Newspaper Page Text
By LOMAX & ELLIS]
Volume XVII.
PRESIDENT’S MESSAGE.
Fellow-Citizens of the Senute
and House of Representatives :
In obedience to tbe command of the Constitu
tion, it has now become my duty “to give to Con
gress information of the State ot the Union, and re
commend to their consideration such measures'* as
I judge to be “necessary and expedient.”
15ut lirst, and above all, our thanks are due to Al
mighty God for the numerous heneflts which He
has bestowed upon this people; and our united
prayers ought to ascend to Him that He would con
tinue to bless our great Republic in time to come
as He has blessed it in time past. Since the ad
journment ot the last Congress our constituents
have enjoyed an unusual degree of health. The
earth has yielded her fruits abundantly, and has
bountilully rewarded the toil of the husbandman.
Our great staples have commanded high prices,
and, up to within a brief period,our manufacturing,
mineral, and mechanical occupations have largely
partaken of the general prosperity. We have pos
sessed all the elements of material wealth in rich
abundance, and yet, notwithstanding all the ad
vantages, our country, in its monetary interests,
is at the present moment in a deplorable condition.
In the midst of unsurpassed plenty in all the pro
ductions ot agriculture and in all the elements of
national wealth, we find our manufactures suspend
ed, our public works retarded, our private enterpri
ses of different kinds abandoned, and thousands of
useful laborers thrown out of employment and re
duced to want. The revenue of the Government,
which is chiefly derived from duties on imports
from abroad, has been greatly reduced, whilst the
appropriations made by Congress at its last session
fur the current fiscal year are very large in amount.
Under these circumstances a loan may he requir
ed before the close of your present session ; but
this, although deeply to he regretted, would prove
to be only a slight misfortune when compared with
the suffering and distress prevailing among the
people. W ith this the Government cannot fail
deeply to sympathize, though it may be without
the power to extend relief.
CDRREMCY AND BANES.
It is our duty to inquire what has produced such
unfortunate results, and whether their recurrence
can be prevented I In all former revulsions the
blame might have been fairly attributed to a variety
of co-operating causes; but not so upon rhe pres
ent occasion. It is apparent that our existing mis
fortunes have proceeded solely from our extrava
gant and vicious system of paper currency and
bank credits, exciting the people to wild specula
tions and gambling in stocks. These revulsions
must continue to recur at successive intervals so
long as the amount of the paper currency and bank
loans and discounts of the country shall be left to
the discretion of fourteen hundred irresponsible
banking institutions, which, from the very law of
their nature, will consult the interest of the stock
holders rather than the public welfare.
The framers of the Constitution, when they gave
to Congress the [lower “to coin money and to reg
ulate the value thereof,” and prohibited the States
from coining money, emitting bills ot credit, or ma
king anything but gold and silver coin a tender in
payment of debts, supposed they had protected the
people against the evils of an excessive and irre
deemable paper currency. They are not responsi
ble for the existing anomaly, that a Government
endowed with the sovereign attribute of coining
money and regulating the value thereof, should
have no power to prevent others from driving this
coin out of the country and filling up the channels
of circulation with paper which does not represent
gold and silver.
It is one of the highest and most responsible du
ties of Government to insure to the people a sound
circulating medium, the amount of which ought
to be adapted with the utmost possible wisdom and
skill to the wants of internal trade and foreign ex
changes. If this be either greatly above or greatly
below the proper standard, the marketable value of
every man’s property is increased or diminished in
the same proportion, and injustice to individuals,
as well as incalculable evils to the community, are
the consequence.
Unfortunately, under the construction of the
Federal Constitution, which has now prevailed too
long to be changed, this important and delicate du
ty has been dissevered from the coining power, and
virtually transferred to more than fourteen hundred
State banks, acting independently of each other,
and regulating their paper issues almost exclusively
by a regard to the present interest of their stock
holders. Exercising the sovereign power of provi
ding a paper currency, instead of coin, for the coun
try, the first duty which these banks owe to the
public is to keep in their vaults a sufficient amount
of gold and silver to insure the convertibility of
their notes into coin at all times and under all cir
cumstances. No bank ought ever to be chartered
without such restrictions on its business as to se
cure this result. All other restrictions are compar
atively vain. This is the only true touchstone, the
only efficient regulator of a paper currency—the
only one which can guard the public against over
issues and bank suspensions. Asa collaterafand
eventual security it is doubtless wise, and in ail ca
ses ought to be required, that banks shall hold an
amount of United States or State securities equal to
their notes in circulation, and pledged for their re
demption. This, however, furnishes no adequate
secarity against over-issues. On the contrary, it
it may be perverted to inflate the currency. In
deed, it is possible by this means to convert all the
debts of the United States and State governments
into bank notes, without reference to the specie re
quired to redeem them. However valuable these
securities may be in themselves, they cannot be
converted into gold and silver at the moment of
pressure, as our experience teaches, in sufficient
time to prevent bank suspensions and the deprecia
tion of bank notes. In England, which is to a
considerable extent a paper-money country, though
vastly behind our own in this respect, it was deem
ed advisable, anterior to the act ot Parliament of
1844, which wisely separated the issue of notes
from the banking department, for the Bank of Eng
land always to keep on hand gold and silver equal
to one-third of its combined circulation and depos
its. If this proportion was no more than sufficient
to secure the convertibility of its notes, with the
whole of Great Britain, and to some extent the
continent of Europe, as a field of its circulation,
rendering it almost impossible that a sudden and
immediate run to a dangerous amount should be
made upon it, the same proportion would certainly
be insufficient under our banking system. Each
of our fourteen hundred banks has but a limited
circumference for its circulation, and in the course
of a very few days the depositors and note-holders
might demand from such a bank a sufficient amount
in specie to compel it to suspend, even although it
had coin in its vaults equal to one third of its im
mediate liabilities. And yet Tam not aware, with
the exception of the Banks of Louisiana, that any
State bank throughout the Union has been required
by its charter to keep this or any other proportion
of gold and silver compared with the amount of its
combined circulation and deposits. W htl has
been the consequence? In a recent report made
by the Treasury Department on the condition o
the banks throughout the different States, accord
ing to returns dated nearest to January, 1857. the
aggregate amount of actual specie in their vaults is
•1>58,349,838 ; of their circulation, $214,778,822 ;
and of their deposits, $230,351,352. I hus it ap
pears that these hanks, in the aggregate, have con
siderably less than $1 in $7 of gold and silver, com
pared with their circulation and deposits. It was pal
pable, therefore, that the very first pressure must drive
them to suspension, and deprive the people of a
convertible currency, with all its disastrous conse
quences. It is truly wonderful that they should
have so long continued to preserve their credit,
when a demand for the payment of one-seventh of
their immediate liabilities would have driven them
into insolvency. And this is the condition of t e
banks, notwithstanding that four hundred millions
of gold from California have flowed in upon us
within the last eight years, and the tide still con
tinues to flow. Indeed 6uch has been the extrava
gance of bank credits that the banks now hold a
considerable less amount of specie, either in propor
tion to their capital or to their circulation and de
posits combined, than they did before the discovery
Os gold in California. Whilst in the year 1848
their specie in proportion to their capital was more
than equal to one dollar for four and a half, in 1857
it does not amount to one dollar for every six dol
lars and thirty-three cents of their capital. In the
year 1848 till? specie was equal, within a very small
fraction, to one dollar in five of their circulation
and deposits; in 1857 it is not equal to one dollar
in seven and a half of their circulation and deposits.
