« ΠροηγούμενηΣυνέχεια »
ple, and it belongs to the States exclusively; and there is not a single instance in the history of this country where the Government of the United States has attempted to trench upon it; but in numerous instances the courts have settled that the police regulations of the States are independent of the General Government and exclusively within the power of the States, and that under the power to regulate commerce the Government of the United States has no authority whatever to interfere with them. Now, what is quarantine?
Mr. CONNESS. Will the Senator permit me to ask him a question?
Mr. MORRILL. Certainly.
Mr. CONNESS. I do not propose speaking on this subject, but I desire to ask the Senator from Maine, if he denies all power on the part of the Government of the United States over this subject, how he reconciles the statute of 1799, which has been quoted by the Senator from Massachusetts, which gave a joint power. I should like to hear the Senator upon the exercise of that joint power.
Mr. MORRILL. The answer to that suggestion is that the statute does not propose to give a joint power. If the Senator will look at that statute he will find that the power of the United States is subordinated to the power of the States. It simply authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury to do an act in cooperation with the States, and that implies no joint power, but it implies a subordinated power.
Mr. SUMNER. It is a concurrent power. Mr. MORRILL. No, not a concurrent power. It is in aid of the States. Anybody can aid. That is not an assumption of power. Mr. SUMNER. That is a concurrence. Mr. MORRILL. It is simply in aid of the States.
Mr. CONNESS. Now, how may a party having no right to exercise a power aid in that power, or perform a part of it rightfully, when it has not the right or the power to perform the whole of it? I should like to hear the Senator on that point.
Mr. MORRILL. I think the answer to that is quite obvious, that the Government of the United States did not claim the right to exercise the power concurrently. It might offer to do an act which might prove to be acceptable to the State. That would not be offensive, and that was precisely the character of the act of 1799, as I understand it.
something of the combination and directness of war. At the same time I beg to say, as I have heretofore said, that I do not recognize this in any respect as a military measure; I treat it absolutely as a commercial measure; I derive it from a commercial power, and by the amendment which I have introduced I would place it under the direction of the Secretary of the Treasury.
Mr. MORRILL. Mr. President, in reply to the last position of the honorable Senator from Massachusetts, I desire to call his attention to the phraseology of his own amendment and see whether he treats it solely as a commercial question. It shall be the duty of the Secretary of the Treasury, the Secretary of War, and the Secretary of the Navy to adopt an efficient and uniform system of quarantine." If it is a commercial question, what has the Secretary of the Navy to do with it?
Mr. SUMNER. Does the Senator wish an answer?
Mr. MORRILL. I should like to have an
Mr. SUMNER. Because it may be neces sary to act with regard to it on the water; and who would be more competent to advise upon such a matter than the Secretary of the Navy? Or it may be necessary to use military force, and who more competent to supply it than the Secretary of War?
Mr. MORRILL. I have elicited all the answer I expected; it is all the answer that could be given; whether it is a reason or not I submit to the Senate. It is all that the utmost stretch of ingenuity could give. There is no possible reason for associating either the War or the Navy Department with it, except that you want to bring to bear upon the question the power of the Navy and of the Army. Now, is that so? So far as you desire to go upon the water to enforce a quarantine, if you have a right to enforce it the Secretary of the Treasury has a military power at his command always to enforce the revenue laws; and there is no more necessity, on that score, of associating the Secretary of the Navy, I submit to the honorable Senator, to enforce a quarantine than there would be to enforce the laws preventing smuggling. The association is incongruous; and it is either from the fact that you desire to get a power that you are conscious you have not under the authority to regulate commerce, or, I submit, that it is an association of a power not necessary; and so of the War Department. This is strictly a commercial question, says the honorable Senator. I submit that it is not in any sense. In the first place, cholera is not the subject of commerce; and in the second place, the immigrants are not the subject of commerce; they are the subjects of navigation, | one of the incidents of commerce. They enter into that element, and not in any sense are they the subjects of traffic, which is the chief characteristic of commerce. They are simply an incident to commerce in the sense that navigation is an incident to commerce; but when you come to consider the subject of the introduction of immigrants into the country, they lose that character entirely.
Now, I desire to call the attention of the honorable Senator to this question in another aspect. I maintain that all sanitary regulations touching the health of the people of this country within the jurisdictional limits of the several States are matters of police regulation, using that term in its strict and legal sense. Anything of that kind is a police regulation; it has to do simply with the health of the peo
Now, what I am undertaking to demonstrate is that the quarantine power which the States exercise is a police power, belongs exclusively to the States, has been so regarded from the earliest period. What is a quarantine? What is the right of quarantine or the power of quarantine? It is simply to say that a vessel on its way to a particular port, destined to a particular port, must not land, must tarry at a given point for a certain period of time, until an opportunity has been given to the local authorities to inspect the condition of the vessel, to see whether it is dangerous to the public health for it to land. That is the power. That power is internal; that power is police; that power is entirely independent of the commercial power and has so been settled in repeated instances. In the license cases that question was elaborated at very great length || and it was settled distinctly that the police power existed independent of the power to regulate commerce, and was exclusively in the States.
Now let me call the attention of the honorable Senator from Massachusetts as to the condition of affairs in his own harbor. Quarantine regulations exist in the harbor of Boston by the power of the city. Did anybody ever question it? The Supreme Court of the United States have said they properly exist and that they are exclusively within the power of the State government, and the General Government, under its power of commercial regulation, has no right to interfere with them. Here is a circular in which the surgeon general of that State says:
"By the general statutes of this Commonwealth.
