Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

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