 |
Unfortunately, differences continue to exist among some of the nations of South America which, following our example, have established their independence, while in others internal dissensions prevail. It is natural that our sympathies should be warmly enlisted for their welfare; that we should desire that all controversies between them should be amicably adjusted and their Governments administered in a manner to protect the rights and promote the prosperity of their people. It is contrary, however, to our settled policy to interfere in their controversies, whether external or internal.
I have thus adverted to all the subjects connected with our foreign relations to which I deem it necessary to call your attention. Our policy is not only peace with all, but good will toward all the powers of the earth. While we are just to all, we require that all shall be just to us. Excepting the differences with Mexico and Great Britain, our relations with all civilized nations are of the most satisfactory character. It is hoped that in this enlightened age these differences may be amicably adjusted.
The Secretary of the Treasury in his annual report to Congress will communicate a full statement of the condition of our finances. The imports for the fiscal year ending on the 30th of June last were of the value of $117,254,564, of which the amount exported was $15,346,830, leaving a balance of $101,907,734 for domestic consumption. The exports for the same year were of the value of $114,646,606, of which the amount of domestic articles was $99,299,776. The receipts into the Treasury during the same year were $29,769,133.56, of which there were derived from customs $27,528,112.70, from sales of public lands $2,077,022.30, and from incidental and miscellaneous sources $163,998.56. The expenditures for the same period were $29,968,206.98, of which $8,588,157.62 were applied to the payment of the public debt. The balance in the Treasury on the 1st of July last was $7,658,306.22. The amount of the public debt remaining unpaid on the 1st of October last was $17,075,445.52. Further payments of the public debt would have been made, in anticipation of the period of its reimbursement under the authority conferred upon the Secretary of the Treasury by the acts of July 21, 1841, and of April 15, 1842, and March 3, 1843, had not the unsettled state of our relations with Mexico menaced hostile collision with that power. In view of such a contingency it was deemed prudent to retain in the Treasury an amount unusually large for ordinary purposes.
A few years ago our whole national debt growing out of the Revolution and the War of 1812 with Great Britain was extinguished, and we presented to the world the rare and noble spectacle of a great and growing people who had fully discharged every obligation. Since that time the existing debt has been contracted, and, small as it is in comparison with the similar burdens of most other nations, it should be extinguished at the earliest practicable period. Should the state of the country permit, and especially if our foreign relations interpose no obstacle, it is contemplated to apply all the moneys in the Treasury as they accrue, beyond what is required for the appropriations by Congress, to its liquidation. I cherish the hope of soon being able to congratulate the country on its recovering once more the lofty position which it so recently occupied. Our country, which exhibits to the world the benefits of self-government, in developing all the sources of national prosperity owes to mankind the permanent example of a nation free from the blighting influence of a public debt.
The attention of Congress is invited to the importance of making suitable modifications and reductions of the rates of duty imposed by our present tariff laws. The object of imposing duties on imports should be to raise revenue to pay the necessary expenses of Government. Congress may undoubtedly, in the exercise of a sound discretion, discriminate in arranging the rates of duty on different articles, but the discriminations should be within the revenue standard and be made with the view to raise money for the support of Government.
It becomes important to understand distinctly what is meant by a revenue standard the maximum of which should not be exceeded in the rates of duty imposed. It is conceded, and experience proves, that duties may be laid so high as to diminish or prohibit altogether the importation of any given article, and thereby lessen or destroy the revenue which at lower rates would be derived from its importation. Such duties exceed the revenue rates and are not imposed to raise money for the support of Government. If Congress levy a duty for revenue of 1 per cent on a given article, it will produce a given amount of money to the Treasury and will incidentally and necessarily afford protection or advantage to the amount of 1 per cent to the home manufacturer of a similar or like article over the importer. If the duty be raised to 10 per cent, it will produce a greater amount of money and afford greater protection. If it be still raised to 20, 25, or 30 per cent, and if as it is raised the revenue derived from it is found to be increased, the protection or advantage will also be increased; but if it be raised to 31 per cent, and it is found that the revenue produced at that rate is less than at 30 per cent, it ceases to be a revenue duty. The precise point in the ascending scale of duties at which it is ascertained from experience that the revenue is greatest is the maximum rate of duty which can be laid for the bona fide purpose of collecting money for the support of Government. To raise the duties higher than that point, and thereby diminish the amount collected, is to levy them for protection merely, and not for revenue. As long, then, as Congress may gradually increase the rate of duty on a given article, and the revenue is increased by such increase of duty, they are within the revenue standard. When they go beyond that point, and as they increase the duties, the revenue is diminished or destroyed; the act ceases to have for its object the raising of money to support Government, but is for protection merely. It does not follow that Congress should levy the highest duty on all articles of import which they will bear within the revenue standard, for such rates would probably produce a much larger amount than the economical administration of the Government would require. Nor does it follow that the duties on all articles should be at the same or a horizontal rate. Some articles will bear a much higher revenue duty than others. Below the maximum of the revenue standard Congress may and ought to discriminate in the rates imposed, taking care so to adjust them on different articles as to produce in the aggregate the amount which, when added to the proceeds of the sales of public lands, may be needed to pay the economical expenses of the Government.
In levying a tariff of duties Congress exercise the taxing power, and for purposes of revenue may select the objects of taxation. They may exempt certain articles altogether and permit their importation free of duty. On others they may impose low duties. In these classes should be embraced such articles of necessity as are in general use, and especially such as are consumed by the laborer and poor as well as by the wealthy citizen. Care should be taken that all the great interests of the country, including manufactures, agriculture, commerce, navigation, and the mechanic arts, should, as far as may be practicable, derive equal advantages from the incidental protection which a just system of revenue duties may afford. Taxation, direct or indirect, is a burden, and it should be so imposed as to operate as equally as may be on all classes in the proportion of their ability to bear it. To make the taxing power an actual benefit to one class necessarily increases the burden of the others beyond their proportion, and would be manifestly unjust. The terms "protection to domestic industry" are of popular import, but they should apply under a just system to all the various branches of industry in our country. The farmer or planter who toils yearly in his fields is engaged in "domestic industry," and is as much entitled to have his labor "protected" as the manufacturer, the man of commerce, the navigator, or the mechanic, who are engaged also in "domestic industry" in their different pursuits. The joint labors of all these classes constitute the aggregate of the "domestic industry" of the nation, and they are equally entitled to the nation's "protection." No one of them can justly claim to be the exclusive recipient of "protection," which can only be afforded by increasing burdens on the "domestic industry" of the others.
If these views be correct, it remains to inquire how far the tariff act of 1842 is consistent with them. That many of the provisions of that act are in violation of the cardinal principles here laid down all must concede. The rates of duty imposed by it on some articles are prohibitory and on others so high as greatly to diminish importations and to produce a less amount of revenue than would be derived from lower rates. They operate as "protection merely" to one branch of "domestic industry" by taxing other branches.
By the introduction of minimums, or assumed and false values, and by the imposition of specific duties the injustice and inequality of the act of 1842 in its practical operations on different classes and pursuits are seen and felt. Many of the oppressive duties imposed by it under the operation of these principles range from 1 per cent to more than 200 per cent. They are prohibitory on some articles and partially so on others, and bear most heavily on articles of common necessity and but lightly on articles of luxury. It is so framed that much the greatest burden which it imposes is thrown on labor and the poorer classes, who are least able to bear it, while it protects capital and exempts the rich from paying their just proportion of the taxation required for the support of Government. While it protects the capital of the wealthy manufacturer and increases his profits, it does not benefit the operatives or laborers in his employment, whose wages have not been increased by it. Articles of prime necessity or of coarse quality and low price, used by the masses of the people, are in many instances subjected by it to heavy taxes, while articles of finer quality and higher price, or of luxury, which can be used only by the opulent, are lightly taxed. It imposes heavy and unjust burdens on the farmer, the planter, the commercial man, and those of all other pursuits except the capitalist who has made his investments in manufactures. All the great interests of the country are not as nearly as may be practicable equally protected by it.
The Government in theory knows no distinction of persons or classes, and should not bestow upon some favors and privileges which all others may not enjoy. It was the purpose of its illustrious founders to base the institutions which they reared upon the great and unchanging principles of justice and equity, conscious that if administered in the spirit in which they were conceived they would be felt only by the benefits which they diffused, and would secure for themselves a defense in the hearts of the people more powerful than standing armies and all the means and appliances invented to sustain governments founded in injustice and oppression.
