President[ Andrew Johnson
Date[ December 3, 1867
Fellow-Citizens of the Senate and House of Representatives:
The continued disorganization of the Union, to which the President has
so often called the attention of Congress, is yet a subject of profound
and patriotic concern. We may, however, find some relief from that
anxiety in the reflection that the painful political situation,
although before untried by ourselves, is not new in the experience of
nations. Political science, perhaps as highly perfected in our own time
and country as in any other, has not yet disclosed any means by which
civil wars can be absolutely prevented. An enlightened nation, however,
with a wise and beneficent constitution of free government, may
diminish their frequency and mitigate their severity by directing all
its proceedings in accordance with its fundamental law.
When a civil war has been brought to a close, it is manifestly the
first interest and duty of the state to repair the injuries which the
war has inflicted, and to secure the benefit of the lessons it teaches
as fully and as speedily as possible. This duty was, upon the
termination of the rebellion, promptly accepted not only by the
executive department, but by the insurrectionary States themselves, and
restoration in the first moment of peace was believed to be as easy and
certain as it was indispensable. The expectations, however, then so
reasonably and confidently entertained were disappointed by legislation
from which I felt constrained by my obligations to the Constitution to
withhold my assent.
It is therefore a source of profound regret that in complying with the
obligation imposed upon the President by the Constitution to give to
Congress from time to time information of the state of the Union I am
unable to communicate any definitive adjustment satisfactory to the
American people, of the questions which since the close of the
rebellion have agitated the public mind. On the contrary, candor
compels me to declare that at this time there is no Union as our
fathers understood the term, and as they meant it to be understood by
us. The Union which they established can exist only where all the
States are represented in both Houses of Congress; where one State is
as free as another to regulate its internal concerns according to its
own will, and where the laws of the central Government, strictly
confined to matters of national jurisdiction, apply with equal force to
all the people of every section. That such is not the present "state of
the Union" is a melancholy fact, and we must all acknowledge that the
restoration of the States to their proper legal relations with the
Federal Government and with one another, according to the terms of the
original compact, would be the greatest temporal blessing which God, in
His kindest providence, could bestow upon this nation. It becomes our
imperative duty to consider whether or not it is impossible to effect
this most desirable consummation. The Union and the Constitution are
inseparable. As long as one is obeyed by all parties, the other will be
preserved; and if one is destroyed, both must perish together. The
destruction of the Constitution will be followed by other and still
greater calamities. It was ordained not only to form a more perfect
union between the States, but to "establish justice, insure domestic
tranquillity, provide for the common defense, promote the general
welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our
posterity." Nothing but implicit obedience to its requirements in all
parts of the country will accomplish these great ends. Without that
obedience we can look forward only to continual outrages upon
individual rights, incessant breaches of the public peace, national
weakness, financial dishonor, the total loss of our prosperity, the
general corruption of morals, and the final extinction of popular
freedom. To save our country from evils so appalling as these, we
should renew our efforts again and again.
To me the process of restoration seems perfectly plain and simple. It
consists merely in a faithful application of the Constitution and laws.
The execution of the laws is not now obstructed or opposed by physical
force. There is no military or other necessity, real or pretended,
which can prevent obedience to the Constitution, either North or South.
All the rights and all the obligations of States and individuals can be
protected and enforced by means perfectly consistent with the
fundamental law. The courts may be everywhere open, and if open their
process would be unimpeded. Crimes against the United States can be
prevented or punished by the proper judicial authorities in a manner
entirely practicable and legal. There is therefore no reason why the
Constitution should not be obeyed, unless those who exercise its powers
have determined that it shall be disregarded and violated. The mere
naked will of this Government, or of some one or more of its branches,
is the only obstacle that can exist to a perfect union of all the
States.
On this momentous question and some of the measures growing out of it I
have had the misfortune to differ from Congress, and have expressed my
convictions without reserve, though with becoming deference to the
opinion of the legislative department. Those convictions are not only
unchanged, but strengthened by subsequent events and further reflection
The transcendent importance of the subject will be a sufficient excuse
for calling your attention to some of the reasons which have so
strongly influenced my own judgment. The hope that we may all finally
concur in a mode of settlement consistent at once with our true
interests and with our sworn duties to the Constitution is too natural
and too just to be easily relinquished.
It is clear to my apprehension that the States lately in rebellion are
still members of the National Union. When did they cease to be so? The
"ordinances of secession" adopted by a portion (in most of them a very
small portion) of their citizens were mere nullities. If we admit now
that they were valid and effectual for the purpose intended by their
authors, we sweep from under our feet the whole ground upon which we
justified the war. Were those States afterwards expelled from the Union
by the war? The direct contrary was averred by this Government to be
its purpose, and was so understood by all those who gave their blood
and treasure to aid in its prosecution. It can not be that a successful
war, waged for the preservation of the Union, had the legal effect of
dissolving it. The victory of the nation's arms was not the disgrace of
her policy; the defeat of secession on the battlefield was not the
triumph of its lawless principle. Nor could Congress, with or without
the consent of the Executive, do anything which would have the effect,
directly or indirectly, of separating the States from each other. To
dissolve the Union is to repeal the Constitution which holds it
together, and that is a power which does not belong to any department
of this Government, or to all of them united.
This is so plain that it has been acknowledged by all branches of the
Federal Government. The Executive (my predecessor as well as myself)
and the heads of all the Departments have uniformly acted upon the
principle that the Union is not only undissolved, but indissoluble.
Congress submitted an amendment of the Constitution to be ratified by
the Southern States, and accepted their acts of ratification as a
necessary and lawful exercise of their highest function. If they were
not States, or were States out of the Union, their consent to a change
in the fundamental law of the Union would have been nugatory, and
Congress in asking it committed a political absurdity. The judiciary
has also given the solemn sanction of its authority to the same view of
the case. The judges of the Supreme Court have included the Southern
States in their circuits, and they are constantly, in banc and
elsewhere, exercising jurisdiction which does not belong to them unless
those States are States of the Union.
If the Southern States are component parts of the Union, the
Constitution is the supreme law for them, as it is for all the other
States. They are bound to obey it, and so are we. The right of the
Federal Government, which is clear and unquestionable, to enforce the
Constitution upon them implies the correlative obligation on our part
to observe its limitations and execute its guaranties. Without the
Constitution we are nothing; by, through, and under the Constitution we
are what it makes us. We may doubt the wisdom of the law, we may not
approve of its provisions, but we can not violate it merely because it
seems to confine our powers within limits narrower than we could wish.
It is not a question of individual or class or sectional interest, much
less of party predominance, but of duty--of high and sacred duty--which
we are all sworn to perform. If we can not support the Constitution
with the cheerful alacrity of those who love and believe in it, we must
give to it at least the fidelity of public servants who act under
solemn obligations and commands which they dare not disregard.