From this statement, it is easy to account for our
financial history for the last forty years. It has
been a history of extravagant expansions in the bus
iness of the country, followed by ruinous contrac
tions. At successive intervals the best and most
enterprising men have been tempted to their ruin
by excessive bank loans of mere paper credit, ex
citing them to extravagant importations of foreign
goods, wild speculations, and ruinous and demor
alizing stock gambling. When the crisis arrives,
as arrive it must, the banks can extend no relief
to the people. In a vain struggle to redeem their
liabilities in specie, they are compelled to contract
their loans and their issues; and at last, in th*
hour of distress, when their assistance is most
needed, they and their debtors together sink into
insolvency.
• It is this paper system of extravagant expansion,
raising the nominal price of every articTtTTar beyond
its real value, when compared with the cost of sim
ilar articles in countries whose circulation is wisely
regulated, which has prevented us from competing
in our own markets with foreign manufacturers,
has produced extravagant importations, and has
counteracted the effect of the large incidental pro
tection afforded to our domestic manufactures by
the present revenue tariff. But for this the branches
of our manufactures composed of raw materials,
the production of our own country —such as cot
ton, iron, ffnd woolen fabrics—would not only have
acquired almost exclusive possession of the home
market, but would have created for themselves a
foreign market throughout the world.
Deplorable, however, as may be our present fi
nancial condition, we may yet indulge in bright
hopes for the future. No other nation has ever ex
isted which could have endured such violent expan
sions and contractions of paper credits without last
ing injury ; yet the buoyancy of youth, the ener
gies of our population, and the spirit which never
quails before difficulties, will enable us soon to recov
er from our present financial embarrassments, and
may even occasion us speedily to forget the lesson
which they have taught.
In the mean time, it is the duty of the Govern
ment, by all proper means within its power, to aid
in alleviating the sufferings of the people occasion
ed by the suspensions of the banks, and to provide
against a recurrence ot the same calamity. Unfor
tunately, in either aspect of the case, it can do but
little. Thanks to the Independent Treasury, the
Government has not suspended payment, as it was
compelled to do by the failure of the banks in 1837.
It will continue to discharge its liabilities to the
people in gold and silver. Its disbursements in
coin will pass into circulation, and materially assist
in restoring a sound currency. From its high cred
it, should we be compelled to make a temporary
loan, it can be effected on advantageous terms.—
This, however, shall, if possible, be avoided ; but if
not, then the amount shall be limited to the lowest
practicable sum.
I have therefore determined that whilst no use
ful Government works already in progress shall be
suspended, new works, not already commenced,
will be postponed, if this can be done without in
jury to the country. Those necessary for its de
fence shall proceed as though there had been no
crisis in our monetary affairs.
But the Federal Government cannot do much to
provide against a recurrence of existing evils. Even
if insurmountable constitutional objections did not
exist against the creation of a national bank, this
would furnish no adequate preventive security.—
The history of the last Bank of che United States
abundantly proves the truth of this assertion. Such
a bank could not, if it would, regulate the issues
and credits of fourteen hundred State banks in such
a manner as to prevent the ruinous expansions and
contractions in our currency which afflicted the
country throughout the existence of the late bank,
or secure us against future suspens : ons. In 1825
an effort was made by the Bank of England to cur
tail the issues of the country banks under the most
favorable circumstances. The paper currency had
been expanded to a ruinous extent, and the bank
put forth all its power to contract it, in order to re
duce prices, and restore the equilibrium of the for
eign exchanges. It accordingly commenced a sys
tem of curtailment of its loans and issues, in the
vain hope that the joint-stock and private banks of
the kingdom would be compelled to follow its ex
ample. It found, however, that as it contracted
they expanded, and at the end of the process, to
employ the language of a very high official author
ity, “whatever reduction of the paper circulation
was effected by the Bank of England [in 1825]
was more than made up by the issues of the coun
try banks.”
But a bank of the United States would not, if it
could, restrain the issues and loans of the State
banks, because its duty as a regulator of the cur
rency must often be in direct conflict with the im
mediate interest of its stockholders. If wc expect
one agent to restrain or control another, their in
terests must, at least in some degreo, be antagonis
tic. But the directors of a bank of the United
States would feel the same interest and the same
inclination with the directors of the State banks to
expand the currency, to accommodate their favor
ites and friends with loans, and to declare laige
dividends. Such has been our experience in re
gard to the last bank.
After all, we must mainly rely upon the patriot
ism an.l wisdom of the States for the prevention
and redress of the evil. If they will afford us a
real specie basis for our paper circulation by in
creasing the denomination of bank notes, first to
twenty, and afterwards to fifty dollars; if they will
require that the banks shall at all times keep on
hand at least one dollar of gold and silver for every
three dollars of their circulation and deposits ; and
if they will provide, by a self-executing enactment
which nothing can arrest, tha’ the moment they
suspend they shall go into liquidation, I believe that
such provisions, with a weekly publication by each
bank of a statement of its condition, would go far
to secure us against future suspensions of specie
payments.
Congress, m my opinion, possess the power to
pass a uniform bankrupt law applicable to all bank
ing institutions throughout the United States, and
I strongly recommend its exercise. This would
make it the irreversible organic law of each bank’s
existence, that a suspension of specie payments
shall produce its civil death. The instinct of self
preservation would then compel it to pertorm its
duties in such a manner as to escape the penalty
and preserve its life.
The existence of banks and the circulation o
bank paper are so identified with the habits of our
people, that they cannot at this day be suddenly
abolished without much immediate injury to tbe
country. If wc could confine them to their appro
priate sphere, and prevent them trom administer
ing to the spirit of wild and reckless speculation
by extravagant loans and issues,* they might be
continued with advantage to the public.
But this I say, after long and much reflection : if
experience shall prove it to be impossible to enjoy
the facilities which well-regulated banks might af
ford, without at the same time suffering the calam
ities which the excesses of the banks have hitherto
inflicted upon the country, it would then be far the
lesser evil to deprive them altogether of the power
to issue a paper currency and confine them to the
functions of banks of deposit and discount.
RELATIONS WITH GREAT BRITAIN.
Our relations with foreign Governments are, upon
the whole, in a satisfactory condition.
The diplomatic difficulties which existed between
the Government of the United States and that of
Great Britain at the adjournment of the last Con
gress have been happily terminated by the appoint
ment of a British Minister to this country, who has
been cordially received.
Whilst it is greatly to the interest, as I am con
vinced it is the sincere desire, of the Governments
and people of the two countries to be on terms ot
intimate friendship with each other, it has been our
misfortune almost always to have some irritating, it
not dangerous, outstanding question with Great
Br Since the origin of the Government we have been
u the union or THE states and the sovereignty of the states.’’