The well-known fact that the tariff act of 1842 was passed by a majority of one vote in the Senate and two in the House of Representatives, and that some of those who felt themselves constrained, under the peculiar circumstances existing at the time, to vote in its favor, proclaimed its defects and expressed their determination to aid in its modification on the first opportunity, affords strong and conclusive evidence that it was not intended to be permanent, and of the expediency and necessity of its thorough revision.
In recommending to Congress a reduction of the present rates of duty and a revision and modification of the act of 1842, I am far from entertaining opinions unfriendly to the manufacturers. On the contrary, I desire to see them prosperous as far as they can be so without imposing unequal burdens on other interests. The advantage under any system of indirect taxation, even within the revenue standard, must be in favor of the manufacturing interest, and of this no other interest will complain.
I recommend to Congress the abolition of the minimum principle, or assumed, arbitrary, and false values, and of specific duties, and the substitution in their place of ad valorem duties as the fairest and most equitable indirect tax which can be imposed. By the ad valorem principle all articles are taxed according to their cost or value, and those which are of inferior quality or of small cost bear only the just proportion of the tax with those which are of superior quality or greater cost. The articles consumed by all are taxed at the same rate. A system of ad valorem revenue duties, with proper discriminations and proper guards against frauds in collecting them, it is not doubted will afford ample incidental advantages to the manufacturers and enable them to derive as great profits as can be derived from any other regular business. It is believed that such a system strictly within the revenue standard will place the manufacturing interests on a stable footing and inure to their permanent advantage, while it will as nearly as may be practicable extend to all the great interests of the country the incidental protection which can be afforded by our revenue laws. Such a system, when once firmly established, would be permanent, and not be subject to the constant complaints, agitations, and changes which must ever occur when duties are not laid for revenue, but for the "protection merely" of a favored interest.
In the deliberations of Congress on this subject it is hoped that a spirit of mutual concession and compromise between conflicting interests may prevail, and that the result of their labors may be crowned with the happiest consequences.
By the Constitution of the United States it is provided that "no money shall be drawn from the Treasury but in consequence of appropriations made by law." A public treasury was undoubtedly contemplated and intended to be created, in which the public money should be kept from the period of collection until needed for public uses. In the collection and disbursement of the public money no agencies have ever been employed by law except such as were appointed by the Government, directly responsible to it and under its control. The safe-keeping of the public money should be confided to a public treasury created by law and under like responsibility and control. It is not to be imagined that the framers of the Constitution could have intended that a treasury should be created as a place of deposit and safe-keeping of the public money which was irresponsible to the Government. The first Congress under the Constitution, by the act of the 2d of September, 1789, "to establish the Treasury Department," provided for the appointment of a Treasurer, and made it his duty "to receive and keep the moneys of the United States" and "at all times to submit to the Secretary of the Treasury and the Comptroller, or either of them, the inspection of the moneys in his hands."
That banks, national or State, could not have been intended to be used as a substitute for the Treasury spoken of in the Constitution as keepers of the public money is manifest from the fact that at that time there was no national bank, and but three or four State banks, of limited capital, existed in the country. Their employment as depositories was at first resorted to to a limited extent, but with no avowed intention of continuing them permanently in place of the Treasury of the Constitution. When they were afterwards from time to time employed, it was from motives of supposed convenience. Our experience has shown that when banking corporations have been the keepers of the public money, and been thereby made in effect the Treasury, the Government can have no guaranty that it can command the use of its own money for public purposes. The late Bank of the United States proved to be faithless. The State banks which were afterwards employed were faithless. But a few years ago, with millions of public money in their keeping, the Government was brought almost to bankruptcy and the public credit seriously impaired because of their inability or indisposition to pay on demand to the public creditors in the only currency recognized by the Constitution. Their failure occurred in a period of peace, and great inconvenience and loss were suffered by the public from it. Had the country been involved in a foreign war, that inconvenience and loss would have been much greater, and might have resulted in extreme public calamity. The public money should not be mingled with the private funds of banks or individuals or be used for private purposes. When it is placed in banks for safe-keeping, it is in effect loaned to them without interest, and is loaned by them upon interest to the borrowers from them. The public money is converted into banking capital, and is used and loaned out for the private profit of bank stockholders, and when called for, as was the case in 1837, it may be in the pockets of the borrowers from the banks instead of being in the public Treasury contemplated by the Constitution. The framers of the Constitution could never have intended that the money paid into the Treasury should be thus converted to private use and placed beyond the control of the Government.
Banks which hold the public money are often tempted by a desire of gain to extend their loans, increase their circulation, and thus stimulate, if not produce, a spirit of speculation and extravagance which sooner or later must result in ruin to thousands. If the public money be not permitted to be thus used, but be kept in the Treasury and paid out to the public creditors in gold and silver, the temptation afforded by its deposit with banks to an undue expansion of their business would be checked, while the amount of the constitutional currency left in circulation would be enlarged by its employment in the public collections and disbursements, and the banks themselves would in consequence be found in a safer and sounder condition. At present State banks are employed as depositories, but without adequate regulation of law whereby the public money can be secured against the casualties and excesses, revulsions, suspensions, and defalcations to which from overissues, overtrading, an inordinate desire for gain, or other causes they are constantly exposed. The Secretary of the Treasury has in all cases when it was practicable taken collateral security for the amount which they hold, by the pledge of stocks of the United States or such of the States as were in good credit. Some of the deposit banks have given this description of security and others have declined to do so.
Entertaining the opinion that "the separation of the moneys of the Government from banking institutions is indispensable for the safety of the funds of the Government and the rights of the people," I recommend to Congress that provision be made by law for such separation, and that a constitutional treasury be created for the safe-keeping of the public money. The constitutional treasury recommended is designed as a secure depository for the public money, without any power to make loans or discounts or to issue any paper whatever as a currency or circulation. I can not doubt that such a treasury as was contemplated by the Constitution should be independent of all banking corporations. The money of the people should be kept in the Treasury of the people created by law, and be in the custody of agents of the people chosen by themselves according to the forms of the Constitution—agents who are directly responsible to the Government, who are under adequate bonds and oaths, and who are subject to severe punishments for any embezzlement, private use, or misapplication of the public funds, and for any failure in other respects to perform their duties. To say that the people or their Government are incompetent or not to be trusted with the custody of their own money in their own Treasury, provided by themselves, but must rely on the presidents, cashiers, and stockholders of banking corporations, not appointed by them nor responsible to them, would be to concede that they are incompetent for self-government.
In recommending the establishment of a constitutional treasury in which the public money shall be kept, I desire that adequate provision be made by law for its safety and that all Executive discretion or control over it shall be removed, except such as may be necessary in directing its disbursement in pursuance of appropriations made by law.
Under our present land system, limiting the minimum price at which the public lands can be entered to $1.25 per acre, large quantities of lands of inferior quality remain unsold because they will not command that price. From the records of the General Land Office it appears that of the public lands remaining unsold in the several States and Territories in which they are situated, 39,105,577 acres have been in the market subject to entry more than twenty years, 49,638,644 acres for more than fifteen years, 73,074,600 acres for more than ten years, and 106,176,961 acres for more than five years. Much the largest portion of these lands will continue to be unsalable at the minimum price at which they are permitted to be sold so long as large territories of lands from which the more valuable portions have not been selected are annually brought into market by the Government. With the view to the sale and settlement of these inferior lands, I recommend that the price be graduated and reduced below the present minimum rate, confining the sales at the reduced prices to settlers and cultivators, in limited quantities. If graduated and reduced in price for a limited term to $1 per acre, and after the expiration of that period for a second and third term to lower rates, a large portion of these lands would be purchased, and many worthy citizens who are unable to pay higher rates could purchase homes for themselves and their families. By adopting the policy of graduation and reduction of price these inferior lands will be sold for their real value, while the States in which they lie will be freed from the inconvenience, if not injustice, to which they are subjected in consequence of the United States continuing to own large quantities of the public lands within their borders not liable to taxation for the support of their local governments.
I recommend the continuance of the policy of granting preemptions in its most liberal extent to all those who have settled or may hereafter settle on the public lands, whether surveyed or unsurveyed, to which the Indian title may have been extinguished at the time of settlement. It has been found by experience that in consequence of combinations of purchasers and other causes a very small quantity of the public lands, when sold at public auction, commands a higher price than the minimum rates established by law. The settlers on the public lands are, however, but rarely able to secure their homes and improvements at the public sales at that rate, because these combinations, by means of the capital they command and their superior ability to purchase, render it impossible for the settler to compete with them in the market. By putting down all competition these combinations of capitalists and speculators are usually enabled to purchase the lands, including the improvements of the settlers, at the minimum price of the Government, and either turn them out of their homes or extort from them, according to their ability to pay, double or quadruple the amount paid for them to the Government. It is to the enterprise and perseverance of the hardy pioneers of the West, who penetrate the wilderness with their families, suffer the dangers, the privations, and hardships attending the settlement of a new country, and prepare the way for the body of emigrants who in the course of a few years usually follow them, that we are in a great degree indebted for the rapid extension and aggrandizement of our country.