The constitutional duty is not the only one which requires the States
to be restored. There is another consideration which, though of minor
importance, is yet of great weight. On the 22d day of July, 1861,
Congress declared by an almost unanimous vote of both Houses that the
war should be conducted solely for the purpose of preserving the Union
and maintaining the supremacy of the Federal Constitution and laws,
without impairing the dignity, equality, and rights of the States or of
individuals, and that when this was done the war should cease. I do not
say that this declaration is personally binding on those who joined in
making it, any more than individual members of Congress are personally
bound to pay a public debt created under a law for which they voted.
But it was a solemn public, official pledge of the national honor, and
I can not imagine upon what grounds the repudiation of it is to be
justified. If it be said that we are not bound to keep faith with
rebels, let it be remembered that this promise was not made to rebels
only. Thousands of true men in the South were drawn to our standard by
it, and hundreds of thousands in the North gave their lives in the
belief that it would be carried out. It was made on the day after the
first great battle of the war had been fought and lost. All patriotic
and intelligent men then saw the necessity of giving such an assurance,
and believed that without it the war would end in disaster to our
cause. Having given that assurance in the extremity of our peril, the
violation of it now, in the day of our power, would be a rude rending
of that good faith which holds the moral world together; our country
would cease to have any claim upon the confidence of men; it would make
the war not only a failure, but a fraud.
Being sincerely convinced that these views are correct, I would be
unfaithful to my duty if I did not recommend the repeal of the acts of
Congress which place ten of the Southern States under the domination of
military masters. If calm reflection shall satisfy a majority of your
honorable bodies that the acts referred to are not only a violation of
the national faith, but in direct conflict with the Constitution, I
dare not permit myself to doubt that you will immediately strike them
from the statute book.
To demonstrate the unconstitutional character of those acts I need do
no more than refer to their general provisions. It must be seen at once
that they are not authorized. To dictate what alterations shall be made
in the constitutions of the several States; to control the elections of
State legislators and State officers, members of Congress and electors
of President and Vice-President, by arbitrarily declaring who shall
vote and who shall be excluded from that privilege; to dissolve State
legislatures or prevent them from assembling; to dismiss judges and
other civil functionaries of the State and appoint others without
regard to State law; to organize and operate all the political
machinery of the States; to regulate the whole administration of their
domestic and local affairs according to the mere will of strange and
irresponsible agents, sent among them for that purpose--these are
powers not granted to the Federal Government or to any one of its
branches. Not being granted, we violate our trust by assuming them as
palpably as we would by acting in the face of a positive interdict; for
the Constitution forbids us to do whatever it does not affirmatively
authorize, either by express words or by clear implication. If the
authority we desire to use does not come to us through the
Constitution, we can exercise it only by usurpation, and usurpation is
the most dangerous of political crimes. By that crime the enemies of
free government in all ages have worked out their designs against
public liberty and private right. It leads directly and immediately to
the establishment of absolute rule, for undelegated power is always
unlimited and unrestrained.
The acts of Congress in question are not only objectionable for their
assumption of ungranted power, but many of their provisions are in
conflict with the direct prohibitions of the Constitution. The
Constitution commands that a republican form of government shall be
guaranteed to all the States; that no person shall be deprived of life,
liberty, or property without due process of law, arrested without a
judicial warrant, or punished without a fair trial before an impartial
jury; that the privilege of habeas corpus shall not be denied in time
of peace, and that no bill of attainder shall be passed even against a
single individual. Yet the system of measures established by these acts
of Congress does totally subvert and destroy the form as well as the
substance of republican government in the ten States to which they
apply. It binds them hand and foot in absolute slavery, and subjects
them to a strange and hostile power, more unlimited and more likely to
be abused than any other now known among civilized men. It tramples
down all those rights in which the essence of liberty consists, and
which a free government is always most careful to protect. It denies
the habeas corpus and the trial by jury. Personal freedom, property,
and life, if assailed by the passion, the prejudice, or the rapacity of
the ruler, have no security whatever. It has the effect of a bill of
attainder or bill of pains and penalties, not upon a few individuals,
but upon whole masses, including the millions who inhabit the subject
States, and even their unborn children. These wrongs, being expressly
forbidden, can not be constitutionally inflicted upon any portion of
our people, no matter how they may have come within our jurisdiction,
and no matter whether they live in States, Territories, or districts.
I have no desire to save from the proper and just consequences of their
great crime those who engaged in rebellion against the Government, but
as a mode of punishment the measures under consideration are the most
unreasonable that could be invented. Many of those people are perfectly
innocent; many kept their fidelity to the Union untainted to the last;
many were incapable of any legal offense; a large proportion even of
the persons able to bear arms were forced into rebellion against their
will, and of those who are guilty with their own consent the degrees of
guilt are as various as the shades of their character and temper. But
these acts of Congress confound them all together in one common doom.
Indiscriminate vengeance upon classes, sects, and parties, or upon
whole communities, for offenses committed by a portion of them against
the governments to which they owed obedience was common in the
barbarous ages of the world; but Christianity and civilization have
made such progress that recourse to a punishment so cruel and unjust
would meet with the condemnation of all unprejudiced and right-minded
men. The punitive justice of this age, and especially of this country,
does not consist in stripping whole States of their liberties and
reducing all their people, without distinction, to the condition of
slavery. It deals separately with each individual, confines itself to
the forms of law, and vindicates its own purity by an impartial
examination of every case before a competent judicial tribunal. If this
does not satisfy all our desires with regard to Southern rebels, let us
console ourselves by reflecting that a free Constitution, triumphant in
war and unbroken in peace, is worth far more to us and our children
than the gratification of any present feeling.
I am aware it is assumed that this system of government for the
Southern States is not to be perpetual. It is true this military
government is to be only provisional, but it is through this temporary
evil that a greater evil is to be made perpetual. If the guaranties of
the Constitution can be broken provisionally to serve a temporary
purpose, and in a part only of the country, we can destroy them
everywhere and for all time. Arbitrary measures often change, but they
generally change for the worse. It is the curse of despotism that it
has no halting place. The intermitted exercise of its power brings no
sense of security to its subjects, for they can never know what more
they will be called to endure when its red right hand is armed to
plague them again. Nor is it possible to conjecture how or where power,
unrestrained by law, may seek its next victims. The States that are
still free may be enslaved at any moment; for if the Constitution does
not protect all, it protects none.