COLUMBUS, GEORGIA, TUESDAY MORNING, DECEMBER 15, 1857.
e mployed in negotiating treaties wiih that Power,
and afterwards in discussing their true intent and
meaning. In this respect, the convention of April
19, 1850, commonly called the Clayton and Bul
wer treaty, has been the most unfortunate of all *.
because the two Governments place directly oPP°
site and contradictory constructions upon its rßt
and most important article. Whilst, in the Uni
States, we believed that this treaty would place
both Powers upon an exact equality by the stipula
tion that neither will ever “occupy, or fortify, or
colonize, or assume or exercise any dominion” over,
any part of Central America, it is contended by
the British Government that the true construction
of this language has left them in the rightful pos
session of all that portion of Central America which
was in their occupancy at the date of the treaty ; in
fact, that the treaty is a virtual recognition on the
part ol the United States of the right of Great
Britain, either as owner or protector, to the whole
extensive coast of Central America, sweeping round
from the Rio Hondo to the port and harbor of San
Juan de Nicaragua, together with the adjacent Bay
Islands, except the comparatively small portion of
this between the Sarstoon and Cape Honduras.
According to their construction, the treaty does no
more than simply prohibit them from extending
their possessions in Central America beyond tbe
present limits. It is not too much to assert, that if
in the United States the treaty had been consider
ed susceptible of such a construction, it never would
have been negotiated under the authority of the
President, nor would it have received the approba
tion of the Senate. The universal conviction in
the United States was, that when our Government
consented to violate its traditional and time hon
ored policy, and to stipulate with a foreign Govern
ment never to occupy or acquire territory in the
Central American portion of our own continent, the
consideration for this sacrifice was that Great Brit
ain should, in this respect at least, be placed in the
same position with ourselves. Whilst we have no
right to doubt the sincerity of the British Govern
ment in their construction of the treaty, it is at the
same time my deliberate conviction that this con
struction is in opposition both to its letter and its
spirit.
Under the late Administration, negotiations were
instituted between the two Governments for the
purpose, if possible, of removing these difficulties ;
and a treaty having this laudable object in view
was signed ut London on the 17th October, 1856,
and was submitted by the President to the Senate
on the following 10th of December. Whether this
treaty, either in its original or amended form, would
have accomplished the object intended without giv
ing birth to new and embarrassing complications
between the two Governments, may perhaps be
well questioned. Certain it is, however, it was
rendered much les9 objectionable by the different
amendments made to it by tbe Senate. The treaty,
as amended, was ratified by me on the I2th March,
1857, and was transmitted to London for ratifica
tion by the British Government. That Govern
ment expressed its willingness to concur in all the
amendments made by the Senate, with the single
exception of the clause relating to Roatan and the
other islands in the Bay of Honduras. The article
in the original treaty, as submitted to the .Senate,
after reciting that these islands and their inhabit
ants “having been by a convention bearing date
the 27th day of August, 1856, between her Britan
nic Majesty and the Republic of Honduras, consti
tuted and declared a free territory, under tbe sover
eignty of the said Republic of Honduras,” stipula
ted that “the two contracting parties do hereby
mutually engage to recognize and respect, in ail
future time, the independence and rights of tbe
said free territory as a part of the Republic of Hon
duras.”
Upon an examination of this convention between
Great Britain and Honduras of tbe 27th August,
1856, it was found that, whilst declaring the Bay
Islands to be “a free territory under the sovereign
ty ol tbe Rupublic of Honduras,” it deprived that
Republic of rights without which its sovereignty
over them could scarcely be said to exist. It divid
ed them Irom the remainder of Honduras, and gave
to their inhabitants a separate government of their
own, with legislative, executive, and judicial offi
cers, elected by themselves. It deprived the Govern
ment of Honduras ot the taxing power in every
torm, and exempted the people of the islands from
the performance of military duty except for their
own exclusive defense. - It also prohibited that Re
public from erecting fortifications upon them for
their protection—thus leaving them open to inva
sion from any quarter ; and, finally, it provided “that
slavery shall not at any time hereafter be permitted
to exist therein.”
Had Honduras rstified this convention, she
would have ratified the establishment of a State sub
stantially independent within her own limits, and a
State at all times subject to British influence and con
trol. Moreover, had the United States ratified the
treaty with Great Britain in its original form, we
should have been bound “to recognize and respect in
all future time” these stipulations to the prejudice of
Honduras. Being in direct oppostion to the spir
it and meaning of the Clayton and Bulwer treaty
as understood in the United States, the Senate re
jected the entire clause, and substituted in its stead
a simple recognition of the sovereign right of Hon
duras to these islands in the following language:
“The two contracting parties do hereby mutually engage
to recognise and respect the Islands ot Roatan, Bonaco, Util
la. Barbaretta, Helena, and Morat, situated in the Bay of
Honduras, and off the coast of the Republic of Honduran, an
under the sovereignty and as part of the said Republic of
Honduras.”
Great Britain rejected this amendment, assigning
as the only reason, that the ratifications of the con
vention of the 27th August, 1856, between her and
Honduras, had not been “exchanged, owing to the
hesitation of that Government.” Had this been
done, it is stated that “her Majesty’s Government
would have had little difficulty in agreeing to the
modification proposed by the Senate, which then
would have had in effect the same signification as
the original wording.” Whether this would have
been the effect; whether the mere circumstance of
the exchange of the ratifications of the British con
vention with Honduras prior in point of time to the
ratification of our treaty with Grea* Britian would,
“in effect,” have had “the same signification as the
original wording,” and thus have nullified the
amendment of the Senate, may well be doubted.—
It is, perhaps, fortunate that the question has never
arisen.
The British Government, iminedia f ely after re
jecting the treaty as amended, proposed to enterin
to anew treaty with the United Stales, similar in all
respects to th# treaty which they had just refused
to ratify, if the United States would consent to add
to the Senate’s clear and unqualified recognition of
the sovereignty of Honduras over the Bay Islands,
the following additional stipulation :
“ Whenever and so soon as the Republic of Honduras shall
have concluded and ratified a treaty with Great Britain, by
which Great Britain shall have ceded, aud the Republic of
Honduras shall have accepted, the said islands, subject to
he provisions and conditions contained in such treaty. 0
This proposition was, of course, rejected. After
the Senate had refused to recognize the British con
vention with Honduras of the 27th August, 1856,
with full knowledge of its contents, it was impossi
ble for me, necessarily ignorant of “the provisions
and conditions” which might be contained in a
future convent on between the same parties, to
sanction them in advance.
Tbe fact is, that when two nations like Great
Britain and the United States, mutually desirous as
they are, and I trust ever may be, of maintaining
the most friendly relations with each other, have
unfortunately concluded a treaty which they un
derstand in senses directly opposite, the wisest
course is to abrogate such a treaty by mutual con
sent, and to commence anew. Had this been doDe
promptly, all difficulties in Central America would
most probably ere this have been adjusted to the
satisfaction of both parties. Tee time spent in
discussing the meaning of the Clayton and Bulwer
treaty would have been devoted to this praiseworthy
purpose, and the task would have been the more
easily accomplished, because the interest of the
two countries in Central America is identical, being
confined to securing safe transits overall the routes
across the isthmus.