I ask my honorable friend from Massachusetts if he will undertake to say that the establishment of sanitary cordons is the exercise of a commercial power. Mr. SUMNER. clearly yes.
Under the circumstances,
Mr. MORRILL. Well, what is a sanitary cordon? What is the literal definition of it? Has it anything on earth to do with commerce? What is the establishment of a sanitary cordon? The literal meaning of it is a military post. That is the definition. It is a post established by the military power of the Government for sanitary
"Sanitary cordon" is a
Mr. SUMNER. sanitary line. Mr. MORRILL. Drawn by whom? Mr. SUMNER. Drawn by the Government. Mr. MORRILL. Drawn by the military authority of the Government and maintained by the military power of the Government.
Mr. SUMNER. A sanitary cordon under this joint resolution would be a line drawn according to the requirements of this resolution. It would not be under the military power of the Government, but under the commercial power attaching to passengers.
Mr. MORRILL. A military cordon is established on the frontier by the military power of the Government to prevent the intercommunication of the people one way and the other for fear of contagion. That is the definition of it; that is the interpretation, and that is the history of it. Now, is there commerce in that? Does that invoke the commercial power? It is simply police; it is an establishment on the frontier of a State for the protection of the public health. That is what it is; nothing more nor less. It comes within the police power, and that police power is exclusively in the States.
Mr. HOWE. Will my friend allow me to ask him whether such a regulation, such a line as that in the interior of a State, would not be just as much a sanitary cordon as one drawn on the frontier?
Mr. MORRILL. To prevent intercommunication between subordinate communities? Mr. HOWE. Yes, sir.
Mr. MORRILL. I should say it would. Mr. HOWE. I understood you to speak of the frontier.
Mr. MORRILL. I did not mean frontiers of independent nations, but between any distinctive communities. But would the Senator from Wisconsin or the Senator from Massachusetts say that the General Government had a right to establish sanitary cordons throughout the States, between the several counties, towns, and cities? That is the principle of this bill. That is so purely local and so purely within the police regulations of the States that I hardly think the argument would be
attempted to be pushed so far. I do not wish to say any more about it.
Mr. HOWE. I am not going to argue this question at any length. I care but very little whether this bill pass or not. I do not think it a very important matter whether the United States assume the exercise of the power which is asserted in this bill or not at the present juncture. I think it of immense importance that the United States should not admit that they have not the power which is asserted here. The newspapers say this morning that two vessels in the harbor of New York are lying at anchor under the quarantine regulations of that city with cholera on board. Those two vessels are not said to be American vessels, but I assume that they are stamped with the national authority, sailing the seas by the national permission, bearing the national flag. They have been brought to anchor, not in the port to which they were destined and where they wish to unload, but short of that; and the question which I wish should not be lost sight of is, where resides the authority to bring those two national ships to anchor, to stop them on their route short of their point of destination?
My friend from Maine says it is in the city of New York if they are bound to New York, or it is in the State of New York if they are bound to a harbor in New York. This bill asserts, I think in terms, that it is in the nation, that by no authority short of that can they rightfully be stopped. That we have conceded the exercise of this power for sanitary purposes to the different municipalities or the different States, from the foundation of the Government, I suspect is true. I do not know that there has been any departure from it. The nation has not seen fit to assume the responsibility of taking this sanitary interest under its care, has permitted the exercise of this power to the several States and municipalities; but that the Constitution leaves it to them, I do not believe, Mr. President, at all. That the Constitution does not give it to us, to the national authority, I never can be made to concede. It is the exercise of a very high prerogative, striking at the very freedom of all our commerce, for the power which can stop one of your vessels on her route a hundred feet from the dock to which she is destined and where she wants to unload--wherever you find the power that can do that, you find the power that can arrest every one of the ships belonging to your commerce. If you say that it is in the several States, your power to regulate commerce, for which as much as for anything you formed this Government, is the merest bagatelle in the world; it is worth nothing.
As I said before, I do not care whether we
The object of this measure is to establish a
favorable action by the Senate. I now simply
As to the question of the constitutional right
Mr. CHANDLER. I hold in my hand a very able document prepared by distinguished physicians and surgeons who have had great experience in regard to the cholera, from which I shall merely read an extract or two, as I do not wish to occupy the time of the Senate, my desire being to get a vote. In this paper they give a number of instances showing the char acter of the disease. Let me read from it:
"The ship Swanton, from Havre, arrived at New Orleans on the 11th of December, 1848, nine days after the New York arrived at Staten. Island, with two hundred and eighty emigrants on board. Thirteen passengers had died with cholera on the passage. No quarantine was instituted, and the ship came to the wharf. The day after the arrival of the passengers in the city the cholera broke out and became epidemic.
The Atlanta, from Havre, arrived at New York on the 2d of November last, with a large number of German emigrants: many had died of cholera on the passage. The disease was confined exclusively to the steerage passengers, A strict quarantine prevented the introduction of the disease into the city.
"It will be recollected that the steamship England put into Halifax on the 9th of last month with some twelve hundred passengers and a crew of one hundred men, with a large number of German passengers who had come from places infected with cholera: one hundred and sixty cases of the disease occurred on board, and fifty deaths during the passage. Owing to strict quarantine at Quebec, the disease was checked there, and the ship is now at quaranting in New York, the passengers having been landed after undergoing the usual quarantine."
