate, arises from the ex- 
 clusive grant in the constitution that Congress shall "regulate commerce 
 with fl>reign nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian 
 tribes 
 
 The States exercise the same power of legislation under their acknowl- 
 edged 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 which the United States and the individual States must, of 
 necessity, exercise concurrent or co-ordinate jurisdiciion. The States, 
 under our political system, may exercise their imperfect right until it 
 comes practically in collision with the actual exercise of the same con- 
 gressional power. As soon as such collision occurs, the right of the State, 
 being subordinate to that of Congress, must be surrendered, and yield to 
 the more absolute power, under the sixth article of the constitution of the 
 United States. "This constitution, 0/?^/ the laics of the United ^States 
 which shall be wade in j)in\siwiice thf^reof, and all treaties made, or 
 which shall be»made under the authority of the United States, shall he 
 ihe sujfrernH law of the land.^^ 
 
 It is well known that, under the confederation, the regulation of com- 
 merce was committed t(> the respective States, each f )r itself; and, in the 
 exercise of it, and the acknowledged rights of sovereignty, the States re- 
 spectively, as necessity required, adopted a pilot system coextensive with 
 their territorial limits, and on the high seas. 
 
 At the first session of Congress, begun and held at the city of New 
 York Oil Monday, the 4th of March, 1789, (the first day the constitution 
 commenced its operation.) Congress was employed in filling out, by legis- 
 lation, the distributed grants which became the subjects of its jurisdic- 
 tion ; and, on the 7th of August following, passed an act adopting the 
 pilot systems of the several States in the Union, in general terms : " That 
 all pilots in the bays, rivers, inlets, harbors, and ports of the United States, 
 shall continue to be regulated in conformity with the existing laws of the 
 States respectively irheiein. such pilots way be, or with such laws a«! the 
 States may respectively hereafier enact for the puipose, until future legis- 
 lative provi^ion by Congress." By that act, the laws of the States were 
 engrafted on the legislative code of the federal government for the regu- 
 lation of pilots; 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, 1 837— without interruption until the 4th of March, 
 ^837— a period of about fifty years. 
 
 The disasters during the winter of 1837 suggested to Congress the ne- 
 cessity of providing more adequate laws, to prevent the recurrence of 3imi- 
 
[15] 
 
 10 
 
 lar misadventures. To accomplish that object, on the 4th of March aa 
 
 act was passed, consisting of a single section, in the following w^rds: 
 " An act concerning pilots. I3e it enacted, that it shall and may be lawful 
 for the master or commander of any vessel coming into ox going out 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." hi 
 the exercise of the sovereign political power of this State, laws have been 
 enacted for the licensing and government of pilots of the port of New 
 York, requiring those appointed not alone to possess suitable qualitication. 
 but to furnish sufficient security for the faithful discharge of their appro- 
 priate 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 adjoining State, to be 
 exercised within, the territorial confines of their own. It is not that Con- 
 gress has legislated within its appropriate sphere that they complain, but 
 that in such legislation its constitutional authority has been transcendedj 
 and the sovereignty of their State has been invaded, to their exclusive 
 prejudice. 
 
 It is admitted that the regulation of commerce includes that of naviga- 
 tion, and that the authority of Congress, though limited to specified ob- 
 jects, 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 sovereignty. Had Congress 
 assumed the task of regulating the pilot system 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 functions, 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 oppoijit- 
 ing mvnici pal officers to per form their functions wifhin the territorial lim- 
 its of this State, they claim the restraint of such authority, and that the 
 integrity of the State be asserted against such infringement of its sove- 
 reign rights. The federal government has full power to appoint ?7.v own 
 officers to discharge their duties everywhere, but has none to autliorize 
 the exercise of the municipal jurisdiction of one sovereign State within 
 the confines of another, and thus perpetrate consolidation 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, which, 
 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 fede- 
 ral government, and are nototherwise 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, 
 
11 
 
 [15 1 
 
 to appoint officers indiscriminately to perform the duties of their office on 
 land within the sanio limits. That doctrine is wholly repugnant to the 
 idea of sovereignty. Such cotitrol, deriving validity from a sovereign 
 power, necessarily implies a diminution of the sovereignty of New York 
 to the extent of that control, and an investment of that sovereignty in the 
 State of i\ew Jersey to the same extent as that control is in] posed. The 
 jurisdiction of a State within its own territory is ext lusive and absolute^ 
 and is susceptible of no linjitation not imposed by itself In adopting the 
 federal constitution, the States invested Congress with the power to regu- 
 late comtnerce, but did not contemplate that Congress should dt(e£iate that 
 risf^f' (as in the present act exercised) by authorizing one State to license 
 officers to perforai the duties of their appointment within the territory of 
 another. 
 