Whilst entertaining these sentiments, I shall nev
ertheless not refuse to contribute to any reasonable
adjustment of the Central American questions
which is not pratically inconsistent with the Amer
ican interpretation of the treaty. Overtures for this
purpose have been recently made by the British
Government in a friendly spirit, which I cordially
reciprocate; but whether this renewed effort will
result in success I am not yet prepared to exp.css
an opinion. A brief period will determine.
OUR RELATIONS WITH FRANCE
With France our ancient relations of friendship
still continue to exist. The French Government
have in several recent instances, which need not be
enumerated, evinced a spirit of good will and kind
ness towards our country I which heartily reciprocate.
It is, notwithstanding, muen to be regretted that
two nations whose productions are of such a char
acter as to invite the most extensive exchanges,
and freest commercial intercouse, should continue
to enforce ancient and obsolete restrictions of trade
against each other. Our commercial treatv with
France is in this respect, an exception from our trea
ties with all other commercial nations. It jealous
ly levies discriminating duties both on tonnage
and on articles, the growth, produce, or manufac
ture of the one country, when arriving in vessels
belonging to the other.
More than forty years ago, on the 3d (f March,
1815, Congress passed an act offering to all nations
to admit their vessels laden with their national
productions into the ports of the United States upon
the same terms with our own vessels, provided they
would reciprocate to us similar advantages. This
act confined the reciprocity to the productions of
the respective foreign nations who might, enter into
the proposed arrangement with the United States.
The act of May 24, 1828, removed this restriction,
and offered a similar reciprocity to all such vessels
without reference to the origin of their cargoes.—
Upon these principles, our commercial treaties and
arrangements have been founded, except with
France ; and let us hope that this exception may
not long exist.
Our relations with Russia remain, as they have
ever been, on the most friendly footing. The pre
sent Emperor, as well as b s predecessors, have nev
er failed, when the occasion offered, to manifest
their good will to our country ; and their friendship
has always been highly appreciated by the Govern
ment and people of tbe United States.
OUR RELATIONS WITH SPAIN.
With all other European Governments, except
that of Spain, our relations are as peaceful as we
could desire. I regret to say that no progress
whatever has been made since tha adjournment of
Congress towards the settlement of any of the nu
merous claims of our citizens against the Spanish
Government. Besides, the outrage committed on
our flag by the tSpanish war frigate Ferolana on the
high seas, off'the coast of Cuba, in March, 1855,
by firing into the American mail steamer El Dora
do, and detaining and searching her, remains no
acknowledged and unredressed. The general tone
nnd temper of the Spanish Government towards
that of the United States are much to be regretted.
Our present Envoy Extraordinary and Minister
Plenipotentiary to Madrid has askvd to be recalled ;
and it is my purpose to send out anew Minister i<>
Spain, with special instructions on alt questions
pending between tbe two Governments, and with a
determination to have them speedily and amicably
adjusted, if this be possible. In the mean time,
whenever our Minister urges the just claims of our
citizens on the notice of the Spanish Government,
he is met with the objection that Congress have
never made the appropriation recommended by
President Polk in his annual message of December,
1847, “to be paid to the Spanish Government for
the purpose of distribution among the claimants in
the Amistad case.” A similar recommendation
was made by my immediate predecessor in his mes
sage of December, 1853 ; and entirely concurring
with both in the opinion that this indemnity is
justly due under the treaty with Spain of the 27th
October, 1795, I earnestly recommend such an ap
propriation to the favorable consideration of Con
gress.
RELATIONS WITH TERSIA.
A treaty of friendship and commerce was conclu
ded at Constantinople on the 13th of December,
1856, between the United States and Persia, the
ratifications of which were exchanged at Constan
tinople on the 13th of June, 1857, and the treaty
was proclaimed by the President on tbe 18th of
August, 1857. This treaty, it is believed, will prove
beneficial to American commerce. The Shah has
manifested an earnest disposition to cultivate
friendly relations with our country, and has ex
pressed a strong wish that we should be represented
at Teheran by a minister plenipotentiary ; unti 1
recommend that an appropriation be made for this
purpose.
R ELATIONS WITH iKI N A.
Recent occurrences in China hav*. bin unfavora
ble to a revision of the treaty with that Eu ■ t
the 3d ot J uly, 1844, with a view to the secum y and
extension ot our commerce. The 24th article o;
this treaty stipulated for a revision of it, in case
experience should prove this to be requsite; “in
which case the two Governments will, at the expi
ration of twelve years from the date of said con
vention, treat amicably concerning the same, by
means of suitable persons appointed to conduct such
negotiations.” These twelve years expired on the
3d July, 1856; but long before that period it was
ascertained that important changes in the treaty
were neceesary; and several fruitless attempts were
made by the Commissioner of the United States to
effect these changes. Another effort was about to
be made for the same purpose by our Commissioner
in conjunction with the Ministers of England and
France, but this was suspended by the occurrence
of hostilities in the Canton river between Great
Britain and the Chinese Empire. These hostilities
have necesarily interrupted the trade of all nations
with Canton, which is now in a state of blockade,
and have occasioned a serious loss of life and prop
erty. Meanwhile the insurrection within the Em
pire against the existing imperial dynasty still
continues, and it is difficult to anticipate what will
will be the result.
Under these circumstances I have deemed it ad
visable to appoint a distinguished citizen of Penn
sylvania Envoy Extraordinary and Minister Pleni
potentiary to proceed to China, and to avail himself
of any opportunities which may offer to effect
changes in the existing treaty favorable to Ameri
can commerce. He left the United States for tbe
place of his destination in July last in the war
steamer Minnesota. Special Ministers to China
have also been appointed by the Governments ot
Great Britain and France.
Whilst our Minister has been instructed to occu
py a neutral position in reference to the existing
hostilities at Canton, he will cordially co-operate
with the British and French Ministers in all peace
ful measures to secure,by treaty stipulations, those
just concessions to commerce which the nations
of the world have a right to expect, and which China
cannot long be permitted to withhold. From assur
ances received, I entertain no doubt that the three
Ministers will act in harmonious concert to obtain
similar commercial treaties for each ot the powers
they represent.
OUR RELATIONS WITH CENTR A L AMERICA.
We cannot fail to feel a deep interest in all that
concerns the welfare of the independent Republics
on our own continent, as well as ot the Empire of
Brazil.
Our difficulties with NewjGranada, which a short
time since bore so threatening an aspect, are it is
to be hoped, in a fair train of settlement in a man
ner just and honorable to both parties.
The isthmus of Central America, including that
of Panama, is the great’ highway between tbe AN
lantic and Pacific, over which a large portion ot the
commerce of the world is destined to pa*-s. The
United States are more deeply interested than any
other nation in preserving the freedom and security
of all the communications across this isthmus, it
is our duty, therefore, to take care that they shall
not be interrupted either by invasions from our own
country or by wars between the independent States
of Central America. Under our treaty with New
Granada of the 12th December, 1846, we are bound
to guaranty the neutrality of the isthmus of Pana
ma, through which the Panama Railroad passes,
“as well as the rights of sovereignty and property
which New Granada has and possesses over the
said territory.” This obligation is founded upon
equivalents granted by the treaty to the Govern
ment and people of the United States.
