I transmit herewith a letter from the Secretary of War, dated the 18th instant, and accompanying papers from the Acting Chief Signal Officer, representing the necessity of a special appropriation being made not later than the 1st of June proximo for the purpose of dispatching a vessel, with men and supplies, for the relief of the expedition which was last year sent to Lady Franklin Bay, Grinnell Land.

CHESTER A. ARTHUR.



EXECUTIVE MANSION, May 24, 1882.

To the Senate of the United States:

In compliance with a resolution of the Senate of the 1st of March last, I transmit a communication from the Secretary of the Navy, accompanied by the report (with the exception of such parts thereof as it is deemed incompatible with the public interests to furnish) of Commodore R.W. Shufeldt, United States Navy, of his cruise around the world in the United States steamer Ticonderoga.

CHESTER A. ARTHUR.



EXECUTIVE MANSION, Washington, May 25, 1882.

To the Senate and House of Representatives:

I transmit herewith a letter from the Secretary of State, concerning the awards made against Venezuela by the mixed commission under the convention of April 25, 1866. I earnestly invite the attention of Congress to this communication and the accompanying inclosures. In case neither House takes action upon it during the present Congress I shall feel it my duty to direct that this prolonged discussion be definitely terminated by recognizing the absolute validity of all the awards.

CHESTER A. ARTHUR.



EXECUTIVE MANSION, May 26, 1882.

To the House of Representatives:

In answer to the resolution of the House of Representatives of the 10th of April ultimo, calling upon the Secretary of State for information in regard to the restrictions imposed by the French Government upon pork exported from the United States, I transmit herewith a report of that officer and its accompanying papers.

CHESTER A. ARTHUR.



EXECUTIVE MANSION, June 5, 1882.

To the Senate and House of Representatives:

I transmit herewith a communication from the Secretary of the Interior of the 24th ultimo, with accompanying papers, submitting the draft of a proposed clause for insertion in one of the pending appropriation bills, to provide for the payment of certain legal services rendered to the Cherokee Indians in North Carolina in 1881, amounting to $150.

The subject is presented for the consideration of Congress.

CHESTER A. ARTHUR.



EXECUTIVE MANSION, Washington, June 5, 1882.

To the Senate of the United States:

In further answer to the Senate's resolution of the 12th of December last, I transmit herewith a report of the Secretary of State and its accompanying paper, in regard to the modification of the Clayton-Bulwer treaty.

CHESTER A. ARTHUR.



EXECUTIVE MANSION, June 14, 1882.

To the Senate and House of Representatives:

I transmit herewith a letter from the Secretary of the Interior, respecting the Louisiana private land claim of Antonio Vaca, deceased, to which, with the accompanying papers, I invite the attention of Congress.

CHESTER A. ARTHUR.



EXECUTIVE MANSION, Washington, June 14, 1882.

To the Senate of the United States:

I transmit herewith, in response to the resolution of the Senate of the 5th instant, a report from the Secretary of State, submitting copies of the full correspondence between the Department of State and Hon. William Henry Trescot, special envoy extraordinary to the Republics of Peru, Chile, and Bolivia, and Walker Elaine, Third Assistant Secretary of State.

CHESTER A. ARTHUR.



EXECUTIVE MANSION, June 16, 1882.

To the Senate and House of Representatives:

I submit herewith, for the consideration of Congress, a communication from the Secretary of the Interior, in which he recommends that the sum of $245,000, the amount which the Superintendent estimates will be required to complete the work of the Tenth Census, be appropriated for the purpose.

CHESTER A. ARTHUR.



EXECUTIVE MANSION, June 16, 1882.

To the Senate and House of Representatives:

I transmit herewith, for the consideration of Congress, a letter from the Secretary of War, dated the 14th instant, covering plans and estimates for repairs, additions, and alterations to public buildings at the depot of the mounted recruiting service, Jefferson Barracks, Mo., and in which he recommends that the sum of $24,938.44 be appropriated for the purpose, in accordance with the estimates, during the present session of Congress.

CHESTER A. ARTHUR.



EXECUTIVE MANSION, June 16, 1882.

To the Senate:

I transmit herewith a report from the Secretary of State and its accompanying papers, concerning the Smoke Abatement Exhibition which was held at South Kensington, London, last winter.

CHESTER A. ARTHUR.



WASHINGTON, June 16, 1882.

To the Senate of the United States:

I transmit herewith to the Senate, for its consideration with a view to ratification, a convention between the United States and His Majesty the King of the Belgians, touching the reciprocal surrender of fugitives from justice, signed on the 13th day of June, 1882, and intended to supersede the convention for extradition of criminals between both countries which was concluded on the 19th day of March, 1874.

CHESTER A. ARTHUR.



EXECUTIVE MANSION, June 19, 1882.

To the Senate and House of Representatives:

I transmit herewith a communication, dated the 16th instant, from the Secretary of the Interior, inclosing, with accompanying papers, a draft of a bill "to enlarge the Pawnee Indian Reservation in Indian Territory."

The subject is presented for the consideration of Congress.

CHESTER A. ARTHUR.



EXECUTIVE MANSION, June 19, 1882.

To the House of Representatives:

I transmit herewith a letter from the Secretary of State, referring a communication from the Mexican minister at this capital touching the arrest and imprisonment in Mexico of Thomas Shields and two other American citizens, to which the resolution of the House of Representatives of the 6th day of February last relates.

CHESTER A. ARTHUR.



WASHINGTON, June 23, 1882.

To the Senate of the United States:

I transmit herewith to the Senate, with a view to ratification, a convention between the United States and His Majesty the King of Spain, for securing reciprocal protection for the trade-marks and manufactured articles of their respective citizens and subjects within the dominions or territories of the other country, signed on the 19th day of June, 1882.

CHESTER A. ARTHUR.



EXECUTIVE MANSION, June 26, 1882.

To the Senate and House of Representatives:

I transmit herewith a communication from the Secretary of War, dated the 9th instant, and its accompanying copy of the telegram from the general commanding the Military Division of the Pacific and Department of California, relative to the construction of additional quarters, barracks, storehouses, etc., within the limits of the Military Department of Arizona.

The Secretary of War recommends that for the purpose of constructing the additional buildings referred to the sum of their estimated cost, $205,000, be appropriated during the present session of Congress.

CHESTER A. ARTHUR.



EXECUTIVE MANSION, June 28, 1882.

To the Senate and House of Representatives:

I transmit herewith a communication from the Secretary of the Interior of the 22d instant, with accompanying papers, submitting the draft of a proposed clause for insertion in one of the pending appropriation bills, to provide for the payment for improvements made by certain settlers on the Jicarilla Apache Indian Reservation, in New Mexico.

The subject is presented for the consideration of Congress.

CHESTER A. ARTHUR.



EXECUTIVE MANSION, July 3, 1882.

To the House of Representatives:

In answer to the resolution of the House of Representatives of the 25th of April last, calling for information in regard to the reassembling of the Paris Monetary Conference during the current year and other matters connected therewith, I transmit herewith a report on the subject and its accompanying papers.

CHESTER A. ARTHUR.



EXECUTIVE MANSION, Washington, July 20, 1882.

To the Senate of the United States:

I transmit herewith a report of the Secretary of State and accompanying papers, furnished in response to the resolution of the Senate of December 21, 1881, calling for the correspondence with the Mexican Government in regard to the claims of Benjamin Weil and La Abra Silver Mining Company against Mexico.

CHESTER A. ARTHUR.



EXECUTIVE MANSION, Washington, July 20, 1882.

To the Senate of the United States:

I transmit herewith to the Senate, for its consideration with a view to ratification, a convention between the United States and Mexico, providing for the reopening and retrying of the claims of Benjamin Weil and La Abra Silver Mining Company against Mexico, which was signed on the 13th instant.

A report of the Secretary of State, with its accompanying correspondence, transmitted to the Senate this day in response to the resolution of December 21, 1881, will show the antecedents of the negotiation which resulted in the accompanying convention. In view of the accumulation of testimony presented by Mexico relative to these two claims, I have deemed it proper to avail myself of the authority given to the Executive by the Constitution, and of which authority the act of Congress of June 18, 1878, is declarative, to effect a rehearing of these cases. I therefore empowered the Secretary of State to negotiate with the minister of Mexico a convention to that end.

