Contents    Prev    Next    Last


President[ Franklin Pierce

         Date[ December 2, 1856


Fellow-Citizens of the Senate and of the House of Representatives:


The Constitution requires that the President shall from time to time not

only recommend to the consideration of Congress such measures as he may

judge necessary and expedient, but also that he shall give information to

them of the state of the Union. To do this fully involves exposition of all

matters in the actual condition of the country, domestic or foreign, which

essentially concern the general welfare. While performing his

constitutional duty in this respect, the President does not speak merely to

express personal convictions, but as the executive minister of the

Government, enabled by his position and called upon by his official

obligations to scan with an impartial eye the interests of the whole and of

every part of the United States.


Of the condition of the domestic interests of the Union--its agriculture,

mines, manufactures, navigation, and commerce--it is necessary only to say

that the internal prosperity of the country, its continuous and steady

advancement in wealth and population and in private as well as public

well-being, attest the wisdom of our institutions and the predominant

spirit of intelligence and patriotism which, notwithstanding occasional

irregularities of opinion or action resulting from popular freedom, has

distinguished and characterized the people of America. In the brief

interval between the termination of the last and the commencement of the

present session of Congress the public mind has been occupied with the care

of selecting for another constitutional term the President and

Vice-President of the United States.


The determination of the persons who are of right, or contingently, to

preside over the administration of the Government is under our system

committed to the States and the people. We appeal to them, by their voice

pronounced in the forms of law, to call whomsoever they will to the high

post of Chief Magistrate.


And thus it is that as the Senators represent the respective States of the

Union and the members of the House of Representatives the several

constituencies of each State, so the President represents the aggregate

population of the United States. Their election of him is the explicit and

solemn act of the sole sovereign authority of the Union.


It is impossible to misapprehend the great principles which by their recent

political action the people of the United States have sanctioned and

announced.


They have asserted the constitutional equality of each and all of the

States of the Union as States: they have affirmed the constitutional

equality of each and all of the citizens of the United States as citizens,

whatever their religion, wherever their birth or their residence; they have

maintained the inviolability of the constitutional rights of the different

sections of the Union, and they have proclaimed their devoted and

unalterable attachment to the Union and to the Constitution, as objects of

interest superior to all subjects of local or sectional controversy, as the

safeguard of the rights of all, as the spirit and the essence of the

liberty, peace, and greatness of the Republic. In doing this they have at

the same time emphatically condemned the idea of organizing in these United

States mere geographical parties, of marshaling in hostile array toward

each other the different parts of the country, North or South, East or

West.


Schemes of this nature, fraught with incalculable mischief, and which the

considerate sense of the people has rejected, could have had countenance in

no part of the country had they not been disguised by suggestions plausible

in appearance, acting upon an excited state of the public mind, induced by

causes temporary in their character and, it is to be hoped, transient in

their influence.


Perfect liberty of association for political objects and the widest scope

of discussion are the received and ordinary conditions of government in our

country. Our institutions, framed in the spirit of confidence in the

intelligence and integrity of the people, do not forbid citizens, either

individually or associated together, to attack by writing, speech, or any

other methods short of physical force the Constitution and the very

existence of the Union. Under the shelter of this great liberty, and

protected by the laws and usages of the Government they assail,

associations have been formed in some of the States of individuals who,

pretending to seek only to prevent the spread of the institution of slavery

into the present or future inchoate States of the Union, are really

inflamed with desire to change the domestic institutions of existing

States. To accomplish their objects they dedicate themselves to the odious

task of depreciating the government organization which stands in their way

and of calumniating with indiscriminate invective not only the citizens of

particular States with whose laws they find fault, but all others of their

fellow citizens throughout the country who do not participate with them in

their assaults upon the Constitution, framed and adopted by our fathers,

and claiming for the privileges it has secured and the blessings it has

conferred the steady support and grateful reverence of their children. They

seek an object which they well know to be a revolutionary one. They are

perfectly aware that the change in the relative condition of the white and

black races in the slaveholding States which they would promote is beyond

their lawful authority; that to them it is a foreign object; that it can

not be effected by any peaceful instrumentality of theirs; that for them

and the States of which they are citizens the only path to its

accomplishment is through burning cities, and ravaged fields, and

slaughtered populations, and all there is most terrible in foreign

complicated with civil and servile war; and that the first step in the

attempt is the forcible disruption of a country embracing in its broad

bosom a degree of liberty and an amount of individual and public prosperity

to which there is no parallel in history, and substituting in its place

hostile governments, driven at once and inevitably into mutual devastation

and fratricidal carnage, transforming the now peaceful and felicitous

brotherhood into a vast permanent camp of armed men like the rival

monarchies of Europe and Asia. Well knowing that such, and such only, are

the means and the consequences of their plans and purposes, they endeavor

to prepare the people of the United States for civil war by doing

everything in their power to deprive the Constitution and the laws of moral

authority and to undermine the fabric of the Union by appeals to passion

and sectional prejudice, by indoctrinating its people with reciprocal

hatred, and by educating them to stand face to face as enemies, rather than

shoulder to shoulder as friends.


It is by the agency of such unwarrantable interference, foreign and

domestic, that the minds of many otherwise good citizens have been so

inflamed into the passionate condemnation of the domestic institutions of

the Southern States as at length to pass insensibly to almost equally

passion late hostility toward their fellow-citizens of those States, and

thus finally to fall into temporary fellowship with the avowed and active

enemies of the Constitution. Ardently attached to liberty in the abstract,

they do not stop to consider practically how the objects they would attain

can be accomplished, nor to reflect that, even if the evil were as great as

they deem it, they have no remedy to apply, and that it can be only

aggravated by their violence and unconstitutional action. A question which

is one of the most difficult of all the problems of social institution,

political economy, and statesmanship they treat with unreasoning

intemperance of thought and language. Extremes beget extremes. Violent

attack from the North finds its inevitable consequence in the growth of a

spirit of angry defiance at the South. Thus in the progress of events we

had reached that consummation, which the voice of the people has now so

pointedly rebuked, of the attempt of a portion of the States, by a

sectional organization and movement, to usurp the control of the Government

of the United States.