 The Congress of 1789 was, in part, composed of those illustrious states- 
 men who framed the constitution, and the act of that date may be regard- 
 ed as a contemporaneous legislative exposition of that instrument. That 
 Congress well utiderstood the limit of Pederal and State sovereignty ; and, 
 moving with caution and circumspection, did not venture to trench on 
 State sovereignty, but, e.r ahundantta cantt^la^ avoided it, and limited the 
 laws of the respective States to the pilots of the respective States, the act 
 declaring " That all pilots, <fcc., (fcc, shall continue to be regulated in 
 conformity with the existing laws of the States respectively wherein suck 
 pilots may 6^." 
 
 Though the terms of the act of 1837 invest masters of vessels with 
 authority to employ certain pilots, yet the aim, object, and spirit of it, is 
 to confer the power in the pihtfs to act rather than on the masters to em- 
 ploy them, as is sufficiently expressed by the title of the sinijie section 
 act. It is act concerning pilots." Nor is it an act for the regulation 
 an4 government of pilots, but designed to extend the field of operation, 
 heretotore denied, to the citizens of the Slate of New Jersey, by confer- 
 ring on them, in common with the pilots of New York, the right of pilot- 
 ing vessels on the exclusive waters of this State — for exclusive the waters 
 are, as regards the municipal rehtions of this State — of exercising the 
 sovereignty of New Jersey within the State of New York, their only pow- 
 er to act springing from the conmiission of tJiat 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 expression in the 
 act " that it u]ay be lawful" by obvious legal intendment is, that it was un- 
 lawful before, or is a grant of power not before possessed, as, if it were 
 lawful before the act of 1837, the leijislative declaration to that effect was 
 wholly superfluous. The act of 1837 accomplishes two purposes. First, 
 it deprives the Slate of New York of the exclusive authority to appoint 
 pilots for her own waters ; and, second, authorizes the State of New Jer- 
 sey to participa e equally iti that right, notwithstanding the Supreme Court 
 of the United Slates has adjudged that the licensing of pilots is embraced 
 in the power of a State to regulate h^ r 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 citizens 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 
 
[15] 
 
 12 
 
 act of 1837, and is now enjoyed in most successful activity — aright 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 concurrence 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 commission of their sovereign, are exempted 
 from the operation of the laws of that Slate in whose confines they exe- 
 cute the duties of their office; are unrestrained by the salutary regulations 
 established in pursuance of such laws, and rendered amenable alone (if 
 at all) for misconduct 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 tliis blending of jurisdiction is compatible with sove- 
 reignty, that boasted independence is but a theory. 
 
 It has lieen well said that the act of 1837 " has occasioned serious diffi- 
 culties 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 specified in the law.'* 
 The collision of jurisdiction between tlie United Stales and the States is 
 rather prospective in its practical operation ; but it is a collision, in princi- 
 ple, on the threshold. It compels one State to admit and tolerate, within 
 its own jurisdiction, the action and functions of a municipal license issu- 
 ing from another State. It authorizes one sovereign State to inva ie, in 
 this manner, the waters, territories, and jurisdiction of another. The as- 
 sumption of this authority by Congress will, we think, be allowed to be 
 a collision of jurisdiction between the United States and the J:5tates* It 
 carries violence on the face of it. It requires the authorities of New York 
 (State and city) to recognise 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 consequence already is, 
 that the State of New Jersey, having little navigation, issues commissions 
 or licenses to pilots not so much because the State needs their servi'^es, as 
 because these pilots need the profits of employment under the jurisdiction 
 of New York. New York, having a vast interest at stake, has found it 
 necessary to enact an extended code of pilot regulations, prescribing ap- 
 prenticeship, qualifications, &c., all of which 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 Congress 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? 
 
 '1 he power granted to Congress by the constitution " to regulate com- 
 merce among the several States," is a very diffiirent 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 consideration. This is 
 tlie single principle, the exact shape and definite action of this law, viz : 
 
13 
 
 [15] 
 
 to enforce the authorities of one State on those of another — a principle, as 
 cannot be denied, of disorganization and aggression. 
 