Under these circumstances, I recommend to Con
fress the passage of an act authorizing the Presi
ent, in case of necessity, to employ the land and
naval forces of the United States to carry into ef
fect this guarantee of neutrality and protection. I
also recommend similar legislation for the security
of any other route across the isthmus in which we
may acquire an interest by treaty.
With the independent Republics on this continent
it is both our duty and our interest to cultivate the
most friendly relations. We can never feel indif
ferent to their fate, and must always rejoice in their
prosperity. Unfortunately, both for them and for
us, our example and advice have lost much of their
influence in consequence of the lawless expeditions
which have been fitted out against some of them
within the limits of our country. Nothing is bet
ter calculated to retard our steady material pro
gress, or impair our character as a nation, than the
toleration of such enterprises in violation of the law
of nations.
It is one of the first and highest duties of any in*
dependent State, in its relations with the members
of the grear family of nations, to restrain its peo
ple from acts of hostile aggression against iheir
citizens or subjects. The most eminent writers on
public law do not hesitate to denounce such hostile
acts as robbery and murder.
Weak and feeble States, like those of Central
America, may not feel themselves able to aasert and
vindicate their rights. The case would be fur dif
ferent it expeditions were set on foot wiihin our
own territories to make private war against a pow
• erful nation. If such expeditions were fitted out
from abroad against any portion ot our own coun
try, to burn down our cities, murder and plunder
our people, and usurp our Government, we should
call any Power on earth to the strictest account for
not preventing such enormities
Ever since the administration of General Wash
ington, acts of Congress have been in force lo pun*
isii severely the crime of setting on foot a military
expedition within the limits of the United States,
to proceed from thence against a nation or State
with whom we are at peace. The present neu
trality act of April 20, 1818, is but little more than
a collection of pre-existing laws. Under this act
the President is empowered to employ the land and
naval forces and the militia “lor the purpose of
preventing the carrying on of any such expedition
or enterprise from the territories and jurisdiction
of the United States ;” and the collectors of cus
toms are authorized and required to detain any ves
sel in port when there is reason to believe she is
about to take part in such lawless enterprises.
WALKER’S EXPEDITION.
When it was first rendered probable that an at
tempt would lie made to get up anotuer unlawful
expedition against Nicaragua, the Secretary of
State issued instructions to the marshals and dis
trict attorneys, which were directed by the Secre
taries of War and Navy, to appropriate the Army
and Navy officers, requiringthem to be vigilant, and
to use their best exertions in carrying into effect
the provisions of the act of 1818. Notwithstanding
these precautions, the expedition has escaped from
our shores. Such enterprises can do no possible
good to our country, but have already inflicted
much injury both on its interests and its character.
They have prevented peaceful emigration from the
United States to the States ot Central America,
w'hieh could not fail to prove highly beneficial to
all the parlies concerned. In a pecuniary point of
view’ alone, our citizens have sustained heavy loss
es from the seizure and closing of the transit route
by the San Juan between ihe two oceans.
Tfle leader of the recent expedition was arre.-ted at
New Orleans, bat was discharged on giving hail for
his appearance in the insufficient sum of two thousand
dollars.
I commend the whole subject to the serious eonsid
tion of Congress, believing that our duty and our in
terest, as well as our National character, require that
we should adopt such measures as will he effectual in
restraining our citizens from committing such outrages.
RELATIONS WITH PARAGUAY.
I regret to inform you that the President of Paraguay
has refused to ratify the treaty between the United
States and that Slate, as amended by the Senate, the
signature of which was mentioned in the message of
my predecessor to Congress at the opening of it.- ses
sion in December, 1853. The reasons assigned lor this
refusal will appear in the correspondence herewith
submitted.
It being desirable to ascertain the fitness of the river
I.x Plata and its tributaries for navigation by steam, the
United States steamer Water Witch, was sent thither
h” that purpose in 1853 This enterprise was success
fully carried on until February. 1855, whilst in the
peaceful prosecution of her voyage up the Parana river
the mearner was fired upon by a Paraguayan fort. The
fire was returned; as the Water Witch was of
small force, and not designed for offens ve operations,
she retired from the conflict. The pretext upon which
the attack was made, was a deree of the President of
Paraguay ot October, 1854, prohibiting foreign vessels
of war from navigating the rivers of that State As
Paraguay, however, was the owner of but one hank of
the river of that name, ihe other belonging to Corien
tes, a State of the Argentine Confederation, the right
of its Government to expect that such a decree would
be obeyed, cannot he acknowledged. But the. Water
W itch was not, properly speaking, a vessel of war.—
She was a small ©teamer engaged in a scientific enter
prise, intended for the advantage of commercial States
generally. Under these circumstances, I am con
strained to consider the attack upon her as unjustifia
ble, and as calling for satisfaction from the Paraguayan
Government.
Citizens of the United States, also, who were estab
lished iu business in Paraguay, have had their property
seized and taken from them, and have otherwise been
treated by the authorities in an insulting and arbitrary
manner, which requires redress.
A demand for these purposes will be made in a firm
but conciliatory spiiit. ‘l’his will the more probably
hegranted.it the Executive shall have HUihorhy to
use other means in the event ol a relusal This is ac
cordingly recommended
KANSAS.
It is unnecessary to slate in detail the alarming con
dition of the Territory of Kansas at the time of my
inauguration. The opposing parties then stood in hos
tile array against each other, and any accident might
have relighted the flames of civil war. Besides, at this
critical moment, Kansas was lefi w ithout a Governor
by the resignation of Gov. Geary.
On ihe I‘Jth of February previous, the Territorial
Legislature had pas-ed a law providing lor the election
of den gates, on the third Monday ol June, to a con
vention to meet on the first Monday of September for
the purpose of framing a consuimion preparatory to
admission into the Union. This law was in the main
fair and just; and it is to be regretted that all the quali
fied electors, had not registered themselves and voted
under its provisions.
At the time of the election for delegates, an extensive
organization existed in the territory, whose avowed
object it was, if need be, to put down the lawful Gov
ernment by force, and to establish a government of their
own under the so-called Topeka Constitution. The
l>ersons attached to thi- revolutionary organization ab
stained trom taking any part in ihe election.
The act of the Territorial Legislature had omitted to
provide for submitting to the people the constitution,
which might be framed by he convention; and in the
excited state of public leoling throughout Kansas, an
apprehension extensively prevailed that a design sxisied
to force upon them a constitution in relation to slavery
against their* will. In this emergency it it became my
duly, as it was my unquestionable right, having in view
the union of all good citizens iu support of the territo
rial laws, to express an opinion on the true construction
of the provisions concerning slavery contained in the
organic act of Congress of the 30th May, 1854. Con
gress declared it to he “the true intent and meaning of
this act not to legislate slavery into any Territory or
State, nor to exclude it therefrom, but to leave the peo
ple thereof perfectly free to form and regulate theii do
mestic institutions iri their own way.” Under it Kan
sas “when admitted as a State,” was to he “received
into the Union, with or without slavery, as then consti
tution may prescribe, at the time of their admission.”
