Newspaper Page Text
VOLUME 1.
The State Press
IS PUBLISHED EVERY THURSDAY
BY
EDWIN C. ROWLAND,
Proprietor;
E. C. & A. M. ROWLAND,
Editors.
SUBSCRIPTION:
Two Dollars per annum in advance, or Three Dol
lars at the end of the year.
ADVERTISING S
One Dollar per Square for the first insertion, and
Fifty cents for each subsequent insertion. Liberal
arrangements will be made with those who advertise
by the year.
JOB WORK.
Having a new and beautiful supply of job type and
one of Gordon's celebrated Power Presses, we are
prepared to do any kind of work in this line with
neatness, accuracy and dispatch, at moderate prices.
PRESIDENT'S MESSAGE.
Fellow Citizene of the Senate and Haute of
Rep reeen tatirze:
In obedience to the command of the Consti
tution, it lias now bocome my duty to “give i
to Congress information of the state of the
Union, and recommend to their consideration
such measures’’ as 1 judge to be “necessary
and expedient”
But first., and above all, our thanks arc due
to Almighty God tor the numerous benefits
which He has bestowed upon this people; and
our united prayers ought to ascend to Him
that He would continue to bless our great Re
public in time to come as He has blessed it in
time past. Since the adjournment of the last
Congress our constituents have enjoyed an un
usual degree of health. The earth lias yielded
her fruits abundantly, and has bountifully re
warded the toil of the husbandman. Our great
staples have commanded high prices, and, up
till within a brief period, our manufacturing,
mineral, and mechanical occupations have large
ly partaken of the general prosterity. We
have possessed all the material wealth in rich
abundance, and yet, notwithstanding all these
advantages, our country, in its monetary inter
ests, is at the present moment in a deplorable
condition. In the midst of unsurpassed plenty
in all the productions of agriculture, and in ail
the elements of national wealth, we find our
manufactures suspended, our public works re
tarded, our private enterprises of different kinds
abandoned and thousands of useful laborers
thrown out of employment, and reduced 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 for the current fiscal year are very large
in amount.
Under these circumstances a loan may be re
quired before the close of your present session
bit this, although deeply to be regretted, i
would prove to be only a slight misfortune '
when compared with the suffering and distress
prevailing among the people. With this the'
government cannot fail deeply to sympathize,
though it may be without the power to extend
relief.
CUiIBEXI V ANO BANKS.
It is our duty to enquire what has produced
such unfortunate results, and whether their
recurrence can be prevented? In all former
revulsions the blame might have been fairly at
tributed to a variety of co-operating causes;
but not so upon the present occasion. It is
apparent that our existing misfortunes have
proceeded solely from our extravagant ami vic
ious system of paper currency and bank cred
its, exciting the people to u ild speculations and
gambling in stocks. These revulsions must
continue to recur at successive intervals so
long as the amount of paper currency and bank
loans and discount of the country shall lie left
to the discretion of fourteen hundred irrespon
sible banking institutions, w hich from the very
law of their nature w ill consult the interest of
the stockholders rather than the public w elfare.
The framers of the Constitution, when they
gave to Congress the power "to coin money
and to regulate the value thereof,” and pro
hibited the States from coining money, emit
ting bills of credit, or making anything but
gold and silver coin a tender in payment ot’
debts, supposed they had protected the peo
ple against the evils of an excessive and irre
deemable paper currency. They are not re
sponsible tor the existing anomaly that a gov
ernment endowed w ith the sovereign attribute
of coining money and regulating the value
thereof, should have no power to prevent oth
ers from driving thiscoin out of the country and
filling up the channels of circulation with pa
per which does not represent gold and silver.
It i* one of the highest and most responsible
dutien 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 w ants of internal trade
and foreign exchanges. If this be either great
ly above or greatly below the proper standard,
the marketable value of every man's property
is increased or diminished in tin- same propor
tion, and injustice to individuals, as well as in
calculable evils to the community are the con
sequence.
Unfortunately, under the construction of
the Federal Constitution, which lias now pre
vailed Un> long to be changed, this important
and delicate duty has been disserved from the
coining power, and virtually transferred to
more than fourteen hundred State banks, act
ing independently of each other, and regulating
their paper issues almost exclusively, by a re
gard to the present interest of their stockhold
ers. Exercising the sovereign power of pro
viding a paper currency, instead of coin, for the
country, the first duty which these banks owe
to the public, is to keep in their vaults a suffi
cient amount of gold and silver to insure the
convertibility of their notes into coin at all
times and under all circumstance 1 N o bank
ought ever to be chartered without such re
strictions on its business as to secure this re
sult. All other restrictions are comparatively
vain. This is the only true touchstone, the on
ly efficient, regulator of a paper currency—the
only one which can guard the public against
over issue* and bank suspensions. As a eulla
teral and eventual security, it is doubtless wise,
mid in a cases ought to be required, that banks
shall hold an amount of United States securi
ties equal to their notes in circulation, and
pledged tor their redemption. This, however,
furnishes no adequate security against over
issues. On the contrary, it may be perverted
to inflate the currency. Indeed it is possible
by this means to convert all the debts of the
United Sfotes apd State government into bunk
notes, withoqt reference to tl|p specie required
to redeem them. However valqabje these se
curities may be in themselves, they cgni|ot be
converted into gold and silver at the moment
of pressure, as our exjierience teaches, in suffi
cient time to prevent bank suspensions and the
depreciation of bank uufos, la England, which
is to a considerable extent a paper-money
country, though vastly behind our own in tfii's
respect, it was deeined advisable, anterior to
the act of Parliament of 1644, which w isely
separated the issue of notes from the banking
department, for the Bank of England always
State
to keep on hand gold and silver equal to one
third of its combined circulation and deposites.