The cholera has been in New York harbor since the 2d day of last November, six months and a half, all the time, and it has never yet landed. There was one case of what was called sporadic cholera, produced by circumstances connected with that particular case, but not a single case of Asiatic cholera has landed. The Senator from Vermont [Mr. EDMUNDS] brought a very important fact to the knowledge of the Senate the other day in his remarks, and that was that by a strict quarantine in the Italian ports the cholera passed by the whole of Italy, and was finally introduced into Italy across the Alps from France, where the quarantine was
not so strict.
friend from Maine and others who see a constitutional obstacle to passing a railroad or a quarantine bill, I have no such difficulties and apprehensions as they seem to entertain. I do not think we shall injure the Constitution if we keep out the cholera, and I hope the Senate will pass the resolution in the form proposed by the Committee on Commerce.
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Chair has received a communication from a very eminent gentleman of the medical faculty on this subject, which, if there be no objection, the Chair will have read.
The Secretary read it as follows:
It is an old saying that those who know nothing fear nothing. I happen to know just enough of cholera to desire to keep it down in New York bay if we can. I do not know that quarantine regulations will keep it there, but having kept it there for six months and fourteen days I hope they may keep it there for six months and fourteen days longer.
NEW YORK, May 11, 1866. DEAR SIR: In the reported proceedings of the Sen. ate I have noticed the recent introduction of a joint resolution authorizing the establishment by the Secretaries of War, the Navy and the Treasury, of a uniform system of quarantine to avoid the introduction of Asiatic cholera through our ports of entry. I respectfully ask permission to suggest a modification of, or an addition to, the proposed measure, in order to reach the root of the evil, and prevent the occurrence of the disease in question on board passenger ships, whereby not only the necessity of subjecting them to quarantine may be greatly diminished, but likewise the lives of the passengers saved.
It is believed to be the unanimous opinion of those members of the medical profession on both sides of the Atlantic who have studied the habitudes of this discase that the circumstances which favor its development are peculiar and well understood, and that to a great degree they are identical with those provocative of typhus fever, (known as ship fever when occurring at sea,) and that both these diseases are as clearly preventable under the rigid enforcement of the laws of hygiene as is small-pox by vaccination. Numerous instances might be cited to prove that this result is attainable, but I will here refer to but one fact to show how completely dependent is the sanitary condition of emigrant passengers upon the supervision and conduct of the ship's officers. By a report on quarantine made to the British Parliament by Lords Carlisle and Ashby, and two of England's most eminent sanitarians, Edwin Chadwick and Dr. Southwood Smith, we learn that under the system of convict transportation to New South Wales, which prevailed prior to 1801, the contractors were paid for each passenger embarked on board their ships. It being thus their interest to receive the largest possible number, the passengers were admitted without reference to their comfort or health, and the neglect of their sanitary necessities produced a mortality of from thirty-three to fifty per cent. Yet we are told there was no omission palpable to common observation, or that could be distinctly proved as matter of crimination to which responsibility might be attached. The attention of the authorities being at length aroused to the subject, an alteration was made in the terms of the contract, by which payment was to be made only for those landed alive, instead of for all those embarked.
The effect of this change was the immediate employment of competent men and the thorough application of suitable hygienic measures, whereby the mortality was reduced to one and a half per cent.
The two emigrant vessels recently arrived at this port, namely, the Virginia and England, presented equally striking illustrations of the evil effects of the neglect of sanitary measures. With their great overcrowding and disregard of ventilation, disinfection, and cleanliness, ship fever or cholera was the inevitable consequence, which no sensible person can doubt might have been wholly avoided by the exercise of proper precautions, to the saving of hundreds of lives, as well as obviating the necessity of quarantine.
To prevent, therefore, the introduction of cholera by vessels, the vessels themselves and all their contents need but to be kept under the constant supervision and control of sanitary law,
Further information on this grave topic with regard to the necessities of the ease and the means of relief may be had by consulting the report of the select committee of the Senate on "the sickness and mortality on board emigrant ships." Thirty-Third Congress, first session, No. 386, August 2, 18534.
It is greatly to be regretted that in the discussions relating to and the enactment of laws for the suppression of epidemies by quarantine, &c., too little attention is given to that most valuable feature of sanitary science and practice, the preventure of disease. I would therefore respectfully suggest that in the resolution referred to, power should be given to enforce such regulations on all passenger vessels as may be deemed essential to this important end. Very respectfully,
JOHN H. GRISCOM, M. D.
Hon. LA FAYETTE S. FOSTER,
President of the United States Senate. P. S. I observe by this morning's paper the proba bility of the failure of the joint resolution. In that event it is earnestly to be hoped that some measure may be adopted by Government, independently of quarantine, for the enforcement of sanitary regulations on shipboard, it being demanded by science, by humanity, and by the best interests of the country. Recent improvements in all matters pertaining thereto will greatly facilitate their application. JOHN H. GRISCOM.
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question is on the amendment proposed by the Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. SUMNER] to
the amendment reported by the Committee on Commerce.