It is manifestly and avowedly the object of these laws to confer upon
Negroes the privilege of voting and to disfranchise such a number of
white citizens as will give the former a clear majority at all
elections in the Southern States. This, to the minds of some persons,
is so important that a violation of the Constitution is justified as a
means of bringing it about. The morality is always false which excuses
a wrong because it proposes to accomplish a desirable end. We are not
permitted to do evil that good may come. But in this case the end
itself is evil, as well as the means. The subjugation of the States to
Negro domination would be worse than the military despotism under which
they are now suffering. It was believed beforehand that the people
would endure any amount of military oppression for any length of time
rather than degrade themselves by subjection to the Negro race.
Therefore they have been left without a choice. Negro suffrage was
established by act of Congress, and the military officers were
commanded to superintend the process of clothing the Negro race with
the political privileges torn from white men.
The blacks in the South are entitled to be well and humanely governed,
and to have the protection of just laws for all their rights of person
and property. If it were practicable at this time to give them a
Government exclusively their own, under which they might manage their
own affairs in their own way, it would become a grave question whether
we ought to do so, or whether common humanity would not require us to
save them from themselves. But under the circumstances this is only a
speculative point. It is not proposed merely that they shall govern
themselves, but that they shall rule the white race, make and
administer State laws, elect Presidents and members of Congress, and
shape to a greater or less extent the future destiny of the whole
country. Would such a trust and power be safe in such hands?
The peculiar qualities which should characterize any people who are fit
to decide upon the management of public affairs for a great state have
seldom been combined. It is the glory of white men to know that they
have had these qualities in sufficient measure to build upon this
continent a great political fabric and to preserve its stability for
more than ninety years, while in every other part of the world all
similar experiments have failed. But if anything can be proved by known
facts, if all reasoning upon evidence is not abandoned, it must be
acknowledged that in the progress of nations Negroes have shown less
capacity for government than any other race of people. No independent
government of any form has ever been successful in their hands. On the
contrary, wherever they have been left to their own devices they have
shown a constant tendency to relapse into barbarism. In the Southern
States, however, Congress has undertaken to confer upon them the
privilege of the ballot. Just released from slavery, it may be doubted
whether as a class they know more than their ancestors how to organize
and regulate civil society. Indeed, it is admitted that the blacks of
the South are not only regardless of the rights of property, but so
utterly ignorant of public affairs that their voting can consist in
nothing more than carrying a ballot to the place where they are
directed to deposit it. I need not remind you that the exercise of the
elective franchise is the highest attribute of an American citizen, and
that when guided by virtue, intelligence, patriotism, and a proper
appreciation of our free institutions it constitutes the true basis of
a democratic form of government, in which the sovereign power is lodged
in the body of the people. A trust artificially created, not for its
own sake, but solely as a means of promoting the general welfare, its
influence for good must necessarily depend upon the elevated character
and true allegiance of the elector. It ought, therefore, to be reposed
in none except those who are fitted morally and mentally to administer
it well; for if conferred upon persons who do not justly estimate its
value and who are indifferent as to its results, it will only serve as
a means of placing power in the hands of the unprincipled and
ambitious, and must eventuate in the complete destruction of that
liberty of which it should be the most powerful conservator. I have
therefore heretofore urged upon your attention the great danger--to be
apprehended from an untimely extension of the elective franchise to any
new class in our country, especially when the large majority of that
class, in wielding the power thus placed in their hands, can not be
expected correctly to comprehend the duties and responsibilities which
pertain to suffrage. Yesterday, as it were, 4,000,000 persons were held
in a condition of slavery that had existed for generations; to-day they
are freemen and are assumed by law to be citizens. It can not be
presumed, from their previous condition of servitude, that as a class
they are as well informed as to the nature of our Government as the
intelligent foreigner who makes our land the home of his choice. In the
case of the latter neither a residence of five years and the knowledge
of our institutions which it gives nor attachment to the principles of
the Constitution are the only conditions upon which he can be admitted
to citizenship; he must prove in addition a good moral character, and
thus give reasonable ground for the belief that he will be faithful to
the obligations which he assumes as a citizen of the Republic. Where a
people--the source of all political power--speak by their suffrages
through the instrumentality of the ballot box, it must be carefully
guarded against the control of those who are corrupt in principle and
enemies of free institutions, for it can only become to our political
and social system a safe conductor of healthy popular sentiment when
kept free from demoralizing influences. Controlled through fraud and
usurpation by the designing, anarchy and despotism must inevitably
follow. In the hands of the patriotic and worthy our Government will be
preserved upon the principles of the Constitution inherited from our
fathers. It follows, therefore, that in admitting to the ballot box a
new class of voters not qualified for the exercise of the elective
franchise we weaken our system of government instead of adding to its
strength and durability.
I yield to no one in attachment to that rule of general suffrage which
distinguishes our policy as a nation. But there is a limit, wisely
observed hitherto, which makes the ballot a privilege and a trust, and
which requires of some classes a time suitable for probation and
preparation. To give it indiscriminately to a new class, wholly
unprepared by previous habits and opportunities to perform the trust
which it demands, is to degrade it, and finally to destroy its power,
for it may be safely assumed that no political truth is better
established than that such indiscriminate and all-embracing extension
of popular suffrage must end at last in its destruction. I repeat the
expression of my willingness to join in any plan within the scope of
our constitutional authority which promises to better the condition of
the Negroes in the South, by encouraging them in industry, enlightening
their minds, improving their morals, and giving protection to all their
just rights as freedmen. But the transfer of our political inheritance
to them would, in my opinion, be an abandonment of a duty which we owe
alike to the memory of our fathers and the rights of our children.
The plan of putting the Southern States wholly and the General
Government partially into the hands of Negroes is proposed at a time
peculiarly unpropitious. The foundations of society have been broken up
by civil war. Industry must be reorganized, justice reestablished,
public credit maintained, and order brought out of confusion. To
accomplish these ends would require all the wisdom and virtue of the
great men who formed our institutions originally. I confidently believe
that their descendants will be equal to the arduous task before them,
but it is worse than madness to expect that Negroes will perform it for
us. Certainly we ought not to ask their assistance till we despair of
our own competency.
The great difference between the two races in physical, mental, and
moral characteristics will prevent an amalgamation or fusion of them
together in one homogeneous mass. If the inferior obtains the
ascendency over the other, it will govern with reference only to its
own interests for it will recognize no common interest--and create such
a tyranny as this continent has never yet witnessed. Already the
Negroes are influenced by promises of confiscation and plunder. They
are taught to regard as an enemy every white man who has any respect
for the rights of his own race. If this continues it must become worse
and worse, until all order will be subverted, all industry cease, and
the fertile fields of the South grow up into a wilderness. Of all the
dangers which our nation has yet encountered, none are equal to those
which must result from the success of the effort now making to
Africanize the half of our country.