If this proportion was no more than sufficient
to secure the convertibility of its notes, with
the whole of Great Britain and to some ex
tent the continent of Europe, as afield for its
circulation, rendering it almost impossible that
a sudden and immediate, run to a dangerous
amount shoul be made upon it, the same pro
portion would certainly be insufficient under
our bankingsystem. Each of ourfourteen hun
dred bunks has but a limited circumference for
its circulation, and in the course of a very few
days the depositors and note-holders might de
mand from such a bank a sufficient amount in
specie to compel it to suspend, even although
it bad coin in its vaults equal to one-third of
its immediate liabilities. And yet I aiu not
aware, with the exception of the banks of
Louisiana, that any State bank throughout the
Union lias been required by its charter to keep
this or any other proportion of gold and silver
compared with the amount of its combined cir
culation and deposites. What has been the
consequence ?
In a recent report made by the Treasury
department on the condition of the banks
throughout the different States, according to
returns dated nearest to January, 1857, the
aggregate amount of actual specie in their
vaults is $58,349,838 of their circulation $214,-
778,822, and of their deposites $230,351,352,
Thus it appears that these banks in the aggre
gate have considerably less than one dollar in
seven of gold and silver, compared with their
circulation and deposits. It was palpable,
therefore, that the very first pressure must drive
them to suspension, and deprive the people of
a controvertible currency with all its disas
trous consequences. 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 li
abilities would have driven them into insolven
cy. And this is the condition of the banks,
notwithstanding that four hundred millions of
gold from California have flowed in upon us
within the last eight years, and the tide still
continues to flow ; indeed such has been the
extravagance ot bank credits that the banks
now hold a considerably less amount of specie,
either in proportion to their capital or to their
circulation and deposits combined, than they
did before the discovery ot gold in California.
Whilst in the year 1848 their specie in propor
tion 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 dollars
and thirty-three cents of their capital. In the
year 1846 the specie was equal, within a very
small fraction, to one dollar in five to their cir
culation and deposites; in 1858 it is not equal
to one dollar in seven and a half of their circu
lation and deposits.
From this statement it is easy to account for
our financial history for the last forty v "ars.—
It has been a history of extravagant expansions
in the business of the country, followed by
ruinous contractions. At successive intervals
the best and most enterprising men have been
tempted to their ruin by excessive bank loans
of mere paper credit exciting them to extrava
gant importations of foreign goods, wild specu
lations. and ruinous and demoralizing 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 con
tract their loans and their issues; and at last,
in the hour of distress, w hen their assistance is
most needed, they and their debtors together
sink into insolvency.
It is this paper system of extravagant expul
sion, raising the nominal price of every article
far beyond its real value, when compared w ith
the cost of similar articles in countries whose!
circulation is wisely regulated, which has pre
vented us from competing in our own markets
with foreign manufacturers, has produced ex
travagant importations, has counteracted the
effect of the large incidental protection afford
ed 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
cotton, iron and woolen fabrics—w ould not on
ly 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
financial condition, we may yet indulge in
bright hopes for the future. No other nation I
has ever existed that could have endured such
violent expansions and contractions of paper
credits without lasting injury ; yet the buoyan
cy of youth, the energies of our population, and
the spirit which never quails before difficulties,
w ill enable us soon to recover from our present
financial embarrassments, and may even oeca
sion ussjH'edily to forget the lesson which they
have taught.
In the meantime, it is the duty of the Gov
ernment, by all proper means within its power,
to aid in alleviating the sufferings of the people
occasioned by the suspension ot the banks, and
to provide against a recurrence of the same ca
lamity.
Unfortunately, in either asjiect of the case,
it ean do but little. Thanksto the independent
treasury, the Government has not suspended
payment, as it was compelled to do by the fail
ure of the banks in 1837. It will continue to
discharge its liabilities to the people in gold
and silver. Its disbursements in coin w ill pass
into circulation, and materially assist in restor
ing a sound currency. From its high credit,
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.
1 have, therefore, determined that whilst no
useful government works already in progress
shall be suspended, new’ works, not already
commenced, will be postponed, if this can be
done without injury to the country. Thosene
cessary for its defence shall proceed as though
there had been ..o crisis in our money af
fairs.