The more important correspondence preliminary to the treaty is herewith transmitted.

It will be seen by the stipulations of the treaty that the rehearing will have no retroactive effect as to payments already distributed, that the bona fide interests of third parties are amply secured, and that the Government of the United States is fully guarded against any liability resulting from the rehearing.

CHESTER A. ARTHUR.



EXECUTIVE MANSION, Washington, July 26, 1882.

To the Senate of the United States:

I transmit herewith to the Senate, for consideration with a view to ratification, a supplementary convention between the United States and the French Republic, signed at Washington on the 19th instant, extending the term of duration of the commission organized under the convention of January 15, 1880, between the two countries.

CHESTER A. ARTHUR.



EXECUTIVE MANSION, Washington, July 29, 1882.

To the Senate of the United States:

I transmit herewith, in response to the Senate resolution of the 15th instant, a report of the Secretary of State and accompanying papers, relating to the Clayton-Bulwer treaty.

CHESTER A. ARTHUR.



EXECUTIVE MANSION, Washington, July 29, 1882.

To the Senate of the United States:

I transmit herewith to the Senate, for consideration with a view to ratification, a treaty between the United States and the Kingdom of Korea, or Chosen, concluded on the 22d May last. For the information of the Senate the accompanying letter of the Secretary of State is also transmitted.

CHESTER A. ARTHUR.



EXECUTIVE MANSION, Washington, August 1, 1882.

To the Senate of the United States:

I transmit herewith to the Senate, for consideration with a view to ratification, a convention concluded on the 29th of July, 1882, between the United States and Mexico, providing for an international boundary survey to relocate the existing frontier line between the two countries west of the Rio Grande.

CHESTER A. ARTHUR.



OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES,

Washington, August 4, 1882.

To the Senate of the United States:

In reply to a resolution of the Senate passed April 25, 1882, I transmit herewith a communication, with accompanying papers, from the Secretary of the Navy, in relation to the title by which the United States holds the land now occupied as a navy-yard at Boston, Mass.

CHESTER A. ARTHUR.



EXECUTIVE MANSION, August 5, 1882.

To the House of Representatives:

I transmit herewith a report of the Secretary of State, submitted in compliance with the resolution of the House of Representatives of the 28th of June, calling for additional information respecting the case of American citizens under arrest in Ireland.

CHESTER A. ARTHUR.



EXECUTIVE MANSION, Washington, August 7, 1882.

To the Senate of the United States:

I transmit herewith to the Senate, with a view to ratification, a convention concluded this day between the United States of America and His Majesty the King of Spain, supplementary to the extradition convention concluded between said countries on the 5th day of January, 1877.

CHESTER A. ARTHUR.



VETO MESSAGES.

EXECUTIVE MANSION, Washington, April 4, 1882.

To the Senate of the United States:

After careful consideration of Senate bill No. 71, entitled "An act to execute certain treaty stipulations relating to Chinese," I herewith return it to the Senate, in which it originated, with my objections to its passage.

A nation is justified in repudiating its treaty obligations only when they are in conflict with great paramount interests. Even then all possible reasonable means for modifying or changing those obligations by mutual agreement should be exhausted before resorting to the supreme right of refusal to comply with them.

These rules have governed the United States in their past intercourse with other powers as one of the family of nations. I am persuaded that if Congress can feel that this act violates the faith of the nation as pledged to China it will concur with me in rejecting this particular mode of regulating Chinese immigration, and will endeavor to find another which shall meet the expectations of the people of the United States without coming in conflict with the rights of China.

The present treaty relations between that power and the United States spring from an antagonism which arose between our paramount domestic interests and our previous relations.

The treaty commonly known as the Burlingame treaty conferred upon Chinese subjects the right of voluntary emigration to the United States for the purposes of curiosity or trade or as permanent residents, and was in all respects reciprocal as to citizens of the United States in China. It gave to the voluntary emigrant coming to the United States the right to travel there or to reside there, with all the privileges, immunities, or exemptions enjoyed by the citizens or subjects of the most favored nation.

Under the operation of this treaty it was found that the institutions of the United States and the character of its people and their means of obtaining a livelihood might be seriously affected by the unrestricted introduction of Chinese labor. Congress attempted to alleviate this condition by legislation, but the act which it passed proved to be in violation of our treaty obligations, and, being returned by the President with his objections, failed to become a law.

Diplomatic relief was then sought. A new treaty was concluded with China. Without abrogating the Burlingame treaty, it was agreed to modify it so far that the Government of the United States might regulate, limit, or suspend the coming of Chinese laborers to the United States or their residence therein, but that it should not absolutely prohibit them, and that the limitation or suspension should be reasonable and should apply only to Chinese who might go to the United States as laborers, other classes not being included in the limitations. This treaty is unilateral, not reciprocal. It is a concession from China to the United States in limitation of the rights which she was enjoying under the Burlingame treaty. It leaves us by our own act to determine when and how we will enforce those limitations. China may therefore fairly have a right to expect that in enforcing them we will take good care not to overstep the grant and take more than has been conceded to us.

It is but a year since this new treaty, under the operation of the Constitution, became part of the supreme law of the land, and the present act is the first attempt to exercise the more enlarged powers which it relinquishes to the United States.

In its first article the United States is empowered to decide whether the coming of Chinese laborers to the United States or their residence therein affects or threatens to affect our interests or to endanger good order, either within the whole country or in any part of it. The act recites that "in the opinion of the Government of the United States the coming of Chinese laborers to this country endangers the good order of certain localities thereof." But the act itself is much broader than the recital. It acts upon residence as well as immigration, and its provisions are effective throughout the United States. I think it may fairly be accepted as an expression of the opinion of Congress that the coming of such laborers to the United States or their residence here affects our interests and endangers good order throughout the country. On this point I should feel it my duty to accept the views of Congress.

The first article further confers the power upon this Government to regulate, limit, or suspend, but not actually to prohibit, the coming of such laborers to or their residence in the United States. The negotiators of the treaty have recorded with unusual fullness their understanding of the sense and meaning with which these words were used.

As to the class of persons to be affected by the treaty, the Americans inserted in their draft a provision that the words "Chinese laborers" signify all immigration other than that for "teaching, trade, travel, study, and curiosity." The Chinese objected to this that it operated to include artisans in the class of laborers whose immigration might be forbidden. The Americans replied that they "could" not consent that artisans shall be excluded from the class of Chinese laborers, for it is this very competition of skilled labor in the cities where the Chinese labor immigration concentrates which has caused the embarrassment and popular discontent. In the subsequent negotiations this definition dropped out, and does not appear in the treaty. Article II of the treaty confers the rights, privileges, immunities, and exemptions which are accorded to citizens and subjects of the most favored nation upon Chinese subjects proceeding to the United States as teachers, students, merchants, or from curiosity. The American commissioners report that the Chinese Government claimed that in this article they did by exclusion provide that nobody should be entitled to claim the benefit of the general provisions of the Burlingame treaty but those who might go to the United States in those capacities or for those purposes. I accept this as the definition of the word "laborers" as used in the treaty.

As to the power of legislating respecting this class of persons, the new treaty provides that we "may not absolutely prohibit" their coming or their residence. The Chinese commissioners gave notice in the outset that they would never agree to a prohibition of voluntary emigration. Notwithstanding this the United States commissioners submitted a draft, in which it was provided that the United States might "regulate, limit, suspend, or prohibit" it. The Chinese refused to accept this. The Americans replied that they were "willing to consult the wishes of the Chinese Government in preserving the principle of free intercourse between the people of the two countries, as established by existing treaties, provided that the right of the United States Government to use its discretion in guarding against any possible evils of immigration of Chinese laborers is distinctly recognized. Therefore if such concession removes all difficulty on the part of the Chinese commissioners (but only in that case) the United States commissioners will agree to remove the word 'prohibit' from their article and to use the words 'regulate, limit, or suspend.'" The Chinese reply to this can only be inferred from the fact that in the place of an agreement, as proposed by our commissioners, that we might prohibit the coming or residence of Chinese laborers, there was inserted in the treaty an agreement that we might not do it.