I would not put considerations of money in competition with justice and
right; but the expenses incident to "reconstruction" under the system
adopted by Congress aggravate what I regard as the intrinsic wrong of
the measure itself. It has cost uncounted millions already, and if
persisted in will add largely to the weight of taxation, already too
oppressive to be borne without just complaint, and may finally reduce
the Treasury of the nation to a condition of bankruptcy. We must not
delude ourselves. It will require a strong standing army and probably
more than $200,000,000 per annum to maintain the supremacy of Negro
governments after they are established. The sum thus thrown away would,
if properly used, form a sinking fund large enough to pay the whole
national debt in less than fifteen years. It is vain to hope that
Negroes will maintain their ascendency themselves. Without military
power they are wholly incapable of holding in subjection the white
people of the South.
I submit to the judgment of Congress whether the public credit may not
be injuriously affected by a system of measures like this. With our
debt and the vast private interests which are complicated with it, we
can not be too cautious of a policy which might by possibility impair
the confidence of the world in our Government. That confidence can only
be retained by carefully inculcating the principles of justice and
honor on the popular mind and by the most scrupulous fidelity to all
our engagements of every sort. Any serious breach of the organic law,
persisted in for a considerable time, can not but create fears for the
stability of our institutions. Habitual violation of prescribed rules,
which we bind ourselves to observe, must demoralize the people. Our
only standard of civil duty being set at naught, the sheet anchor of
our political morality is lost, the public conscience swings from its
moorings and yields to every impulse of passion and interest. If we
repudiate the Constitution, we will not be expected to care much for
mere pecuniary obligations. The violation of such a pledge as we made
on the 22d day of July, 1861, will assuredly diminish the market value
of our other promises. Besides, if we acknowledge that the national
debt was created, not to hold the States in the Union, as the taxpayers
were led to suppose, but to expel them from it and hand them over to be
governed by Negroes, the moral duty to pay it may seem much less clear.
I say it may seem so, for I do not admit that this or any other
argument in favor of repudiation can be entertained as sound; but its
influence on some classes of minds may well be apprehended. The
financial honor of a great commercial nation, largely indebted and with
a republican form of government administered by agents of the popular
choice, is a thing of such delicate texture and the destruction of it
would be followed by such unspeakable calamity that every true patriot
must desire to avoid whatever might expose it to the slightest danger.
The great interests of the country require immediate relief from these
enactments. Business in the South is paralyzed by a sense of general
insecurity, by the terror of confiscation, and the dread of Negro
supremacy. The Southern trade, from which the North would have derived
so great a profit under a government of law, still languishes, and can
never be revived until it ceases to be fettered by the arbitrary power
which makes all its operations unsafe. That rich country--the richest
in natural resources the world ever saw--is worse than lost if it be
not soon placed under the protection of a free constitution. Instead of
being, as it ought to be, a source of wealth and power, it will become
an intolerable burden upon the rest of the nation.
Another reason for retracing our steps will doubtless be seen by
Congress in the late manifestations of public opinion upon this
subject. We live in a country where the popular will always enforces
obedience to itself, sooner or later. It is vain to think of opposing
it with anything short of legal authority backed by overwhelming force.
It can not have escaped your attention that from the day on which
Congress fairly and formally presented the proposition to govern the
Southern States by military force, with a view to the ultimate
establishment of Negro supremacy, every expression of the general
sentiment has been more or less adverse to it. The affections of this
generation can not be detached from the institutions of their
ancestors. Their determination to preserve the inheritance of free
government in their own hands and transmit it undivided and unimpaired
to their own posterity is too strong to be successfully opposed. Every
weaker passion will disappear before that love of liberty and law for
which the American people are distinguished above all others in the
world.
How far the duty of the President "to preserve, protect, and defend the
Constitution" requires him to go in opposing an unconstitutional act of
Congress is a very serious and important question, on which I have
deliberated much and felt extremely anxious to reach a proper
conclusion. Where an act has been passed according to the forms of the
Constitution by the supreme legislative authority, and is regularly
enrolled among the public statutes of the country, Executive resistance
to it, especially in times of high party excitement, would be likely to
produce violent collision between the respective adherents of the two
branches of the Government. This would be simply civil war, and civil
war must be resorted to only as the last remedy for the worst of evils.
Whatever might tend to provoke it should be most carefully avoided. A
faithful and conscientious magistrate will concede very much to honest
error, and something even to perverse malice, before he will endanger
the public peace; and he will not adopt forcible measures, or such as
might lead to force, as long as those which are peaceable remain open
to him or to his constituents. It is true that cases may occur in which
the Executive would be compelled to stand on its rights, and maintain
them regardless of all consequences. If Congress should pass an act
which is not only in palpable conflict with the Constitution, but will
certainly, if carried out, produce immediate and irreparable injury to
the organic structure of the Government, and if there be neither
judicial remedy for the wrongs it inflicts nor power in the people to
protect themselves without the official aid of their elected
defender--if, for instance, the legislative department should pass an
act even through all the forms of law to abolish a coordinate
department of the Government--in such a case the President must take
the high responsibilities of his office and save the life of the nation
at all hazards. The so-called reconstruction acts, though as plainly
unconstitutional as any that can be imagined, were not believed to be
within the class last mentioned. The people were not wholly disarmed of
the power of self-defense. In all the Northern States they still held
in their hands the sacred right of the ballot, and it was safe to
believe that in due time they would come to the rescue of their own
institutions. It gives me pleasure to add that the appeal to our common
constituents was not taken in vain, and that my confidence in their
wisdom and virtue seems not to have been misplaced.
It is well and publicly known that enormous frauds have been
perpetrated on the Treasury and that colossal fortunes have been made
at the public expense. This species of corruption has increased, is
increasing, and if not diminished will soon bring us into total ruin
and disgrace. The public creditors and the taxpayers are alike
interested in an honest administration of the finances, and neither
class will long endure the large-handed robberies of the recent past.
For this discreditable state of things there are several causes. Some
of the taxes are so laid as to present an irresistible temptation to
evade payment. The great sums which officers may win by connivance at
fraud create a pressure which is more than the virtue of many can
withstand, and there can be no doubt that the open disregard of
constitutional obligations avowed by some of the highest and most
influential men in the country has greatly weakened the moral sense of
those who serve in subordinate places. The expenses of the United
States, including interest on the public debt, are more than six times
as much as they were seven years ago. To collect and disburse this vast
amount requires careful supervision as well as systematic vigilance.
The system, never perfected, was much disorganized by the
"tenure-of-office bill," which has almost destroyed official
accountability. The President may be thoroughly convinced that an
officer is incapable, dishonest, or unfaithful to the Constitution, but
under the law which I have named the utmost he can do is to complain to
the Senate and ask the privilege of supplying his place with a better
man. If the Senate be regarded as personally or politically hostile to
the President, it is natural, and not altogether unreasonable, for the
officer to expect that it will take his part as far as possible,
restore him to his place, and give him a triumph over his Executive
superior. The officer has other chances of impunity arising from
accidental defects of evidence, the mode of investigating it, and the
secrecy of the hearing. It is not wonderful that official malfeasance
should become bold in proportion as the delinquents learn to think
themselves safe. I am entirely persuaded that under such a rule the
President can not perform the great duty assigned to him of seeing the
laws faithfully executed, and that it disables him most especially from
enforcing that rigid accountability which is necessary to the due
execution of the revenue laws.