But the federal government cannot do much
to provide against a recurrence of existing
evils. Even if insurmountable objections did
not exist against the creation of a National
Bank, this would furnish no adequate prevent
tive security. The history of the last Bank of
the I nitvd Mates abundantly proves the truth
of this assertion. Such a bank eould not. if it ,
would, regulate the issues and credits of four
teen hundred State banks, in such a manner as
to prevent the ruinous expansions and contrac
tions in our curret. y, which afflicted the coun
try throughout the existence of the lute bank,
or secure us against further suspensions. In
1825, an effort was made by the Bank of Eng
land tocurtail the issues of the country banks. !
under the most favorable circumstances. Ibe
paper currency had been expanded to a ruinous
extent, and the bank put forth all its power to
contract it, in order to reduce prices, and re
store the equilibrium of the foreign exchanges.
It accordingly commenced a system of curtail
ment of its loans and issues, hi the vain hope
that the joint stock and private banks of the
kingdom would be eumpctlcd to follow its ex
ample. It found, however, that ns it contract
ed, (hey expanded, and at the end of the pro
cess. to employ the language of a very high of
ficial authority, “whatever reduction of the pa
per circulation was effected by the Bank of
MACON, GEORGIA, THURSDAY, DECEMBER 17, 1857.
England (in 1825) was more than made up by
the issues of the country 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 currency, must be often in direct conflict
with the immediate interest of its stockholders.
If we expect one agent to restrain or control
another, their interests must, at least in some
degree, be antagonistic. 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 cur
rency, accommodate their favorites and friends
with loans, and to declare large dividends.
Such has been our experience in regard to the
last bank.
After all. we must mainly rely upon the pat
riotism and wisdom of the States for the pre
vention and redress of the evil. If they will
afford us a r >al specie basis for our paper cir
culation, by increasing 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 enact
ment, which nothing ean arrest, that the mo
ment they suspend they shall go into liquida
tion, I believe that such provisions, with a
weekly publication by each bank of a state
ment of its condition, w ould go far to secure
us against future suspensions of specie pay
ments.
Congress, in my opinion, possesses the pow -
er to pass a uniform bankrupt law applicable
to all banking institutions throughout the Uni
ted States, and I strongly recommend its exer
cise. This would make it the irreversible or
ganic law of each bank’s existence, that a sus
pension of specie payments shall produce its
civil death. The instinct of self-prerervation
would then compel it to perform its duties in
such a manner as to escape the penalty and
preserve its life.
The existence of banks, and the circulation
of bank paper are so identified w ith the habits
of our people, that they cannot at this day be
suddenly abolished w ithout much immediate
injury to the country. If we could confine
them to their appropriate sphere and prevent
them from administering to the spirit of wild
and reckless speculation by extravagant loans
and issues, they might be continued with ad
vantage to the public.
But this I say, after long and much reflec
tion; if experience shall prove it to be impos
sible to enjoy the facilities which well regula
ted banks might afford, without at the same
time suffering the calamities w hich 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 func
tions of banks of deposit and discount.
RELATIONS WITH FOIIEIGN GOVEIINMKSTS.
Our relations w ith foreign governments are,
upon the whole, in a satisfactory condition.
The diplomatic difficulties which existed be
tween the government of the United States and
that of Great Britain at the adjournment of the
last Congress have been happily terminated by
the appointment of a British ministcb to this
country, w bo has been cordially received.
Whilst it is greatly to the interest, as 1 am
convinced it is the sincere desire of the govern
ments and people of the two countries to be on
terms of intimate friendship w ith each other,
it has been our misfortune almost always to
have had some irritating, if not dangerous, out
standing question w ith Great Britain.
Since the origin of the government we have
been employed in negotiation treaties with that
power, and afterwards ill discussing their true
intent and meaning. In this respect, the con
vention of April 19. 1850. commonly called the
Clayton and Bulwer treaty, has been the most
unfortunate of all; because the two govern
ments place directly opposite and contradicto
ry constructions upon its first and most impor
tant article. Whilst, in the United States, we
believed that this treaty would place both pow
ers upon an exact equality by the stipulations
that neither will ever “occupy, or fortify, or
colonize, or assume, or exercise any dominion,”
over any part of Central America, it is contend
ed by the British Government that the true
construction of this language has left them in
the rightful possession 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 of
the United States of the right of Great Britain,
either as owner or protector, to the whole ex
tensive coasts of Central America, sweeping
round from the Rio llonde to the port and har
bor of San Juan de Nicaragua, together with
the adjacent Bay Islands, except the compara
tively small portion of this between the Sars
toon and Cape Honduras.