The remaining words, "regulate, limit, and suspend," first appear in the American draft. When it was submitted to the Chinese, they said:

We infer that of the phrases regulate, limit, suspend, or prohibit, the first is a general expression referring to the others. * * * We are entirely ready to negotiate with your excellencies to the end that a limitation either in point of time or of numbers may be fixed upon the emigration of Chinese laborers to the United States.

At a subsequent interview they said that "by limitation in number they meant, for example, that the United States, having, as they supposed, a record of the number of immigrants in each year, as well as the total number of Chinese now there, that no more should be allowed to go in any one year in future than either the greatest number which had gone in any year in the past, or that the total number should never be allowed to exceed the number now there. As to limitation of time they meant, for example, that Chinese should be allowed to go in alternate years, or every third year, or, for example, that they should not be allowed to go for two, three, or five years."

At a subsequent conference the Americans said:

The Chinese commissioners have in their project explicitly recognized the right of the United States to use some discretion, and have proposed a limitation as to time and number. This is the right to regulate, limit, or suspend.

In one of the conferences the Chinese asked the Americans whether they could give them any idea of the laws which would be passed to carry the powers into execution. The Americans answered that this could hardly be done; that the United States Government might never deem it necessary to exercise this power. It would depend upon circumstances. If Chinese immigration concentrated in cities where it threatened public order, or if it confined itself to localities where it was an injury to the interests of the American people, the Government of the United States would undoubtedly take steps to prevent such accumulations of Chinese. If, on the contrary, there was no large immigration, or if there were sections of the country where such immigration was clearly beneficial, then the legislation of the United States under this power would be adapted to such circumstances. For example, there might be a demand for Chinese labor in the South and a surplus of such labor in California, and Congress might legislate in accordance with these facts. In general the legislation would be in view of and depend upon the circumstances of the situation at the moment such legislation became necessary. The Chinese commissioners said this explanation was satisfactory; that they had not intended to ask for a draft of any special act, but for some general idea how the power would be exercised. What had just been said gave them the explanation which they wanted.

With this entire accord as to the meaning of the words they were about to employ and the object of the legislation which might be had in consequence, the parties signed the treaty, in Article I of which—

The Government of China agrees that the Government of the United States may regulate, limit, or suspend such coming or residence, but may not absolutely prohibit it. The limitation or suspension shall be reasonable, and shall apply only to Chinese who may go to the United States as laborers, other classes not being included in the limitations. Legislation taken in regard to Chinese laborers will be of such a character only as is necessary to enforce the regulation, limitation, or suspension of immigration.

The first section of the act provides that—

From and after the expiration of sixty days next after the passage of this act, and until the expiration of twenty years next after the passage of this act, the coming of Chinese laborers be, and the same is hereby, suspended; and during such suspension it shall not be lawful for any Chinese laborer to come, or, having so come after the expiration of said sixty days, to remain within the United States.

The examination which I have made of the treaty and of the declarations which its negotiators have left on record of the meaning of its language leaves no doubt in my mind that neither contracting party in concluding the treaty of 1880 contemplated the passage of an act prohibiting immigration for twenty years, which is nearly a generation, or thought that such a period would be a reasonable suspension or limitation, or intended to change the provisions of the Burlingame treaty to that extent. I regard this provision of the act as a breach of our national faith, and being unable to bring myself in harmony with the views of Congress on this vital point the honor of the country constrains me to return the act with this objection to its passage.

Deeply convinced of the necessity of some legislation on this subject, and concurring fully with Congress in many of the objects which are sought to be accomplished, I avail myself of the opportunity to point out some other features of the present act which, in my opinion, can be modified to advantage.

The classes of Chinese who still enjoy the protection of the Burlingame treaty are entitled to the privileges, immunities, and exemptions accorded to citizens and subjects of the most favored nation. We have treaties with many powers which permit their citizens and subjects to reside within the United States and carry on business under the same laws and regulations which are enforced against citizens of the United States. I think it may be doubted whether provisions requiring personal registration and the taking out of passports which are not imposed upon natives can be required of Chinese. Without expressing an opinion on that point, I may invite the attention of Congress to the fact that the system of personal registration and passports is undemocratic and hostile to the spirit of our institutions. I doubt the wisdom of putting an entering wedge of this kind into our laws. A nation like the United States, jealous of the liberties of its citizens, may well hesitate before it incorporates into its polity a system which is fast disappearing in Europe before the progress of liberal institutions. A wide experience has shown how futile such precautions are, and how easily passports may be borrowed, exchanged, or even forged by persons interested to do so.

If it is, nevertheless, thought that a passport is the most convenient way for identifying the Chinese entitled to the protection of the Burlingame treaty, it may still be doubted whether they ought to be required to register. It is certainly our duty under the Burlingame treaty to make their stay in the United States, in the operation of general laws upon them, as nearly like that of our own citizens as we can consistently with our right to shut out the laborers. No good purpose is served in requiring them to register.

My attention has been called by the Chinese minister to the fact that the bill as it stands makes no provision for the transit across the United States of Chinese subjects now residing in foreign countries. I think that this point may well claim the attention of Congress in legislating on this subject.

I have said that good faith requires us to suspend the immigration of Chinese laborers for a less period than twenty years; I now add that good policy points in the same direction.

Our intercourse with China is of recent date. Our first treaty with that power is not yet forty years old. It is only since we acquired California and established a great seat of commerce on the Pacific that we may be said to have broken down the barriers which fenced in that ancient Monarchy. The Burlingame treaty naturally followed. Under the spirit which inspired it many thousand Chinese laborers came to the United States. No one can say that the country has not profited by their work. They were largely instrumental in constructing the railways which connect the Atlantic with the Pacific. The States of the Pacific Slope are full of evidences of their industry. Enterprises profitable alike to the capitalist and to the laborer of Caucasian origin would have lain dormant but for them. A time has now come when it is supposed that they are not needed, and when it is thought by Congress and by those most acquainted with the subject that it is best to try to get along without them. There may, however, be other sections of the country where this species of labor may be advantageously employed without interfering with the laborers of our own race. In making the proposed experiment it may be the part of wisdom as well as of good faith to fix the length of the experimental period with reference to this fact.

Experience has shown that the trade of the East is the key to national wealth and influence. The opening of China to the commerce of the whole world has benefited no section of it more than the States of our own Pacific Slope. The State of California, and its great maritime port especially, have reaped enormous advantages from this source. Blessed with an exceptional climate, enjoying an unrivaled harbor, with the riches of a great agricultural and mining State in its rear and the wealth of the whole Union pouring into it over its lines of railway, San Francisco has before it an incalculable future if our friendly and amicable relations with Asia remain undisturbed. It needs no argument to show that the policy which we now propose to adopt must have a direct tendency to repel Oriental nations from us and to drive their trade and commerce into more friendly lands. It may be that the great and paramount interest of protecting our labor from Asiatic competition may justify us in a permanent adoption of this policy; but it is wiser in the first place to make a shorter experiment, with a view hereafter of maintaining permanently only such features as time and experience may commend.

I transmit herewith copies of the papers relating to the recent treaty with China, which accompanied the confidential message of President Hayes to the Senate of the 10th January, 1881, and also a copy of a memorandum respecting the act herewith returned, which was handed to the Secretary of State by the Chinese minister in Washington.

CHESTER A. ARTHUR.



EXECUTIVE MANSION, July 1, 1882.

To the House of Representatives of the United States:

Herewith I return House bill No. 2744, entitled "An act to regulate the carriage of passengers by sea," without my approval. In doing this I regret that I am not able to give my assent to an act which has received the sanction of the majority of both Houses of Congress.

The object proposed to be secured by the act is meritorious and philanthropic. Some correct and accurate legislation upon this subject is undoubtedly necessary. Steamships that bring large bodies of emigrants must be subjected to strict legal enactments, so as to prevent the passengers from being exposed to hardship and suffering; and such legislation should be made as will give them abundance of space and air and light, protecting their health by affording all reasonable comforts and conveniences and by providing for the quantity and quality of the food to be furnished and all of the other essentials of roomy, safe, and healthful accommodations in their passage across the sea.

A statute providing for all this is absolutely needed, and in the spirit of humane legislation must be enacted. The present act, by most of its provisions, will obtain and secure this protection for such passengers, and were it not for some serious errors contained in it it would be most willingly approved by me.