The Constitution invests the President with authority to decide whether
a removal should be made in any given case; the act of Congress
declares in substance that he shall only accuse such as he supposes to
be unworthy of their trust. The Constitution makes him sole judge in
the premises, but the statute takes away his jurisdiction, transfers it
to the Senate, and leaves him nothing but the odious and sometimes
impracticable duty of becoming a prosecutor. The prosecution is to be
conducted before a tribunal whose members are not, like him,
responsible to the whole people, but to separate constituent bodies,
and who may hear his accusation with great disfavor. The Senate is
absolutely without any known standard of decision applicable to such a
case. Its judgment can not be anticipated, for it is not governed by
any rule. The law does not define what shall be deemed good cause for
removal. It is impossible even to conjecture what may or may not be so
considered by the Senate. The nature of the subject forbids clear
proof. If the charge be incapacity, what evidence will support it?
Fidelity to the Constitution may be understood or misunderstood in a
thousand different ways, and by violent party men, in violent party
times, unfaithfulness to the Constitution may even come to be
considered meritorious. If the officer be accused of dishonesty, how
shall it be made out? Will it be inferred from acts unconnected with
public duty, from private history, or from general reputation, or must
the President await the commission of an actual misdemeanor in office?
Shall he in the meantime risk the character and interest of the nation
in the hands of men to whom he can not give his confidence? Must he
forbear his complaint until the mischief is done and can not be
prevented? If his zeal in the public service should impel him to
anticipate the overt act, must he move at the peril of being tried
himself for the offense of slandering his subordinate? In the present
circumstances of the country someone must be held responsible for
official delinquency of every kind. It is extremely difficult to say
where that responsibility should be thrown if it be not left where it
has been placed by the Constitution. But all just men will admit that
the President ought to be entirely relieved from such responsibility if
he can not meet it by reason of restrictions placed by law upon his
action.
The unrestricted power of removal from office is a very great one to be
trusted even to a magistrate chosen by the general suffrage of the
whole people and accountable directly to them for his acts. It is
undoubtedly liable to abuse, and at some periods of our history perhaps
has been abused. If it be thought desirable and constitutional that it
should be so limited as to make the President merely a common informer
against other public agents, he should at least be permitted to act in
that capacity before some open tribunal, independent of party politics,
ready to investigate the merits of every case, furnished with the means
of taking evidence, and bound to decide according to established rules.
This would guarantee the safety of the accuser when he acts in good
faith, and at the same time secure the rights of the other party. I
speak, of course, with all proper respect for the present Senate, but
it does not seem to me that any legislative body can be so constituted
as to insure its fitness for these functions.
It is not the theory of this Government that public offices are the
property of those who hold them. They are given merely as a trust for
the public benefit, sometimes for a fixed period, sometimes during good
behavior, but generally they are liable to be terminated at the
pleasure of the appointing power, which represents the collective
majesty and speaks the will of the people. The forced retention in
office of a single dishonest person may work great injury to the public
interests. The danger to the public service comes not from the power to
remove, but from the power to appoint. Therefore it was that the
framers of the Constitution left the power of removal unrestricted,
while they gave the Senate a fight to reject all appointments which in
its opinion were not fit to be made. A little reflection on this
subject will probably satisfy all who have the good of the country at
heart that our best course is to take the Constitution for our guide,
walk in the path marked out by the founders of the Republic, and obey
the rules made sacred by the observance of our great predecessors.
The present condition of our finances and circulating medium is one to
which your early consideration is invited.
The proportion which the currency of any country should bear to the
whole value of the annual produce circulated by its means is a question
upon which political economists have not agreed. Nor can it be
controlled by legislation, but must be left to the irrevocable laws
which everywhere regulate commerce and trade. The circulating medium
will ever irresistibly flow to those points where it is in greatest
demand. The law of demand and supply is as unerring as that which
regulates the tides of the ocean; and, indeed, currency, like the
tides, has its ebbs and flows throughout the commercial world.
At the beginning of the rebellion the bank-note circulation of the
country amounted to not much more than $200,000,000; now the
circulation of national-bank notes and those known as "legal-tenders"
is nearly seven hundred millions. While it is urged by some that this
amount should be increased, others contend that a decided reduction is
absolutely essential to the best interests of the country. In view of
these diverse opinions, it may be well to ascertain the real value of
our paper issues when compared with a metallic or convertible currency.
For this purpose let us inquire how much gold and silver could be
purchased by the seven hundred millions of paper money now in
circulation. Probably not more than half the amount of the latter,
showing that when our paper currency is compared with gold and silver
its commercial value is compressed into three hundred and fifty
millions. This striking fact makes it the obvious duty of the
Government, as early as may be consistent with the principles of sound
political economy, to take such measures as will enable the holder of
its notes and those of the national banks to convert them without loss
into specie or its equivalent. A reduction of our paper circulating
medium need not necessarily follow. This, however, would depend upon
the law of demand and supply, though it should be borne in mind that by
making legal-tender and bank notes convertible into coin or its
equivalent their present specie value in the hands of their holders
would be enhanced 100 per cent.
Legislation for the accomplishment of a result so desirable is demanded
by the highest public considerations. The Constitution contemplates
that the circulating medium of the country shall be uniform in quality
and value. At the time of the formation of that instrument the country
had just emerged from the War of the Revolution, and was suffering from
the effects of a redundant and worthless paper currency. The sages of
that period were anxious to protect their posterity from the evils that
they themselves had experienced. Hence in providing a circulating
medium they conferred upon Congress the power to coin money and
regulate the value thereof, at the same time prohibiting the States
from making anything but gold and silver a tender in payment of debts.