Mr. GRIMES. What is the amendment to the amendment? I should like to hear it read. The Secretary read the amendment to the amendment, which was in line three of the amendment of the committee, to strike out the word War" and insert "the Treasury;" in line four, to strike out the words "the Navy" and insert "War;" and in line five to strike out the words "Treasury, whose concurrent action shall be directed by the Commander-in-Chief of the Army and Navy," and insert Navy, under the direction of the President of the United States;" so that the amendment will read:
substantially accomplishes the same thing. If Senators have a preference for the proposition reported by the Committee on Commerce, I desire to insert this feature of the original resolution in the committee's amendment. My preference would be to vote down their amendment and adopt the resolution as it came from
so far I the the HouANDLER. I hope that will not be simply as have been able to find, has been
That it shall be the duty of the Secretary of the Treasury, with the coöperation of the Secretary of War and the Secretary of the Navy, under the direction of the President of the United States, to adopt an efficient and uniform system of quarantine against the introduction into this country of the Asiatic cholera through its ports of entry whenever the same may be threatened by the prevalence of said disease in countries having direct commercial intercourse with the United States.
2. That he shall also enforce the establishment of sanitary cordons to prevent the spread of said disease from infected districts adjacent to or within the limits of the United States.
3. That said Secretaries are hereby authorized to use the means at their command to carry out the foregoing provisions.
4. That it shall be the duty of the Secretary of State to open a correspondence with the foreign Powers whose proximity to the United States will endanger the introduc ion of Asiatic cholera into this country through their ports and territory, soliciting their coöperation with this Government in such efforts to prevent the introduction and spread of said disease: Provided, That this resolution shall continue in force from its passage until the second Monday in December, A. D. 1866, and no longer.
The amendment to the amendment was agreed to.
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. A verbal amendment was proposed by the Senator from Vermont,[Mr. EDMUNDS,] striking out the word "he" in the twelfth line and inserting "they,' to make the language correct, so that it will read, "that they shall also enforce the establishment of sanitary cordons," &c. That correction will be made if there be no objection. The question now is on the amendment as amended.
Mr. MORRILL. On that question I ask for the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
Mr. HARRIS. I move further to amend the amendment by striking out in line three the words "it shall be the duty of" and inserting after the word "Treasury" in the same line the words "shall be authorized in aid of the State or municipal authorities;" so that it will read:
That the Secretary of the Treasury shall be authorized, in aid of the State or municipal authorities, with the coöperation of the Secretary of War and the Seeretary of the Navy, under the direction of the President of the United States, to adopt an efficient and uniform system of quarantine, &c.
It will be perceived that the object of my amendment is, instead of authorizing directly these Federal authorities to take this whole matter into their hands to the exclusion of the State authorities, to provide that they shall act in aid of them and in cooperation with them. It is, in effect, authorizing the General Government, as it was in the resolution that came from the House of Representatives, to aid the State and municipal authorities in enforcing their quarantine.
Mr. CHANDLER. I will ask the Senator if he understands his amendment to authorize them to act where the State or municipal authorities do not act. The object of the committee's amendment is to enable them to act where no action is taken by the State or municipal authorities. Unless the Senator's amendment gives that power, it does not effect the object contemplated in this measure. I hope the amendment will not be adopted unless it does give that power. The expectation is that they will act in aid of the municipal authorities, but we wish to give them the power to act where the municipal authorities fail to act.
Mr. HARRIS. I prefer the original resolution as it came from the House of Representatives, and the amendment that I have offered
The amendment to the amendment was rejected.
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The ques tion now is on the amendment reported by the Committee on Commerce, on which the yeas and nays have been ordered.
Mr. HENDERSON. Before the vote is taken I wish to say that in voting against this amendment of the committee I do not desire to negative the power of Congress on this subject. I have heard no complaint against State laws on the subject of quarantine in this discussion, and I think it altogether likely that the quarantine regulations now established by the different States and the different cities are much better than would be established in the course of any short time under this act of Congress. The difficulty will be that, needing the quarantine immediately, in overthrowing those very excellent quarantine regulations at New York and other points, we may, in the conflict of jurisdiction, fail to get any good quarantine regulations at all. I have heard no complaint against those regulations. Gentlemen have urged none that amount to anything. If I understand it properly, the regulations of New York are perhaps superior to any regulations ever established in this country. They are the most perfect that can now be established; and inasmuch as we need the benefit and advantage of an establishment of this character at present, and will need it for the next few months, I think it better not to interfere with it. In case of the passage of the amendment I am very well assured that we shall have a conflict in jurisdiction. It is not necessary to bring about that conflict if the States are doing their duty; and is it reasonable to suppose that they will not do their duty? In the protection of their own citizens against the ravages of this disease they will necessarily have to protect the interior of the country.
Within the last few minutes I have referred to the legislation of Congress on this subject. In 1796 Congress passed the following act:
"That the President of the United States be, and
he is hereby, authorized to direct the revenue officers and the officers commanding forts and revenue-cutters to aid in the execution of quarantine, and also in the execution of the health laws of the States. respectively, in such manner as may to him appear
Afterward, in 1799, a similar act was passed. The officers of the United States were directed simply to aid the officers of the States and to carry out the quarantine regulations adopted by them. In 1832, when we were threatened with the cholera, Congress passed another act, not assuming any jurisdiction over the subject at all, but carrying out the views entertained
1796 and also in 1799. That act, passed on the 13th of July, 1832, is in the following
fore my day. I do not like to confess that I know much about the quarantine regulations of that time. But, sir, I have failed to find any legislation of Congress on this subject except in aid of the State laws in 1832 and 1833. All the legislation of Congress from the origin of the Government down to the present time,
"That if in the opinion of the Secretary of the Treasury the revenue-cutters, revenue-boats, or revenue officers, employed or authorized to be employed for the purposes of the revenue, should be sufficient to aid in the execution of the quarantine and health laws of any State or the regulations made pursuant thereto, the said Secretary may cause to be employed such additional revenue-boats and revenue officers as he may deem necessary for that purpose, the said revenue-boats to be of such size and description as he may see proper. This act to continue in force until the 4th of March, 1833."