I confidently believe that the great body of those who inconsiderately took

this fatal step are sincerely attached to the Constitution and the Union.

They would upon deliberation shrink with unaffected horror from any

conscious act of disunion or civil war. But they have entered into a path

which leads nowhere unless it be to civil war and disunion, and which has

no other possible outlet. They have proceeded thus far in that direction in

consequence of the successive stages of their progress having consisted of

a series of secondary issues, each of which professed to be confined within

constitutional and peaceful limits, but which attempted indirectly what few

men were willing to do directly; that is, to act aggressively against the

constitutional rights of nearly one-half of the thirty-one States.


In the long series of acts of indirect aggression, the first was the

strenuous agitation by citizens of the Northern States, in Congress and out

of it, of the question of Negro emancipation in the Southern States.


The second step in this path of evil consisted of acts of the people of the

Northern States, and in several instances of their governments, aimed to

facilitate the escape of persons held to service in the Southern States and

to prevent their extradition when reclaimed according to law and in virtue

of express provisions of the Constitution. To promote this object,

legislative enactments and other means were adopted to take away or defeat

rights which the Constitution solemnly guaranteed. In order to nullify the

then existing act of Congress concerning the extradition of fugitives from

service, laws were enacted in many States forbidding their officers, under

the severest penalties, to participate in the execution of any act of

Congress whatever. In this way that system of harmonious cooperation

between the authorities of the United States and of the several States, for

the maintenance of their common institutions, which existed in the early

years of the Republic was destroyed; conflicts of jurisdiction came to be

frequent, and Congress found itself compelled, for the support of the

Constitution and the vindication of its power, to authorize the appointment

of new officers charged with the execution of its acts, as if they and the

officers of the States were the ministers, respectively, of foreign

governments in a state of mutual hostility rather than fellow-magistrates

of a common country peacefully subsisting under the protection of one

well-constituted Union. Thus here also aggression was followed by reaction,

and the attacks upon the Constitution at this point did but serve to raise

up new barriers for its defense and security.


The third stage of this unhappy sectional controversy was in connection

with the organization of Territorial governments and the admission of new

States into the Union. When it was proposed to admit the State of Maine, by

separation of territory from that of Massachusetts, and the State of

Missouri, formed of a portion of the territory ceded by France to the

United States, representatives in Congress objected to the admission of the

latter unless with conditions suited to particular views of public policy.

The imposition of such a condition was successfully resisted; but at the

same period the question was presented of imposing restrictions upon the

residue of the territory ceded by France. That question was for the time

disposed of by the adoption of a geographical line of limitation.


In this connection it should not be forgotten that when France, of her own

accord, resolved, for considerations of the most farsighted sagacity, to

cede Louisiana to the United States, and that accession was accepted by the

United States, the latter expressly engaged that "the inhabitants of the

ceded territory shall be incorporated in the Union of the United States and

admitted as soon as possible, according to the principles of the Federal

Constitution, to the enjoyment of all the rights, advantages, and

immunities of citizens of the United States; and in the meantime they shall

be maintained and protected in the free enjoyment of their liberty,

property, and the religion which they profess;" that is to say, while it

remains in a Territorial condition its inhabitants are maintained and

protected in the free enjoyment of their liberty and property, with a right

then to pass into the condition of States on a footing of perfect equality

with the original States.


The enactment which established the restrictive geographical line was

acquiesced in rather than approved by the States of the Union. It stood on

the statute book, however, for a number of years; and the people of the

respective States acquiesced in the reenactment of the principle as applied

to the State of Texas, and it was proposed to acquiesce in its further

application to the territory acquired by the United States from Mexico. But

this proposition was successfully resisted by the representatives from the

Northern States, who, regardless of the statute line, insisted upon

applying restriction to the new territory generally, whether lying north or

south of it, thereby repealing it as a legislative compromise, and, on the

part of the North, persistently violating the compact, if compact there

was.


Thereupon this enactment ceased to have binding virtue in any sense,

whether as respects the North or the South, and so in effect it was treated

on the occasion of the admission of the State of California and the

organization of the Territories of New Mexico, Utah, and Washington.


Such was the state of this question when the time arrived for the

organization of the Territories of Kansas and Nebraska. In the progress of

constitutional inquiry and reflection it had now at length come to be seen

clearly that Congress does not possess constitutional power to impose

restrictions of this character upon any present or future State of the

Union. In a long series of decisions, on the fullest argument and after the

most deliberate consideration, the Supreme Court of the United States had

finally determined this point in every form under which the question could

arise, whether as affecting public or private rights--in questions of the

public domain, of religion, of navigation, and of servitude.


The several States of the Union are by force of the Constitution coequal in

domestic legislative power. Congress can not change a law of domestic

relation in the State of Maine; no more can it in the State of Missouri.

Any statute which proposes to do this is a mere nullity; it takes away no

right, it confers none. If it remains on the statute book unrepealed, it

remains there only as a monument of error and a beacon of warning to the

legislator and the statesman. To repeal it will be only to remove

imperfection from the statutes, without affecting, either in the sense of

permission, or of prohibition, the action of the States or of their

citizens.


Still, when the nominal restriction of this nature, already a dead letter

in law, was in terms repealed by the last Congress, in a clause of the act

organizing the Territories of Kansas and Nebraska, that repeal was made the

occasion of a widespread and dangerous agitation. It was alleged that the

original enactment being a compact of perpetual moral obligation, its

repeal constituted an odious breach of faith. An act of Congress, while it

remains unrepealed, more especially if it be constitutionally valid in the

judgment of those public functionaries whose duty it is to pronounce on

that point, is undoubtedly binding on the conscience of each good citizen

of the Republic. But in what sense can it be asserted that the enactment in

question was invested with perpetuity and entitled to the respect of a

solemn Compact? Between whom was the compact? No distinct contending powers

of the Government, no separate sections of the Union treating as such,

entered into treaty stipulations on the subject. It was a mere clause of an

act of Congress, and, like any other controverted matter of legislation,

received its final shape and was passed by compromise of the conflicting

opinions or sentiments of the members of Congress. But if it had moral

authority over men's consciences, to whom did this authority attach? Not to

those of the North, who had repeatedly refused to confirm it by extension

and who had zealously striven to establish other and incompatible

regulations upon the subject. And if, as it thus appears, the supposed

compact had no obligatory force as to the North, of course it could not

have had any as to the South, for all such compacts must be mutual and of

reciprocal obligation.