 " Congress shall have power to regulate commerce between the Slates," 
 etc. The fair interpretation of a law is a reasonable one. One of the 
 first and fundamental principles of our state of society is the sovereignty 
 of the States within their own jurisdiction, as to "all powers not dele- 
 gated to the United States by the coiistitution, or prohibited by it to the 
 States;" and the question now belnre us is, whether this power "to 
 regulate commerce between the Stales" would authorize this law of 1837? 
 We think not; first, because the jurisdiction assumed is personal as to 
 the subject of it, and therefore municipal. It is the government of the 
 agent of conmierce, which lies in the jurisdiction of a State, and does not 
 aifect the terms or conditions on which the material of commerce shall 
 pass from one State to another. By this law the State of New Jersey 
 may and does push its jurisdiction over persons itjto the State of New 
 York, and compels the latter to admit such jurisdiction by surrendering 
 its own, so far as the regulation of the personal conduct of pilots is con- 
 cerned in their profe.^sional 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 prescribe, 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 maintam the obligation of contracts throughout the Union ; 
 to provide a standard of common currency, etc., but it would be pre- 
 posterous to suppose that this power was intended to authorize Congress 
 to compel the State of Georgia to recognise a pedlar's license obtained 
 from the municipal authorities of South Carolina, or to surrender jurisdic- 
 tion over a stage driver's functions because he happened to take up his 
 whip in a neighboring State. Peddling on wheels or on foot is commerce, 
 doubtless, as much so as shipping; but we apprehend that a nullification 
 temper 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 belit-ve it will be admit- 
 ted as sound doctrine, that when a man passes from one State to another, 
 his personal accountability is transferred to the latter. He cannot be ame- 
 nable to both jurisdictions at the same time and for the same acts. The rea- 
 son is, because the laws of the State left behind catnjot f illow or reach 
 him — cannot lap over. Even if he is a criminal flying from justice, he can- 
 not 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 pre- 
 scribe the terms and modes of personal acts or functions performed in an- 
 other State. The professional functions of pilots are purely personal 
 acts. 
 
 It is conceded that an officer or acram of the United States must be ad- 
 mitted and entertained by the States in the discharge of his appropriate 
 functions, and that for these duties he comes under the jurisdiction of 
 the authority from which he derives his commission. For all such pur- 
 poses, the jurisdiction of the United States comprehends all the Stales. 
 But It will be seen that the entrance of a commission or license of the 
 
[ 15 ] 14 
 
 federal government into the jurisdiction of the States for such purposes, 
 is a very ditferent thing from tlie entratire and action of a commission or 
 license of any one of ilie States into tlie territorifs 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 authorizeil by this law of 
 Congress. Nor would ii he sufficient 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 Slate of New Jersey, so 
 far as the immediate derivation of his authority is concerned, which, we 
 conceive, is all we [jave to consider. A commission or license of New 
 Jersey is forced upon the State of New York. 
 
 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 ac- 
 tion 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 iiitended to assume it till 
 1837, when it was suddenly, and we may add violently, taken, without 
 even the couriesy of a notice served on the parties concerned. The pilot 
 regulations formed a part, in some Stales 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 thu'ty nine days thereafter adopted 
 a new code, consisting of two acts and fifty-two sections, tnany of those 
 sections being chapters in themselves, the authority and effect of which 
 were 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 histo- 
 ry of the past, if Congress meditated such an assumption — we will not 
 say usurpation — of power— although it cannot be called resumption, 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 con- 
 venience and paralyzed the arm of their authority, besides leaving them 
 open to privateering incursions from neighboring States, acting under 
 commission of those States, with the authority 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 pilots of New Jer- 
 sey, 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 light of its own sovereignty, in the good faith of the act of 
 Congress of 1 798, and in accordance with all usage in these United States, 
 took up >n itself to revise and aniend the laws of the State for the regula- 
 tion of pilots, in conseiiuence of the public excitement respecting the loss 
 
15 
 
 of the Bristol and Mexico, and simultaneously with the action of Con- 
 gress on the same subject, for the same object. It is evident, from an ex- 
 amination of the law of New York, that no pains or expense were spared 
 to obtam all information that could be of use, and that the committee 
 charged with the duty of reporting a bill perfm-med their task with great 
 fidelity. Two separate acts were prepared, one of forty four, and the other 
 of eight sections, in all fifty two, altogether of such extent and particu- 
 larity as to constitute 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 participate, un- 
 less authorized by the commissioners, in the earnings of any others than 
 diose 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, every pilot 
 boat has a separate interest, is barred from combination by heavy penal- 
 ties, 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 die 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 years' 
 standing, and from every day's observation. We have before us reports 
 made by them (Jhe 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 re- 
 form 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 regulation 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 of a declaration 
 on the part of Congress as to the right of sovereignty in this particular, 
 and a full concession thereof 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 befor<^, 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 disturbed, 
 not to say violated it, by the act of 1837. 
 