My objections are these: In the first section, in lines from 13 to 24, inclusive, it is provided "that the compartments or spaces," etc., "shall be of sufficient dimensions to allow for each and any passenger," etc., "100 cubic feet, if the compartment or space is located on the first deck next below the uppermost deck of the vessel," etc., "or 120 cubic feet for each passenger," etc., "if the compartment or space is located on the second deck below the uppermost deck of the vessel," etc. "It shall not be lawful to carry or bring passengers on any deck other than the two decks mentioned," etc.

Nearly all of the new and most of the improved ocean steamers have a spar deck, which is above the main deck. The main deck was in the old style of steamers the only uppermost deck. The spar deck is a comparatively new feature of the large and costly steamships, and is now practically the uppermost deck. Below this spar deck is the main deck. Because of the misuse of the words "uppermost deck" instead of the use of the words "main deck" by this act, the result will be to exclude nearly all of the large steamships from carrying passengers anywhere but on the main deck and on the deck below, which is the steerage deck, and to leave the orlop, or lower deck, heretofore used for passengers, useless and unoccupied by passengers. This objection, which is now presented in connection with others that will be presently explained, will, if this act is enforced as it is now phrased, render useless for passenger traffic and expose to heavy loss all of the great ocean steam lines; and it will also hinder emigration, as there will not be ships enough that could accept these conditions to carry all who may now wish to come.

The use of the new and the hitherto unknown term "uppermost deck" creates this difficulty, and I can not consent to have an abuse of terms like this to operate thus injuriously to these large fleets of ships. The passengers will not be benefited by such a statute, but emigration will be hindered, if not for a while almost prevented for many.

Again, the act in the first section, from line 31 to line 35, inclusive, provides: "And such passengers shall not be carried or brought in any between-decks, nor in any compartment," etc., "the clear height of which is less than 7 feet." Between the decks of all ships are the beams; they are about a foot in width. The legal method of ascertaining tonnage for the purpose of taxation is to measure between the beams from the floor to the ceiling. If this becomes a law the space required would be 8 feet from floor to ceiling, and this is impracticable, for in all ships the spaces between decks are adjusted in proportion to the dimensions of the ship; and if these spaces between decks are changed so as not to correspond in their proportions with the dimensions of the vessel, the ship will not work well in the sea, her sailing qualities will be injured, and she will be rendered unfit for service.

It is only in great ships of vast tonnage that the height between decks can be increased. All the ordinary-sized ships are necessarily constructed with 7 feet space in the interval between the beams from the floor to the ceiling. To adopt this act, with this provision, would be to drive out of the service of transporting passengers most all of the steamships now in such trade, and no practical good obtained by it, for really, with the exception of the narrow beam, the space between the decks is now 7 feet. The purpose of the space commanded by the act is to obtain sufficient air and ventilation, and that is actually now given to the passenger by the 7 feet that exists in all of these vessels between floor and ceiling.

There is also another objection that I must suggest. In section 12, from line 14 to line 24, it is provided: "Before such vessel shall be cleared or may lawfully depart," etc., "the master of said vessel shall furnish," etc., "a correct list of all passengers who have been or are intended to be taken on board the vessel, and shall specify," etc. This provision would prevent the clearing of the vessel. Steam vessels start at an appointed hour and with punctuality. Down almost to the very hour of their departure new passengers, other than those who have engaged their passage, constantly come on board. If this provision is to be the law; they must be rejected, for the ship can not, without incurring heavy penalties, take passengers whose names are not set forth on the list required before such vessel shall be cleared. They should be allowed to take such new passengers upon condition that they would furnish an additional list containing such persons' names. There are other points of objection of a minor character that might be presented for consideration if the bill could be reconsidered and amended, but the three that I have recited are conspicuous defects in a bill that ought to be a code for such a purpose, clear and explicit, free from all such objections. The practical result of this law would be to subject all of the competing lines of large ocean steamers to great losses. By restricting their carrying accommodations it would also stay the current of emigration that it is our policy to encourage as well as to protect. A good bill, correctly phrased, and expressing and naming in plain, well-known technical terms the proper and usual places and decks where passengers are and ought to be placed and carried, will receive my prompt and immediate assent as a public necessity and blessing.

CHESTER A. ARTHUR.



EXECUTIVE MANSION, August 1, 1882.

To the House of Representatives:

Having watched with much interest the progress of House bill No. 6242, entitled "An act making appropriations for the construction, repair, and preservation of certain works on rivers and harbors, and for other purposes," and having since it was received carefully examined it, after mature consideration I am constrained to return it herewith to the House of Representatives, in which it originated, without my signature and with my objections to its passage.

Many of the appropriations in the bill are clearly for the general welfare and most beneficent in their character. Two of the objects for which provision is made were by me considered so important that I felt it my duty to direct to them the attention of Congress. In my annual message in December last I urged the vital importance of legislation for the reclamation of the marshes and for the establishment of the harbor lines along the Potomac front. In April last, by special message, I recommended an appropriation for the improvement of the Mississippi River. It is not necessary that I say that when my signature would make the bill appropriating for these and other valuable national objects a law it is with great reluctance and only under a sense of duty that I withhold it.

My principal objection to the bill is that it contains appropriations for purposes not for the common defense or general welfare, and which do not promote commerce among the States. These provisions, on the contrary, are entirely for the benefit of the particular localities in which it is proposed to make the improvements. I regard such appropriation of the public money as beyond the powers given by the Constitution to Congress and the President.

I feel the more bound to withhold my signature from the bill because of the peculiar evils which manifestly result from this infraction of the Constitution. Appropriations of this nature, to be devoted purely to local objects, tend to an increase in number and in amount. As the citizens of one State find that money, to raise which they in common with the whole country are taxed, is to be expended for local improvements in another State, they demand similar benefits for themselves, and it is not unnatural that they should seek to indemnify themselves for such use of the public funds by securing appropriations for similar improvements in their own neighborhood. Thus as the bill becomes more objectionable it secures more support. This result is invariable and necessarily follows a neglect to observe the constitutional limitations imposed upon the lawmaking power.

The appropriations for river and harbor improvements have, under the influences to which I have alluded, increased year by year out of proportion to the progress of the country, great as that has been. In 1870 the aggregate appropriation was $3,975,900; in 1875, $6,648,517.50; in 1880, $8,976,500; and in 1881, $11,451,000; while by the present act there is appropriated $18,743,875.

While feeling every disposition to leave to the Legislature the responsibility of determining what amount should be appropriated for the purposes of the bill, so long as the appropriations are confined to objects indicated by the grant of power, I can not escape the conclusion that, as a part of the lawmaking power of the Government, the duty devolves upon me to withhold my signature from a bill containing appropriations which in my opinion greatly exceed in amount the needs of the country for the present fiscal year. It being the usage to provide money for these purposes by annual appropriation bills, the President is in effect directed to expend so large an amount of money within so brief a period that the expenditure can not be made economically and advantageously.

The extravagant expenditure of public money is an evil not to be measured by the value of that money to the people who are taxed for it. They sustain a greater injury in the demoralizing effect produced upon those who are intrusted with official duty through all the ramifications of government.

These objections could be removed and every constitutional purpose readily attained should Congress enact that one-half only of the aggregate amount provided for in the bill be appropriated for expenditure during the fiscal year, and that the sum so appropriated be expended only for such objects named in the bill as the Secretary of War, under the direction of the President, shall determine; provided that in no case shall the expenditure for any one purpose exceed the sum now designated by the bill for that purpose.

I feel authorized to make this suggestion because of the duty imposed upon the President by the Constitution "to recommend to the consideration of Congress such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient," and because it is my earnest desire that the public works which are in progress shall suffer no injury. Congress will also convene again in four months, when this whole subject will be open for their consideration.

CHESTER A. ARTHUR.



PROCLAMATIONS.

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

A PROCLAMATION.

Whereas it is provided in the laws of the United States that—

Whenever, by reason of unlawful obstructions, combinations, or assemblages of persons or rebellion against the authority of the Government of the United States, it shall become impracticable, in the judgment of the President, to enforce by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings the laws of the United States within any State or Territory, it shall be lawful for the President to call forth the militia of any or all the States and to employ such parts of the land and naval forces of the United States as he may deem necessary to enforce the faithful execution of the laws of the United States or to suppress such rebellion, in whatever State or Territory thereof the laws of the United States may be forcibly opposed or the execution thereof forcibly obstructed.