That was in 1832, when surely we were threatened much more imminently with the ravages of this disease than we now are.
Mr. CHANDLER. I should like to ask the Senator from Missouri if the quarantine regulations of 1832 proved perfectly satisfactory to him and efficacious in preventing the landing and spread of the cholera.
Mr. HENDERSON. That was rather be
were threatened with the worst forms of disease, cholera, yellow fever, and other diseases, Congress has never undertaken to interfere with the State regulations. The Senator will find no legislation assuming jurisdiction over this subject. I do not pretend to say that Congress has not the power. In fact, like the Senator from Wisconsin, I say what I am now saying before I vote on this subject because I shall vote against the amendment, and I desire to say this much in order to declare that I believe Congress has the power. I believe they have full and entire power. The Senator from Michigan is correct on that subject.
But if we, on account of the fact that we are now threatened with the appearance of this disease among us, when the States, for the protection of their own citizens, have adopted the most perfect system, as I understand, of quarantine, undertake to assume jurisdiction over it on the recommendation of a few physicians who perhaps-I do not pretend to say that such is the fact-may be interested in putting themselves prominently forward as the champions of some new system of quarantine, may it not produce danger and difficulty, and, in fact, aid in the dissemination of the disease instead of preventing it? Under the circumstances I think it is better to vote down the amendment and to adopt the joint resolution as it came from the House. If we do anything on this subject, let us assist the States. If any reasonable complaint exists against the quarantine regulations of the different States, if it be probable or possible that they have neglected to protect their own citizens, and in consequence of this neglect the disease may spread into the interior of the country, then, perhaps, it may be necessary for us to adopt some regulation to protect citizens in the interior, when those upon the sea-board will not protect themselves; but I can scarcely think it possible. We have now State governments in all the States. They have one in Louisiana; they have one in South Carolina; they have one in each of the different States; and will they not go to work to protect themselves? I think, under the circumstances, we had better let the State regulations stand; and if we do anything whatever, our officers whom we appoint here can make such suggestions to the State Legislatures, perhaps, as may induce a better system of legislation than they have. I think it, therefore, much better to take the original resolution that came from the House and not to assume at present a jurisdiction which I admit we possess, but which will bring about a conflict and perhaps destroy any good and perfect system of quarantine.
Mr. CHANDLER. I admit that the quar
antine at New York has been efficacious, and there is no intention or expectation that the Government will interfere where the quarantine is efficacious. The object of this measure is to make it uniform; that where the States or municipalities have failed to do their duty, the General Government shall have the power to step in and compel its being done. It is absolute.
I shall vote against the House resolution as it came to this body, because it is totally inefficient. It is utterly useless to have even a very efficient system of quarantine in New York harbor if there is no quarantine at all in New Jersey. It is absolutely useless to have an efficient quarantine in New York and fail to have it in Norfolk, because it is well known the moment the cholera lands it spreads. It may come into New York the back way, as it came into Italy across the Alps. No one who has ever been in Italian cities will say they are not more liable to the ravages of cholera than the
cities in France. Take Naples, that actually breeds the material that furnishes victims for the cholera; and yet the cholera passed by Naples and landed at Marseilles; it passed Genoa and Rome and all the Italian cities, and was finally brought from Marseilles across the Alps into northern Italy. If we keep the cholera out of New York and let it land in Philadelphia, or if we keep it out of New York and let it land in Boston, there is no use of keeping it out of New York. The object of the proposition reported by the committee is-and I shall vote against any measure that does not give that power to make the quarantine uniform throughout the United States, or place it in the power of the Secretaries to make it so. I hope the amendment of the committee will be adopted as it stands. If it should be defeated, I shall vote against the House resolution, because I do not deem it of any sort of consequence whatever.
Mr. CHANDLER. now?
Do you wish an answer
Mr. GRIMES. Any time that will suit the convenience of the Senator.
Mr. CHANDLER. I desire to give all the light I can to the Senator from Iowa. In case a ship should come into Boston with the cholera on board, and one of his fleet or one of mine should happen to be there, I suppose either the Secretary of the Treasury or the Secretary of the Navy would order that ship to hold the vessel at quarantine instead of permitting her to land at the dock. As for dismissing any officers or appointing a board of health with salaries, and all that sort of thing, I do not expect them to do it; but I expect that they will enforce a quarantine, even should the citizens of Boston fail to enforce one.
Mr. HENDERSON. I desire to ask the Senator if he thinks the system of quarantine ought to be uniform throughout the United States. What is a perfect system of quarantine in one State may not be so perfect in another. This very uniformity of which he speaks would be a great objection to any system of quarantine.
Mr. CHANDLER. The language here is, that they shall adopt a "uniform and efficient system of quarantine."