Experience has proved that no portion of our population are more patriotic than the hardy and brave men of the frontier, or more ready to obey the call of their country and to defend her rights and her honor whenever and by whatever enemy assailed. They should be protected from the grasping speculator and secured, at the minimum price of the public lands, in the humble homes which they have improved by their labor. With this end in view, all vexatious or unnecessary restrictions imposed upon them by the existing preemption laws should be repealed or modified. It is the true policy of the Government to afford facilities to its citizens to become the owners of small portions of our vast public domain at low and moderate rates.
The present system of managing the mineral lands of the United States is believed to be radically defective. More than 1,000,000 acres of the public lands, supposed to contain lead and other minerals, have been reserved from sale, and numerous leases upon them have been granted to individuals upon a stipulated rent. The system of granting leases has proved to be not only unprofitable to the Government, but unsatisfactory to the citizens who have gone upon the lands, and must, if continued, lay the foundation of much future difficulty between the Government and the lessees. According to the official records, the amount of rents received by the Government for the years 1841, 1842, 1843, and 1844 was $6,354.74, while the expenses of the system during the same period, including salaries of superintendents, agents, clerks, and incidental expenses, were $26,111.11, the income being less than one-fourth of the expenses. To this pecuniary loss may be added the injury sustained by the public in consequence of the destruction of timber and the careless and wasteful manner of working the mines. The system has given rise to much litigation between the United States and individual citizens, producing irritation and excitement in the mineral region, and involving the Government in heavy additional expenditures. It is believed that similar losses and embarrassments will continue to occur while the present system of leasing these lands remains unchanged. These lands are now under the superintendence and care of the War Department, with the ordinary duties of which they have no proper or natural connection. I recommend the repeal of the present system, and that these lands be placed under the superintendence and management of the General Land Office, as other public lands, and be brought into market and sold upon such terms as Congress in their wisdom may prescribe, reserving to the Government an equitable percentage of the gross amount of mineral product, and that the preemption principle be extended to resident miners and settlers upon them at the minimum price which may be established by Congress.
I refer you to the accompanying report of the Secretary of War for information respecting the present situation of the Army and its operations during the past year, the state of our defenses, the condition of the public works, and our relations with the various Indian tribes within our limits or upon our borders. I invite your attention to the suggestions contained in that report in relation to these prominent objects of national interest. When orders were given during the past summer for concentrating a military force on the western frontier of Texas, our troops were widely dispersed and in small detachments, occupying posts remote from each other. The prompt and expeditious manner in which an army embracing more than half our peace establishment was drawn together on an emergency so sudden reflects great credit on the officers who were intrusted with the execution of these orders, as well as upon the discipline of the Army itself. To be in strength to protect and defend the people and territory of Texas in the event Mexico should commence hostilities or invade her territories with a large army, which she threatened, I authorized the general assigned to the command of the army of occupation to make requisitions for additional forces from several of the States nearest the Texan territory, and which could most expeditiously furnish them, if in his opinion a larger force than that under his command and the auxiliary aid which under like circumstances he was authorized to receive from Texas should be required. The contingency upon which the exercise of this authority depended has not occurred. The circumstances under which two companies of State artillery from the city of New Orleans were sent into Texas and mustered into the service of the United States are fully stated in the report of the Secretary of War. I recommend to Congress that provision be made for the payment of these troops, as well as a small number of Texan volunteers whom the commanding general thought it necessary to receive or muster into our service.
During the last summer the First Regiment of Dragoons made extensive excursions through the Indian country on our borders, a part of them advancing nearly to the possessions of the Hudsons Bay Company in the north, and a part as far as the South Pass of the Rocky Mountains and the head waters of the tributary streams of the Colorado of the West. The exhibition of this military force among the Indian tribes in those distant regions and the councils held with them by the commanders of the expeditions, it is believed, will have a salutary influence in restraining them from hostilities among themselves and maintaining friendly relations between them and the United States. An interesting account of one of these excursions accompanies the report of the Secretary of War. Under the directions of the War Department Brevet Captain Fremont, of the Corps of Topographical Engineers, has been employed since 1842 in exploring the country west of the Mississippi and beyond the Rocky Mountains. Two expeditions have already been brought to a close, and the reports of that scientific and enterprising officer have furnished much interesting and valuable information. He is now engaged in a third expedition, but it is not expected that this arduous service will be completed in season to enable me to communicate the result to Congress at the present session.
Our relations with the Indian tribes are of a favorable character. The policy of removing them to a country designed for their permanent residence west of the Mississippi, and without the limits of the organized States and Territories, is better appreciated by them than it was a few years ago, while education is now attended to and the habits of civilized life are gaining ground among them.
Serious difficulties of long standing continue to distract the several parties into which the Cherokees are unhappily divided. The efforts of the Government to adjust the difficulties between them have heretofore proved unsuccessful, and there remains no probability that this desirable object can be accomplished without the aid of further legislation by Congress. I will at an early period of your session present the subject for your consideration, accompanied with an exposition of the complaints and claims of the several parties into which the nation is divided, with a view to the adoption of such measures by Congress as may enable the Executive to do justice to them, respectively, and to put an end, if possible, to the dissensions which have long prevailed and still prevail among them.
I refer you to the report of the Secretary of the Navy for the present condition of that branch of the national defense and for grave suggestions having for their object the increase of its efficiency and a greater economy in its management. During the past year the officers and men have performed their duty in a satisfactory manner. The orders which have been given have been executed with promptness and fidelity. A larger force than has often formed one squadron under our flag was readily concentrated in the Gulf of Mexico, and apparently without unusual effort. It is especially to be observed that notwithstanding the union of so considerable a force, no act was committed that even the jealousy of an irritated power could construe as an act of aggression, and that the commander of the squadron and his officers, in strict conformity with their instructions, holding themselves ever ready for the most active duty, have achieved the still purer glory of contributing to the preservation of peace. It is believed that at all our foreign stations the honor of our flag has been maintained and that generally our ships of war have been distinguished for their good discipline and order. I am happy to add that the display of maritime force which was required by the events of the summer has been made wholly within the usual appropriations for the service of the year, so that no additional appropriations are required.
The commerce of the United States, and with it the navigating interests, have steadily and rapidly increased since the organization of our Government, until, it is believed, we are now second to but one power in the world, and at no distant day we shall probably be inferior to none. Exposed as they must be, it has been a wise policy to afford to these important interests protection with our ships of war distributed in the great highways of trade throughout the world. For more than thirty years appropriations have been made and annually expended for the gradual increase of our naval forces. In peace our Navy performs the important duty of protecting our commerce, and in the event of war will be, as it has been, a most efficient means of defense.
The successful use of steam navigation on the ocean has been followed by the introduction of war steamers in great and increasing numbers into the navies of the principal maritime powers of the world. A due regard to our own safety and to an efficient protection to our large and increasing commerce demands a corresponding increase on our part. No country has greater facilities for the construction of vessels of this description than ours, or can promise itself greater advantages from their employment. They are admirably adapted to the protection of our commerce, to the rapid transmission of intelligence, and to the coast defense. In pursuance of the wise policy of a gradual increase of our Navy, large supplies of live-oak timber and other materials for shipbuilding have been collected and are now under shelter and in a state of good preservation, while iron steamers can be built with great facility in various parts of the Union. The use of iron as a material, especially in the construction of steamers which can enter with safety many of the harbors along our coast now inaccessible to vessels of greater draft, and the practicability of constructing them in the interior, strongly recommend that liberal appropriations should be made for this important object. Whatever may have been our policy in the earlier stages of the Government, when the nation was in its infancy, our shipping interests and commerce comparatively small, our resources limited, our population sparse and scarcely extending beyond the limits of the original thirteen States, that policy must be essentially different now that we have grown from three to more than twenty millions of people, that our commerce, carried in our own ships, is found in every sea, and that our territorial boundaries and settlements have been so greatly expanded. Neither our commerce nor our long line of coast on the ocean and on the Lakes can be successfully defended against foreign aggression by means of fortifications alone. These are essential at important commercial and military points, but our chief reliance for this object must be on a well-organized, efficient navy. The benefits resulting from such a navy are not confined to the Atlantic States. The productions of the interior which seek a market abroad are directly dependent on the safety and freedom of our commerce. The occupation of the Balize below New Orleans by a hostile force would embarrass, if not stagnate, the whole export trade of the Mississippi and affect the value of the agricultural products of the entire valley of that mighty river and its tributaries.