The anomalous condition of our currency is in striking contrast with
that which was originally designed. Our circulation now embraces,
first, notes of the national banks, which are made receivable for all
dues to the Government, excluding imposts, and by all its creditors,
excepting in payment of interest upon its bonds and the securities
themselves; second, legal-tender notes, issued by the United States,
and which the law requires shall be received as well in payment of all
debts between citizens as of all Government dues, excepting imposts;
and, third, gold and silver coin. By the operation of our present
system of finance, however, the metallic currency, when collected, is
reserved only for one class of Government creditors, who, holding its
bonds, semiannually receive their interest in coin from the National
Treasury. They are thus made to occupy an invidious position, which may
be used to strengthen the arguments of those who would bring into
disrepute the obligations of the nation. In the payment of all its
debts the plighted faith of the Government should be inviolably
maintained. But while it acts with fidelity toward the bondholder who
loaned his money that the integrity of the Union might be preserved, it
should at the same time observe good faith with the great masses of the
people, who, having rescued the Union from the perils of rebellion, now
bear the burdens of taxation, that the Government may be able to
fulfill its engagements. There is no reason which will be accepted as
satisfactory by the people why those who defend us on the land and
protect us on the sea; the pensioner upon the gratitude of the nation,
bearing the scars and wounds received while in its service; the public
servants in the various Departments of the Government; the farmer who
supplies the soldiers of the Army and the sailors of the Navy; the
artisan who toils in the nation's workshops, or the mechanics and
laborers who build its edifices and construct its forts and vessels of
war, should, in payment of their just and hard-earned dues, receive
depreciated paper, while another class of their countrymen, no more
deserving, are paid in coin of gold and silver. Equal and exact justice
requires that all the creditors of the Government should be paid in a
currency possessing a uniform value. This can only be accomplished by
the restoration of the currency to the standard established by the
Constitution; and by this means we would remove a discrimination which
may, if it has not already done so, create a prejudice that may become
deep rooted and widespread and imperil the national credit.
The feasibility of making our currency correspond with the
constitutional standard may be seen by reference to a few facts derived
from our commercial statistics.
The production of precious metals in the United States from 1849 to
1857, inclusive, amounted to $579,000,000; from 1858 to 1860,
inclusive, to $137,500,000, and from 1861 to 1867, inclusive, to
$457,500,000--making the grand aggregate of products since 1849
$1,174,000,000. The amount of specie coined from 1849 to 1857
inclusive, was $439,000,000; from 1858 to 1860, inclusive,
$125,000,000, and from 1861 to 1867, inclusive, $310,000,000--making
the total coinage since 1849 $874,000,000. From 1849 to 1857,
inclusive, the net exports of specie amounted to $271,000,000; from
1858 to 1860, inclusive, to $148,000,000, and from 1861 to 1867,
inclusive, $322,000,000--making the aggregate of net exports since 1849
$741,000,000. These figures show an excess of product over net exports
of $433,000,000. There are in the Treasury $111,000,000 in coin,
something more than $40,000,000 in circulation on the Pacific Coast,
and a few millions in the national and other banks--in all about
$160,000,000. This, however, taking into account the specie in the
country prior to 1849 leaves more than $300,000,000 which have not been
accounted for by exportation, and therefore may yet remain in the
country.
These are important facts and show how completely the inferior currency
will supersede the better, forcing it from circulation among the masses
and causing it to be exported as a mere article of trade, to add to the
money capital of foreign lands. They show the necessity of retiring our
paper money, that the return of gold and silver to the avenues of trade
may be invited and a demand created which will cause the retention at
home of at least so much of the productions of our rich and
inexhaustible gold-bearing fields as may be sufficient for purposes of
circulation. It is unreasonable to expect a return to a sound currency
so long as the Government by continuing to issue irredeemable notes
fills the channels of circulation with depreciated paper.
Notwithstanding a coinage by our mints, since 1849, of $874,000,000,
the people are now strangers to the currency which was designed for
their use and benefit, and specimens of the precious metals bearing the
national device are seldom seen, except when produced to gratify the
interest excited by their novelty. If depreciated paper is to be
continued as the permanent currency of the country, and all our coin is
to become a mere article of traffic and speculation, to the enhancement
in price of all that is indispensable to the comfort of the people, it
would be wise economy to abolish our mints thus saving the nation the
care and expense incident to such establishments, and let all our
precious metals be exported in bullion. The time has come, however,
when the Government and national banks should be required to take the
most efficient steps and make all necessary arrangements for a
resumption of specie payments at the earliest practicable period.
Specie payments having been once resumed by the Government and banks,
all notes or bills of paper issued by either of a less denomination
than $20 should by law be excluded from circulation, so that the people
may have the benefit and convenience of a gold and silver currency
which in all their business transactions will be uniform in value at
home and abroad. Every man of property or industry, every man who
desires to preserve what he honestly possesses or to obtain what he can
honestly earn, has a direct interest in maintaining a safe circulating
medium--such a medium as shall be real and substantial, not liable to
vibrate with opinions, not subject to be blown up or blown down by the
breath of speculation, but to be made stable and secure. A disordered
currency is one of the greatest political evils. It undermines the
virtues necessary for the support of the social system and encourages
propensities destructive of its happiness; it wars against industry,
frugality, and economy, and it fosters the evil spirits of extravagance
and speculation. It has been asserted by one of our profound and most
gifted statesmen that--Of all the contrivances for cheating the
laboring classes of mankind, none has been more effectual than that
which deludes them with paper money. This is the most effectual of
inventions to fertilize the rich man's fields by the sweat of the poor
man's brow. Ordinary tyranny, oppression, excessive taxation--these
bear lightly on the happiness of the mass of the community compared
with a fraudulent currency and the robberies committed by depreciated
paper. Our own history has recorded for our instruction enough, and
more than enough, of the demoralizing tendency, the injustice, and the
intolerable oppression on the virtuous and well disposed of a degraded
paper currency authorized by law or in any way countenanced by
government. It is one of the most successful devices, in times of peace
or war, expansions or revulsions, to accomplish the transfer of all the
precious metals from the great mass of the people into the hands of the
few, where they are hoarded in secret places or deposited in strong
boxes under bolts and bars, while the people are left to endure all the
inconvenience, sacrifice, and demoralization resulting from the use of
a depreciated and worthless paper money.
The condition of our finances and the operations of our revenue system
are set forth and fully explained in the able and instructive report of
the Secretary of the Treasury. On the 30th of June, 1866, the public
debt amounted to $2,783,425,879; on the 30th of June last it was
$2,692,199,215, showing a reduction during the fiscal year of
$91,226,664. During the fiscal year ending June 30, 1867, the receipts
were $490,634,010 and the expenditures $346,729,129, leaving an
available surplus of $143,904,880. It is estimated that the receipts
for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1868, will be $417,161,928 and that
the expenditures will reach the sum of $393,269,226, leaving in the
Treasury a surplus of $23,892,702. For the fiscal year ending June 30,
1869, it is estimated that the receipts will amount to $381,000,000 and
that the expenditures will be $372,000,000, showing an excess of
$9,000,000 in favor of the Government.