And whereas it has been made to appear satisfactorily to me, by information received from the governor of the Territory of Arizona and from the General of the Army of the United States and other reliable sources, that in consequence of unlawful combinations of evil-disposed persons who are banded together to oppose and obstruct the execution of the laws it has become impracticable to enforce by the ordinary course of judicial proceedings the laws of the United States within that Territory, and that the laws of the United States have been therein forcibly opposed and the execution thereof forcibly resisted; and

Whereas the laws of the United States require that whenever it may be necessary, in the judgment of the President, to use the military forces for the purpose of enforcing the faithful execution of the laws of the United States, he shall forthwith, by proclamation, command such insurgents to disperse and retire peaceably to their respective abodes within a limited time:

Now, therefore, I, Chester A. Arthur, President of the United States, do hereby admonish all good citizens of the United States, and especially of the Territory of Arizona, against aiding, countenancing, abetting, or taking part in any such unlawful proceedings; and I do hereby warn all persons engaged in or connected with said obstruction of the laws to disperse and retire peaceably to their respective abodes on or before noon of the 15th day of May.

[SEAL.]

In witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of the United States to be affixed.

Done at the city of Washington, this 3d day of May, A.D. 1882, and of the Independence of the United States the one hundred and sixth.

CHESTER A. ARTHUR.

By the President: FREDK. T. FRELINGHUYSEN, Secretary of State.



BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

A PROCLAMATION.

In conformity with a custom the annual observance of which is justly held in honor by this people, I, Chester A. Arthur, President of the United States, do hereby set apart Thursday, the 30th day of November next, as a day of public thanksgiving.

The blessings demanding our gratitude are numerous and varied. For the peace and amity which subsist between this Republic and all the nations of the world; for the freedom from internal discord and violence; for the increasing friendship between the different sections of the land; for liberty, justice, and constitutional government; for the devotion of the people to our free institutions and their cheerful obedience to mild laws; for the constantly increasing strength of the Republic while extending its privileges to fellow-men who come to us; for the improved means of internal communication and the increased facilities of intercourse with other nations; for the general prevailing health of the year; for the prosperity of all our industries, the liberal return for the mechanic's toil affording a market for the abundant harvests of the husbandman; for the preservation of the national faith and credit; for wise and generous provision to effect the intellectual and moral education of our youth; for the influence upon the conscience of a restraining and transforming religion, and for the joys of home—for these and for many other blessings we should give thanks.

Wherefore I do recommend that the day above designated be observed throughout the country as a day of national thanksgiving and prayer, and that the people, ceasing from their daily labors and meeting in accordance with their several forms of worship, draw near to the throne of Almighty God, offering to Him praise and gratitude for the manifold goodness which He has vouchsafed to us and praying that His blessings and His mercies may continue.

And I do further recommend that the day thus appointed be made a special occasion for deeds of kindness and charity to the suffering and the needy, so that all who dwell within the land may rejoice and be glad in this season of national thanksgiving.

[SEAL.]

In witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand and caused the seal of the United States to be affixed.

Done at the city of Washington, this 25th day of October, A.D. 1882, and of the Independence of the United States the one hundred and seventh.

CHESTER A. ARTHUR.

By the President: FREDK. T. FRELINGHUYSEN, Secretary of State.



EXECUTIVE ORDERS.

TREASURY DEPARTMENT, March 30, 1882.

To Collectors of Customs:

Under the provisions of section 1955, Revised Statutes, so much of Department instructions of July 3, 1875,[12] approved by the President, as prohibits the importation and use of breech-loading rifles and suitable ammunition therefor into and within the limits of the Territory of Alaska is hereby amended and modified so as to permit emigrants who intend to become actual bona fide settlers upon the mainland to ship to the care of the collector of customs at Sitka, for their own personal protection and for the hunting of game, not exceeding one such rifle and suitable ammunition therefor to each male adult; also to permit actual bona fide residents of the mainland of Alaska (not including Indians or traders), upon application to the collector and with his approval, to order and ship for personal use such arms and ammunition to his care, not exceeding one rifle for each such person, and proper ammunition.

The sale of such arms and ammunition is prohibited except by persons about to leave the Territory, and then only to bona fide residents (excluding Indians and traders) upon application to and with the approval of the collector.

H.F. FRENCH, Acting Secretary.

Approved:

CHESTER A. ARTHUR.

[Footnote 12: See Vol. VII, p. 328.]



CHESTER A. ARTHUR, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

To all to whom these presents shall come, greeting:

Whereas on the 10th day of January, 1863, Fitz John Porter, then major-general of volunteers in the military service of the United States, and also colonel of the Fifteenth Regiment of Infantry and brevet brigadier-general in the United States Army, was by a general court-martial, for certain offenses of which he had been thereby convicted, sentenced "to be cashiered and to be forever disqualified from holding any office of trust or profit under the Government of the United States;" and

Whereas on the 21st day of January 1863, that sentence was duly confirmed by the President of the United States, and by his order of the same date carried into execution; and

Whereas so much of that sentence as forever disqualified the said Fitz John Porter from holding office imposed upon him a continuing penalty and is still being executed; and

Whereas doubts have since arisen concerning the guilt of the said Fitz John Porter of the offenses whereof he was convicted by the said court-martial, founded upon the result of an investigation ordered on the 12th day of April, 1878, by the President of the United States, which are deemed by me to be of sufficient gravity to warrant the remission of that part of said sentence which has not yet been completely executed:

Now, therefore, know ye that I, Chester A. Arthur, President of the United States, by virtue of the power vested in me by the Constitution of the United States and in consideration of the premises, do hereby grant to the said Fitz John Porter full remission of the hereinbeforementioned continuing penalty.

In witness whereof I have hereunto signed my name and caused the seal of the United States to be affixed.

Done at the city of Washington, this 4th day of May, A.D. 1882, and of the Independence of the United States the one hundred and sixth.

[SEAL.]

CHESTER A. ARTHUR.

By the President: FREDK. T. FRELINGHUYSEN, Secretary of State.



EXECUTIVE MANSION, Washington, May 26, 1882.

SIR:[13] I am directed by the President to inform you that the several Departments of the Government will be closed on Tuesday, the 30th instant, to enable the employees to participate in the decoration of the graves of the soldiers who fell during the rebellion.

Very respectfully,

FRED. J. PHILLIPS, Private Secretary.

[Footnote 13: Addressed to the heads of the Executive Departments, etc.]



WAR DEPARTMENT, Washington, July 13, 1882.

I. By direction of the President, the Military Department of West Point will be discontinued September 1, 1882.

II. By direction of the President, sections 1 and 2 of Article I of the general regulations for the United States Military Academy are hereby amended to read as follows:

1. The General of the Army, under the War Department, shall have supervision and charge of the United States Military Academy. He will watch over its administration and discipline and the instruction of the Corps of Cadets, and will make reports thereof to the Secretary of War.

2. The Superintendent, and in his absence the next in rank, shall have the immediate government and military command of the Academy, and shall be commandant of the military post of West Point. The Superintendent will render, through the Adjutant-General, to the General of the Army, for submission to the Secretary of War, all required reports, returns, and estimates concerning the Academy.

ROBERT T. LINCOLN,

Secretary of War.



SECOND ANNUAL MESSAGE.

WASHINGTON, December 4, 1882.

To the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States:

It is provided by the Constitution that the President shall from time to time give to the Congress information of the state of the Union and recommend to their consideration such measures as he shall judge necessary and expedient.

In reviewing the events of the year which has elapsed since the commencement of your sessions, I first call your attention to the gratifying condition of our foreign affairs. Our intercourse with other powers has continued to be of the most friendly character.

Such slight differences as have arisen during the year have been already settled or are likely to reach an early adjustment. The arrest of citizens of the United States in Ireland under recent laws which owe their origin to the disturbed condition of that country has led to a somewhat extended correspondence with the Government of Great Britain. A disposition to respect our rights has been practically manifested by the release of the arrested parties.

The claim of this nation in regard to the supervision and control of any interoceanic canal across the American Isthmus has continued to be the subject of conference.

It is likely that time will be more powerful than discussion in removing the divergence between the two nations whose friendship is so closely cemented by the intimacy of their relations and the community of their interests.