It has never been our policy to maintain large standing armies in time of peace. They are contrary to the genius of our free institutions, would impose heavy burdens on the people and be dangerous to public liberty. Our reliance for protection and defense on the land must be mainly on our citizen soldiers, who will be ever ready, as they ever have been ready in times past, to rush with alacrity, at the call of their country, to her defense. This description of force, however, can not defend our coast, harbors, and inland seas, nor protect our commerce on the ocean or the Lakes. These must be protected by our Navy.
Considering an increased naval force, and especially of steam vessels, corresponding with our growth and importance as a nation, and proportioned to the increased and increasing naval power of other nations, of vast importance as regards our safety, and the great and growing interests to be protected by it, I recommend the subject to the favorable consideration of Congress.
The report of the Postmaster-General herewith communicated contains a detailed statement of the operations of his Department during the past year. It will be seen that the income from postages will fall short of the expenditures for the year between $1,000,000 and $2,000,000. This deficiency has been caused by the reduction of the rates of postage, which was made by the act of the 3d of March last. No principle has been more generally acquiesced in by the people than that this Department should sustain itself by limiting its expenditures to its income. Congress has never sought to make it a source of revenue for general purposes except for a short period during the last war with Great Britain, nor should it ever become a charge on the general Treasury. If Congress shall adhere to this principle, as I think they ought, it will be necessary either to curtail the present mail service so as to reduce the expenditures, or so to modify the act of the 3d of March last as to improve its revenues. The extension of the mail service and the additional facilities which will be demanded by the rapid extension and increase of population on our western frontier will not admit of such curtailment as will materially reduce the present expenditures. In the adjustment of the tariff of postages the interests of the people demand that the lowest rates be adopted which will produce the necessary revenue to meet the expenditures of the Department. I invite the attention of Congress to the suggestions of the Postmaster-General on this subject, under the belief that such a modification of the late law may be made as will yield sufficient revenue without further calls on the Treasury, and with very little change in the present rates of postage. Proper measures have been taken in pursuance of the act of the 3d of March last for the establishment of lines of mail steamers between this and foreign countries. The importance of this service commends itself strongly to favorable consideration.
With the growth of our country the public business which devolves on the heads of the several Executive Departments has greatly increased. In some respects the distribution of duties among them seems to be incongruous, and many of these might be transferred from one to another with advantage to the public interests. A more auspicious time for the consideration of this subject by Congress, with a view to system in the organization of the several Departments and a more appropriate division of the public business, will not probably occur.
The most important duties of the State Department relate to our foreign affairs. By the great enlargement of the family of nations, the increase of our commerce, and the corresponding extension of our consular system the business of this Department has been greatly increased.
In its present organization many duties of a domestic nature and consisting of details are devolved on the Secretary of State, which do not appropriately belong to the foreign department of the Government and may properly be transferred to some other Department. One of these grows out of the present state of the law concerning the Patent Office, which a few years since was a subordinate clerkship, but has become a distinct bureau of great importance. With an excellent internal organization, it is still connected with the State Department. In the transaction of its business questions of much importance to inventors and to the community frequently arise, which by existing laws are referred for decision to a board of which the Secretary of State is a member. These questions are legal, and the connection which now exists between the State Department and the Patent Office may with great propriety and advantage be transferred to the Attorney-General.
In his last annual message to Congress Mr. Madison invited attention to a proper provision for the Attorney-General as "an important improvement in the executive establishment," This recommendation was repeated by some of his successors. The official duties of the Attorney-General have been much increased within a few years,' and his office has become one of great importance. His duties may be still further increased with advantage to the public interests. As an executive officer his residence and constant attention at the seat of Government are required. Legal questions involving important principles and large amounts of public money are constantly referred to him by the President and Executive Departments for his examination and decision. The public business under his official management before the judiciary has been so augmented by the extension of our territory and the acts of Congress authorizing suits against the United States for large bodies of valuable public lands as greatly to increase his labors and responsibilities. I therefore recommend that the Attorney-General be placed on the same footing with the heads of the other Executive Departments, with such subordinate officers provided by law for his Department as may be required to discharge the additional duties which have been or may be devolved upon him.
Congress possess the power of exclusive legislation over the District of Columbia, and I commend the interests of its inhabitants to your favorable consideration. The people of this District have no legislative body of their own, and must confide their local as well as their general interests to representatives in whose election they have no voice and over whose official conduct they have no control. Each member of the National Legislature should consider himself as their immediate representative, and should be the more ready to give attention to their interests and wants because he is not responsible to them. I recommend that a liberal and generous spirit may characterize your measures in relation to them. I shall be ever disposed to show a proper regard for their wishes and, within constitutional limits, shall at all times cheerfully cooperate with you for the advancement of their welfare.
I trust it may not be deemed inappropriate to the occasion for me to dwell for a moment on the memory of the most eminent citizen of our country who during the summer that is gone by has descended to the tomb. The enjoyment of contemplating, at the advanced age of near fourscore years, the happy condition of his country cheered the last hours of Andrew Jackson, who departed this life in the tranquil hope of a blessed immortality. His death was happy, as his life had been eminently useful. He had an unfaltering confidence in the virtue and capacity of the people and in the permanence of that free Government which he had largely contributed to establish and defend. His great deeds had secured to him the affections of his fellow-citizens, and it was his happiness to witness the growth and glory of his country, which he loved so well. He departed amidst the benedictions of millions of freemen. The nation paid its tribute to his memory at his tomb. Coming generations will learn from his example the love of country and the rights of man. In his language on a similar occasion to the present, "I now commend you, fellow-citizens, to the guidance of Almighty God, with a full reliance on His merciful providence for the maintenance of our free institutions, and with an earnest supplication that whatever errors it may be my lot to commit in discharging the arduous duties which have devolved on me will find a remedy in the harmony and wisdom of your counsels."
JAMES K. POLK.
SPECIAL MESSAGES.
Washington, December 9, 1845.
To the Senate and House of Representatives:
I communicate herewith a letter received from the President of the existing Government of the State of Texas, transmitting duplicate copies of the constitution formed by the deputies of the people of Texas in convention assembled, accompanied by official information that the said constitution had been ratified, confirmed, and adopted by the people of Texas themselves, in accordance with the joint resolution for annexing Texas to the United States, and in order that Texas might be admitted as one of the States of that Union.
JAMES K. POLK.
WASHINGTON, December 10, 1845.
To the Senate of the United States:
I transmit herewith a report of the Secretary of War, in answer to a resolution of the Senate of the 4th instant, calling for information "with respect to the practicability and utility of a fort or forts on Ship Island, on the coast of Mississippi, with a view to the protection of said coast."
JAMES K. POLK.
WASHINGTON, December 15, 1845.
To the Senate of the United States:
I herewith communicate to the Senate, for its consideration, a convention signed on the 14th May of the present year by the minister of the United States at Berlin with the minister of Saxony at the same Court, for the mutual abolition of the droit d'aubaine, droit de detraction, and taxes on emigration between the United States and Saxony; and I communicate with the convention an explanatory dispatch of the minister of the United States, dated on the 14th May, 1845, and numbered 267.
JAMES K. POLK.
WASHINGTON, December 16, 1845.
To the Senate of the United States:
I herewith communicate to the Senate, for its consideration, a convention concluded and signed at Berlin on the 29th day of January, 1845, between the United States and Prussia, together with certain other German States, for the mutual extradition of fugitives from justice in certain cases; and I communicate with the convention the correspondence necessary to explain it.
In submitting this convention to the Senate I deem it proper to call their attention to the third article, by which it is stipulated that "none of the contracting parties shall be bound to deliver up its own citizens or subjects under the stipulations of this convention."
No such reservation is to be found in our treaties of extradition with Great Britain and France, the only two nations with whom we have concluded such treaties. These provide for the surrender of all persons who are fugitives from justice, without regard to the country to which they may belong. Under this article, if German subjects of any of the parties to the convention should commit crimes within the United States and fly back to their native country from justice, they would not be surrendered. This is clear in regard to all such Germans as shall not have been naturalized under our laws. But even after naturalization difficult and embarrassing questions might arise between the parties. These German powers, holding the doctrine of perpetual allegiance, might refuse to surrender German naturalized citizens, whilst we must ever maintain the principle that the rights and duties of such citizens are the same as if they had been born in the United States.