Did Congress mean by this language that the de-e
----gates elected to frame a constitution should havealu
thority finally to deeiile the question of slavery, or did
they intend by leaving it to tiie people, that the people
of Kansas themselves should decidtj this que-slion by a
direct vote? On this subject, l confess,! had never en
tertained a serious doubt; and, therefore, in my instruc
tions to Governor Walker, of the 28th of Ma*ch last,
I merely said, that when “aconstitution shall be sub
mitted to the people ol the territory, they must be pro
tected in the exercise of their right of voting for or
against that instrument, and the fair expression of the
popular will must not be interrupted by fraud or vio
lence.”
In expressing this opinion it was far from my inten
tion to interfere with the decision of the people of
Kansas, either for or against ©lavery. From this 1 have
always carefully r.b~tainpd. Intrusted with duty ol
taking ‘‘care that the laws be faith’ullv executed,” my
only desire was that the people of Kansas should fur
nish to Congress the evidence required by the organic
act, whether for or against slavery; and in this manner
smooth their passage into the Union. In emerging
from the condition of territorial dependence into that
of a sovereign State, it was their duty, in rny opinion,
to make known their will by the vot sos the majority,
on the direct question whether this important domes
tic institution should or should not continue to exist.—
Indeed this was the only possible mode in which their
will could he authenticallv ascertained
The election of delegates to a convention must nec
essarily take place in separate di-ti icts From this cause
it may readily happen, as ha? often been the case, that
a majority of the people of a State or Territory are ou
one sidtf of a question, whilst a majority ot the repre
sentatives from the several districts into which it is di
vided may be upon the other side. This arises trom
the fact that in some districts delegates may be elected
by small majorities, whilst in othes those of different
sentiments may receive majorities sufficiently great not
only to overcome the vote given tor the former, hut to
leave a large majority of the whole people in direct op
position to a majority of the delegates Besides, our
history proves that influences may be bi ought to bear
on the representative sufficiently powerful to induce
him to din regard the will of his constituents. The truth
is, that no other authentic and satisfactory mode exists
ol ascertaining the will of a majority of the people of
any State or Territory, on an important and exciting
question like that of slavery in by leav
ing it to a direct vote. How wise, then, was it for
Congress to pass over all subordinate and intermediate
agencies, and proceed directly to the source of fall legit
imate power under our institutions!
How vain would any other principle prove in prac
tice! This may be illustrated by the case of Kansas
Should she be admitted into the Union, with a consti
tution oither maintaining or abolishing slavery, against
the sentiment of the people, this could have no other
effect than to continue and to exasperate the existing
agitation during the brief period required to make the
constitution conform to the irresponsible will of the
majority.
The friends and supporters of the Nebraska and Kan
sas net, when struggling on a Irecent occasion to sus
tain its wise provisions before the great tribunal of the
American people, never differed about its true meaning
on this subject. Everywhere throughout the Union,
they publicly pledged their laith and their honor, that
they would cheerfully submit the question of slavery
to the derision of the bona fide peop e of Kansas, with
out any restriction or qualification whatever. All
were cordially united upon the great doctrine of pop
ular sovereignty, which is the vital principle ot our
free institutions. Had it then been insinuated from any
quarter that it would be a sufficient compliance *i h the
requisitions of the organic law for the members of a
convention, thereafter to be elected, to withhold the
question of slavery from the people, and to susbtitute
their own will for that ot a legally ascertained major
ity of all their constituents, this would have been in
stantly rejected. Everywhere they remained true to
the resolution adopted on a celebrated ,occasion recog
nizing “the rights of the people of all the Territories
--including Kansas and Nebraska—acting through the
legally and fairly expressed will of a majority ol actu
al residents, and whenever the number of their inhabi
tants justifies it, to form a constitution, with or without
slavery, and be admitted into the Union upon terms of
perfect equality witn the other Slates.”
The Conventions frame a constitution for Kansas
met on the first Monday in September last. They were
called together by virtue of an act of the Territorial
Legislature, whose lawful existence had been recogni
zed by Congress in different forms and by different en
actments. A large proportion of the citizens of Kan
sas did not think proper to register their names and to
vote at the election for delegates; but an opportunity
to do this having been fairly afforded, their refusal to
avail themselves of their right, could in no manner af
fect the legality of the convention.
1 his convention proceeded to frame a constitution for
Kansas, and finally adjourned on the 7th day of Nov
iiiU little difficulty occurred in the convention except
on the subject of slavery. The truth is, that the gen
eral provisions of our recent State constitutions are so
similar—and, I may add, so excellent—that the differ
ence between them is not essential. Under the earlier
practice of the Government, no constitution framed by
the convention of a Territory, preparatory to its ad
mission into the Union as a State, had been submitted
to the people- I trust, however, the example set by the
last Congress, requiting that the constitution of Minne
sota “should be subject to the approval and ratification
of the people of the proposed State,” may be followed
on future occasions I took it for granted that the con
vention of Kansas would act in accordance with this
example, founded, as it is, on correct principles; and
hence my instructions to Governor Walker, in favor of
submitting the constitution to the people, were express
ed in general and unqualified terms.
in the Kansas-Nebraska act, howevei, this require
nient, as applicable to the whole constitution, had not
been inserted, and the convention were not bound by its
terms to submit any other portion of the instiumeut to
an election, except that which relates to the “domestic
institution” ol slavery. This will be renderod cleat bv
a simple relerence to its language. It was “not to leg
islate slavery into any Territory or State, nor to exclude
it therelrom, but to leave the people thereof perfectly
free to form and,regulate their domestic institutions in
their own way,” According to the plain construction
of the sentence, the words “domestic institutions” have
a direct, as they have an appropriate, refeience to sla
very. “Domestic instituttons” are limited to the family.
‘I he relation between master and slave and a few others
are “domestic institutions of a political character. Be
sides, there was no question then before Congress, nor
indeed has there since been any serious question before
the people of Kansas <>r the country,except that which
relates to the “domestic institution” of slavery.
The convention, after an angry and excited debate,
finally determined, by a majority of only two, to submit
tlie question of slavery to the people, though, at the last,
forty-three of the fifty delegates prsent affixed their
signatures to the constitution.
A large majority of the convention were in favor of
establishing slavery in Kansas. They accordingly in
serted an article in the constitution tor the puipose, sim
ilar in form to those which hf.d been adopted by other
territorial conventions, in the schedule, however, pro
viding lor the transition from a territorial to a State
government, the question has been fairly and explicitly
referred to the people, whether they will have a consti
tution “with or without slavery.” it declares that , be
fore the constitution adopted by the convention “shall
be sent to < ongrese for admission into the Union as a
State,” an election shall be held to decide this question,
at which ail the while male inhabitants of the Territory
above the age of tweuty-orie are entitled to vote They
are to vote by ballot; and the “ballots cast at said elec
tion shall be indorsed ‘constitution with slavery,* and
‘constitution with no slavery.’ ” If there be a majority
in favor of the “constitution with slavery,” then it is
transmuted to Congress by the president of the conven
tion in its original form If on the contrary, there shall
be a majority in favor of the “constitution with no sla
very,” “then the article providing for slavery shall be
stricken from the constitution by the president of this
convention ;** and it is expressly declared that “no sla
very shall exist in the State of Kansas, except that the
right of property in Haves now in the Territory shall
in no manner beinterterred with;” and in that event it
in made his duty to have the constitution thus ratified
transmitted to the Congress of the United States for the
admission of the State into the Union.