Our long-established friendliness with Russia has remained unshaken. It has prompted me to proffer the earnest counsels of this Government that measures be adopted for suppressing the proscription which the Hebrew race in that country has lately suffered. It has not transpired that any American citizen has been subjected to arrest or injury, but our courteous remonstrance has nevertheless been courteously received. There is reason to believe that the time is not far distant when Russia will be able to secure toleration to all faiths within her borders.

At an international convention held at Paris in 1880, and attended by representatives of the United States, an agreement was reached in respect to the protection of trade-marks, patented articles, and the rights of manufacturing firms and corporations. The formulating into treaties of the recommendations thus adopted is receiving the attention which it merits.

The protection of submarine cables is a subject now under consideration by an international conference at Paris. Believing that it is clearly the true policy of this Government to favor the neutralization of this means of intercourse, I requested our minister to France to attend the convention as a delegate. I also designated two of our eminent scientists to attend as our representatives at the meeting of an international committee at Paris for considering the adoption of a common unit to measure electric force.

In view of the frequent occurrence of conferences for the consideration of important matters of common interest to civilized nations, I respectfully suggest that the Executive be invested by Congress with discretionary powers to send delegates to such conventions, and that provision be made to defray the expenses incident thereto.

The difference between the United States and Spain as to the effect of a judgment and certificate of naturalization has not yet been adjusted, but it is hoped and believed that negotiations now in progress will result in the establishment of the position which seems to this Government so reasonable and just.

I have already called the attention of Congress to the fact that in the ports of Spain and its colonies onerous fines have lately been imposed upon vessels of the United States for trivial technical offenses against local regulations. Efforts for the abatement of these exactions have thus far proved unsuccessful.

I regret to inform you also that the fees demanded by Spanish consuls in American ports are in some cases so large, when compared with the value of the cargo, as to amount in effect to a considerable export duty, and that our remonstrances in this regard have not as yet received the attention which they seem to deserve.

The German Government has invited the United States to participate in an international exhibition of domestic cattle to be held at Hamburg in July, 1883. If this country is to be represented, it is important that in the early days of this session Congress should make a suitable appropriation for that purpose.

The death of Mr. Marsh, our late minister to Italy, has evoked from that Government expressions of profound respect for his exalted character and for his honorable career in the diplomatic service of his country. The Italian Government has raised a question as to the propriety of recognizing in his dual capacity the representative of this country recently accredited both as secretary of legation and as consul-general at Rome. He has been received as secretary, but his exequatur as consul-general has thus far been withheld.

The extradition convention with Belgium, which has been in operation since 1874, has been lately supplanted by another. The Senate has signified its approval, and ratifications have been duly exchanged between the contracting countries. To the list of extraditable crimes has been added that of the assassination or attempted assassination of the chief of the State.

Negotiations have been opened with Switzerland looking to a settlement by treaty of the question whether its citizens can renounce their allegiance and become citizens of the United States without obtaining the consent of the Swiss Government.

I am glad to inform you that the immigration of paupers and criminals from certain of the Cantons of Switzerland has substantially ceased and is no longer sanctioned by the authorities.

The consideration of this subject prompts the suggestion that the act of August 3, 1882, which has for its object the return of foreign convicts to their own country, should be so modified as not to be open to the interpretation that it affects the extradition of criminals on preferred charges of crime.

The Ottoman Porte has not yet assented to the interpretation which this Government has put upon the treaty of 1830 relative to its jurisdictional rights in Turkey. It may well be, however, that this difference will be adjusted by a general revision of the system of jurisdiction of the United States in the countries of the East, a subject to which your attention has been already called by the Secretary of State.

In the interest of justice toward China and Japan, I trust that the question of the return of the indemnity fund to the Governments of those countries will reach at the present session the satisfactory solution which I have already recommended, and which has recently been foreshadowed by Congressional discussion.

The treaty lately concluded with Korea awaits the action of the Senate.

During the late disturbance in Egypt the timely presence of American vessels served as a protection to the persons and property of many of our own citizens and of citizens of other countries, whose governments have expressed their thanks for this assistance.

The recent legislation restricting immigration of laborers from China has given rise to the question whether Chinese proceeding to or from another country may lawfully pass through our own.

Construing the act of May 6, 1882, in connection with the treaty of November 7, 1880, the restriction would seem to be limited to Chinese immigrants coming to the United States as laborers, and would not forbid a mere transit across our territory. I ask the attention of Congress to the subject, for such action, if any, as may be deemed advisable.

This Government has recently had occasion to manifest its interest in the Republic of Liberia by seeking to aid the amicable settlement of the boundary dispute now pending between that Republic and the British possession of Sierra Leone.

The reciprocity treaty with Hawaii will become terminable after September 9, 1883, on twelve months' notice by either party. While certain provisions of that compact may have proved onerous, its existence has fostered commercial relations which it is important to preserve. I suggest, therefore, that early consideration be given to such modifications of the treaty as seem to be demanded by the interests of our people.

In view of our increasing trade with both Hayti and Santo Domingo, I advise that provision be made for diplomatic intercourse with the latter by enlarging the scope of the mission at Port an Prince.

I regret that certain claims of American citizens against the Government of Hayti have thus far been urged unavailingly.

A recent agreement with Mexico provides for the crossing of the frontier by the armed forces of either country in pursuit of hostile Indians. In my message of last year I called attention to the prevalent lawlessness upon the borders and to the necessity of legislation for its suppression. I again invite the attention of Congress to the subject.

A partial relief from these mischiefs has been sought in a convention, which now awaits the approval of the Senate, as does also another touching the establishment of the international boundary between the United States and Mexico. If the latter is ratified, the action of Congress will be required for establishing suitable commissions of survey. The boundary dispute between Mexico and Guatemala, which led this Government to proffer its friendly counsels to both parties, has been amicably settled.

No change has occurred in our relations with Venezuela. I again invoke your action in the matter of the pending awards against that Republic, to which reference was made by a special message from the Executive at your last session.

An invitation has been received from the Government of Venezuela to send representatives in July, 1883, to Caracas for participating in the centennial celebration of the birth of Bolivar, the founder of South American independence. In connection with this event it is designed to commence the erection at Caracas of a statue of Washington and to conduct an industrial exhibition which will be open to American products. I recommend that the United States be represented and that suitable provision be made therefor.

The elevation of the grade of our mission in Central America to the plenipotentiary rank, which was authorized by Congress at its late session, has been since effected.

The war between Peru and Bolivia on the one side and Chile on the other began more than three years ago. On the occupation by Chile in 1880 of all the littoral territory of Bolivia, negotiations for peace were conducted under the direction of the United States. The allies refused to concede any territory, but Chile has since become master of the whole coast of both countries and of the capital of Peru. A year since, as you have already been advised by correspondence transmitted to you in January last, this Government sent a special mission to the belligerent powers to express the hope that Chile would be disposed to accept a money indemnity for the expenses of the war and to relinquish her demand for a portion of the territory of her antagonist.

This recommendation, which Chile declined to follow, this Government did not assume to enforce; nor can it be enforced without resort to measures which would be in keeping neither with the temper of our people nor with the spirit of our institutions.

The power of Peru no longer extends over its whole territory, and in the event of our interference to dictate peace would need to be supplemented by the armies and navies of the United States. Such interference would almost inevitably lead to the establishment of a protectorate—a result utterly at odds with our past policy, injurious to our present interests, and full of embarrassments for the future.

For effecting the termination of hostilities upon terms at once just to the victorious nation and generous to its adversaries, this Government has spared no efforts save such as might involve the complications which I have indicated.

It is greatly to be deplored that Chile seems resolved to exact such rigorous conditions of peace and indisposed to submit to arbitration the terms of an amicable settlement. No peace is likely to be lasting that is not sufficiently equitable and just to command the approval of other nations.

About a year since invitations were extended to the nations of this continent to send representatives to a peace congress to assemble at Washington in November, 1882. The time of meeting was fixed at a period then remote, in the hope, as the invitation itself declared, that in the meantime the disturbances between the South American Republics would be adjusted. As that expectation seemed unlikely to be realized, I asked in April last for an expression of opinion from the two Houses of Congress as to the advisability of holding the proposed convention at the time appointed. This action was prompted in part by doubts which mature reflection had suggested whether the diplomatic usage and traditions of the Government did not make it fitting that the Executive should consult the representatives of the people before pursuing a line of policy somewhat novel in its character and far reaching in its possible consequences. In view of the fact that no action was taken by Congress in the premises and that no provision had been made for necessary expenses, I subsequently decided to postpone the convocation, and so notified the several Governments which had been invited to attend.