It has not unfrequently happened that lawgivers, with undue estimation of

the value of the law they give or in the view of imparting to it peculiar

strength, make it perpetual in terms; but they can not thus bind the

conscience, the judgment, and the will of those who may succeed them,

invested with similar responsibilities and clothed with equal authority.

More careful investigation may prove the law to be unsound in principle.

Experience may show it to be imperfect in detail and impracticable in

execution. And then both reason and right combine not merely to justify but

to require its repeal.


The Constitution, supreme, as it is, over all the departments of the

Government--legislative, executive, and judicial--is open to amendment by

its very terms; and Congress or the States may, in their discretion,

propose amendment to it, solemn compact though it in truth is between the

sovereign States of the Union. In the present instance a political

enactment which had ceased to have legal power or authority of any kind was

repealed. The position assumed that Congress had no moral right to enact

such repeal was strange enough, and singularly so in view of the fact that

the argument came from those who openly refused obedience to existing laws

of the land, having the same popular designation and quality as compromise

acts; nay, more, who unequivocally disregarded and condemned the most

positive and obligatory injunctions of the Constitution itself, and sought

by every means within their reach to deprive a portion of their

fellow-citizens of the equal enjoyment of those rights and privileges

guaranteed alike to all by the fundamental compact of our Union.


This argument against the repeal of the statute line in question was

accompanied by another of congenial character and equally with the former

destitute of foundation in reason and truth. It was imputed that the

measure originated in the conception of extending the limits of slave labor

beyond those previously assigned to it, and that such was its natural as

well as intended effect; and these baseless assumptions were made, in the

Northern States, the ground of unceasing assault upon constitutional

right.


The repeal in terms of a statute, which was already obsolete and also null

for unconstitutionality, could have no influence to obstruct or to promote

the propagation of conflicting views of political or social institution.

When the act organizing the Territories of Kansas and Nebraska was passed,

the inherent effect upon that portion of the public domain thus opened to

legal settlement was to admit settlers from all the States of the Union

alike, each with his convictions of public policy and private interest,

there to found, in their discretion, subject to such limitations as the

Constitution and acts of Congress might prescribe, new States, hereafter to

be admitted into the Union. It was a free field, open alike to all, whether

the statute line of assumed restriction were repealed or not. That repeal

did not open to free competition of the diverse opinions and domestic

institutions a field which without such repeal would have been closed

against them; it found that field of competition already opened, in fact

and in law. All the repeal did was to relieve the statute book of an

objectionable enactment, unconstitutional in effect and injurious in terms

to a large portion of the States.


Is it the fact that in all the unsettled regions of the United States, if

emigration be left free to act in this respect for itself, without legal

prohibitions on either side, slave labor will spontaneously go everywhere

in preference to free labor? Is it the fact that the peculiar domestic

institutions of the Southern States possess relatively so much of vigor

that wheresoever an avenue is freely opened to all the world they will

penetrate to the exclusion of those of the Northern States? Is it the fact

that the former enjoy, compared with the latter, such irresistibly superior

vitality, independent of climate, soil, and all other accidental

circumstances, as to be able to produce the supposed result in spite of the

assumed moral and natural obstacles to its accomplishment and of the more

numerous population of the Northern States? The argument of those who

advocate the enactment of new laws of restriction and condemn the repeal of

old ones in effect avers that their particular views of government have no

self-extending or self-sustaining power of their own, and will go nowhere

unless forced by act of Congress. And if Congress do but pause for a moment

in the policy of stern coercion; if it venture to try the experiment of

leaving men to judge for themselves what institutions will best suit them;

if it be not strained up to perpetual legislative exertion on this

point--if Congress proceed thus to act in the very spirit of liberty, it is

at once charged with aiming to extend slave labor into all the new

Territories of the United States.


Of course these imputations on the intentions of Congress in this respect,

conceived, as they were, in prejudice and disseminated in passion, are

utterly destitute of any justification in the nature of things and contrary

to all the fundamental doctrines and principles of civil liberty and

self-government.


While, therefore, in general, the people of the Northern States have never

at any time arrogated for the Federal Government the power to interfere

directly with the domestic condition of persons in the Southern States,

but, on the contrary, have disavowed all such intentions and have shrunk

from conspicuous affiliation with those few who pursue their fanatical

objects avowedly through the contemplated means of revolutionary change of

the Government and with acceptance of the necessary consequences--a civil

and servile war--yet many citizens have suffered themselves to be drawn

into one evanescent political issue of agitation after another,

appertaining to the same set of opinions, and which subsided as rapidly as

they arose when it came to be seen, as it uniformly did, that they were

incompatible with the compacts of the Constitution and the existence of the

Union. Thus when the acts of some of the States to nullify the existing

extradition law imposed upon Congress the duty of passing a new one, the

country was invited by agitators to enter into party organization for its

repeal; but that agitation speedily ceased by reason of the

impracticability of its object. So when the statute restriction upon the

institutions of new States by a geographical line had been repealed, the

country was urged to demand its restoration, and that project also died

almost with its birth. Then followed the cry of alarm from the North

against imputed Southern encroachments, which cry sprang in reality from

the spirit of revolutionary attack on the domestic institutions of the

South, and, after a troubled existence of a few months, has been rebuked by

the voice of a patriotic people.