Mr. HENDERSON. Then the inhabitants of the district are the best judges in regard to that. What may be a very perfect system at New York will not be so at New Orleans, and what may be perfect at New Orleans will not be so at New York, because these ports are differently situated.
Mr. CHANDLER. Are you not willing to trust this board with that power?
Mr. HENDERSON. I think we can trust the States a great deal better.
Mr. GRIMES. I have got a little light from what the Senator from Michigan has now said, in addition to what he has bestowed on the Senate on former occasions on this subject, and I should like to have a little more. 1 understand him to say it would be useless to establish quarantine at New York and not to establish it at Norfolk or Boston.
Mr. CHANDLER. If they have no quarantine there.
Mr. GRIMES. I want to know of the Senator if it is proposed or contemplated by the Committee on Commerce, who reported this amendment, or by himself as its chairman, that this quarantine shall be established simultaneously at New York, New Orleans, Boston, and all along the coast.
Mr. CHANDLER. Does the Senator desire
an answer now?
Mr. GRIMES. Yes, sir.
Mr. CHANDLER. We do not expect that there will be any interference. We believe that these three gentlemen are men of common sense, and where they find an efficient system they will not interfere with it. Where there is no quarantine, and a ship comes in infected with the cholera, and we have a national ship or a revenue-cutter there, we expect this board will, at the very earliest moment, take measures to quarantine that ship, whether it be at Norfolk, New Orleans, or anywhere else.
Mr. GRIMES. I understand, then, that the Senator from Michigan does not contemplate, although this proposition would authorize them to do so, that this board will interfere with the quarantine regulations now established at the harbor of New York.
Mr. CHANDLER. Not at all.
Mr. GRIMES. But that inasmuch as he tells us there is no quarantine established at Boston, this board will at once close up the harbor of Boston, appoint its various officers, pay them such salaries as are probably paid to quarantine officers now at New York, although there may be no cholera there or any anticipation of the cholera coming. I merely wish to learn from the Senator from Michigan whether I apprehend him correctly.
Mr. GRIMES. I understand from what the Senator now says that so far as the city of Boston is concerned, taking that as an illustration, it is merely accidental whether anything will be done there or not. If a vessel having the cholera on board comes in there, and there happens to be a revenue-cutter or a ship-ofwar there, she will take charge of it; but suppose there should not happen to be a naval vessel or a revenue-cutter there; then what?
Mr. CHANDLER. I have not gone through all the details of what might occur. I suppose I could imagine eight or ten thousand cases that might occur, but which may never arise, that I am not prepared now, at a moment's notice, to decide; but I infer that the three gentlemen named, or even the Senator from Iowa and myself and some other gentleman, were we put in charge of this matter, would adopt what seemed to be the best and most efficient system that we could, under the circumstances of the case that might arise.
Mr. GRIMES. I think enough has been said to satisfy the Senate that this measure proceeds upon this idea, and this idea alone, that the coinmission to be created by this resolution shall immediately proceed to organize, in anticipation of the advent of the cholera; that there shall be quarantine officers established at Boston, at Philadelphia, at Baltimore, and at Norfolk, whether there is any cholera there or not; and it must be so if you are going to have a uniform system; and I understand that that is the spirit of the resolution. The Senate can see what a vast machine this is going to be, if we are to establish a uniform system for every harbor on the coast of the Atlantic, every harbor on the Gulf of Mexico, and every harbor on the coast of the Pacific, all to be controlled by a central power here at Washington that cannot by any possibility be correctly informed as to the particular local circumstances attending each of those points where the quarantine is to be established.
Again, the Senator says that they do not intend to interfere with any quarantine already established.
do not overturn it you are not going to carry out the provisions of the law which requires it to be uniform, unless they adopt the New York system. Thus you make the system that has been established at New York the system that shall be established at San Francisco and New Orleans, in a different sort of climate and under different circumstances, and that carry on a different sort of commerce with altogether dif ferent ports in the world. Under the provisions of the amendment reported by the Committee on Commerce, you have either got to overturn the system they have in New York, or else you have got to establish the New York system as a sort of Procrustean bed upon which all the other establishments in the United States, on both sides of the continent, shall be built up; for the law expressly requires that the whole system shall be uniform throughout the United States, on your northern coast in Minnesota, and on your southern coast in Texas.
Mr. CHANDLER. The Treasury has agents in every exposed port to-day; the Navy has a great many agents; the Secretary of War a great many agents. The Senator, of course, can imagine anything. There are great powers contained in this measure, I admit, but it is not anticipated that those powers will be abused. I do not anticipate it, and I do not think the Senator from Iowa does. It is true under the powers contained in this proposition abuses might grow up. It is a temporary measure, which is to terminate on the second Monday in December next. It is expected that the present existing agencies of the several Departments will be instructed to adopt certain measures, and if it be necessary to appoint other agencies they will be appointed. "However, I do not deem it necessary to answer the Senator from Iowa. I simply ask for a vote on this proposition.
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Chair will put the question the moment the debate is terminated. The question is on the amendment reported by the Committee on Commerce as a substitute for the original resolution.
Mr. CHANDLER. Which is efficient. Mr. GRIMES. Which is efficient. Suppose this board should decide that the quarantine established at New York is not efficient; then, I suppose, they are to overturn it. Is not that the idea of the Senator?
Mr. CHANDLER. They have the power under this proposition.