The attention of Congress is earnestly invited to the necessity of a
thorough revision of our revenue system. Our internal-revenue laws and
impost system should be so adjusted as to bear most heavily on articles
of luxury, leaving the necessaries of life as free from taxation as may
be consistent with the real wants of the Government, economically
administered. Taxation would not then fall unduly on the man of
moderate means; and while none would be entirely exempt from
assessment, all, in proportion to their pecuniary abilities, would
contribute toward the support of the State. A modification of the
internal-revenue system, by a large reduction in the number of articles
now subject to tax, would be followed by results equally advantageous
to the citizen and the Government. It would render the execution of the
law less expensive and more certain, remove obstructions to industry,
lessen the temptations to evade the law, diminish the violations and
frauds perpetrated upon its provisions, make its operations less
inquisitorial, and greatly reduce in numbers the army of taxgatherers
created by the system, who "take from the mouth of honest labor the
bread it has earned." Retrenchment, reform, and economy should be
carried into every branch of the public service, that the expenditures
of the Government may be reduced and the people relieved from
oppressive taxation; a sound currency should be restored, and the
public faith in regard to the national debt sacredly observed. The
accomplishment of these important results, together with the
restoration of the Union of the States upon the principles of the
Constitution, would inspire confidence at home and abroad in the
stability of our institutions and bring to the nation prosperity,
peace, and good will.
The report of the Secretary of War ad interim exhibits the operations
of the Army and of the several bureaus of the War Department. The
aggregate strength of our military force on the 30th of September last
was 56,315. The total estimate for military appropriations is
$77,124,707, including a deficiency in last year's appropriation of
$13,600,000. The payments at the Treasury on account of the service of
the War Department from January 1 to October 29, 1867--a period of ten
months--amounted to $109,807,000. The expenses of the military
establishment, as well as the numbers of the Army, are now three times
as great as they have ever been in time of peace, while the
discretionary, power is vested in the Executive to add millions to this
expenditure by an increase of the Army to the maximum strength allowed
by the law.
The comprehensive report of the Secretary of the Interior furnishes
interesting information in reference to the important branches of the
public service connected with his Department. The menacing attitude of
some of the warlike bands of Indians inhabiting the district of country
between the Arkansas and Platte rivers and portions of Dakota Territory
required the presence of a large military force in that region.
Instigated by real or imaginary grievances, the Indians occasionally
committed acts of barbarous violence upon emigrants and our frontier
settlements; but a general Indian war has been providentially averted.
The commissioners under the act of 20th July, 1867, were invested with
full power to adjust existing difficulties, negotiate treaties with the
disaffected bands, and select for them reservations remote from the
traveled routes between the Mississippi and the Pacific. They entered
without delay upon the execution of their trust, but have not yet made
any official report of their proceedings. It is of vital importance
that our distant Territories should be exempt from Indian outbreaks,
and that the construction of the Pacific Railroad, an object of
national importance, should not be interrupted by hostile tribes. These
objects, as well as the material interests and the moral and
intellectual improvement of the Indians, can be most effectually
secured by concentrating them upon portions of country set apart for
their exclusive use and located at points remote from our highways and
encroaching white settlements.
Since the commencement of the second session of the Thirty-ninth
Congress 510 miles of road have been constructed on the main line and
branches of the Pacific Railway. The line from Omaha is rapidly
approaching the eastern base of the Rocky Mountains, while the terminus
of the last section of constructed road in California, accepted by the
Government on the 24th day of October last, was but 11 miles distant
from the summit of the Sierra Nevada. The remarkable energy evinced by
the companies offers the strongest assurance that the completion of the
road from Sacramento to Omaha will not be long deferred.
During the last fiscal year 7,041,114 acres of public land were
disposed of, and the cash receipts from sales and fees exceeded by
one-half million dollars the sum realized from those sources during the
preceding year. The amount paid to pensioners, including expenses of
disbursements, was $18,619,956, and 36,482 names were added to the
rolls. The entire number of pensioners on the 30th of June last was
155,474. Eleven thousand six hundred and fifty-five patents and designs
were issued during the year ending September 30, 1867, and at that date
the balance in the Treasury to the credit of the patent fund was
$286,607.
The report of the Secretary of the Navy states that we have seven
squadrons actively and judiciously employed, under efficient and able
commanders, in protecting the persons and property of American
citizens, maintaining the dignity and power of the Government, and
promoting the commerce and business interests of our countrymen in
every part of the world. Of the 238 vessels composing the present Navy
of the United States, 56, carrying 507 guns, are in squadron service.
During the year the number of vessels in commission has been reduced
12, and there are 13 less on squadron duty than there were at the date
of the last report. A large number of vessels were commenced and in the
course of construction when the war terminated, and although Congress
had made the necessary appropriations for their completion, the
Department has either suspended work upon them or limited the slow
completion of the steam vessels, so as to meet the contracts for
machinery made with private establishments. The total expenditures of
the Navy Department for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1867, were
$31,034,011. No appropriations have been made or required since the
close of the war for the construction and repair of vessels, for steam
machinery, ordnance, provisions and clothing, fuel, hemp, etc., the
balances under these several heads having been more than sufficient for
current expenditures. It should also be stated to the credit of the
Department that, besides asking no appropriations for the above objects
for the last two years, the Secretary of the Navy, on the 30th of
September last, in accordance with the act of May 1, 1820, requested
the Secretary of the Treasury to carry to the surplus fund the sum of
$65,000.000, being the amount received from the sales of vessels and
other war property and the remnants of former appropriations.
The report of the Postmaster-General shows the business of the
Post-Office Department and the condition of the postal service in a
very favorable light, and the attention of Congress is called to its
practical recommendations. The receipts of the Department for the year
ending June 30, 1867, including all special appropriations for sea and
land service and for free mail matter, were $19,978,693. The
expenditures for all purposes were $19,235,483, leaving an unexpended
balance in favor of the Department of $743,210, which can be applied
toward the expenses of the Department for the current year. The
increase of postal revenue, independent of specific appropriations, for
the year 1867 over that of 1866 was $850,040. The increase of revenue
from the sale of stamps and stamped envelopes was $783,404. The
increase of expenditures for 1867 over those of the previous year was
owing chiefly to the extension of the land and ocean mail service.
During the past year new postal conventions have been ratified and
exchanged with the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland,
Belgium, the Netherlands, Switzerland, the North German Union, Italy,
and the colonial government at Hong Kong, reducing very largely the
rates of ocean and land postages to and from and within those
countries.
The report of the Acting Commissioner of Agriculture concisely presents
the condition, wants, and progress of an interest eminently worthy the
fostering care of Congress, and exhibits a large measure of useful
results achieved during the year to which it refers.
The reestablishment of peace at home and the resumption of extended
trade, travel, and commerce abroad have served to increase the number
and variety of questions in the Department for Foreign Affairs. None of
these questions, however, have seriously disturbed our relations with
other states.
