The Mississippi River is a boundary between Mississippi and
Louisiana from below the port of Natchez as far north as Louisiana
extends; but below Natchez, all the river is wholly within
Louisiana, and that state, subject only to the paramount power of
Congress, has exclusive jurisdiction over pilotage in the river
between points south of Natchez.
Section 4236, Rev.Stat., Act of March 2, 1837, c. 22, 5 Stat.
153, allowing the master of vessels coming in or going out of ports
on boundary rivers to employ any pilot licensed by either state,
does not apply to pilotage to ports on a river below the point
where it becomes a boundary river, and a pilot licensed only by
Mississippi has no right to pilot a vessel from the Gulf of Mexico
to New Orleans.
Quaere whether, under § 4236, a pilot
licensed only by Mississippi can pilot a vessel from the Gulf to
Natchez.
Neither continuity of water nor identity of name will make a
river a boundary river except where it flows between the states it
separates for a part of its course; it ceases to be a boundary
river wherever it is wholly within one state.
119 La. 522 affirmed.
The facts are stated in the opinion.
Page 214 U. S. 177
MR. JUSTICE HOLMES delivered the opinion of the Court.
This is an information charging the plaintiff in error with
piloting a foreign vessel from the Gulf of Mexico to New Orleans,
the port to which she was bound, he not being a duly qualified
pilot under the laws of Louisiana. He was convicted after a trial,
and the supreme court of the state pronounced the judgment correct.
119 La. 522. By demurrer, motion to quash, and motion in arrest of
judgment, he raised the objection that the power of Louisiana was
not exclusive, and that a license from the Board of Pilot
Commissioners for the harbor of Natchez, Mississippi, was a
sufficient authority under the Act of Congress of March 2, 1837, c.
22, 5 Stat. 153, Rev.Stat. § 4236.
The Mississippi River, it will be remembered, is a boundary
between Mississippi and Louisiana from below the port of Natchez as
far north as Louisiana extends. On the other hand, all the
southernmost portion of the river is wholly within Louisiana. The
destination of the vessel which the plaintiff in error undertook to
pilot was to a point within this southernmost portion -- New
Orleans -- as the information charged.
Page 214 U. S. 178
For the purposes of decision, it may be assumed, although it is
disputed, that the State of Mississippi has attempted to authorize
the plaintiff in error to do what he did, while Louisiana has made
his conduct criminal if it has power to do so under the United
States law.
The section of the Revised Statutes reads as follows:
"The master of any vessel coming into or going out of any port
situate upon waters which are the boundary between two states may
employ any pilot duly licensed or authorized by the laws of either
of the states bounded on such waters, to pilot the vessels to or
from such port."
The case for the plaintiff in error depends upon the assumption
that the "waters which are the boundary between two states" are, in
this case, the whole Mississippi River so far as navigable. We are
of opinion that the assumption is wrong, and that the limit of the
waters referred to is the point at which they cease to be a
boundary between two states. Neither continuity of water nor
identity of name will carry them beyond that point. If the
plaintiff in error had undertaken to pilot from the Gulf to
Natchez, a different question would have been presented, and it may
be that in that case the Mississippi license would have been good.
But New Orleans, although upon the Mississippi, is not situate upon
waters which are the boundary between two states, and therefore the
section relied upon does not apply. That being out of the way,
Louisiana had power to pass her local regulations. Rev.Stat. §
4235, Act of August 7, 1789, c. 9, § 4. 1 Stat. 54.
Judgment affirmed.