Mr. GRIMES. And it is the intention that it shall be overturned, I take it.
Mr. CHANDLER. No, sir.
Mr. GRIMES. Not if it is not efficient?
Mr. GRIMES. But suppose the Secretaries of War, of the Treasury, and of the Navy, here at Washington, influenced by such influences as may be brought to bear from New York upon them, are satisfied that it is not quite as efficient as they think it ought to be, as another set of doctors not in command there think it ought to be; then it is the duty of these departmental officers to overturn that system, as I understand it. I understand the Senator from Wisconsin, [Mr. Howe,] who advocates this measure, to assent to that proposition. Now, it will at once be observed that if they
The question being taken by yeas and nays, resulted-yeas 17, nays 19; as follows:
YEAS-Messrs. Chandler, Conness, Cragin, Edmunds. Howard, Howe, Morgan, Nesmith, Nye, Poland, Pomeroy, Ramsey, Stewart, Sumner, Wade, Wilson, and Yates-17.
NAYS-Messrs. Buckalew, Clark, Davis, Dixon, Fessenden, Foster. Grimes, Guthrie, Harris, Ilenderson, Hendricks, Kirkwood, McDougall, Morrill, Norton, Riddle, Sprague, Van Winkle, and Willey-19. ABSENT-Messrs. Anthony, Brown, Cowan, Creswell, Doolittle, Johnson, Lane of Indiana, Lane of Kansas, Saulsbury, Sherman, Trumbull, Williams, and Wright-13.
So the amendment was rejected.
Mr. CHANDLER. I now move to lay the joint resolution upon the table, and ask for the yeas and nays upon that motion.
The yeas and nays were ordered; and being taken, resulted—yeas 15, nays 23; as follows:
YEAS-Messrs. Chandler, Conness, Edmunds, Howard, Howe, McDougall, Nesmith, Nye, Poland, Pomeroy, Ramsey, Sumner, Wade, Williams, and Yates-15.
NAYS-Messrs. Buckalew, Clark, Cowan, Davis, Dixon, Fessenden. Foster, Grimes, Guthrie, Harris, Henderson, Hendricks, Kirkwood, Morgan, Morrill, Norton, Riddle, Sherman, Sprague, Stewart, Van Winkle, Willey, and Wilson-23.
ABSENT-Messrs. Anthony, Brown, Cragin, Creswell, Doolittle, Johnson, Lane of Indiana, Lane of Kansas, Saulsbury, Trumbull, and Wright-11. So the motion was not agreed to.
Mr. CHANDLER. I ask that the joint resolution as it came from the House, be now reported to the Senate.
The Secretary read the resolution, as follows: Resolved, That the President be, and he hereby is, authorized to make and carry into effect such orders and regulations of quarantine as in his opinion may be deemed necessary and proper, in aid of State or municipal authorities, to guard against the introduction of the cholera into the ports of the United States; and the President is further authorized to empower the military and naval commanders in ports and places in the States that have been or are in insurrec tion to enforce such quarantine regulations as may be deemed necessary for the purpose of guarding against the introduction of cholera or yellow fever, and to provide for the proper care and treatment of patients. And such an amount of money as may be hereby appropriated out of any money in the Treasnecessary to carry into effect this joint resolution is ury not otherwise appropriated.
Mr. CHANDLER. It will be noticed that this joint resolution places extraordinary power, not in the hands of a board, but of one individual. It will be seen by the first line of it that the President is "authorized to make and carry into effect such orders and regulations of quarantine as in his opinion may be deemed necessary and proper, in aid of State or municipal authorities," and the last clause of it provides:
that one man, a wise man, governing a nation is better than a nation governed by a multitude; but that is not our system of government, and it is not the way we were established formerly. This resolution, as it stands, places a vast power that may be handled simultaneously by the executive officers without limit, without restraint, and for what purpose God Almighty will know when the thing has been done. It is wrong in principle, and against the whole policy of our Government. The whole proposition is radically wrong.
I only advance these observations because it is well for us once in a while to recur to the principles upon which our Government is based.
And such an amount of money as may be necessary to carry into effect this joint resolution is hereby appropriated out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated.
By this resolution you authorize Andrew Johnson, President of the United States, to appoint ten thousand agents to go anywhere and do anything that he may say is in aid of State sanitary regulations. I will not discuss so monstrous a proposition. I will not vote for it. It is an improper resolution. I was willing to intrust great powers in the hands of three men, in some of whom certainly I have great confidence, but I am not willing to intrust all powers in the hands of one man in whom I have no confidence without limitation as to the number of men who may be employed, or the amount of money that may be appropriated.
Mr. SUMNER. It is a monstrous proposi
Mr. CHANDLER. Yes, sir, it is a monstrous proposition.
Mr. McDOUGALL. Mr. President, in the person of whom the Senator from Michigan speaks I have great confidence, but notwithstanding that, in my judgment, this resolution is an unwise resolution. It is giving a power into the hands of the Federal Executive which, used with great wisdom, might be used well; but a power with which he need not be intrusted, and his being intrusted therewith will be, in my judgment, of no value for our safety against the contagions that some people think threaten us. I am of the opinion that cholera is the child of fear, and not the offspring of contagion. I am of the opinion that all this business can be best conducted in the localities where it is best understood. Suppose a contagious disease should come across the Pacific and approach our western shores, what would the President of the United States or his council know of it? Nothing. If it should come in many sections of the southern coast, what would they know of it? I say again, nothing.