I am unwilling to dismiss this subject without assuring you of my support of any measures the wisdom of Congress may devise for the promotion of peace on this continent and throughout the world, and I trust that the time is nigh when, with the universal assent of civilized peoples, all international differences shall be determined without resort to arms by the benignant processes of arbitration.

Changes have occurred in the diplomatic representation of several foreign powers during the past year. New ministers from the Argentine Republic, Austria-Hungary, Brazil, Chile, China, France, Japan, Mexico, the Netherlands, and Russia have presented their credentials. The missions of Denmark and Venezuela at this capital have been raised in grade. Switzerland has created a plenipotentiary mission to this Government, and an embassy from Madagascar and a minister from Siam will shortly arrive.

Our diplomatic intercourse has been enlarged by the establishment of relations with the new Kingdom of Servia, by the creation of a mission to Siam, and by the restoration of the mission to Greece. The Shah of Persia has expressed his gratification that a charge d'affaires will shortly be sent to that country, where the rights of our citizens have been hitherto courteously guarded by the representatives of Great Britain.

I renew my recommendation of such legislation as will place the United States in harmony with other maritime powers with respect to the international rules for the prevention of collisions at sea.

In conformity with your joint resolution of the 3d of August last, I have directed the Secretary of State to address foreign governments in respect to a proposed conference for considering the subject of the universal adoption of a common prime meridian to be used in the reckoning of longitude and in the regulation of time throughout the civilized world. Their replies will in due time be laid before you.

An agreement was reached at Paris in 1875 between the principal powers for the interchange of official publications through the medium of their respective foreign departments.

The admirable system which has been built up by the enterprise of the Smithsonian Institution affords a practical basis for our cooperation in this scheme, and an arrangement has been effected by which that institution will perform the necessary labor, under the direction of the Department of State. A reasonable compensation therefor should be provided by law.

A clause in the act making appropriations for the diplomatic and consular service contemplates the reorganization of both branches of such service on a salaried basis, leaving fees to inure to the benefit of the Treasury. I cordially favor such a project, as likely to correct abuses in the present system. The Secretary of State will present to you at an early day a plan for such reorganization.

A full and interesting exhibit of the operations of the Treasury Department is afforded by the report of the Secretary.

It appears that the ordinary revenues from all sources for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1882, were as follows:

From customs $220,410,730.25 From internal revenue 146,497,595.45 From sales of public lands 4,753,140.37 From tax on circulation and deposits of national banks 8,956,794.45 From repayment of interest by Pacific Railway companies 840,554.37 From sinking fund for Pacific Railway companies 796,271.42 From customs fees, fines, penalties, etc. 1,343,348.00 From fees—consular, letters patent, and lands 2,638,990.97 From proceeds of sales of Government property 314,959.85 From profits on coinage, bullion deposits, and assays 4,116,693.73 From Indian trust funds 5,705,243.22 From deposits by individuals for surveying public lands 2,052,306.36 From revenues of the District of Columbia 1,715,176.41 From miscellaneous sources 3,383,445.43 ___ Total ordinary receipts 403,525,250.28

The ordinary expenditures for the same period were—

For civil expenses $18,042,386.42 For foreign intercourse 1,307,583.19 For Indians 9,736,747.40 For pensions 61,345,193.95 For the military establishment, including river and harbor improvements, and arsenals 43,570,494.19 For the naval establishment, including vessels, machinery, and improvements at navy-yards 15,032,046.26 For miscellaneous expenditures, including public buildings, light-houses, and collecting the revenue 34,539,237.50 For expenditures on account of the District of Columbia 3,330,543.87 For interest on the public debt 71,077,206.79 ___ Total ordinary expenditures 257,981,439.57

Leaving a surplus revenue of $145,543,810.71, which, with an amount drawn from the cash balance in the Treasury of $20,737,694.84, making $166,281,505.55, was applied to the redemption—

Of bonds for the sinking fund $60,079,150.00 Of fractional currency for the sinking fund 58,705.55 Of loan of July and August, 1861 62,572,050.00 Of loan of March, 1863 4,472,900.00 Of funded loan of 1881 37,194,450.00 Of loan of 1858 1,000.00 Of loan of February, 1861 303,000.00 Of five-twenties of 1862 2,100.00 Of five-twenties of 1864 7,400.00 Of five-twenties of 1865 6,500.00 Of ten-forties of 1864 254,550.00 Of consols of 1865 86,450.00 Of consols of 1867 408,250.00 Of consols of 1868 141,400.00 Of Oregon War debt 675,250.00 Of old demand, compound-interest, and other notes 18,350 00 ___ 166,281,505 55

The foreign commerce of the United States during the last fiscal year, including imports and exports of merchandise and specie, was as follows:

Exports: Merchandise $750,542,257 Specie 49,417,479 Total 799,959,736 Imports: Merchandise 724,639,574 Specie 42,472,390 Total 767,111,964 =========== Excess of exports over imports of merchandise 25,902,683

This excess is less than it has been before for any of the previous six years, as appears by the following table:

——————————————————————————————————- Year ended June 30— Excess of exports over imports of merchandise ——————————————————————————————————- 1876 $79,643,481 1877 151,152,094 1878 257,814,234 1879 264,661,666 1880 167,683,912 1881 259,712,718 1882 25,902,683 ——————————————————————————————————-

During the year there have been organized 171 national banks, and of those institutions there are now in operation 2,269, a larger number than ever before. The value of their notes in active circulation on July 1, 1882, was $324,656,458.

I commend to your attention the Secretary's views in respect to the likelihood of a serious contraction of this circulation, and to the modes by which that result may, in his judgment, be averted.

In respect to the coinage of silver dollars and the retirement of silver certificates, I have seen nothing to alter but much to confirm the sentiments to which I gave expression last year.

A comparison between the respective amounts of silver-dollar circulation on November 1, 1881, and on November 1, 1882, shows a slight increase of a million and a half of dollars; but during the interval there had been in the whole number coined an increase of twenty-six millions. Of the one hundred and twenty-eight millions thus far minted, little more than thirty-five millions are in circulation. The mass of accumulated coin has grown so great that the vault room at present available for storage is scarcely sufficient to contain it. It is not apparent why it is desirable to continue this coinage, now so enormously in excess of the public demand.

As to the silver certificates, in addition to the grounds which seemed last year to justify their retirement may be mentioned the effect which is likely to ensue from the supply of gold certificates for whose issuance Congress recently made provision, and which are now in active circulation.

You can not fail to note with interest the discussion by the Secretary as to the necessity of providing by legislation some mode of freeing the Treasury of an excess of assets in the event that Congress fails to reach an early agreement for the reduction of taxation.

I heartily approve the Secretary's recommendation of immediate and extensive reductions in the annual revenues of the Government.

It will be remembered that I urged upon the attention of Congress at its last session the importance of relieving the industry and enterprise of the country from the pressure of unnecessary taxation. It is one of the tritest maxims of political economy that all taxes are burdensome, however wisely and prudently imposed; and though there have always been among our people wide differences of sentiment as to the best methods of raising the national revenues, and, indeed, as to the principles upon which taxation should be based, there has been substantial accord in the doctrine that only such taxes ought to be levied as are necessary for a wise and economical administration of the Government. Of late the public revenues have far exceeded that limit, and unless checked by appropriate legislation such excess will continue to increase from year to year. For the fiscal year ended June 30, 1881, the surplus revenue amounted to $100,000,000; for the fiscal year ended on the 30th of June last the surplus was more than one hundred and forty-five millions.

The report of the Secretary shows what disposition has been made of these moneys. They have not only answered the requirements of the sinking fund, but have afforded a large balance applicable to other reductions of the public debt.

But I renew the expression of my conviction that such rapid extinguishment of the national indebtedness as is now taking place is by no means a cause for congratulation; it is a cause rather for serious apprehension.

If it continues, it must speedily be followed by one of the evil results so clearly set forth in the report of the Secretary.