Of this last agitation, one lamentable feature was that it was carried on

at the immediate expense of the peace and happiness of the people of the

Territory of Kansas. That was made the battlefield, not so much of opposing

factions or interests within itself as of the conflicting passions of the

whole people of the United States. Revolutionary disorder in Kansas had its

origin in projects of intervention deliberately arranged by certain members

of that Congress which enacted the law for the organization of the

Territory; and when propagandist colonization of Kansas had thus been

undertaken in one section of the Union for the systematic promotion of its

peculiar views of policy there ensued as a matter of course a counteraction

with opposite views in other sections of the Union.


In consequence of these and other incidents, many acts of disorder, it is

undeniable, have been perpetrated in Kansas, to the occasional interruption

rather than the permanent suspension of regular government. Aggressive and

most reprehensible incursions into the Territory were undertaken both in

the North and the South, and entered it on its northern border by the way

of Iowa, as well as on the eastern by way of Missouri; and there has

existed within it a state of insurrection against the constituted

authorities, not without countenance from inconsiderate persons in each of

the great sections of the Union. But the difficulties in that Territory

have been extravagantly exaggerated for purposes of political agitation

elsewhere. The number and gravity of the acts of violence have been

magnified partly by statements entirely untrue and partly by reiterated

accounts of the same rumors or facts. Thus the Territory has been seemingly

filled with extreme violence, when the whole amount of such acts has not

been greater than what occasionally passes before us in single cities to

the regret of all good citizens, but without being regarded as of general

or permanent political consequence.


Imputed irregularities in the elections had in Kansas, like occasional

irregularities of the same description in the States, were beyond the

sphere of action of the Executive. But incidents of actual violence or of

organized obstruction of law, pertinaciously renewed from time to time,

have been met as they occurred by such means as were available and as the


circumstances required, and nothing of this character now remains to affect

the general peace of the Union. The attempt of a part of the inhabitants of

the Territory to erect a revolutionary government, though sedulously

encouraged and supplied with pecuniary aid from active agents of disorder

in some of the States, has completely failed. Bodies of armed men, foreign

to the Territory, have been prevented from entering or compelled to leave

it; predatory bands, engaged in acts of rapine under cover of the existing

political disturbances, have been arrested or dispersed, and every

well-disposed person is now enabled once more to devote himself in peace to

the pursuits of prosperous industry, for the prosecution of which he

undertook to participate in the settlement of the Territory.


It affords me unmingled satisfaction thus to announce the peaceful

condition of things in Kansas, especially considering the means to which it

was necessary to have recourse for the attainment of the end, namely, the

employment of a part of the military force of the United States. The

withdrawal of that force from its proper duty of defending the country

against foreign foes or the savages of the frontier to employ it for the

suppression of domestic insurrection is, when the exigency occurs, a matter

of the most earnest solicitude. On this occasion of imperative necessity it

has been done with the best results, and my satisfaction in the attainment

of such results by such means is greatly enhanced by the consideration

that, through the wisdom and energy of the present executive of Kansas and

the prudence, firmness, and vigilance of the military officers on duty

there tranquillity has been restored without one drop of blood having been

shed in its accomplishment by the forces of the United States.


The restoration of comparative tranquillity in that Territory furnishes the

means of observing calmly and appreciating at their just value the events

which have occurred there and the discussions of which the government of

the Territory has been the subject. We perceive that controversy concerning

its future domestic institutions was inevitable; that no human prudence, no

form of legislation, no wisdom on the part of Congress, could have

prevented it.


It is idle to suppose that the particular provisions of their organic law

were the cause of agitation. Those provisions were but the occasion, or the

pretext, of an agitation which was inherent in the nature of things.

Congress legislated upon the subject in such terms as were most consonant

with the principle of popular sovereignty which underlies our Government.

It could not have legislated otherwise without doing violence to another

great principle of our institutions--the imprescriptible right of equality

of the several States.


We perceive also that sectional interests and party passions have been the

great impediment to the salutary operation of the organic principles

adopted and the chief cause of the successive disturbances in Kansas. The

assumption that because in the organization of the Territories of Nebraska

and Kansas Congress abstained from imposing restraints upon them to which

certain other Territories had been subject, therefore disorders occurred in

the latter Territory, is emphatically contradicted by the fact that none

have occurred in the former. Those disorders were not the consequence, in

Kansas, of the freedom of self-government conceded to that Territory by

Congress, but of unjust interference on the part of persons not inhabitants

of the Territory. Such interference, wherever it has exhibited itself by

acts of insurrectionary character or of obstruction to process of law, has

been repelled or suppressed by all the means which the Constitution and the

laws place in the hands of the Executive.


In those parts of the United States where, by reason of the inflamed state

of the public mind, false rumors and misrepresentations have the greatest

currency it has been assumed that it was the duty of the Executive not only

to suppress insurrectionary movements in Kansas, but also to see to the

regularity of local elections. It needs little argument to show that the

President has no such power. All government in the United States rests

substantially upon popular election. The freedom of elections is liable to

be impaired by the intrusion of unlawful votes or the exclusion of lawful

ones, by improper influences, by violence, or by fraud. But the people of

the United States are themselves the all sufficient guardians of their own

rights, and to suppose that they will not remedy in due season any such

incidents of civil freedom is to suppose them to have ceased to be capable

of self-government. The President of the United States has not power to

interpose in elections, to see to their freedom, to canvass their votes, or

to pass upon their legality in the Territories any more than in the States.

If he had such power the Government might be republican in form, but it

would be a monarchy in fact; and if he had undertaken to exercise it in the

case of Kansas he would have been justly subject to the charge of

usurpation and of violation of the dearest rights of the people of the

United States.


Unwise laws, equally with irregularities at elections, are in periods of

great excitement the occasional incidents of even the freest and best

political institutions; but all experience demonstrates that in a country

like ours, where the right of self-constitution exists in the completest

form, the attempt to remedy unwise legislation by resort to revolution is

totally out of place, inasmuch as existing legal institutions afford more

prompt and efficacious means for the redress of wrong.