According to their construction, the treaty
does no more than simply prohibit them from
extending their possessions in Central Ameri
ca beyond the present limits. It is not too
much to assert, that it in the U nited States the
treaty had been considered susceptible of such
a construction, it never w ould have been ne
gotiated under the authority of the President,
nor would it have received the approbation of
the Senate. The universal conviction in the
United States was. that when our government
consented to violate its traditional and time
honored policy, and to stipulate with a foreign
government never to occupy territory in the
Central American portion of our own conti
nent, the consideration tor this sacrifice was
that Great Britain should, in this respect at
least, be placed in the same position w ith our
selves. Whilst we have no right to doubt the
sincerity of the British government 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 lute 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 at London on the
17th of October, 1856, and was submitted by
the I’resident to the Senate on the following
loth of December. W hetlier this treaty, either
■ in its original or amended form, w ould have
accomplished the object intended w ithout giv
ing birth to new and embarrassing complica
tions between the two governments, may. per
haps. lie well questioned. Certain it is. how
ever, it was rendered much less objectionable
by the different amendments made to it by the
Senate. The treaty, as amended, was ratified
by me on the 12th of March. 1857, and was
transmitted to London for ratification by the
British Government. That Government ex
pressed its willingness to concur in all the
amendments made by the Senate, w ith the sin
gle exception of the clause relating to Ruatan
mid the other islands in the Bay of Honduras.
Die article in the original treaty, as submitted
to the Senate, after reciting that these islands
and tlieir inhabitants, " having been by a con
vention bearing date the 27th day of August.
1856, between her Britanic Majesty and the
Republic of Honduras, constituted and declared
# free Territory under the sovereignty of the
said Republie of Honduras," stipulated that
“ the two contracting parties do hereby mu
tually engage to recognize and respect, in ail
’ future time, the independence and rights of the
said free Territory as a part of the Republic of
i Honduras.”
Upon an examination of the convention be
tween Great Britain and Honduras of the 27th
August, 1856. it was found that, w liilst declar
ing the Bay Islands to be a “ free territory un
der the sovereignty of the Republic of Hondu
ras,” it deprived that Republic of rights with
out which its sovereignty over them could
scarcely be said to exist. It divided them from
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
government of Honduras of the taxing power
in every form, and exempted the people of the
islands from the |wrtoru».M* of military duty,
I except for tlieir own exclusive defence. It al
; so prohibited that Republic from erecting for
tifications upon them for their own protection
—thus leaving them open to invasion from any
quarter; and. finally, it provided "that slavery
i shall not, at any time hereafter, be permitted
to exist therein.”
Had Honduras ratified this convention, she
would have ratified the establishment of a State
substantially independent within her limits,
and a State at all times subject to British influ
ence and control. Moreover, iiad the United
States ratified the treaty with Great Britain in
its original form, we should have been bound
“to recognise and respect in all future time”
these stipulations to the prejudice of Honduras.
Being in direct opposition to the spirit 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 Honduras to these islands in the following
language: “The two contracting parties do
hereby mutually engage to recognize and re
spect the islands of Ruatan, Conaco, Utila, Bar
• baretta. Helena and Morat,. situate in the Bay
of Honduras, and off’ the coast of the republic
of Honduras, as under the sovereignty and as
part of the said republic ot Honduras."
Great Britain rejected this amendment, as
signing as the only reason, that the ratifications
I of the convention of the 27th August. 185 G, be
-1 tween her and Honduras, hail not been "ex
changed, owing to the hesitation of that gov
ernment.” Had this been done, it is stated
, that "her Majesty’s government would have
had little difficulty in agreeing to the mollifica
tion projiosed 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 circum
stances of the exchange of the ratifications of
the British convention with Honduras prior in
point ot time to the ratification of our treaty
with Great Britain would “in effect.” have had
"the same signification as the original word
ing,” and thus have nullified the amendment of
the Scutate, may well be doubted. It is, per
haps, fortunate that the question has never
arisen.
But the British government, immediately af
ter rejecting the treaty as amended, proposed
to cuter into a new treaty with the United
; States, similarin all respects to the treaty which
they had just refused to ratify, if the United
States would consent to add to the Senate’s
clear and qualified recognition of the sovereign
ty of Honduras over the Bay Islands the fol- '
lowing conditional stipulation : “ Whenever
and so soon as the Republic of Honduras shall
have concluded and ratified a treaty w ith Great
Britain, by w hich Great Britain shall have ce- ■
ded, and the Republic of Honduras shall have
accepted, the said islands, subject to the pro- i
visions and conditions contained in such treaty.” I
This proposition was, of course, rejected. 1
Arter the Senate had refused to recognize the
British convention with Honduras ot the 27th
of August, 1856, with full knowledge of its
contents, it was impossible for me, necessarily
ignorant of “the pi o visions and conditions”
which might be contained in a future conven
tion between the same parties, to sanction them
in advance.
The fact is, that when two nations, like Great
Britain and the United States, mutually desi
rous. 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 understand in sense directly
; opposite, the wisest course is to abrogate such I
a treaty by mutual consent, and to commence
anew. Had this been done promptly, all diffi-
I culties in Central America would most proba-
I bly ere this have been adjusted to the satisfac
tion of both parties. The time spent in discus
sing the meaning of the Clayton and Bulwer
treaty would have been devoted to this praise
worthy purpose, and the task would have been
the more easily accomplished, because the in
terest of the two countries in Central America
is identical, being confined to securing safe
transits over all the routes across the isthmus.