I would also observe that the fourth article of the treaty submitted contains a provision not to be found in our conventions with Great Britain and France.
JAMES K. POLK.
WASHINGTON, December 16, 1845.
To the Senate of the United States:
I herewith transmit a report from the Secretary of State, containing the information called for by the resolution of the Senate of the 8th of January last, in relation to the claim of the owners of the brig General Armstrong against the Government of Portugal.[1]
JAMES K. POLK.
[Footnote 1: For failing to protect the American armed brig General Armstrong, while lying in the port of Fayal, Azores, from attack by British armed ships on September 26, 1814.]
WASHINGTON, December 19, 1845.
To the House of Representatives:
I communicate to the House of Representatives, in reply to their resolution of the 25th of February last, a report from the Secretary of State, together with the correspondence of George W. Slacum, late consul of the United States at Rio de Janeiro, with the Department of State, relating to the African slave trade.
JAMES K. POLK.
WASHINGTON, December 22, 1845.
To the Congress of the United States:
I transmit to Congress a communication from the Secretary of State, with a statement of the expenditures from the appropriation made by the act entitled "An act providing the means of future intercourse between the United States and the Government of China," approved the 3d of March, 1843.
JAMES K. POLK.
WASHINGTON, January 3, 1846.
To the Senate of the United States:
I transmit to the Senate a report of the Secretary of the Navy, communicating the information called for by their resolution of the 18th of December, 1845, in relation to the "number of agents now employed for the preservation of timber, their salaries, the authority of law under which they are paid, and the allowances of every description made within the last twenty years in the settlement of the accounts of said agents."
JAMES K. POLK.
WASHINGTON, January 6, 1846.
To the Senate of the United States:
I communicate to the Senate the information called for by their resolution of December 31, 1845, "requesting the President to cause to be communicated to the Senate copies of the correspondence between the Attorney-General and the Solicitor of the Treasury and the judicial officers of Florida in relation to the authority of the Territorial judges as Federal judges since the 3d of March, 1845."
JAMES K. POLK.
WASHINGTON, January 12, 1846.
To the Senate of the United States:
I nominate the persons named in the accompanying list[2] of promotions and appointments in the Army of the United States to the several grades annexed to their names, as proposed by the Secretary of War.
JAMES K. POLK.
[Footnote 2: Omitted.]
WAR DEPARTMENT, January 8, 1846.
The PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.
SIR: I have the honor respectfully to propose for your approbation the annexed list[3] of officers for promotion and persons for appointment in the Army of the United States.
I am, sir, with great respect, your obedient servant,
W.L. MARCY
[Footnote 3: Omitted.]
ADJUTANT-GENERAL'S OFFICE,
Washington, January 8, 1846.
Hon. W.L. Marcy, Secretary of War,
SIR: I respectfully submit the accompanying list[4] of promotions and appointments to fill the vacancies in the Army which are known to have happened since the date of the last list, December 12, 1845. The promotions are all regular except that of Captain Martin Scott, Fifth Infantry, whose name, agreeably to the decision of the President and your instructions, is submitted to fill the vacancy of major in the First Regiment of Infantry (vice Dearborn, promoted), over the two senior captains of Infantry, Captain John B. Clark, of the Third Regiment, and Brevet Major Thomas Noel, of the Sixth. The reasons for this departure from the ordinary course (as in other like cases of disability) are set forth in the Adjutant-General's report of the 27th ultimo and the General in Chief's indorsement thereon, of which copies are herewith respectfully annexed, marked A.
I am, sir, with great respect, your obedient servant,
R. JONES, Adjutant-General.
[Footnote 4: Omitted.]
A.
ADJUTANT-GENERAL'S OFFICE, Washington, December 27, 1845.
Major-General WINFIELD SCOTT, Commanding the Army.
SIR: The death of Lieutenant-Colonel Hoffman, Seventh Infantry, on the 26th ultimo, having caused a vacancy in the grade of major, to which, under the rule, Captain J.B. Clark, Third Infantry, would be entitled to succeed, I deem it proper to submit the following statement, extracted from the official returns of his regiment, touching his physical capacity for the performance of military duty.
In May, 1836, Captain Clark went on the recruiting service, where he remained till October 4, 1838, when he was granted a three months' leave. He joined his company at Fort Towson in May, 1839, and continued with it from that time till March, 1841, accompanying it meanwhile (October, 1840) to Florida. He obtained a three months' leave on surgeon's certificate of ill health March 23, 1841, but did not rejoin till February 16, 1842. In the interim he was placed on duty for a short time as a member of a general court-martial, which happened to be convened at St. Louis, where he was then staying. He remained with his company from February to November, 1842, when he again received a leave for the benefit of his health, and did not return to duty till April 26, 1843 (after his regiment had been ordered to Florida), when he rejoined it at Jefferson Barracks. He continued with it (with the exception of one short leave) from April, 1843, till June, 1845, but the returns show him to have been frequently on the sick report during that period. On the 2d of June, 1845, his company being then encamped near Fort Jessup in expectation of orders for Texas, he again procured a leave on account of his health, and has not since been able to rejoin, reporting monthly that his health unfitted him for the performance of duty. The signature of his last report (not written by himself), of November 30 (herewith[5]), would seem to indicate great physical derangement or decrepitude, approaching, perhaps, to paralysis.
From the foregoing it appears that during the last seven years (since October, 1838) Captain Clark has been off duty two years and four months, the greater part of the time on account of sickness, and that even when present with his company his health is so much impaired that very often he is unable to perform the ordinary garrison duties.
Under these circumstances it is respectfully submitted, for the consideration of the proper authority, whether the senior captain of infantry should not be passed over and (as Brevet Major Noel,[6] the next in rank, is utterly disqualified) Captain Martin Scott, of the Fifth Infantry, promoted to the vacant majority.
It is proper to state that Captain Clark has always been regarded as a perfect gentleman, and as such, as far as I know, is equal to any officer in the Army.
I am, sir, most respectfully, your obedient servant,
R. JONES, Adjutant-General.
[Remarks indorsed on the foregoing report by the General in Chief.]
DECEMBER 30, 1845.
This report presents grave points for consideration. It is highly improbable that the Captain will ever be fit for the active duties of his profession. The question, therefore, seems to be whether he shall be a pensioner on full pay as captain or as major, for he has long been, not in name, but in fact, a pensioner on full pay. We have no half pay in the Army to relieve marching regiments of crippled and superannuated officers. We have many such—Colonel Maury, of the Third Infantry (superannuated), and Majors Cobb and McClintock, Fifth Infantry and Third Artillery (crippled). Many others are fast becoming superannuated. The three named are on indefinite leaves of absence, and so are Majors Searle and Noel, permanent cripples from wounds. General Cass's resolution of yesterday refers simply to age. A half pay or retired list with half pay would be much better. There are some twenty officers who ought at once to be placed on such list and their places filled by promotion.
Upon the whole, I think it best that Captain M. Scott should be promoted, vice Dearborn, vice Lieutenant-Colonel Hoffman.
Respectfully submitted to the Secretary of War.
WINFIELD SCOTT.
[Footnote 5: Omitted.]
[Footnote 6: In 1839 Brevet Major Noel, Sixth Infantry, was severely wounded (serving in the Florida War at the time) by the accidental discharge of his own pistol. He left his company February 16, 1839, and has ever since been absent from his regiment, the state of his wound and great suffering rendering him utterly incapable of performing any kind of duty whatever; nor is there any reason to hope he will ever be able to resume his duties.]
R. JONES, Adjutant-General.
JANUARY 8, 1846.
It appearing from the within statements of the Commanding General and the Adjutant-General that the two officers proposed to be passed over are physically unable to perform the duties of major, and their inability is not temporary, I recommend that Captain Martin Scott be promoted to the vacant majority 3d January, 1846.
W.L. MARCY.
WASHINGTON, January 13, 1846.
To the Senate of the United States:
I transmit to the Senate a report of the Secretary of War, with accompanying papers, showing the measures which have been adopted in relation to the transfer of certain stocks between the Chickasaw and Choctaw Indians under the treaty between those tribes of the 24th March, 1837. The claim presented by the Choctaw General Council, if deemed to be founded in equity, can not be adjusted without the previous advice and consent of the Senate.