I confidently trust that now, when the peaceful condition of Kansas affords

opportunity for calm reflection and wise legislation, either the

legislative assembly of the Territory or Congress will see that no act

shall remain on its statute book violative of the provisions of the

Constitution or subversive of the great objects for which that was ordained

and established, and will take all other necessary steps to assure to its

inhabitants the enjoyment, without obstruction or abridgment, of all the

constitutional rights, privileges, and immunities of citizens of the United

States, as contemplated by the organic law of the Territory.


Full information in relation to recent events in this Territory will be

found in the documents communicated herewith from the Departments of State

and War.


I refer you to the report of the Secretary of the Treasury for particular

information concerning the financial condition of the Government and the

various branches of the public service connected with the Treasury

Department.


During the last fiscal year the receipts from customs were for the first

time more than $64,000,000, and from all sources $73,918,141, which, with

the balance on hand up to the 1st of July, 1855, made the total resources

of the year amount to $92,850,117. The expenditures, including $3,000,000

in execution of the treaty with Mexico and excluding sums paid on account

of the public debt, amounted to $60,172,401, and including the latter to

$72,948,792, the payment on this account having amounted to $12,776,390.


On the 4th of March, 1853, the amount of the public debt was $69,129,937.

There was a subsequent increase of $2,750,000 for the debt of Texas, making

a total of $71,879,937. Of this the sum of $45,525,319, including premium,

has been discharged, reducing the debt to $30,963,909, all which might be

paid within a year without embarrassing the public service, but being not

yet due and only redeemable at the option of the holder, can not be pressed

to payment by the Government.


On examining the expenditures of the last five years it will be seen that

the average, deducting payments on account of the public debt and

$10,000,000 paid by treaty to Mexico, has been but about $48,000,000. It is

believed that under an economical administration of the Government the

average expenditure for the ensuing five years will not exceed that sum,

unless extraordinary occasion for its increase should occur. The acts

granting bounty lands will soon have been executed, while the extension of

our frontier settlements will cause a continued demand for lands and

augmented receipts, probably, from that source. These considerations will

justify a reduction of the revenue from customs so as not to exceed

forty-eight or fifty million dollars. I think the exigency for such

reduction is imperative, and again urge it upon the consideration of

Congress.


The amount of reduction, as well as the manner of effecting it, are

questions of great and general interest, it being essential to industrial

enterprise and the public prosperity, as well as the dictate of obvious

justice, that the burden of taxation be made to rest as equally as possible

upon all classes and all sections and interests of the country.


I have heretofore recommended to your consideration the revision of the

revenue laws, prepared under the direction of the Secretary of the

Treasury, and also legislation upon some special questions affecting the

business of that Department, more especially the enactment of a law to

punish the abstraction of official books or papers from the files of the

Government and requiring all such books and papers and all other public

property to be turned over by the outgoing officer to his successor; of a

law requiring disbursing officers to deposit all public money in the vaults

of the Treasury or in other legal depositories, where the same are

conveniently accessible, and a law to extend existing penal provisions to

all persons who may become possessed of public money by deposit or

otherwise and who shall refuse or neglect on due demand to pay the same

into the Treasury. I invite your attention anew to each of these objects.


The Army during the past year has been so constantly employed against

hostile Indians in various quarters that it can scarcely be said, with

propriety of language, to have been a peace establishment. Its duties have

been satisfactorily performed, and we have reason to expect as a result of

the year's operations greater security to the frontier inhabitants than has

been hitherto enjoyed. Extensive combinations among the hostile Indians of

the Territories of Washington and Oregon at one time threatened the

devastation of the newly formed settlements of that remote portion of the

country. From recent information we are permitted to hope that the

energetic and successful operations conducted there will prevent such

combinations in future and secure to those Territories an opportunity to

make steady progress in the development of their agricultural and mineral

resources.


Legislation has been recommended by me on previous occasions to cure

defects in the existing organization and to increase the efficiency of the

Army, and further observation has but served to confirm me in the views

then expressed and to enforce on my mind the conviction that such measures

are not only proper, but necessary.


I have, in addition, to invite the attention of Congress to a change of

policy in the distribution of troops and to the necessity of providing a

more rapid increase of the military armament. For details of these and

other subjects relating to the Army I refer to the report of the Secretary

of War.


The condition of the Navy is not merely satisfactory, but exhibits the most

gratifying evidences of increased vigor. As it is comparatively small, it

is more important that it should be as complete as possible in all the

elements of strength; that it should be efficient in the character of its

officers, in the zeal and discipline of its men, in the reliability of its

ordnance, and in the capacity of its ships. In all these various qualities

the Navy has made great progress within the last few years. The execution

of the law of Congress of February 28, 1855, "to promote the efficiency of

the Navy," has been attended by the most advantageous results. The law for

promoting discipline among the men is found convenient and salutary. The

system of granting an honorable discharge to faithful seamen on the

expiration of the period of their enlistment and permitting them to

reenlist after a leave of absence of a few months without cessation of pay

is highly beneficial in its influence. The apprentice system recently

adopted is evidently destined to incorporate into the service a large

number of our countrymen, hitherto so difficult to procure. Several hundred

American boys are now on a three years' cruise in our national vessels and

will return well-trained seamen. In the Ordnance Department there is a

decided and gratifying indication of progress, creditable to it and to the

country. The suggestions of the Secretary of the Navy in regard to further

improvement in that branch of the service I commend to your favorable

action. The new frigates ordered by Congress are now afloat and two of them

in active service. They are superior models of naval architecture, and with

their formidable battery add largely to public strength and security. I

concur in the views expressed by the Secretary of the Department in favor

of a still further increase of our naval force.


The report of the Secretary of the Interior presents facts and views in

relation to internal affairs over which the supervision of his Department

extends of much interest and importance.


The aggregate sales of the public lands during the last fiscal year amount

to 9,227,878 acres, for which has been received the sum of $8,821,414.

During the same period there have been located with military scrip and land

warrants and for other purposes 30,100,230 acres, thus making a total

aggregate of 39,328,108 acres. On the 30th of September last surveys had

been made of 16,873,699 acres, a large proportion of which is ready for

market.