Whilst entertaining these sentiments, I shall
’ nevertheless not refuse to contribute to any
reasonable adjustment of the Central American
questions which is not practically inconsistant
with the American interpretation of the treaty.
Overtures tor this purpose have been recently
made by the British government in a friendly
spirit, which I cordially reciprocate; but wheth
! er this renewed effort will result in success, 1
am not yet prepared to express an opinion. A
brief period will determine.
With France our ancient relations of friend
ship still continue to exist. The French gov-
I eminent have in several recent instances, which
need not be enumerated, evinced a spirit of
good will and kindness towards our country,
which I heartily reciprocate. It is, notwith
standing, much to be regretted thut two na
tions w hose productions are of such a character
as to invite the most extensive exchanges and
freest commercial intercourse, should continue
to enforce ancient and obsolete restrictions of
trade against each other. Our commercial
treaty with France is in this respect an excep
tion from our treaties with all other commercial
nations. It jealously levies discriminating du
ties both on tonnage and on articles, the growth,
produce, or manufacture of the one country,
w hen arriving in vessels belonging to the other.
More than forty years ago, on the 3d March,
1815 Congress passed an act offering to nil na
tions to admit their vessels laden w ith their
national productions into the ports of the Uni
. ted States upon the same terms with our own
vessels, provided they would reciprocate to us
siluiliar advantages. This act confined the
reciprocity to the productions of the respec
tive foreign nutions who might enter into the
proposed arrangement with the United States.
The act of May 24, 1828, removed this restric
tion, and offered a similar reciprocity to all
such vessels without reference to the origin of
their cargoes. Upon these principles, our com
mercial treaties and arrangements have l>een
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 present Emperor, as well as his predeces
sors. have never failed, when the occasion of
fered, to manifest their gisal will to our coun
try; and their friendship has always been ap
preciated by the government and |>eople of the
United States.
With all other European governments, ex
cept thut of Spain, our relations are as peaceful
as we could desire. I regret to say that no
progress whatever has been made since the ad
journment of Congress, towards the settlement
of any of the numerous claims of our citizens
against the Spanish government. Besides, the
outrage committed on our flag by the Spanish
war frigate Serrolana on the high sea. off the
coast of Cuba, in March, 1855, by firing into
I the American mail steamer El Dorado, and de
i tabling and searching her. remains unackuow-
■ ledged and unredressed. The general tone and
temper of the Spanish government towards that
I of the United States arc much to lie regretted.
Our present envoy extraordinary and minister
■ plenipotentiary to Madrid has asked to be re-
■ called; and it is my purpose to send out a new
minister to Spain, w ith special instructions on
all questions [lending between the two govern
ments. and with a determination to have them
' speedily and amicably adjusted, if this be pos
i silde.
In the mean time, whenever our minister
urges the just claims of our citizens on the no
tice of the Spanish government, he is met with
the objections that Congress have never made
the appropriation recommended by President
Polk in his annual message of December, 1347,
“to be paid to the Spanish government for the
purpose of distribution among the claimants in
the Armistead case." A similar recommenda
' tion was made by my immediate predecessor
in the message of December, 1853 ; and entire
ly concurring with both in the opinion that
this indemnity is justly due under the treaty
with Spain of the 27th of October, 1795, 1
earnestly recommend such an appropriation to
the favorable consideration of Congress.
A treaty of friendship and commerce was
concluded at Constantinople on the 13th De
cember, 185 G, between the United States and
Persia, the ratifications of which were exchang
ed at Constantinople on the 13th June, 1857,
and thy treaty was proclaimed by the Presi
dent on the 18th August, 1857. This treaty
it is believed, will prove beneficial to Ameri
can commerce. The Shah has manifested an
earnest disposition to cultivate friendly rela
tions with our country, and has expressed a
strong wish that we should lie represented at
Teheran by a minister plenipotentiary, and 1
recommend that an appropriation be made for
this purpose.
Recent occurrences in China have been un
favorable to a revision of’the treaty with that
empire of the 3rd of July, 1844, with a view
to the security and extension of our commerce.
The 24th article of this treaty stipulated for a
revision of it in case experience should prove
this to be requisite: “in which case the two
governments will, at the expiration of twelve
years from the date of said convention, treat
amicably concerning the same, by means of
suitable persons appointed to condui t such ne
gotiations.” These twelve years expired on the
3rd of July. 1856 ; but long before that period'
it was ascertained that important changes in
the treaty were necessary ; and several fruit
less attempts were made by the commissioners
of the United States to effect these changes.
! Another effort was about to be made for the
same purpose by onr commissioner in coujunc
i tion with the ministers of England and France,
but this was suspended by the occurrence of
, hostilities in the Canton river between Great
I Britain and the Chinese empire. These hos
! tilities have necessarily interrupted the trade
I of all nations with Canton, which is now in a
state of blockade, and have occasioned a serious
j loss of life and property. Meanwhile the in
surrection within the empire against the ex
isting imperial <ly nasty still continues; audit
I is difficult to anticipate what will be the result.
