such an act would be wholly useless and inoperative.  If the New York grant be opposed to, or inconsistent with, any constitutional power which Congress has exercised, then, so far as the incompatibility exists, the grant is nugatory and void, necessarily, and by reason of the supremacy of the law of Congress.  But if the grant be not inconsistent with any exercise of the powers of Congress, then, certainly, Congress has no authority to revoke or annul it.  Such an act of Congress, therefore, would be either unconstitutional or supererogatory.  The laws of Congress need no non obstante clause.  The Constitution makes them supreme, when State laws come into opposition to them.  So that in these cases there is no question except this; whether there be, or be not, a repugnancy or hostility between the law of Congress and the law of the State.  Nor is it at all material, in this view, whether the law of the State be a law regulating commerce, or a law of police, nor by what other name or character it may be designated.  If its provisions be inconsistent with an act of Congress, they are void, so far as that inconsistency extends.  The whole argument, therefore, is substantially and effectually given up, when it is admitted that Congress might, by express terms, abrogate the State grant, or declare that it should not stand in the way of its own legislation; because such express terms would add nothing to the effect and operation of an act of Congress.

I contend, therefore, upon the whole of this point, that a case of actual collision has been made out between the State grant and the act of Congress; and as the act of Congress is entirely unexceptionable, and clearly in pursuance of its constitutional powers, the State grant must yield.

There are other provisions of the Constitution of the United States, which have more or less bearing on this question.  “No State shall, without the consent of Congress, lay any duty of tonnage.”  Under color of grants like this, that prohibition might be wholly evaded.  This grant authorizes Messrs. Livingston and Fulton to license navigation in the waters of New York.  They, of course, license it on their own terms.  They may require a pecuniary consideration, ascertained by the tonnage of the vessel, or in any other manner.  Probably, in fact, they govern themselves, in this respect, by the size or tonnage of the vessels to which they grant licenses.  Now, what is this but substantially a tonnage duty, under the law of the State?  Or does it make any difference, whether the receipts go directly into her own treasury, or into the hands of those to whom she has made the grant?