Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 5.djvu/628

 OIQ FEDERAL REPORTER. �coniKiction that the suggestion above quoted is made relative to the power of congress to pass an act giving material men a lien on domestic vessels of uniform operation throughout the United States. And the court does not seem to limit this suggestion to vessels which are engaged in Interstate and foreign commerce. We would not press these observations of the court beyond their fair meaning and intent, but they cer- tainly seem to afford support for the proposition, that, inde- pendently of the express power given to congress to regulate commerce with foreign countries and between the states, it has also authority, under those clauses in the constitution which commit to the judicial power of the United States ail cases of admiralty and maritime jurisdiction, and power, to pass lawB to carry this power into effect, to adopt, as part of the maritime law of the United States, a rule or principle of the general maritime law which has not heretofore been adopted as part of our maritime law. Before the formation of the Union, undoubtedly, the several states could exercise this power, and could, by legislation, change the maritime law of the state as they saw fit. If congress cannot exercise the power outside the range of foreign and Interstate commerce, then there is no authority to make such changes, directly and by legislation, in the maritime law of the United States. The adoption of the constitution adopted a uniform maritime law of the United States, regardless of ail differences in the mari- time law of the several states, which thereafter became merely important as illustrative of the question, what, on particular topics, was the prevailing maritime law of the whole country. The courts, under the judicial power, have no authority to change that law first adopted. The states can no longer modify the maritime law. Is it possible that such power to change was left unprovided for in the constitution? that, wbile full authority is given to regulate foreign and interstate commerce, yet, without the range of those subjeots which do not cover the whole field of admiralty and maritime jurisdic- tion committed to the judicial power of the nation, change is no longer possible ? These considerations and the views of the supreme court above quoted, taken in connection with the ����