Either the surplus must lie idle in the Treasury or the Government will be forced to buy at market rates its bonds not then redeemable, and which under such circumstances can not fail to command an enormous premium, or the swollen revenues will be devoted to extravagant expenditure, which, as experience has taught, is ever the bane of an overflowing treasury.

It was made apparent in the course of the animated discussions which this question aroused at the last session of Congress that the policy of diminishing the revenue by reducing taxation commanded the general approval of the members of both Houses.

I regret that because of conflicting views as to the best methods by which that policy should be made operative none of its benefits have as yet been reaped.

In fulfillment of what I deem my constitutional duty, but with little hope that I can make valuable contribution to this vexed question, I shall proceed to intimate briefly my own views in relation to it.

Upon the showing of our financial condition at the close of the last fiscal year, I felt justified in recommending to Congress the abolition of all internal revenue taxes except those upon tobacco in its various forms and upon distilled spirits and fermented liquors, and except also the special tax upon the manufacturers of and dealers in such articles.

I venture now to suggest that unless it shall be ascertained that the probable expenditures of the Government for the coming year have been underestimated all internal taxes save those which relate to distilled spirits can be prudently abrogated.

Such a course, if accompanied by a simplification of the machinery of collection, which would then be easy of accomplishment, might reasonably be expected to result in diminishing the cost of such collection by at least $2,500,000 and in the retirement from office of from 1,500 to 2,000 persons.

The system of excise duties has never commended itself to the favor of the American people, and has never been resorted to except for supplying deficiencies in the Treasury when, by reason of special exigencies, the duties on imports have proved inadequate for the needs of the Government. The sentiment of the country doubtless demands that the present excise tax shall be abolished as soon as such a course can be safely pursued.

It seems to me, however, that, for various reasons, so sweeping a measure as the total abolition of internal taxes would for the present be an unwise step.

Two of these reasons are deserving of special mention:

First. It is by no means clear that even if the existing system of duties on imports is continued without modification those duties alone will yield sufficient revenue for all the needs of the Government. It is estimated that $100,000,000 will be required for pensions during the coming year, and it may well be doubted whether the maximum annual demand for that object has yet been reached. Uncertainty upon this question would alone justify, in my judgment, the retention for the present of that portion of the system of internal revenue which is least objectionable to the people.

Second. A total abolition of excise taxes would almost inevitably prove a serious if not an insurmountable obstacle to a thorough revision of the tariff and to any considerable reduction in import duties.

The present tariff system is in many respects unjust. It makes unequal distributions both of its burdens and its benefits. This fact was practically recognized by a majority of each House of Congress in the passage of the act creating the Tariff Commission. The report of that commission will be placed before you at the beginning of this session, and will, I trust, afford you such information as to the condition and prospects of the various commercial, agricultural, manufacturing, mining, and other interests of the country and contain such suggestions for statutory revision as will practically aid your action upon this important subject.

The revenue from customs for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1879, amounted to $137,000,000.

It has in the three succeeding years reached, first, $186,000,000, then $198,000,000, and finally, as has been already stated, $220,000,000.

The income from this source for the fiscal year which will end on June 30, 1883, will doubtless be considerably in excess of the sum last mentioned.

If the tax on domestic spirits is to be retained, it is plain, therefore, that large reductions from the customs revenue are entirely feasible. While recommending this reduction, I am far from advising the abandonment of the policy of so discriminating in the adjustment of details as to afford aid and protection to domestic labor. But the present system should be so revised as to equalize the public burden among all classes and occupations and bring it into closer harmony with the present needs of industry.

Without entering into minute detail, which under present circumstances is quite unnecessary, I recommend an enlargement of the free list so as to include within it the numerous articles which yield inconsiderable revenue, a simplification of the complex and inconsistent schedule of duties upon certain manufactures, particularly those of cotton, iron, and steel, and a substantial reduction of the duties upon those articles and upon sugar, molasses, silk, wool, and woolen goods.

If a general revision of the tariff shall be found to be impracticable at this session, I express the hope that at least some of the more conspicuous inequalities of the present law may be corrected before your final adjournment. One of them is specially referred to by the Secretary. In view of a recent decision of the Supreme Court, the necessity of amending the law by which the Dutch standard of color is adopted as the test of the saccharine strength of sugars is too obvious to require comment.

From the report of the Secretary of War it appears that the only outbreaks of Indians during the past year occurred in Arizona and in the southwestern part of New Mexico. They were promptly quelled, and the quiet which has prevailed in all other parts of the country has permitted such an addition to be made to the military force in the region endangered by the Apaches that there is little reason to apprehend trouble in the future.

Those parts of the Secretary's report which relate to our seacoast defenses and their armament suggest the gravest reflections. Our existing fortifications are notoriously inadequate to the defense of the great harbors and cities for whose protection they were built.

The question of providing an armament suited to our present necessities has been the subject of consideration by a board, whose report was transmitted to Congress at the last session. Pending the consideration of that report, the War Department has taken no steps for the manufacture or conversion of any heavy cannon, but the Secretary expresses the hope that authority and means to begin that important work will be soon provided. I invite the attention of Congress to the propriety of making more adequate provision for arming and equipping the militia than is afforded by the act of 1808, which is still upon the statute book. The matter has already been the subject of discussion in the Senate, and a bill which seeks to supply the deficiencies of existing laws is now upon its calendar.

The Secretary of War calls attention to an embarrassment growing out of the recent act of Congress making the retirement of officers of the Army compulsory at the age of 64. The act of 1878 is still in force, which limits to 400 the number of those who can be retired for disability or upon their own application. The two acts, when construed together, seem to forbid the relieving, even for absolute incapacity, of officers who do not fall within the purview of the later statute, save at such times as there chance to be less than 400 names on the retired list. There are now 420. It is not likely that Congress intended this result, and I concur with the Secretary that the law ought to be amended.

The grounds that impelled me to withhold my signature from the bill entitled "An act making appropriations for the construction, repair, and preservation of certain works on rivers and harbors," which became a law near the close of your last session, prompt me to express the hope that no similar measure will be deemed necessary during the present session of Congress. Indeed, such a measure would now be open to a serious objection in addition to that which was lately urged upon your attention. I am informed by the Secretary of War that the greater portion of the sum appropriated for the various items specified in that act remains unexpended.

Of the new works which it authorized, expenses have been incurred upon two only, for which the total appropriation was $210,000. The present available balance is disclosed by the following table:

Amount of appropriation by act of August 2, 1882 $18,738,875 Amount of appropriation by act of June 19, 1882 10,000 Amount of appropriation for payments to J.B. Eads 304,000 Unexpended balance of former appropriations 4,738,263 23,791,138 Less amount drawn from Treasury between July 1, 1882, and November 30, 1882 6,056,194 17,734,944

It is apparent by this exhibit that so far as concerns most of the items to which the act of August 2, 1882, relates there can be no need of further appropriations until after the close of the present session. If, however, any action should seem to be necessary in respect to particular objects, it will be entirely feasible to provide for those objects by appropriate legislation. It is possible, for example, that a delay until the assembling of the next Congress to make additional provision for the Mississippi River improvements might be attended with serious consequences. If such should appear to be the case, a just bill relating to that subject would command my approval.

This leads me to offer a suggestion which I trust will commend itself to the wisdom of Congress. Is it not advisable that grants of considerable sums of money for diverse and independent schemes of internal improvement should be made the subjects of separate and distinct legislative enactments? It will scarcely be gainsaid, even by those who favor the most liberal expenditures for such purposes as are sought to be accomplished by what is commonly called the river and harbor bill, that the practice of grouping in such a bill appropriations for a great diversity of objects, widely separated either in their nature or in the locality with which they are concerned, or in both, is one which is much to be deprecated unless it is irremediable. It inevitably tends to secure the success of the bill as a whole, though many of the items, if separately considered, could scarcely fail of rejection. By the adoption of the course I have recommended every member of Congress, whenever opportunity should arise for giving his influence and vote for meritorious appropriations, would be enabled so to do without being called upon to sanction others undeserving his approval. So also would the Executive be afforded thereby full opportunity to exercise his constitutional prerogative of opposing whatever appropriations seemed to him objectionable without imperiling the success of others which commended themselves to his judgment.