 it is evident that the States only are competent to attend to this busi- 
 ness, not to touch the question of right. liOok 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 
 
[15 ] 
 
 16 
 
 creates a branch of municipal polity of grea't dignity and consequencev 
 well adapted to its purposes. It shows thai all concerned in it understood 
 the subject, and conniiendably discharged their duly. Whereas the con- 
 temporaneous law of Congress evinces, not only a want of consideration, 
 but great ignorance of the subject. There is but one single, solitary prin- 
 ciple in it, and that, most unfortunately, is a principle of mischief — of two- 
 fold, tri-f()ld, 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 o[)erate in 
 the Slate of New York, or in any other State, it struck at the sovereignty 
 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. 1: is, moreover, a violation of the pledged 
 faith of Congress — a faith as soleiiuily pledged as in any part or parcel of 
 the federal constimtion — 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 error of legislation — for such it evi- 
 dently was — is not to be found in ourannals. 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? We say wanton, for what possible good can result from it? 
 There is positively nothing but evil, vi^iihout considering_the breach of 
 faith, and the collision of jurisdiction. The regulation of the pilots of our 
 waters must be either in the care of the United States or of the States. 
 
 The jurisdiction cannot possibly, certainly not conveniently, be divi- 
 ded. We think 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 1837; whereas 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 assump- 
 tion 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 license of one State should be forced, with all its powers 
 and privileges, upon the jurisdiction of another State, to suspend andnul- 
 lify the authority of that State! And yet this is the naked principle, as 
 well as the sum and substance of the law of Congress of 1837. It con- 
 tains nothing more, and nothing less. There is nothing but mischief, 
 portentous mischief, in the act. 
 
 In the same manner as lawyers, doctors, and other professions, obtain 
 licenses to practise, under the municipal regulations of their respective 
 States, granting them peculiarand 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 trainitig 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 con- 
 nected with the wealth, happiness, 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 acquirements to another place, or to another State, if they 
 
17 
 
 [15] 
 
 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 thai 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 pi- 
 lots of every port have grown up under their own system, and are cotin- 
 pelled to rely upon the uniform maintenance of that system for their own 
 livelihood, and that of their dependant 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 liv- 
 ing. They are entirely powerless, and are compelled, unresistingly and 
 unjustly, to submit to the incursions of foreigners, acting under the com- 
 mission or license of foreign States; thus enforced, by the supreme author- 
 ity 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 con- 
 formed to the rules of qualification, as established by the municipal au- 
 thority 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 under- 
 bid the lawful tenants of the ground as to expel them even from compe- 
 tition — as to expel them altogether; and the next thing will be a combi- 
 nation of foreigners, under foreign licenses, in possession of the pilot 
 grounds of New York. This will be the inevitable result. The service 
 must necessarily 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 public and au- 
 thoritative sanction given to the spirit and to acts of disorganization, 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 effectual for purposes of reform, so far as it was required ; 
 next, to the point and fact of competition between the pilots of New 
 York ; and, lastly, a very touching certificate to the excellence of their 
 character, and to the fidelity of their service. 
 
 " A more valuable, capable, deserving and enterprising class of pilots, 
 the world does not produce ; they almost daily board vessels at sea, from 
 fifteen to fifty, one hundred and fifty, and two hundred miles from the 
 Hook ; and in some instances they go up to Nantucket and St. George's 
 bank. It is heart rending to see these invaders of our State rights board 
 vessels alongside 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 suffi- 
 ciently punished for it, and have made ample atonement by their unex- 
 ceptionable conduct, and a probation of nearly four years. The general 
 government, as well as the State, may be assured that they need bounder 
 no apprehension of neglect of duty among thera," &c. 
 
[15] 
 
 18 
 
 And this testimony from the commissioners appointed by the State to 
 see that the pilot regulations of New York are observed and executed: 
 
 "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 we 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 shordy will be greater, by the 
 expiration of the indentures of apprentices, that they will scarcely be able 
 to pay expenses. This board would, as a matter of impartial justice, beg 
 of Congress either to cause a repeal of the laws which do now allow the 
 Jersey pilots to pilot in our waters, or place them under the same restric- 
 tions as those to which our pilots are subjected. 
 