■ Under these circumstances, I have deemed it
advisable to appoint a distinguished citizen of
Pennsylvania envoy extraordinary and minis
ter plenipotentiary to proceed to China, und to
avail himself of any opportunity which may
offer to effect changes in the existing treaty fa
vorable to American commerce. He left the
United States for the place ofhis destination in
July last, in the war steamer Minnesota. Spe
cial ministers to China have also been appoint
ed by the governments of Great Britain and
Frame.
Whilst our ministers has been instructed to
occupy a neutral jiosition in reference to the
existing hostilities at Canton, be w ill cordially
co-operate with the British and French minis
ters in all peaceful measures to secure by treaty
stipulations those just concessions to commerce
which the nations of the w orld have a right to
expect, and which China cannot long lie per
mitted to withhold. From assurances received
1 entertain no doubt that the three ministers
w ill act in harmonious concert to obtain simi
lar commercial treaties fur each of the powers
they represent.
We cannot fail to take a deep interest in all
that concerns the welfare of the independent
republics on our own continent, as well as of
the empire of Brazil.
Our difficulties with New Granada, which a
short time since bore so threatening an aspect,
are, it is to be ho|icd, in a fair train of settle
ment, in a manner just and honorable to both
parties.
The isthmus of Central America, including
that of Panama, is the great highway between
the Atlantic and Pacific, over which a larger
port ion of the commerce of the w orld isdestin
, ed to pass. The United States are more deeply
interested than any other nation in preserving
the freedom and security of all the communica
tions across this isthmus. It is our duty, there
fore. to take care that they shall not be inter
rupted, either by invasions from our own coun
try or by wars between the Independent States
■of Central America. Under our treaty with
New Grenada, on the 12tli of December, 1846,
we are bound to guarantee the neutrality of the
Isthmus of Panama, through which the Pana
ma 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 government und
people of the United States.
Under these circumstances, I recommend to
I Congress the passage of an act authorizing the
President, in case of necessity, to employ the
land and naval forces of the United States, to
carry into effect this guarantee of neutrality
and protection. 1 also recommend similar leg
islation for the security of any other route across
the Isthmus, in w hich we may acquire un in
terest by treaty.
With the independent republics on this con
tinent, it is both our duty and our interest to
cultivate the most friendly relations. We can
never feel indifferent to their fate, und must al
ways rejoice in their prosfierity. Unfortunate
ly, both tor them and for us, our example and
advice have lost much of their influence in cou
i sequence of the lawless expeditions which have
been fitted out against some of them w ithin the
limits of our country. Nothing is better cal
; culated to retard our steady material progress,
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
independent Mate, in its relations with the
members of the great family of nations, to re
strain its people from acts of hostile aggres
sions against their citizens or subjects. The
most eminent writers on public laws do not
hesitate to denounce such hostile acts as rob
-1 bery and murder.
Weak and feeble States, like those of Cen
tral America, may not feel themselves able to
assert and vindicate their rights. The case
would be far different if expeditions were set
on foot within our own territories to make a
I private war against a powerful nation. If such
expeditions were fitted out from abroad against
any portion of our own country, to burn down
our cities, murder and plunder the people, and
usurp our government, we should call any pow
er on earth to the strictest account for not pre
venting such enormities.
walker’s EXI’KIIITION.
Ev r since the administration of General
Washington, acts of Congress have been in
force tn punish 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 wo are
at peace. The present neutrality act, of April
20th, 1818, is but little more than a collection
of pre-existing laws. Under this ai-t the Pres
ident is eni|H«wered to employ the land and
naval forces, and the militia “for the purpose
of preventing the carrying on of any such ex
pedition or enterprise, from the territories and
jurisdiction of the United States.” and tiie col
lectors of customs are authorized and required
to detain any vessel in port when there is rea- |
son to believe she is about to take part in such '
lawless enterprises.
When it wa« first rendered probable that an
attempt would be made to get up another un
lawful expedition against Nicaragua, the Secre
tary of State issued instructions to the marshals
and district attorneys, w hich were directed by
the Secretaries ot War and the Navy to the
appropriate army and navy officers, requiring i
them to be vigilant, and to use tlieir best exer- :
tions in carrying into effect the provisions of 1
the net of 1818. Notwithstanding these pre- ■
cautions, the expedition has escaped from our
shores. Such enterprises can do no possible
good to the country, but have already inflicted
much Injury both on its interests and its
character. They have prevented peaceful em
igration from the United States to the States
of Central America, which could not fail to
prove highly beneficial to all the parties
concerned. In a pecuniary po’ntof view alone '
our citizens have sustained heavy losses from ■
the seizure and closing of the tram it route by '
San Juan between the two oceans.
The leader of the recent expedition was ar- 1
rested at New Orleans, but was discharged on I
giving bail for his appearance in the insufficient ■
sum of two thousand dollars.
I commend the whole subject to the serious ;
attention of Congress, believing that our duty i
and our interest, us well as our until mil char- I
aeter, require that we sh< ul 1 attempt such ;
measures us will be effectual in restraining our
citizens from committing such outrages.