JAMES K. POLK.
WASHINGTON, January 20, 1846.
To the Senate of the United States:
On the 15th of January, 1846, I withdrew the nomination of James H. Tate, of Mississippi, as consul at Buenos Ayres. The withdrawal was made upon the receipt on that day of a letter addressed to me by the Senators from the State of Mississippi advising it. I transmit their letter herewith to the Senate. At that time I had not been furnished with a copy of the Executive Journal of the Senate, and had no knowledge of the pendency of the resolution before that body in executive session in relation to this nomination. Having since been furnished by the Secretary of the Senate with a copy of the Executive Journal containing the resolution referred to, I deem it proper and due to the Senate to reinstate the nomination in the condition in which it was before it was withdrawn. And with that view I nominate James H. Tate, of Mississippi, to be consul at Buenos Ayres.
JAMES K. POLK.
WASHINGTON, January 28, 1846.
To the Senate of the United States:
I herewith communicate to the Senate, for its consideration with regard to its ratification, a treaty of commerce and navigation between the United States and the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies, concluded and signed on the 1st day of December last at Naples by the charge d'affaires of the United States with the plenipotentiaries of His Majesty the King of the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies.
And I communicate at the same time portions of the correspondence (so far as it has been received) in explanation of the treaty.
JAMES K. POLK.
WASHINGTON, February 3, 1846.
To the Senate of the United States:
I herewith communicate to the Senate, for its consideration in reference to its ratification, a treaty of commerce and navigation between the United States and Belgium, concluded and signed on the 10th November last at Brussels by the charge d'affaires of the United States with the minister of foreign affairs of His Majesty the King of the Belgians.
And I communicate at the same time the correspondence and other papers in explanation of the treaty,
JAMES K. POLK.
WASHINGTON, February 5, 1846.
To the Senate of the United States:
In pursuance with the request of the Senate in their resolution of the 4th instant, I "return" herewith, "for their further action, the resolution advising and consenting to the appointment of Isaac H. Wright as navy agent at Boston." It will be observed that the resolution of the Senate herewith returned contains the advice and consent of that body to the appointment of several other persons to other offices not embraced in their resolution of the 4th instant, and it being impossible to comply with the request of the Senate without communicating to them the whole resolution, I respectfully request that so far as it relates to the other cases than that of Mr. Wright it may be returned to me.
JAMES K. POLK.
WASHINGTON, February 7, 1846.
To the Senate of the United States:
In compliance with the request of the Senate in their resolution of the 29th January last, I herewith communicate a report from the Secretary of State, with the accompanying correspondence, which has taken place between the Secretary of State and the minister of the United States at London and between the Government of the United States and that of England on the "subject of Oregon" since my communication of the 2d of December last was made to Congress.
JAMES K. POLK.
WASHINGTON, February 7, 1846.
To the House of Representatives of the United States:
In compliance with the request of the House of Representatives in their resolution of the 3d instant, I herewith communicate a report from the Secretary of State, with the accompanying "correspondence, which has taken place" between the Secretary of State and the minister of the United States at London and "between the Government of Great Britain and this Government in relation to the country west of the Rocky Mountains since the last annual message of the President" to Congress.
JAMES K. POLK.
WASHINGTON, February 9, 1846.
To the House of Representatives of the United States:
I communicate herewith, in answer to the resolution of the House of Representatives of the 19th of December last, the report of the Secretary of State inclosing "copies of correspondence between this Government and Great Britain within the last two years in relation to the Washington treaty, and particularly in relation to the free navigation of the river St. John, and in relation to the disputed-territory fund named in said treaty;" and also the accompanying copies of documents filed in the Department of State, which embrace the correspondence and information called for by the said resolution.
JAMES K. POLK.
WASHINGTON, February 9, 1846.
To the Senate of the United States:
In compliance with the request of the Senate in their resolution of the 5th instant, I herewith return "the resolution of the Senate advising and consenting to the appointment of F.G. Mayson to be a second lieutenant in the Marine Corps." As the same resolution which contains the advice and consent of the Senate to the appointment of Mr. Mayson contains also the advice and consent of that body to the appointment of several other persons to other offices, to whom commissions have been since issued, I respectfully request that the resolution, so far as it relates to the persons other than Mr. Mayson, may be returned to me.
JAMES K. POLK.
WASHINGTON, February 12, 1846.
To the Senate of the United States:
I transmit herewith, for the consideration and advice of the Senate with regard to its ratification, a treaty concluded on the 14th day of January last by Thomas H. Harvey and Richard W. Cummins, commissioners on the part of the United States, and the chiefs and headmen of the Kansas tribe of Indians, together with a report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs and other papers explanatory of the same.
JAMES K. POLK.
WASHINGTON, February 16, 1846.
To the Senate and House of Representatives:
I herewith transmit a communication from the Attorney-General relating to a contract entered into by him with Messrs. Little & Brown for certain copies of their proposed edition of the laws and treaties of the United States, in pursuance of the joint resolution of the 3d March, 1845.
JAMES K. POLK.
WASHINGTON, February 16, 1846.
To the Senate of the United States:
I herewith transmit a report from the Secretary of the Navy, communicating the correspondence called for by the resolution of the Senate of the 25th of February, 1845, between the commander of the East India Squadrons and foreign powers or United States agents abroad during the years 1842 and 1843, relating to the trade and other interests of this Government.
JAMES K. POLK.
WASHINGTON, February 18, 1846.
To the House of Representatives of the United States:
In compliance with the request of the House of Representatives in their resolution of the 12th instant, asking for information relative to the Mexican indemnity, I communicate herewith a report from the Secretary of State, with the paper accompanying it.
JAMES K. POLK.
[A similar message was sent to the Senate in compliance with a request of that body.]
WASHINGTON, March 23, 1846.
To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States:
I transmit, for your consideration, a correspondence between the minister of Her Britannic Majesty in Washington and the Secretary of State, containing an arrangement for the adjustment and payment of the claims of the respective Governments upon each other arising from the collection of certain import duties in violation of the second article of the commercial convention of 3d of July, 1815, between the two countries, and I respectfully submit to Congress the propriety of making provision to carry this arrangement into effect.
The second article of this convention provides that "no higher or other duties shall be imposed on the importation into the United States of any articles the growth, produce, or manufacture of His Britannic Majesty's territories in Europe, and no higher or other duties shall be imposed on the importation into the territories of His Britannic Majesty in Europe of any articles the growth, produce, or manufacture of the United States, than are or shall be payable on the like articles being the growth, produce, or manufacture of any other foreign country."
Previous to the act of Parliament of the 13th of August, 1836, the duty on foreign rough rice imported into Great Britain was 2s. 6d. sterling per bushel. By this act the duty was reduced to 1 penny per quarter (of 8 bushels) on the rough rice "imported from the west coast of Africa."
Upon the earnest and repeated remonstrances of our ministers at London in opposition to this discrimination against American and in favor of African rice, as a violation of the subsisting convention, Parliament, by the act of 9th July, 1842, again equalized the duty on all foreign rough rice by fixing it at 7s. per quarter., In the intervening period, however, of nearly six years large importations had been made into Great Britain of American rough rice, which was subjected to a duty of 2s. 6d. per bushel; but the importers, knowing their rights under the convention, claimed that it should be admitted at the rate of 1 penny per quarter, the duty imposed on African rice. This claim was resisted by the British Government, and the excess of duty was paid, at the first under protest, and afterwards, in consequence of an arrangement with the board of customs, by the deposit of exchequer bills.
It seems to have been a clear violation both of the letter and spirit of the convention to admit rough rice "the growth" of Africa at 1 penny per quarter, whilst the very same article "the growth" of the United States was charged with a duty of 2s. 6d. per bushel.
The claim of Great Britain, under the same article of the convention, is founded on the tariff act of 30th August, 1842. Its twenty-fifth section provides "that nothing in this act contained shall apply to goods shipped in a vessel bound to any port of the United States, actually having left her last port of lading eastward of the Cape of Good Hope or beyond Cape Horn prior to the 1st day of September, 1842; and all legal provisions and regulations existing immediately before the 30th day of June, 1842, shall be applied to importations which may be made in vessels which have left such last port of lading eastward of the Cape of Good Hope or beyond Cape Horn prior to said 1st day of September, 1842."
The British Government contends that it was a violation of the second article of the convention for this act to require that "articles the growth, produce, or manufacture" of Great Britain, when imported into the United States in vessels which had left their last port of lading in Great Britain prior to the 1st day of September, 1842, should pay any "higher or other duties" than were imposed on "like articles" "the growth, produce, or manufacture" of countries beyond the Cape of Good Hope and Cape Horn.