 " The State of New Jersey having so little commerce, found no occa- 
 sion for legislating on the subject of pilots till this act of Congress of 
 1837, and then her object could not be legitimate as a moral question, be- 
 cause it was only to depredate on the rights of her neighbors, 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 piloting from the New Jersey authorities, 
 however slender their qualifications, 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, would 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 pilot 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 account of the 
 perils to which it is exposed, cannot be insured at any rate which the 
 pilots are able to aflbrd. 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 territorial jurisdic- 
 tion, and the pilot laws since 1731, becomes necessary to ascertain the ex- 
 tent of her limits, and the jurisdiction which has ever been claimed for 
 her in regard to pilot regulations. Before the compact between the States 
 of New York and New Jersey, respecting their territorial limits and juris- 
 diction, ratified by the act of Congress 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 commissioners ; thence southerly along the west shore at low-water 
 mark of the Hudson river, of the Kill-Van Kull, of the sound between 
 Staten island 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 com* 
 pact of 1834 does not vary that boundary to affect this subject. 
 
19 
 
 [15] 
 
 "Article 1. The boundary line between the two States of New York 
 and New Jersey, from a point in the middle of Hudson river, opposite the 
 point on the west shore thereof, in the 41st degree of north latitude, as 
 heretotore 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. 
 
 "Article 2. The State of New York shall retain its present jurisdic- 
 tion over Bedlow's island, Ellis island, and shall also retain exclusive 
 jurisdiction of and over the other islands lying in the waters above men- 
 tioned and now under the jurisdiction of that State. 
 
 " Article 3. The State of New York shall have and enjoy exclusive 
 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 west- 
 erly 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 ricrJit of prop- 
 erty in and to the land under vmter 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 as^romid 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 passen- 
 gers 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 regu- 
 lating 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 jurisdic- 
 tion and right of property of the Kill-Van-Kull, the sound between Staten 
 island and New Jersey, lying west of Wood bridge 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 prop» 
 erty 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 
 over the lands covered by water, to the low- water mark on the New Jersey 
 shore, and over Bedlow's and other islands mentioned. 
 
 New Jersey has the exclusive right of property in the land andf^r 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., (fee, on the shore of that State, and over 
 vessels aground on her shores, or fd.siened to her wharres, subject to the 
 health and passenger laws of New York, and has also the right of ?'egn- 
 Inting thn fisheries on the westerly side of the middle of the waters of 
 New York bay and Hudson river, opposite I\Ianhattan island. 
 
 In other words, New Jersey has no jurisdiction over the waters of New 
 
[15] 
 
 20 
 
 York bay, or Hudson river, opposite Manhattan island, except those flow- 
 ing above low-water mark on Jersey shore^ but all that jurisdiction is ex- 
 clusively vested in the State of New York. 
 
 The right has been claimed for New York, and maintained, to legislate 
 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 & Smith's 
 laws, passed in 1731, provides for the appointment of pilots. The first 
 section is as follows: "That all and every person nominated and ap- 
 pointed by the president or the governor, &c., &c., by and with the ad- 
 vice 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 appointed 
 in the manner before mentioned or deputed by those so authorized 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, he or they 
 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 £5. 
 
 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, (fee, &c., shall be the ottly 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, 1837, enacted in 
 the face of the act of Congress of AfJi March of the same year^ declares 
 that " any person 7iot holding a license as pilots 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 convic- 
 tion thereof be punished by di fine not exceeding fifty dollars, or imprison- 
 ment 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 " not 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 ]jal/)ably in coliision with the act of Congress au- 
 thorizing 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 Yoik is a dead 
 letter, under the Gth article of the federal constitution. Was it becom- 
 ing the dignity of this State that her legislature 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 establishing its unconstitutionality. 
 