The suggestions in this report in regard to the complication and

progressive expansion of the business of the different bureaus of the

Department, to the pension system, to the colonization of Indian tribes,

and the recommendations in relation to various improvements in the District

of Columbia are especially commended to your consideration.


The report of the Postmaster-General presents fully the condition of that

Department of the Government. Its expenditures for the last fiscal year

were $10,407,868 and its gross receipts $7,620,801, making an excess of

expenditure over receipts of $2,787,046. The deficiency of this Department

is thus $744,000 greater than for the year ending June 30, 1853. Of this

deficiency $330,000 is to be attributed to the additional compensation

allowed to postmasters by the act of Congress of June 22, 1854. The mail

facilities in every part of the country have been very much increased in

that period, and the large addition of railroad service, amounting to 7,908

miles, has added largely to the cost of transportation.


The inconsiderable augmentation of the income of the Post-Office Department

under the reduced rates of postage and its increasing expenditures must for

the present make it dependent to some extent upon the Treasury for support.

The recommendations of the Postmaster-General in relation to the abolition

of the franking privilege and his views on the establishment of mail

steamship lines deserve the consideration of Congress. I also call the

special attention of Congress to the statement of the Postmaster-General

respecting the sums now paid for the transportation of mails to the Panama

Railroad Company, and commend to their early and favorable consideration

the suggestions of that officer in relation to new contracts for mail

transportation upon that route, and also upon the Tehuantepec and Nicaragua

routes.


The United States continue in the enjoyment of amicable relations with all

foreign powers.


When my last annual message was transmitted to Congress two subjects of

controversy, one relating to the enlistment of soldiers in this country for

foreign service and the other to Central America, threatened to disturb the

good understanding between the United States and Great Britain. Of the

progress and termination of the former question you were informed at the

time, and the other is now in the way of satisfactory adjustment.


The object of the convention between the United States and Great Britain of

the 19th of April, 1850, was to secure for the benefit of all nations the

neutrality and the common use of any transit way or interoceanic

communication across the Isthmus of Panama which might be opened within the

limits of Central America. The pretensions subsequently asserted by Great

Britain to dominion or control over territories in or near two of the

routes, those of Nicaragua and Honduras, were deemed by the United States

not merely incompatible with the main object of the treaty, but opposed

even to its express stipulations. Occasion of controversy on this point has

been removed by an additional treaty, which our minister at London has

concluded, and which will be immediately submitted to the Senate for its

consideration. Should the proposed supplemental arrangement be concurred in

by all the parties to be affected by it, the objects contemplated by the

original convention will have been fully attained.


The treaty between the United States and Great Britain of the 5th of June,

1854, which went into effective operation in 1855, put an end to causes of

irritation between the two countries, by securing to the United States the

right of fishery on the coast of the British North American Provinces, with

advantages equal to those enjoyed by British subjects. Besides the signal

benefits of this treaty to a large class of our citizens engaged in a

pursuit connected to no inconsiderable degree with our national prosperity

and strength, it has had a favorable effect upon other interests in the

provision it made for reciprocal freedom of trade between the United States

and the British Provinces in America. The exports of domestic articles to

those Provinces during the last year amounted to more than $22,000,000,

exceeding those of the preceding year by nearly $7,000,000; and the imports

therefrom during the same period amounted to more than twenty-one million,

an increase of six million upon those of the previous year.


The improved condition of this branch of our commerce is mainly

attributable to the above-mentioned treaty.


Provision was made in the first article of that treaty for a commission to

designate the mouths of rivers to which the common right of fishery on the

coast of the United States and the British Provinces was not to extend.

This commission has been employed a part of two seasons, but without much

progress in accomplishing the object for which it was instituted, in

consequence of a serious difference of opinion between the commissioners,

not only as to the precise point where the rivers terminate, but in many

instances as to what constitutes a river. These difficulties, however, may

be overcome by resort to the umpirage provided for by the treaty.


The efforts perseveringly prosecuted since the commencement of my

Administration to relieve our trade to the Baltic from the exaction of

Sound dues by Denmark have not yet been attended with success. Other

governments have also sought to obtain a like relief to their commerce, and

Denmark was thus induced to propose an arrangement to all the European

powers interested in the subject, and the manner in which her proposition

was received warranting her to believe that a satisfactory arrangement with

them could soon be concluded, she made a strong appeal to this Government

for temporary suspension of definite action on its part, in consideration

of the embarrassment which might result to her European negotiations by an

immediate adjustment of the question with the United States. This request

has been acceded to upon the condition that the sums collected after the

16th of June last and until the 16th of June next from vessels and cargoes

belonging to our merchants are to be considered as paid under protest and

subject to future adjustment. There is reason to believe that an

arrangement between Denmark and the maritime powers of Europe on the

subject will be soon concluded, and that the pending negotiation with the

United States may then be resumed and terminated in a satisfactory manner.


With Spain no new difficulties have arisen, nor has much progress been made

in the adjustment of pending ones.


Negotiations entered into for the purpose of relieving our commercial

intercourse with the island of Cuba of some of its burdens and providing

for the more speedy settlement of local disputes growing out of that

intercourse have not yet been attended with any results. Soon after the

commencement of the late war in Europe this Government submitted to the

consideration of all maritime nations two principles for the security of

neutral commerce--one that the neutral flag should cover enemies' goods,

except articles contraband of war, and the other that neutral property on

board merchant vessels of belligerents should be exempt from condemnation,

with the exception of contraband articles. These were not presented as new

rules of international law, having been generally claimed by neutrals,

though not always admitted by belligerents. One of the parties to the war

(Russia), as well as several neutral powers, promptly acceded to these

propositions, and the two other principal belligerents (Great Britain and

France) having consented to observe them for the present occasion, a

favorable opportunity seemed to be presented for obtaining a general

recognition of them, both in Europe and America. But Great Britain and

France, in common with most of the States of Europe, while forbearing to

reject, did not affirmatively act upon the overtures of the United States.