At this election every citizen will have an opportu
nity of expressing his opinion by his vote “whether
Kansas shall be received into the Union with or with
out slavery,” and thus this exciting question may he
peacefully settled iu the very mode required by the or
ganic law. The election will he held under legitimate
authority ; and if any portion of the inhabitants shall
refuse to vote, a fair opportunity to do so having been
presented, this will be their own voluntary act, and they
alone will be responsible for the consequences.
Whether Kansas shall be a free or a slave State must
eventually, under some authority, be decided by an
election; and the question can never be more clearly
or distinctly presented to the people than it is at the
present moment. Should this opportunity be rejected,
he may he involved for >ears in domestic discoid, and’
possibly in civil war, before she can again make up the
issue now so fortunately tendered, and again reach the
point she has already attained.
Kansas has for some years occupied too much ol the
public attention. It is high time this should Ire direct
ed to far more important objects. When once adrm -
ted into the Union, whether with or without slavery,
the excitement beyond her own limits will speedily pass
away, and she will then, for the first time be left, as she
ought to have been long since, to manage her own af
fairs in her own way if her Coustiuuimi on the sub
ject of slavery, or on any other subject, he displeasing
to a majority of the people, no human power cau pre
vent them front changing it within a brief period Un
der these circumstances, it may well be questioned
whether the peace and quiet of the whole country are
not ot greater importance than the mere temporary tri
umph of either of the political parties in Kansas
Should the constitution without slavery be adopted
by the votes of the majority, the rights of property in
slaves now* in the Territory are reserved. The number
of these is very small ; but oven if it were greater the
provision would be equally jui and reasonable. These
slaves were brought into the Territory under the Con •
ablution of the United States, and are now the proper
ty of their masters This point has at length been fi
nally decided by the highest judicial tribunal of the
country—and this upon the p ain principle that when a
confederacy of Sovereign Stales acquire anew Terri
tory at their joint expense, both equality and justice de
mand that the citizens of one and all of them shall
have the right to take into it whatsoever is recogn.zed
as property by the common constitution. To have
summarily confiscated the property in slftves already in
the Territory, would have been an act ol gross injus ice,
and contrary to the practice, of the older States of the
Union which have abolished slavery.
UTAH.
A Territorial government was established fur Utah by
act of Coug.ess, approved the 9th September, 1850, and
the Constitution and laws ol the United States were
thereby extended over't “so far as the same, or any
provisions thereof, shall be applicable.” This act pro
vided for the appointment by the President, by and with
the advice and consent of the Senate, of a Governor,
who was to be ex officio superintendent of Indian af
fairs, a secretary, three judges of the Supreme Court, a
marshal, arid a district attorney. Subsequent acts pro
vided for the appointment of officers necessary
tend our land and our Indian system over the Territory.
Brigham Young was appointed the first Governor on
the 20ih September, 1850, and has held the office ever
since. Whilst Gov. Young has been both Governor
and Superintendent of Indian affairs throughout this
period, he has been at the same time the head of the
Church called the Latter Day Saints, and professes
to govern its members and dispose of their property by
direct inspiration and authority front the Almighty.—
His power has been, therefore, absolute over both
Church and State.
The peopled Utah, almost exclusively, belong to
this Church ; and beheving with a fanatical spirit that
he is Governor of the Territory by Divine appointment,
they obey his commands as if these were direct revela
tions front Heaven If, therefore, he chooses that his
Government shall come into collision with the Govern
ment of the United States, the members of the Mor
mon ch"urch will yield implicit obedience to his will.—
Unfortunately, existing facts leave but little doubt that
such is his determination. Without entering upon a
minute history and occurrences, it is sufficient to say that
all the officers of the United States, judicial and exec
utive, with the single exception ol two Indian agents,
have found it necessary for their own personal safety to
withdraw from the Territory, and there no longer re
mains any government in Utah but the despotism of
Brigham Young This being thecondition ot affairs in
the Territory, I could not mistake the path of duty.—
As Chief Executive Magistrate, 1 was bound to restore
the supremacy of the Constitution and laws within its
limits. In order to effect this purpose I appointed a
new Governor and other Federal officers for Utah, and
sent with them a military force for their protection, and
to aid as a posse comitatus, in case of need, m the ex
ecution of the laws.
With the religious opinions of the Mormons, as long
as they remained mere opinions, however deplorable in
themselves, and revolting to the moral and religous
seotiments ot all Christendom, I had no right to inter
fere. Actions alone when in violation of the Con
stitution and laws of the United States, become the le
gitimate subjects lor the jurisdiction of the civil magis
trate. My instructions to Governor Cumming have
therefore been framed in strict accordance with these
principles. At their date a hope was indulged that no
necessity might exist for employing the military in re
storing and maintaining the authority of the law, but
this hope has now vanished. Governor Young has,
v proclamation, declared his determination to main-
[TERMS, $2 00 IN ADVANCE
tain his power by force, and has already committed
acts of hostility against the United States. Unless he
retraces hi? steps, the Territory of Utah will be in a
state of open rebellion. He has committed these acts
of hostility, notwithstanding Major Van Vliet, an offi
cer of the army, sent to Utah by the commanding gen
eral to purchase provisions for the troops, had given
him the strongest assurance of the peaceful intentions
ot the Government, and that the troops would only be
employed as a posse comitatus when called on by the
civil authority loaid in the execution of the laws.
1 here is reason to believe that Governor Younghaa
Jong contemplated this result. He knows that the con
tinuance of his despotic power depends upon the ex
clusion ol ail settlers from the Territory, except those
who will acknowledge hi? divine mission and implicit
ly obey his will ; and that an enlightened public opin
ion there would soon prostrate institutions at war with
the laws both of God and man. He has, therelore, for
several year?, in order to maintain his independence,
been industriously employed in collecting and fabricat
ing arms and munitions of war, and in disciplining the
Mormons for military service. As superintendent of
Indian affairs he has had an opportunity of tampering
with the Indian tribes, and exciting their hostile feel
ings against the United States. This, according to our
information, he has accomplished in regard to some of
these tribes, while others have remained true to their
allegiance, and have communicated his intrigues to our
Indian agents. He ha? laid in a store of provisions for
three years, which, in case of necessity, a? he informed
Major Van Vliet, he will conceal, “ard then take to
the mountains, and bid defiance to all the powers of
the (^overnmeut.”
A great part of all this may be idle boasting; but yet
no wise Government will lightly estimate the efforts
which may be inspired by such frenzied tanaticism as
exists anioug the Mormons iu Utah. This is the first
rebellion winch has existed in our Territories; and hu
manity itselt requires that we should put it down in such
a manner that it shall be the last To trifle with it
would be to encourage it and to render it formidable.