 The legislation by New York has always been exclusive and co-exten- 
 sive with the jurisdiction overber waters, until February Sth, 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 
 
21 
 
 [15] 
 
 aid usually extended to maritime States, and whereas at this time there 
 are no licensed pilots for the safe conduct of our increasing commerce, 
 rendering us wholly dependant upon a neighboring State: Therefore, (fee, 
 cfec." In truth, that act was passed that it might be adopted by Congress, 
 as it was within the short period of twenty-four days, more for the pur- 
 pose of giving employment to the citizens of New Jersey within the juris- 
 diction of Ntw York, than on account of her increasing commerce; and 
 we now find New Jersey pilots navigating vessels (not under any pre- 
 tence of jurisdiction over the waters from that State to the high seas) 
 through the narrows, to and from sea; through the East river, to and from 
 Corlear'sHook and the navy-yard, Brooklyn ; they even take them from the 
 slips and wharves of the city of New York, at the extreme points of that 
 city, whether in the East or Hudson river; 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 " situate 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 recognises Tompkinsville, Williamsburg, 
 Sing Sing, Newburg, and other small places, as ports, and has frequently 
 so held under the admiralty jurisdiction of the lien 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 wa- 
 ters are a common highway? that the right of navigation belongs to every 
 citizen of the United States? True, it is a highway; but it is equally 
 true that the control and regulation of a highway, within the body of a 
 State, is the province and prerogative of the sovereignty through which it 
 passes ; nor is that regulation incompatible with the free enjoyment of 
 such highway. Every vessel on waters within the territory of a sover- 
 eign State, is subjected to the municipal regulations 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 Jersey 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 municipal authority over such highway; 
 nor can such municipal authority 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 w^elfare 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 demanded, 
 under severe penalties, in hailing vessels approaching her ports, and ad- 
 monishing 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 du- 
 ties which are enjoined in every statute to be observed by her own 
 pilots? Congress has not confided to New York jurisdiction over the 
 l^ilots 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 jiilot system. This is the 
 practical etfect of the act of Congress. 
 
 It is repeated, that Congress has the right to commit this wrong di- 
 rectly, by appointing her own officers, as a regulation of commerce, but 
 
[15] 
 
 22 
 
 may not indirectly, by merging the jurisdiction of both States in each 
 other. 
 
 The municipal jurisdiction of the State of New Jersey thus exercised, 
 is entirely repugnant to the second title of the Revised Statutes, treating 
 on " the sovereignty and jurisdiction of New York.'-* That tide declares 
 that " the sovereignty of this State extends to all places within the boun- 
 daries thereof, &c., &c.; but the extent of such jurisdiction over places 
 that have been or may be ceded to the United States shall be quahfied 
 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 jurisdiction." 
 
 It is, in conclusion, respectfully submitted that Congress has author- 
 ized an invasion of the sovereignty of New York by New Jersey, through 
 hasty and ill-advised legislation. It is a usurpation of authority not to 
 be submitted to — inconsistent with the dignity of the State — and, if ac- 
 quiesced in, may soon be followed by other, and, if possible, more fla- 
 grant 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 under foot, and confidently hope 
 that measures may be taken to secure to us the uninterrupted enjoyment 
 of our franchise, and efl'ectually 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 icquire 
 the vindication of the supremacy of the State, and involves a more se- 
 rious question than the protection of the humble pilot. Establish our 
 rights, and our duty will follow j but " niisera servitus est ubi jus est 
 aut vagum aut incognitum." 
 
 Respectfully submitted. 
 
 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 Avay of 
 Sandy Hook, 
 
 RESPECTFULLY REPRESENTS 
 
 That they have 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 Hook. 
 
 That, in faith of the protection of those laws, they have embarked their 
 fortunes in the purchase, building, and equipment of pilot-boats necessaiy 
 and proper to the efficient and useful discharge of the appropriate 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 waters which are the 
 
23 
 
 [15] 
 
 boundary between two States, to employ any pilot duly licensed or au- 
 thorized 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 Jersey 
 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, 1S37, and under and by virtue of a supplemental act of 
 the State of New Jersey, passed the 13th of February, 1838, 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 Tompkinsville, in the county of Rich- 
 mond, by the way of Sandy Hook, on waters within the exclusive terri- 
 torial 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 inter- 
 ests 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 author- 
 izes the municipal 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 deter- 
 mine whether the aforesaid act of Congress does or does not transcend 
 the legislative power of the federal government, and whether the acts ex- 
 ercised under its sanction, and under the authority 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, (fee, &c. 
 
 James Burger, Richard Blake, 
 
 John T. Kelso, J. Livingston, 
 
 John Hyer, Thomas Vail, 
 
 John Maginn, Henry J. BuUinger, 
 
 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, 
 
 Robert W. Johnson, Josiah Johnson, 
 
 John L. Turnure, Maurice D. Weaver, 
 
 Kuyler E. H. Dibble, John Dean. 
 
Avery Architectural and Fine Arts Library 
 Gift of Seymour B. Durst Old York Library