While the question was in this position the representatives of Russia,

France, Great Britain, Austria, Prussia, Sardinia, and Turkey, assembled at

Paris, took into consideration the subject of maritime rights, and put

forth a declaration containing the two principles which this Government had

submitted nearly two years before to the consideration of maritime powers,

and adding thereto the following propositions: "Privateering is and remains

abolished," and "Blockades in order to be binding must be effective; that

is to say, maintained by a force sufficient really to prevent access to the

coast of the enemy;" and to the declaration thus composed of four points,

two of which had already been proposed by the United States, this

Government has been invited to accede by all the powers represented at

Paris except Great Britain and Turkey. To the last of the two additional

propositions--that in relation to blockades--there can certainly be no

objection. It is merely the definition of what shall constitute the

effectual investment of a blockaded place, a definition for which this

Government has always contended, claiming indemnity for losses where a

practical violation of the rule thus defined has been injurious to our

commerce. As to the remaining article of the declaration of the conference

of Paris, that "privateering is and remains abolished," I certainly can not

ascribe to the powers represented in the conference of Paris any but

liberal and philanthropic views in the attempt to change the unquestionable

rule of maritime law in regard to privateering. Their proposition was

doubtless intended to imply approval of the principle that private property

upon the ocean, although it might belong to the citizens of a belligerent

state, should be exempted from capture; and had that proposition been so

framed as to give full effect to the principle, it would have received my

ready assent on behalf of the United States. But the measure proposed is

inadequate to that purpose. It is true that if adopted private property

upon the ocean would be withdrawn from one mode of plunder, but left

exposed meanwhile to another mode, which could be used with increased

effectiveness. The aggressive capacity of great naval powers would be

thereby augmented, while the defensive ability of others would be reduced.

Though the surrender of the means of prosecuting hostilities by employing

privateers, as proposed by the conference of Paris, is mutual in terms, yet

in practical effect it would be the relinquishment of a right of little

value to one class of states, but of essential importance to another and a

far larger class. It ought not to have been anticipated that a measure so

inadequate to the accomplishment of the proposed object and so unequal in

its operation would receive the assent of all maritime powers. Private

property would be still left to the depredations of the public armed

cruisers.


I have expressed a readiness on the part of this Government to accede to

all the principles contained in the declaration of the conference of Paris

provided that the one relating to the abandonment of privateering can be so

amended as to effect the object for which, as is presumed, it was

intended--the immunity of private property on the ocean from hostile

capture. To effect this object, it is proposed to add to the declaration

that "privateering is and remains abolished" the following amendment:


And that the private property of subjects and citizens of a belligerent on

the high seas shall be exempt from seizure by the public armed vessels of

the other belligerent, except it be contraband.


This amendment has been presented not only to the powers which have asked

our assent to the declaration to abolish privateering, but to all other

maritime states. Thus far it has not been rejected by any, and is favorably

entertained by all which have made any communication in reply.


Several of the governments regarding with favor the proposition of the

United States have delayed definitive action upon it only for the purpose

of consulting with others, parties to the conference of Paris. I have the

satisfaction of stating, however, that the Emperor of Russia has entirely

and explicitly approved of that modification and will cooperate in

endeavoring to obtain the assent of other powers, and that assurances of a

similar purport have been received in relation to the disposition of the

Emperor of the French. The present aspect of this important subject allows

us to cherish the hope that a principle so humane in its character, so just

and equal in its operation, so essential to the prosperity of commercial

nations, and so consonant to the sentiments of this enlightened period of

the world will command the approbation of all maritime powers, and thus be

incorporated into the code of international law.


My views on the subject are more fully set forth in the reply of the

Secretary of State, a copy of which is herewith transmitted, to the

communications on the subject made to this Government, especially to the

communication of France.


The Government of the United States has at all times regarded with friendly

interest the other States of America, formerly, like this country, European

colonies, and now independent members of the great family of nations. But

the unsettled condition of some of them, distracted by frequent

revolutions, and thus incapable of regular and firm internal

administration, has tended to embarrass occasionally our public intercourse

by reason of wrongs which our citizens suffer at their hands, and which

they are slow to redress.


Unfortunately, it is against the Republic of Mexico, with which it is our

special desire to maintain a good understanding, that such complaints are

most numerous; and although earnestly urged upon its attention, they have

not as yet received the consideration which this Government had a right to

expect. While reparation for past injuries has been withheld, others have

been added. The political condition of that country, however, has been such

as to demand forbearance on the part of the United States. I shall continue

my efforts to procure for the wrongs of our citizens that redress which is

indispensable to the continued friendly association of the two Republics.


The peculiar condition of affairs in Nicaragua in the early part of the

present year rendered it important that this Government should have

diplomatic relations with that State. Through its territory had been opened

one of the principal thoroughfares across the isthmus connecting North and

South America, on which a vast amount of property was transported and to

which our citizens resorted in great numbers in passing between the

Atlantic and Pacific coasts of the United States. The protection of both

required that the existing power in that State should be regarded as a

responsible Government, and its minister was accordingly received. But he

remained here only a short time. Soon thereafter the political affairs of

Nicaragua underwent unfavorable change and became involved in much

uncertainty and confusion. Diplomatic representatives from two contending

parties have been recently sent to this Government, but with the imperfect

information possessed it was not possible to decide which was the

Government de facto, and, awaiting further developments, I have refused to

receive either.


Questions of the most serious nature are pending between the United States

and the Republic of New Granada. The Government of that Republic undertook

a year since to impose tonnage duties on foreign vessels in her ports, but

the purpose was resisted by this Government as being contrary to existing

treaty stipulations with the United States and to rights conferred by

charter upon the Panama Railroad Company, and was accordingly refurbished

at that time, it being admitted that our vessels were entitled to be exempt

from tonnage duty in the free ports of Panama and Aspinwall. But the

purpose has been recently revived on the part of New Granada by the

enactment of a law to subject vessels visiting her ports to the tonnage

duty of 40 cents per ton, and although the law has not been put in force,

yet the right to enforce it is still asserted and may at any time be acted

on by the Government of that Republic.


