Mr. HOWE. The question is put to me if our power goes so far as to regulate tolls upon commerce. Just how that power is to be exercised I do not now say; but that we have the power to regulate tolls in some way, if it be necessary, I have no more doubt than I have of our right to make appropriations. If there was but one road through which the commerce from the Atlantic sea board could reach the valley of the Mississippi, and that led through the State of NewYork, and the State of NewYork, in the interest of her canal system, was pleased to say that all of this commerce should go on her canals and none of it on her railways, oes anyone tell me, in view of our Constitution, that NewYork could stand at the gateway of her canals and levy just such tolls as she Saw fit upon the commerce flowing between the East an the West? There are 2 empires; the commerce flowing between them is of immense importance to the world; is it at the mercy, under our Constitution, of anyone State? Whether we could say to the State of NewYork, “You must reduce your tolls on that canal to meet the requirements, or what we judge to be the requirements, of the country;” or whether we could say, “ We will build a new canal in the interests of the nation and for the life of thisgreat commerce, ” I will not stop to argue or to assert; but I do say most emphatically that it is not in the power of anyone State to burden the commerce moving on ward between the different States beyond the will of the nation. That question is not here. This is not a question of regulating tolls; it is a cquestion of regulating commerce; it is aquestion ofenabling commerce to move between ifferent highways leading between the same points. I said that either this authority to authorize the construction of railways must be exercised by the States in subordination to our authority to regulate commerce, or our authority to reg ulate commerce must be exercised in subor dination to the authority of the States to construct railways or to authorize the construction of railways. I conclude that the power of the State, even if it be exclusive over the given subject, must be exercised in subordination to the authority of the nation. because the Constitution of the U.S and the laws made in accordance with it are declared to be the supreme law of the land, anything in the laws ofany State to the contrary notwithstanding. If the law of the State is not subordinate to the law of the U.S., then the Constitution of the U.S. is not the supreme law. But I said I denied that the power to build railways or authorize the construction of rail ways is exclusively in the several States. I have no manner of doubt, if it were adjudged by Congress necessary and expedient to ironiote the commercial interests of the U.S., to advance the interests of commerce moving between State and State, to builds railway, that we might authorize the construction of a rail way or build it ourselves. It is an instrument of commerce, and if we judge it expedient to build one. who shall control the exercise of our discretion? I am not going to occupy the time of the Senate with arguin thatquestion. It seems to me it has been decide, if anyquestion ever was decided. It seems to me the SCOTUS affirmed that very power in the case of the Wheeling bridge.