The philosophy of this disease is not yet altogether understood among the most wise, the savans of the world. Men have their own speculations upon it. I have mine. I mingled with it in its first advent into the United States. I saw it face to face, and I saw it without fear, and therefore I did not get it. This thing of legislating against pestilences is mere child's play, shooting child's arrows at the In localities it is well that they, taking care of their particular localities, guard themselves; but for the Federal Government to undertake such administration is a piece of absolute folly. People seem to forget, and Senators seem to forget, that we are a nation embracing a vast continent; that in the details of physical economy the man who lives in Boston knows nothing of the condition of the men who live at St. Louis and New Orleans, and much less of those who live at San Francisco. To undertake to establish rules and regulations here, to be administered at the center of this Federal Government, with regard to physical economy, is absolute folly. Science has not grown so large as to be able to instruct men how to teach these things at such distances. It is my opinion that the States themselves who have the charge of their own domestic police (for this is but a police regulation, and the police government belongs to the States and not to the Federal Government) will be best able to ascertain what the immediate necessity demands and act not with this extenupon it with prudence and
If it be proposed by Senators to consolidate the Government and place it in the hands of one man, then I remember it has been said
Mr. HENDERSON. I move to amend the
resolution by striking out all after the word "to" in the eighth line down to and including the word "patients' in the fourteenth line, and to insert the following:
That the Secretary of the Treasury be, and he hereby is, authorized to make and carry into effect such orders and regulations of quarantine as, in his opinion, may be deemed necessary and proper, in the aid of State or municipal authorities, to guard against the introduction of the cholera into the ports of the United States; and the Secretary of the Treasury is further authorized to direct the revenue officers and the officers commanding revenue-cutters to aid in the execution of such quarantine, and also in the execution of the health laws of the States respectively in such manner as may to him seem necessary. And such an amount of money as may be necessary to carry into effect this joint resolution is hereby appropriated out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated.
The joint resolution was reported to the Senate as amended, and the amendments were concurred in.
The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. EDMUNDS. I offer the following amendment, to be inserted at the end of the resolution: Provided, That the authority hereby granted shall expire on the second Monday in December, A. D. 1866. Mr. CLARK. I suggest to the Senator to say the first Monday in January, 1867, so that it shall not expire until a month after Congress comes together again; and then, if it be necessary, we can renew it.
Mr. EDMUNDS. I will so modify the amendment.
The amendment, as modified, was agreed to.
Mr. HOWE. I shall occupy the attention of the Senate but a moment. I simply wish to call their attention to what they are probably going to agree to. They are going to put substantially the same power in the hands of the Secretary of the Treasury, and incur precisely the same obligations, as were proposed in the amendment that was reported by the committee. There is this difference: the plan, the system, the style of quarantine is to be agreed upon by the States or the municipalities, and the Government of the United States is simply to be commanded by these local authorities and foot the bills. I thought if we had to pay for the fiddling we ought to have the right to name the tune and call the figures, [laughter,] and so I voted for the amendment reported by the committee. I do not care to see the United States dancing to the tune of all these municipalities; and therefore I shall not vote for the resolution as it stands. If the Senate does, no doubt it will be all right.
Mr. CLARK. I think there is a great deal of difference between the resolution as it now stands before the Senate and the amendment as reported by the committee-a very great difference as to the power. The resolution, as it now stands, authorizes the Secretary of the Treasury, if in his judgment anything of that kind is required, to make such orders and regulations as he shall deem to be necessary for the purpose of aiding the quarantine in various places where it is not efficient; but the proposition reported from the committee required the Secretaries named to adopt an efficient and uniform system of quarantine from one end of the country to the other. There is a very great difference, in my judgment, between quarantining every port in the United States in a uniform way, and aiding the authorities in the different localities to do what is absolutely necessary. Suppose a ship should come into the port of New Orleans. Under the committee's proposition you would have to send to the Secretary of War and the Secretary of the Treasury and the Secretary of the Navy to establish a quarantine there. As the resolution stands at present, the inhabitants of the port establish their quarantine, and if it is not found to be efficient, or there is any regulation necessary, the Secretary of the Treasury makes his regulation, and asks the revenue officers and the revenue-cutters to enforce that quarantine. That is a very different matter from what was proposed in the committee's proposition.
Nor do I understand that by this resolution the General Government is dancing an attendance upon the State governments. I have no partiality or preference as to which shall go in the van. I understand the object to be to prevent the cholera from coming into the United States; and if, in any port, the State gov ernments are not efficient, I have no objection to the national Government coming in to aid it to be done.
Mr. CHANDLER. It cannot be done under this resolution.
Mr. CLARK. The Senator from Michigan says it cannot be done under this resolution. I ask him why.
Mr. HOWE. I will answer the Senator, if he will permit me.
Mr. CLARK. I shall be glad to have the Senator answer.
Mr. HOWE. It is simply because if the city of New York adopt some quarantine_regula tions there, the General Government has the right, under your resolution as it now stands, if you pass it, to come in with her Treasury and pay the expenses of carrying out those regulations; and under those regulations a ship may be prevented, if she has cholera on board, from coming to the dock and spreading it; but if the city of Brooklyn sees fit not to adopt any such regulations the vessel can go over there and the United States cannot help herself. Mr. CLARK. Allow me to suggest to the