The Congress of New Granada has also enacted a law during the last year

which levies a tax of more than $3 on every pound of mail matter

transported across the Isthmus. The sum thus required to be paid on the

mails of the United States would be nearly $2,000,000 annually in addition

to the large sum payable by contract to the Panama Railroad Company. If the

only objection to this exaction were the exorbitancy of its amount, it

could not be submitted to by the United States.


The imposition of it, however, would obviously contravene our treaty with

New Granada and infringe the contract of that Republic with the Panama

Railroad Company. The law providing for this tax was by its terms to take

effect on the 1st of September last, but the local authorities on the

Isthmus have been induced to suspend its execution and to await further

instructions on the subject from the Government of the Republic. I am not

yet advised of the determination of that Government. If a measure so

extraordinary in its character and so clearly contrary to treaty

stipulations and the contract rights of the Panama Railroad Company,

composed mostly of American citizens, should be persisted in, it will be

the duty of the United States to resist its execution.


I regret exceedingly that occasion exists to invite your attention to a

subject of still graver import in our relations with the Republic of New

Granada. On the 15th day of April last a riotous assemblage of the

inhabitants of Panama committed a violent and outrageous attack on the

premises of the railroad company and the passengers and other persons in or

near the same, involving the death of several citizens of the United

States, the pillage of many others, and the destruction of a large amount

of property belonging to the railroad company. I caused full investigation

of that event to be made, and the result shows satisfactorily that complete

responsibility for what occurred attaches to the Government of New Granada.

I have therefore demanded of that Government that the perpetrators of the

wrongs in question should be punished; that provision should be made for

the families of citizens of the United States who were killed, with full

indemnity for the property pillaged or destroyed.


The present condition of the Isthmus of Panama, in so far as regards the

security of persons and property passing over it, requires serious

consideration. Recent incidents tend to show that the local authorities can

not be relied on to maintain the public peace of Panama, and there is just

ground for apprehension that a portion of the inhabitants are meditating

further outrages, without adequate measures for the security and protection

of persons or property having been taken, either by the State of Panama or

by the General Government of New Granada. Under the guaranties of treaty,

citizens of the United States have, by the outlay of several million

dollars, constructed a railroad across the Isthmus, and it has become the

main route between our Atlantic and Pacific possessions, over which

multitudes of our citizens and a vast amount of property are constantly

passing; to the security and protection of all which and the continuance of

the public advantages involved it is impossible for the Government of the

United States to be indifferent.


I have deemed the danger of the recurrence of scenes of lawless violence in

this quarter so imminent as to make it my duty to station a part of our

naval force in the harbors of Panama and Aspinwall, in order to protect the

persons and property of the citizens of the United States in those ports

and to insure to them safe passage across the Isthmus. And it would, in my

judgment, be unwise to withdraw the naval force now in those ports until,

by the spontaneous action of the Republic of New Granada or otherwise, some

adequate arrangement shall have been made for the protection and security

of a line of interoceanic communication, so important at this time not to

the United States only, but to all other maritime states, both of Europe

and America.


Meanwhile negotiations have been instituted, by means of a special

commission, to obtain from New Granada full indemnity for injuries

sustained by our citizens on the Isthmus and satisfactory security for the

general interests of the United States.


In addressing to you my last annual message the occasion seems to me an

appropriate one to express my congratulations, in view of the peace,

greatness, and felicity which the United States now possess and enjoy. To

point you to the state of the various Departments of the Government and of

all the great branches of the public service, civil and military, in order

to speak of the intelligence and the integrity which pervades the whole,

would be to indicate but imperfectly the administrative condition of the

country and the beneficial effects of that on the general welfare. Nor

would it suffice to say that the nation is actually at peace at home and

abroad; that its industrial interests are prosperous; that the canvas of

its mariners whitens every sea, and the plow of its husbandmen is marching

steadily onward to the bloodless conquest of the continent; that cities and

populous States are springing up, as if by enchantment, from the bosom of

oar Western wilds, and that the courageous energy of our people is making

of these United States the great Republic of the world. These results have

not been attained without passing through trials and perils, by experience

of which, and thus only, nations can harden into manhood. Our forefathers

were trained to the wisdom which conceived and the courage which achieved

independence by the circumstances which surrounded them, and they were thus

made capable of the creation of the Republic. It devolved on the next

generation to consolidate the work of the Revolution, to deliver the

country entirely from the influences of conflicting transatlantic

partialities or antipathies which attached to our colonial and

Revolutionary history, and to organize the practical operation of the

constitutional and legal institutions of the Union. To us of this

generation remains the not less noble task of maintaining and extending the

national power. We have at length reached that stage of our country's

career in which the dangers to be encountered and the exertions to be made

are the incidents, not of weakness, but of strength. In foreign relations

we have to attemper our power to the less happy condition of other

Republics in America and to place ourselves in the calmness and conscious

dignity of right by the side of the greatest and wealthiest of the Empires

of Europe. In domestic relations we have to guard against the shock of the

discontents, the ambitions, the interests, and the exuberant, and therefore

sometimes irregular, impulses of opinion or of action which are the natural

product of the present political elevation, the self-reliance, and the

restless spirit of enterprise of the people of the United States.


I shall prepare to surrender the Executive trust to my successor and retire

to private life with sentiments of profound gratitude to the good

Providence which during the period of my Administration has vouchsafed to

carry the country through many difficulties, domestic and foreign, and

which enables me to contemplate the spectacle of amicable and respectful

relations between ours and all other governments and the establishment of

constitutional order and tranquillity throughout the Union.


Contents    Prev    Next    Last


Seaside Software Inc. DBA askSam Systems, P.O. Box 1428, Perry FL 32348
Telephone: 800-800-1997 / 850-584-6590   •   Email: info@askSam.com   •   Support: http://www.askSam.com/forums
© Copyright 1985-2011   •   Privacy Statement