1 regret to inform you that the I’resident of
Paraguay has refused to ratify the treaty be
tween the United States and thut State us
umended by the Senate, the signature of w hieh
which was mentioned in the message of my
predecessor to Congress at the opening of its
session in December 1853. The reasons as
signed for this refusal w ill api ear in the corres
pondence herewith submitted.
It being desirable to ascertain the fitness of
the river I.a Plata ami its tributaries for navi
gation by steam, the United States steamer
W ater U itch w us sent thither for that purpose
in 1853. ibis enterprise was successfully car
ried on until February, 1855. when, whilst in
the peaceful prosecution of her voyage up the
Parana river, the steamer was tired ujiou by a 1
a Paragnun fort. The fire was returned ; but I
us the Water M itch was of small force, and not ;
designed for offensive operations, she retired !
from the conflict. The pretext upon w hidi the
attack was made wus u decree of the President
of Paraguay of October 1854, prohibiting for
eign vessels of war from navigating the rivers
of that State.
As Paraguay, however, was u the owner of
but one bank of the river of that name, the
other belonging to Correientes. a State of the
Argentine Confederation, the right of its gc -
ernnient to expect that such a decree would be i
obeyed cannot be acknowledged. Hut the !
Water Witch was not properly speaking, a,
vessel of w ar. She was a small steamer engag- 1
ed in scientific enterprise’, intended for the ud- I
vantage of commercial States generally. Un
der these circumstances, 1 am constrained to ,
consider the attack upon her as unjustifiable. ;
and as calling for satisfaction from the Parag
uayan government.
Citizens of the United States also, who were !
established in business in Paraguay, have had
tlieir property seized and taken from them,
and have otherwise been treated by theiuitbor- •
ities in an insulting and arbitrary manner,
which require redress.
A demand for these purposes w ill be made I
in a firm but conciliatory spirit. This will
the more probably be granted, if the Executive '
shall have the authority to use other means in I
the event of a refusal. This is accordingly '
recommended.
KANSAS.
It is unnecessary to state in detail the alarm .
ing condition of the Territory of Kansas at the
time of my inauguration. The opposing par
ties then stood in hostile array against each
other, and any accident might have relighted
the flames of civil war. Besides, atfhis criti
cal moment, Kansas was left without a Gov
ernor by the resignation of Governor Geary.
On the 19th of February previous, the terri
torial legislature had passed a law providing
for the election of delegates on the third Mon
day of June, to a convention to meet on the i
first Monday of September, for the purpose of
framing a Constitution, preparatory to admis
sion into the Union. This law was in themain
fair and just: and it is to be regretted that all
the qualified electors had not registered them- ■
selves 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 government by force, and to 1
establish a government of their own under the '
so-called Tiqieka Constitution. The persons
attach.*] to this revolutionary organization ab
stained from taking any part in the election.
The aet of the territorial legislature had
omitted to provide for submitting to- the peo
ple the Constitution which might be framed by
the Convention, and in the excited state of
public feeling throughout Kansas an apprehen
sion extensively prevailed that a design existed
to force upon them a Constitution in relation
to slaveay against their will. In this emergen
cy it became my duty, us it was my unques
tionable right, having in view the union of all
good citizens in support of the territorial law s,
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. Congress declared it to be “the true i
intent and meaning of this act not to legislate
slavery into any Territory or State, nor to ex- I
elude it therefrom, but to leave the people |
thereof perfectly free to form and regulate their
domestic institutions in their own way." Un
der it. Kai.-as, "when admitted as a State,”
was to lie “ received into the Union with or
w ithout slavery, as their Constitution may pre
scribe at the time of their admission.”
Did Congress mean by this language that the
delegates elected to frame a Constitution should ;
have authority finally to decide the question of
slavery, or did they intend by leaving it to the
people that the people of Kansas themselves
should decide this question by a direct vote?
On this subject 1 confess I had never entertain
ed a serious doubt, and, therefore, in my in
structions to Gov. Walker of the 28th of March
last. 1 merely said that when “aConstitution
shall bo submitted to the people of the Territo-
N EMBER 9.
ry, they must be protected in the exercise of
tlieir right of voting for or against that instru
, ment, 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 intention to interfere with the decision of
the people of Kansas, either for or against
! slavery. From tills I have always carefully
abstained. Intrusted with the duty of taking
"care that the laws be faithfully executed”
my only desire w«s that the people of Kansas
should furnish to Congress the evidence re
quired by the organic act whether for or against
, slavery ; and in this manner smooth their pas
sage into the Union. In emerging from the
' condition of territorial dependence into that of
a sovereign State, it was their duty, in my
opinion, to make known their will by the vote's
oi the majority, on the direct question w hetlier
! this important domestic institution should or
i should not continue to exist. Indeed, this was
; the only possible mode in w hieh their will could
! be authentically ascertain* d.