We ought to go there with such an imposing force as to
convince these deluded people that resistance would be
vain, and thus spare the effusion of blood. We can in
this manner best convince them that we are their friends
not their enemies In order to accomplish thi? object
it will be necessary, according to the estimate ol the
War Department, to raise four additional regiments; and
thi? I earnestly recommend to Congress. At the pres
ent moment of depression in the revenues of the coun
try, I am sorry to he obliged to recommend such u
measure ; but 1 teel confident of the support of Con*
gres?, cost what it may, in suppressing the insurrection
and in re-tormg and m mtainmg the sovereignty ol the
Constitution and laws over the ‘Territory o’ Utao.
I recommend to Congress the establishment of a
I erritonal Government over Ar.zoua, incorporating
with it such portions of New Mexico as they may deem
expedient. 1 need scarcely adduce arguments iu sup
port ot tlii? rec mmeiidation. We are hound to pro
tect the fives and the property of our citizen? inhabiting
Arizona, and these aie now without any efficient pro
tection. Their present number is already considerable,
and is rapidly increasing, notwithstanding the disad
vantage© under which they labor Besides, the propos
ed Territory ss hefeved to be neb in mineral and agri
cultural resource©, especially in ©fiver and copper. Ihe
•nails ot the United Slate© to California are now carried
over it throughout its wh- le extent and this route is
known io be the nearest, and believed to be the beat to
the Pacific-
PACIFIC RAIL ROAD
Long experience has convinced me that a strict con
struction ol the powers gran ed to Congre © is the only
•rue, as well as the only sale, theory of theCon.-titution.
Whilst this principle shall guide my public conduct, I
consider it clear that under the war m.tki-g power,
Congress may appropriate money for the consiructioo
of a military road through the Territories of the United
States, when this is absolutely necessary for t e de
fense ot any ol the State? agam.-i foreign invasion The
Constitution has conferred upon CoDgress power “to
declare war,” “to raise and support armies,” “to pro
vide and maintain a navy.” and “to call forth the mili
tia to repel invasions.” These high sovereign powers
necessarily involve important and responsible public du
ties, and among them iheie is none so < acred and so
imperative a? that of preserving our soil from the inva
sion ol a foreign enemy. The Constitution has, there
fore, left nothing ou this point to construction, “hut ex
pressly requires that “the United States shall protect
each of them (the Slates) against invasion ” Now, if
a military road over our own Territories be indispen
sably necessary to enable us to meet and repel the inva
der, it follows, as a necessary consequence, not only
that we possess the power, hut it is our imperative duty
to construct such a road- It would be an absurdity to
invest a Government with the unlimited power to make
and conduct war, and at the same time deny to it the
only means of reaching and defeating the enemy at
the frontier. Without such a road it is evident we can
not “protect” California and our Pacific possessions
“against invasion ” We cannot by any other means
transport men and munitions of war from the Atlantic
States in sufficient tune successfully to defend these re
mote and distant portions of the Republic.
Experience has proved that the route? across the isth
mus of Centra! America are at best but a very uncertain
and unreliable mode of communication. Bat even if
this weie not the case, they would at once be closed
against us in the event of war with a naval Power so
much stronger than our own as to enable it to blockade
the ports at either end of these routes. After all,
therefore, we can only rely on a military road through
our own Territories ; and ever since the origin of the
Government < ongress has been in the practice of ap
propriating money from the public Treasury for the con
struction of such roads
The difficulties and expense of constructing a
military Railroad to connect our Atlantic and Pa
cific States have been greatly exaggerated. The
distance on the Arizona route, near the 32d paral
lel of north latitude, between the western bounda
ary of Texas on the Rio Grande, and the eastern
boundary of California on the Colorado, from the
the best explorations within our knowledge, does
not exceed 470 miles, and the face of the country
is, in the main, favorable. For obvious reasons,
the Government ought not to undertake the work
itself, by means of its own agents. This ought to
be committed to other agencies, which Congress
might assist, either by grants of land or money, or
by both, upon such terms as they nlay deem most
beneficial for the country. Provision might thus
he made not only for the safe, rapid, and economi
cal transportation of troops aad munitions of war,
hut also of the public mails. The commercial in
terests of the whole country, both East and West,
would be greatiy promoted by such a road ; and.
above ali.il would be a powerful additional bond of
union. And although advantages of this kind,
whether postal, commercial, or political, cannot
confer constitutional power, yet they may furnish
auxiliary arguments in favor of expediting a work
which, in my judgment, is clearly embraced in the
war-making power.
For these reasons I commend to the friendly con
sideration of Congress the subject of the Pacific
Railroad, without finally committing myself to any
particular route.
TREASURY AND REVENUES.
The Report of the Secretary of the Treasury will
furnish a detailed statement of the condition of the
public finances and of the respective branches of
the public service devolved upon that Department
of the Government. By this report it appears that
the amount of revenue received from all sources
into the Treasury during the fical year ending the
30th June, 1857, wa5568,631,513 67, which amount,
with the balance of $19,901,325 45, remaining in
the Treasury at the commencement of the year,
made an aggregate for the service of the year of
$88,532,839 12.
The public expenditures for the fiscal year end
ing 30th June, 1857, amounted to $70,822,724 85, of
which $5,943,896 91 were applied to the redemp
tion of the public debt, including interest and pre
mium, leaving in the Treasury, at the commence
ment of the present fiscal year on the Ist of July,
1857, $17,710,114 27.
The receipts into the Treasury for the first quar
ter of the present fiscal year, commencing Ist of
July, 1657. were $20,929,819 81, and the estimated
receipts of” the remainingthree-quarters to the 30th
of June, 1856. are $36,750,000, making, with the
balance before staled, an aggregate of $75,389,-
934 08, for the service of the present fiscal year.
The actual expenditures during the first quarter
of the present fiscal year were $23,714,528 37 of
which $3,695,232 39 were applied to the redemp
tion of the public debt, including interest and pre
mium. The probable expenditure? of the remain
ing three quarters, to 30th June. 1858. are $51,248,-
530 04, including interest on the public debt, ina
king an aggregate of $74,963,058 41. leaving an es
timated balance in the Treasury at the close of the
present fiscal year of $426,675 67.
The amount oi the public debt at the commence
ment of the present fiscal year was twenty-nine
million sixty thousand three hundred and eighty
six dollars and ninety cents, ($29.060,?86 90. r
The amount redeemed since the Ist of July was
three million eight hundred and ninety-five thous?
and two hundred and thirty?two dollars and thirty
nine cents, ($3,895,232 39.) leaving a balance unre
deemed at this time of twenty-five millions one
hundred and sixty-five thousand one hundred and
fifty?four dollars and fiftyone cents, ($25,165,154,?
51.)
The amount of estimated expenditures for the
remaining three quarters of the present fiscal year
will, in ail probability, be increased from the caus
es set forth in the report ot the Secretary. Fis
suggestion, therefore, that authority should be
en to supply any temporary deficiency by the issue
of a limited amount of Treasury notes, is approved,
and l accordingly recommend the passage of such
a law.
As stated in the report of the Secretary, the tar
iff of March 3, 1857, has been in operation for so
short a period of time, and under circumstances so
unfavorable to a just development of its results
as a revenue measure, and I should regard it
as inexpedient, at least for the present, to undertake
its revision.
See Fourth Page .
Number 49