The Senator from Maryland has referred us to the decisions of the Supreme Court which in his opinion bear directly on this point; but, Sir, with the ingenuity of a practised lawyer, he has omitted to remind us of that decision which, perhaps, of all others, is the most applicable. With the permission of the Senate, I will make up for the deficiency of the learned Senator, or at least endeavor to do so. I refer to the case of _The United States_ v. _Coombs_, in the twelfth volume of Peters’s Reports. There you will find one of the able and well-considered judgments of the late Mr. Justice Story, particularly treating this question. By “this question” I mean the power of Congress under the National Constitution to regulate commerce with foreign nations and among the several States. I will read a passage from his judgment, page 78:-- “The power to regulate commerce includes the power to regulate navigation, as connected with the commerce with foreign nations and among the States. It was so held and decided by this court, after the most deliberate consideration, in the case of _Gibbons_ v. _Ogden_, 9 Wheaton, 189 to 198.” All that the Senator will of course recognize; for, indeed, he has admitted as much in what he has said and cited. The learned judge then proceeds:-- “It does not stop at the mere boundary-line of a State; nor is it confined to acts done on the water, or in the necessary course of the navigation thereof. It extends to such acts, done on land, which interfere with, obstruct, or prevent the due exercise of the power to regulate commerce and navigation with foreign nations and among the States. Any offence which thus interferes with, obstructs, or prevents such commerce and navigation, though done on land, may be punished by Congress, under its general authority to make all laws necessary and proper to execute their delegated constitutional powers.” Those are the pointed words of Mr. Justice Story. MR. MORRILL. Will the Senator allow me to ask him a question? MR. SUMNER. Certainly. MR. MORRILL. That is, to regulate commerce. MR. SUMNER. To regulate commerce. MR. MORRILL. Does the Senator mean to be understood that a regulation in regard to cholera, a disease, is a regulation of commerce? MR. SUMNER. I do, certainly. MR. MORRILL. Then the cholera is commerce? MR. SUMNER. No; cholera is not commerce, but cholera comes from passengers. MR. MORRILL. Then is the regulation of it commerce, or is it the treatment of a disease? Is it a regulation of health, or a regulation of commerce? MR. SUMNER. It is connected with commerce, and must be treated in its appropriate connection. …