The election of delegates to a convention
must necessarily take place in separate dis
tricts. From this cause it may readily hap
pen, as has often been the case, thut a majori
ot the people of a State or Territory are on one
side of a question, whilst a majority of tl.erepre
s.ntutives from the several districts into which
|it is divided may be upon the other side. This
i arises from the fact that in some districts dele
' gates may be elected by small n iyorilies, whilst
in others those of different sentiments may re
ceive majorities sufficiently great not only to
overcome the votes given for fciie former, "but
to leave a large inujority of the whole people
in direct opposition to the majority of the dele
gates. Besides, our history proves that influ
ences may be brought to bea. on the represen
tative sufficiently powerful to induce him to
disregard the will of his constituents. The
truth is. that no other authentic and satisfacto
ry mode exists of ascertaining the will of a ma
' jority of the people of any Mate or Territory
i on an important and exciting question like that
of slavery in Kansas, except by leaving it to
a direct vote. How wise, then, was it for
■ Congress to pass over all subordinate and in-
I termediate agencies and proceed directly to the
. source of all legitimate power uuder our insti
tutions 1
How vain would any other principle prove
in practice! Ibis may be illustrated by the
ease ot Kansas. Should she be admitted into
the Inion, with a Constitution cither main
taining or abolishing slavery, against the sen
timent ot the [ieople. this could have no other
effect than to continue and to exasperate the
existing agitation during the brief perils! re
quired to make the Constitution conform to
the irresistabk- w ill of the majority.
The friends and supporters of the Nebraska
and Kansas act, when struggling on a recent
occasion to sttsla n its w ise provisions before the
great tribunal of the American people, never dif
fered about it. true meaning on this subject.
Every w here throughout the Union, they pub
licly pledged their faith and their honor, that
they would cheerfully submit the question of
shivery to the decision of the bona fide peo
ple of Kansu.., w itbout any restriction or quali
fication whatever. All were cordially united
Upon the great doctrine of popular sovereignty,
which is the vital principle of our free institu
tions.
Had it then been insinuated from any quar
ter that it would be a sufficient compliance
with the requisition of the organic law for tiie
members of a convention, thereafter to be elec
ted, to w ithhold the question of slavery from
the people, and to substitute their owu will
forthat oi a legally ascertained majority of all
their constituents, this would have been in
stantly rejected. Everywhere they remained
true to the resolution adopted on a celebrated
occasion, recognizing “the rights of the people
of nil the Territories—including Kansas and
Nebraska—acting through the legally und fair
ly expressed will of a majority of actual resi
dents, and w henever the number of their in
habitants justifies it, to form a Constitution,
with or w ithout slavery, and be admitted into
the 1 niou upon terms of perfect equality with
the other States.”
_ The Convention to frame a Constitution for
Kansas, met on the first Monday of September
hist. 1 hey w ere called together by virtue of
an act ot the territorial legislature, whose law
ful existence had been recognized by Congress
in different forms and by different enactments.
A large proportion of the citizens of Kansas
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
ntforded. their refusal to avail themselves of
their right could in no manner affect the legal
ity of the Convention.
Ibis convention proceeded to frame a Con
stitution tor Kansas, and finally adjourned on
the 7th day of November. But little difficulty
occurred in the convention, except on the sub
ject of slavery. The truth is, that the general
provisions of our recent State Constitutions are
so similar—and, I may add, so excellent—that
the difference between them is not essential.
I nder the earlier practice of the government,
no Constitution framed by the Convention of
a Territory preparatory to its admission into
the I nion as a State, had been submitted to
the people. 1 trust, however, the example set
by the last Congress, requiring that the Consti
tution of Minnesota "should be subject to Uu
approval and ratification of the people of the
proposed State,” may be followed un future
occasions. 1 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 uiy hist ructions to Gov
ernor Walker, in favor of submitting the Con
stitution to the people, were expressed in gen
eral and unqualified terms.
In the Kansas Nebraska act, however, this
requirement, as applicable to the whole Consti
tution, had not t een inserted, and the Con
vention were not bound by its tcruis to submit
any other jmrtion of the instrument to au elec
tion. except that which relates to the “domes
tic institution’’ of slavery. This w ill be rvu
dered clear by a simple reference to its lan
guage. it was “not to legislate slavery i*tv
any Territory or State, nor to exclude it there
from, but to leave the people thereof perfectly
tree to form and regulate their domestic insti
tutions in their owu way." According to the
plain construction of the sentence the words
“domestic institutions” have a direct, as they
have an appropriate, reference to slavery.—
“Domestic institutions” are limited to the fam
ily. The relation between master and sJavy
and a few others, are “domestic institutions,”
ami are entirely distinct from institutions of a
political character. Besides, there was no
question then before Congress, nor indeed has
there since been any serious question before
the jieople of Kansas or the country, except
that which relates to the “domestic institution ’
of slavery.
The Convention, alter an angry and excited
debate, finally determined, by a majority of
only two, to submit the question of slavery tv
the people, though, at the last, forty-three oi
the fifty delegates presept affixed their signa
tures to the Constitution,
A large majority of the Convention were in
favor of establishing slavery in Kansas. They
accordingly inserted au article in the Cvnstitu
tion for this purpose similar in form to these
[CMTiyriD ON SICOND FAG£.J