Upon a careful consideration of the subject I arrived at the conclusion that this claim on the part of the British Government was well founded. I deem it unnecessary to state my reasons at length for adopting this opinion, the whole subject being fully explained in the letter of the Secretary of the Treasury and the accompanying papers.
The amount necessary to satisfy the British claim can not at present be ascertained with any degree of accuracy, no individual having yet presented his case to the Government of the United States. It is not apprehended that the amount will be large. After such examination of the subject as it has been in his power to make, the Secretary of the Treasury believes that it will not exceed $100,000.
On the other hand, the claims of the importers of rough rice into Great Britain have been already ascertained, as the duties were paid either under protest or in exchequer bills. Their amount is stated by Mr. Everett, our late minister at London, in a dispatch dated June 1, 1843, to be L88,886 16s. 10d. sterling, of which L60,006 4d. belong to citizens of the United States.
As it may be long before the amount of the British claim can be ascertained, and it would be unreasonable to postpone payment to the American claimants until this can be adjusted, it has been proposed to the British Government immediately to refund the excess of duties collected by it on American rough rice. I should entertain a confident hope that this proposal would be accepted should the arrangement concluded be sanctioned by an act of Congress making provision for the return of the duties in question. The claimants might then be paid as they present their demands, properly authenticated, to the Secretary of the Treasury.
JAMES K. POLK.
WASHINGTON, March 24, 1846.
To the Senate of the United States:
In answer to the inquiry of the Senate contained in their resolution of the 17th instant, whether in my "judgment any circumstances connected with or growing out of the foreign relations of this country require at this time an increase of our naval or military force," and, if so, "what those circumstances are," I have to express the opinion that a wise precaution demands such increase.
In my annual message of the 2d of December last I recommended to the favorable consideration of Congress an increase of our naval force, especially of our steam navy, and the raising of an adequate military force to guard and protect such of our citizens as might think proper to emigrate to Oregon. Since that period I have seen no cause to recall or modify these recommendations. On the contrary, reasons exist which, in my judgment, render it proper not only that they should be promptly carried into effect, but that additional provision should be made for the public defense.
The consideration of such additional provision was brought before appropriate committees of the two Houses of Congress, in answer to calls made by them, in reports prepared, with my sanction, by the Secretary of War and the Secretary of the Navy on the 29th of December and the 8th of January last—a mode of communication with Congress not unusual, and under existing circumstances believed to be most eligible. Subsequent events have confirmed me in the opinion that these recommendations were proper as precautionary measures.
It was a wise maxim of the Father of his Country that "to be prepared for war is one of the most efficient means of preserving peace," and that, "avoiding occasions of expense by cultivating peace," we should "remember also that timely disbursements to prepare for danger frequently prevent much greater disbursements to repel it." The general obligation to perform this duty is greatly strengthened by facts known to the whole world. A controversy respecting the Oregon Territory now exists between the United States and Great Britain, and while, as far as we know, the relations of the latter with all European nations are of the most pacific character, she is making unusual and extraordinary armaments and warlike preparations, naval and military, both at home and in her North American possessions.
It can not be disguised that, however sincere may be the desire of peace, in the event of a rupture these armaments and preparations would be used against our country. Whatever may have been the original purpose of these preparations, the fact is undoubted that they are now proceeding, in part at least, with a view to the contingent possibility of a war with the United States. The general policy of making additional warlike preparations was distinctly announced in the speech from the throne as late as January last, and has since been reiterated by the ministers of the Crown in both houses of Parliament. Under this aspect of our relations with Great Britain, I can not doubt the propriety of increasing our means of defense both by land and sea. This can give Great Britain no cause of offense nor increase the danger of a rupture. If, on the contrary, we should fold our arms in security and at last be suddenly involved in hostilities for the maintenance of our just rights without any adequate preparation, our responsibility to the country would be of the gravest character. Should collision between the two countries be avoided, as I sincerely trust it may be, the additional charge upon the Treasury in making the necessary preparations will not be lost, while in the event of such a collision they would be indispensable for the maintenance of our national rights and national honor.
I have seen no reason to change or modify the recommendations of my annual message in regard to the Oregon question. The notice to abrogate the treaty of the 6th of August, 1827, is authorized by the treaty itself and can not be regarded as a warlike measure, and I can not withhold my strong conviction that it should be promptly given. The other recommendations are in conformity with the existing treaty, and would afford to American citizens in Oregon no more than the same measure of protection which has long since been extended to British subjects in that Territory.
The state of our relations with Mexico is still in an unsettled condition. Since the meeting of Congress another revolution has taken place in that country, by which the Government has passed into the hands of new rulers. This event has procrastinated, and may possibly defeat, the settlement of the differences between the United States and that country. The minister of the United States to Mexico at the date of the last advices had not been received by the existing authorities. Demonstrations of a character hostile to the United States continue to be made in Mexico, which has rendered it proper, in my judgment, to keep nearly two-thirds of our Army on our southwestern frontier. In doing this many of the regular military posts have been reduced to a small force inadequate to their defense should an emergency arise.
In view of these "circumstances," it is my "judgment" that "an increase of our naval and military force is at this time required" to place the country in a suitable state of defense. At the same time, it is my settled purpose to pursue such a course of policy as may be best calculated to preserve both with Great Britain and Mexico an honorable peace, which nothing will so effectually promote as unanimity in our councils and a firm maintenance of all our just rights.
JAMES K. POLK.
WASHINGTON, April 1, 1846.
To the House of Representatives of the United States:
I transmit herewith a letter received from the governor of the State of Ohio in answer to a communication addressed to him in compliance with a resolution of the House of Representatives of January 30, 1846, "requesting the President of the United States to apply to the governor of the State of Ohio for information in regard to the present condition of the Columbus and Sandusky turnpike road; whether the said road is kept in such a state of repair as will enable the Federal Government to realize in case of need the advantages contemplated by the act of Congress approved March 3, 1827."
JAMES K. POLK.
WASHINGTON, April 1, 1846.
To the Senate of the United States:
In compliance with the request of a delegation of the Tonawanda band of the Seneca Indians now in this city, I herewith transmit, for your consideration, a memorial addressed to the President and the Senate in relation to the treaty of January 15, 1838, with the "Six Nations of New York Indians," and that of May 20, 1842, with the "Seneca Nation of Indians'"
JAMES K. POLK.
WASHINGTON, April 3, 1846.
To the Senate of the United States:
I transmit herewith a report from the Acting Secretary of State, with accompanying papers, in answer to the resolution of the Senate of the 23d ultimo, requesting the President to communicate to that body, "if not incompatible with public interests, any correspondence which took place between the Government of the United States and that of Great Britain on the subject of the northeastern boundary between the 20th of June, 1840, and the 4th of March, 1841."
JAMES K. POLK.
WASHINGTON, April 13, 1846.
To the Senate of the United States:
In answer to the resolution of the Senate of the 11th instant, calling for "copies of any correspondence that may have taken place between the authorities of the United States and those of Great Britain since the last documents transmitted to Congress in relation to the subject of the Oregon Territory, or so much thereof as may be communicated without detriment to the public interest," I have to state that no correspondence in relation to the Oregon Territory has taken place between the authorities of the United States and those of Great Britain since the date of the last documents on the subject transmitted by me to Congress.
JAMES K. POLK.
WASHINGTON, April 13, 1846.
To the Senate and House of Representatives:
In my annual message of the 2d of December last it was stated that serious difficulties of long standing continued to distract the several parties into which the Cherokee tribe of Indians is unhappily divided; that all the efforts of the Government to adjust these difficulties had proved to be unsuccessful, and would probably remain so without the aid of further legislation by Congress. Subsequent events have confirmed this opinion.
I communicate herewith, for the information of Congress, a report of the Secretary of War, transmitting a report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, with accompanying documents, together with memorials which have been received from the several bands or parties of the Cherokees themselves. It will be perceived that internal feuds still exist which call for the prompt intervention of the Government of the United States.
Since the meeting of Congress several unprovoked murders have been committed by the stronger upon the weaker party of the tribe, which will probably remain unpunished by the Indian authorities; and there is reason to apprehend that similar outrages will continue to be perpetrated unless restrained by the authorities of the United States.
Many of the weaker party have been compelled to seek refuge beyond the limits of the Indian country and within the State of Arkansas, and are destitute of the means for their daily subsistence. The military forces of the United States stationed on the western frontier have been active in their exertions to suppress these outrages and to execute the treaty of 1835, by which it is stipulated that "the United States agree to protect the Cherokee Nation from domestic strife and foreign enemies, and against intestine wars between the several tribes."
These exertions of the Army have proved to a great extent unavailing, for the reasons stated in the accompanying documents, including communications from the officer commanding at Fort Gibson.
I submit, for the consideration of Congress, the propriety of making such amendments of the laws regulating intercourse with the Indian tribes as will subject to trial and punishment in the courts of the United States all Indians guilty of murder and such other felonies as may be designated, when committed on other Indians within the jurisdiction of the United States.
Such a modification of the existing laws is suggested because if offenders against the laws of humanity in the Indian country are left to be punished by Indian laws they will generally, if not always, be permitted to escape with impunity. This has been the case in repeated instances among the Cherokees. For years unprovoked murders have been committed, and yet no effort has been made to bring the offenders to punishment. Should this state of things continue, it is not difficult to foresee that the weaker party will be finally destroyed. As the guardian of the Indian tribes, the Government of the United States is bound by every consideration of duty and humanity to interpose to prevent such a disaster.
From the examination which I have made into the actual state of things in the Cherokee Nation I am satisfied that there is no probability that the different bands or parties into which it is divided can ever again live together in peace and harmony, and that the well-being of the whole requires that they should be separated and live under separate governments as distinct tribes.
That portion who emigrated to the west of the Mississippi prior to the year 1819, commonly called the "Old Settlers," and that portion who made the treaty of 1835, known as the "treaty party," it is believed would willingly unite, and could live together in harmony. The number of these, as nearly as can be estimated, is about one-third of the tribe. The whole number of all the bands or parties does not probably exceed 20,000. The country which they occupy embraces 7,000,000 acres of land, with the privilege of an outlet to the western limits of the United States. This country is susceptible of division, and is large enough for all.
I submit to Congress the propriety of either dividing the country which they at present occupy or of providing by law a new home for the one or the other of the bands or parties now in hostile array against each other, as the most effectual, if not the only, means of preserving the weaker party from massacre and total extermination. Should Congress favor the division of the country as suggested, and the separation of the Cherokees into two distinct tribes, justice will require that the annuities and funds belonging to the whole, now held in trust for them by the United States, should be equitably distributed among the parties, according to their respective claims and numbers.
There is still a small number of the Cherokee tribe remaining within the State of North Carolina, who, according to the stipulations of the treaty of 1835, should have emigrated with their brethren to the west of the Mississippi. It is desirable that they should be removed, and in the event of a division of the country in the West, or of a new home being provided for a portion of the tribe, that they be permitted to join either party, as they may prefer, and be incorporated with them.
I submit the whole subject to Congress, that such legislative measures may be adopted as will be just to all the parties or bands of the tribe. Such measures, I am satisfied, are the only means of arresting the horrid and inhuman massacres which have marked the history of the Cherokees for the last few years, and especially for the last few months.
The Cherokees have been regarded as among the most enlightened of the Indian tribes, but experience has proved that they have not yet advanced to such a state of civilization as to dispense with the guardian care and control of the Government of the United States.
JAMES K. POLK.
WASHINGTON, April 14, 1846.
To the Senate and House of Representatives:
In compliance with the act of the 3d of March, 1845, I communicate herewith to Congress a report of the Secretaries of War and the Navy on the subject of a fireproof building for the War and Navy Departments, together with documents explaining the plans to which it refers and containing an estimate of the cost of erecting the buildings proposed.
Congress having made no appropriation for the employment of an architect to prepare and submit the necessary plans, none was appointed. Several skillful architects were invited to submit plans and estimates, and from those that were voluntarily furnished a selection has been made of such as would furnish the requisite building for the accommodation of the War and Navy Departments at the least expense.
All the plans and estimates which have been received are herewith communicated, for the information of Congress.
JAMES K. POLK.
WASHINGTON, April 20, 1846.
To the House of Representatives:
I have considered the resolution of the House of Representatives of the 9th instant, by which I am requested "to cause to be furnished to that House an account of all payments made on President's certificates from the fund appropriated by law, through the agency of the State Department, for the contingent expenses of foreign intercourse from the 4th of March, 1841, until the retirement of Daniel Webster from the Department of State, with copies of all entries, receipts, letters, vouchers, memorandums, or other evidence of such payments, to whom paid, for what, and particularly all concerning the northeastern-boundary dispute with Great Britain."
With an anxious desire to furnish to the House any information requested by that body which may be in the Executive Departments, I have felt bound by a sense of public duty to inquire how far I could with propriety, or consistently with the existing laws, respond to their call.
The usual annual appropriation "for the contingent expenses of intercourse between the United States and foreign nations" has been disbursed since the date of the act of May 1, 1810, in pursuance of its provisions. By the third section of that act it is provided—
That when any sum or sums of money shall be drawn from the Treasury under any law making appropriation for the contingent expenses of intercourse between the United States and foreign nations the President shall be, and he is hereby, authorized to cause the same to be duly settled annually with the accounting officers of the Treasury in the manner following; that is to say, by causing the same to be accounted for specially in all instances wherein the expenditure thereof may in his judgment be made public, and by making a certificate of the amount of such expenditures as he may think it advisable not to specify; and every such certificate shall be deemed a sufficient voucher for the sum or sums therein expressed to have been expended.
Two distinct classes of expenditure are authorized by this law—the one of a public and the other of a private and confidential character. The President in office at the time of the expenditure is made by the law the sole judge whether it shall be public or private. Such sums are to be "accounted for specially in all instances wherein the expenditure thereof may in his judgment be made public." All expenditures "accounted for specially" are settled at the Treasury upon vouchers, and not on "President's certificates," and, like all other public accounts, are subject to be called for by Congress, and are open to public examination. Had information as respects this class of expenditures been called for by the resolution of the House, it would have been promptly communicated.
Congress, foreseeing that it might become necessary and proper to apply portions of this fund for objects the original accounts and vouchers for which could not be "made public" without injury to the public interests, authorized the President, instead of such accounts and vouchers, to make a certificate of the amount "of such expenditures as he may think it advisable not to specify," and have provided that "every such certificate shall be deemed a sufficient voucher for the sum or sums therein expressed to have been expended."
The law making these provisions is in full force. It is binding upon all the departments of the Government, and especially upon the Executive, whose duty it is "to take care that the laws be faithfully executed." In the exercise of the discretion lodged by it in the Executive several of my predecessors have made "certificates" of the amount "of such expenditures as they have thought it advisable not to specify," and upon these certificates as the only vouchers settlements have been made at the Treasury.
It appears that within the period specified in the resolution of the House certificates were given by my immediate predecessor, upon which settlements have been made at the Treasury, amounting to $5,460. He has solemnly determined that the objects and items of these expenditures should not be made public, and has given his certificates to that effect, which are placed upon the records of the country. Under the direct authority of an existing law, he has exercised the power of placing these expenditures under the seal of confidence, and the whole matter was terminated before I came into office. An important question arises, whether a subsequent President, either voluntarily or at the request of one branch of Congress, can without a violation of the spirit of the law revise the acts of his predecessor and expose to public view that which he had determined should not be "made public." If not a matter of strict duty, it would certainly be a safe general rule that this should not be done. Indeed, it may well happen, and probably would happen, that the President for the time being would not be in possession of the information upon which his predecessor acted, and could not, therefore, have the means of judging whether he had exercised his discretion wisely or not. The law requires no other voucher but the President's certificate, and there is nothing in its provisions which requires any "entries, receipts, letters, vouchers, memorandums, or other evidence of such payments" to be preserved in the executive department. The President who makes the "certificate" may, if he chooses, keep all the information and evidence upon which he acts in his own possession. If, for the information of his successors, he shall leave the evidence on which he acts and the items of the expenditures which make up the sum for which he has given his "certificate" on the confidential files of one of the Executive Departments, they do not in any proper sense become thereby public records. They are never seen or examined by the accounting officers of the Treasury when they settle an account on the "President's certificate." The First Congress of the United States on the 1st of July, 1790, passed an act "providing the means of intercourse between the United States and foreign nations," by which a similar provision to that which now exists was made for the settlement of such expenditures as in the judgment of the President ought not to be made public. This act was limited in its duration. It was continued for a limited term in 1793, and between that time and the date of the act of May 1, 1810, which is now in force, the same provision was revived and continued. Expenditures were made and settled under Presidential certificates in pursuance of these laws. |
|