The Republic of Mexico, having been relieved from foreign intervention,
is earnestly engaged in efforts to reestablish her constitutional
system of government. A good understanding continues to exist between
our Government and the Republics of Hayti and San Domingo, and our
cordial relations with the Central and South American States remain
unchanged. The tender, made in conformity with a resolution of
Congress, of the good offices of the Government with a view to an
amicable adjustment of peace between Brazil and her allies on one side
and Paraguay on the other, and between Chile and her allies on the one
side and Spain on the other, though kindly received, has in neither
case been fully accepted by the belligerents. The war in the valley of
the Parana is still vigorously maintained. On the other hand, actual
hostilities between the Pacific States and Spain have been more than a
year suspended. I shall, on any proper occasion that may occur, renew
the conciliatory recommendations which have been already made. Brazil,
with enlightened sagacity and comprehensive statesmanship, has opened
the great channels of the Amazon and its tributaries to universal
commerce. One thing more seems needful to assure a rapid and cheering
progress in South America. I refer to those peaceful habits without
which states and nations can not in this age well expect material
prosperity or social advancement.
The Exposition of Universal Industry at Paris has passed, and seems to
have fully realized the high expectations of the French Government. If
due allowance be made for the recent political derangement of industry
here, the part which the United States has borne in this exhibition of
invention and art may be regarded with very high satisfaction. During
the exposition a conference was held of delegates from several nations,
the United States being one, in which the inconveniences of commerce
and social intercourse resulting from the diverse standards of money
value were very fully discussed, and plans were developed for
establishing by universal consent a common principle for the coinage of
gold. These conferences are expected to be renewed, with the attendance
of many foreign states not hitherto represented. A report of these
interesting proceedings will be submitted to Congress, which will, no
doubt, justly appreciate the great object and be ready to adopt any
measure which may tend to facilitate its ultimate accomplishment.
On the 25th of February, 1862, Congress declared by law that Treasury
notes, without interest, authorized by that act should be legal tender
in payment of all debts, public and private, within the United States.
An annual remittance of $30,000, less stipulated expenses, accrues to
claimants under the convention made with Spain in 1834. These
remittances, since the passage of that act, have been paid in such
notes. The claimants insist that the Government ought to require
payment in coin. The subject may be deemed worthy of your attention.
No arrangement has yet been reached for the settlement of our claims
for British depredations upon the commerce of the United States. I have
felt it my duty to decline the proposition of arbitration made by Her
Majesty's Government, because it has hitherto been accompanied by
reservations and limitations incompatible with the rights, interest,
and honor of our country. It is not to be apprehended that Great
Britain will persist in her refusal to satisfy these just and
reasonable claims, which involve the sacred principle of
nonintervention--a principle henceforth not more important to the
United States than to all other commercial nations.
The West India islands were settled and colonized by European States
simultaneously with the settlement and colonization of the American
continent. Most of the colonies planted here became independent nations
in the close of the last and the beginning of the present century. Our
own country embraces communities which at one period were colonies of
Great Britain, France, Spain, Holland, Sweden, and Russia. The people
in the West Indies, with the exception of those of the island of Hayti,
have neither attained nor aspired to independence, nor have they become
prepared for self-defense. Although possessing considerable commercial
value, they have been held by the several European States which
colonized or at some time conquered them, chiefly for purposes of
military and naval strategy in carrying out European policy and designs
in regard to this continent. In our Revolutionary War ports and harbors
in the West India islands were used by our enemy, to the great injury
and embarrassment of the United States. We had the same experience in
our second war with Great Britain. The same European policy for a long
time excluded us even from trade with the West Indies, while we were at
peace with all nations. In our recent civil war the rebels and their
piratical and blockade-breaking allies found facilities in the same
ports for the work, which they too successfully accomplished, of
injuring and devastating the commerce which we are now engaged in
rebuilding. We labored especially under this disadvantage, that
European steam vessels employed by our enemies found friendly shelter,
protection, and supplies in West Indian ports, while our naval
operations were necessarily carried on from our own distant shores.
There was then a universal feeling of the want of an advanced naval
outpost between the Atlantic coast and Europe. The duty of obtaining
such an outpost peacefully and lawfully, while neither doing nor
menacing injury to other states, earnestly engaged the attention of the
executive department before the close of the war, and it has not been
lost sight of since that time. A not entirely dissimilar naval want
revealed itself during the same period on the Pacific coast. The
required foothold there was fortunately secured by our late treaty with
the Emperor of Russia, and it now seems imperative that the more
obvious necessities of the Atlantic coast should not be less carefully
provided for. A good and convenient port and harbor, capable of easy
defense, will supply that want. With the possession of such a station
by the United States, neither we nor any other American nation need
longer apprehend injury or offense from any transatlantic enemy. I
agree with our early statesmen that the West Indies naturally gravitate
to, and may be expected ultimately to be absorbed by, the continental
States, including our own. I agree with them also that it is wise to
leave the question of such absorption to this process of natural
political gravitation. The islands of St. Thomas and St. John, which
constitute a part of the group called the Virgin Islands, seemed to
offer us advantages immediately desirable, while their acquisition
could be secured in harmony with the principles to which I have
alluded. A treaty has therefore been concluded with the King of Denmark
for the cession of those islands, and will be submitted to the Senate
for consideration.
It will hardly be necessary to call the attention of Congress to the
subject of providing for the payment to Russia of the sum stipulated in
the treaty for the cession of Alaska. Possession having been formally
delivered to our commissioner, the territory remains for the present in
care of a military force, awaiting such civil organization as shall be
directed by Congress.
The annexation of many small German States to Prussia and the
reorganization of that country under a new and liberal constitution
have induced me to renew the effort to obtain a just and prompt
settlement of the long-vexed question concerning the claims of foreign
states for military service from their subjects naturalized in the
United States.
In connection with this subject the attention of Congress is
respectfully called to a singular and embarrassing conflict of laws.
The executive department of this Government has hitherto uniformly
held, as it now holds, that naturalization in conformity with the
Constitution and laws of the United States absolves the recipient from
his native allegiance. The courts of Great Britain hold that allegiance
to the British Crown is indefensible, and is not absolved by our laws
of naturalization. British judges cite courts and law authorities of
the United States in support of that theory against the position held
by the executive authority of the United States. This conflict
perplexes the public mind concerning the rights of naturalized citizens
and impairs the national authority abroad. I called attention to this
subject in my last annual message, and now again respectfully appeal to
Congress to declare the national will unmistakably upon this important
question.
The abuse of our laws by the clandestine prosecution of the African
slave trade from American ports or by American citizens has altogether
ceased, and under existing circumstances no apprehensions of its
renewal in this part of the world are entertained. Under these
circumstances it becomes a question whether we shall not propose to Her
Majesty's Government a suspension or discontinuance of the stipulations
for maintaining a naval force for the suppression of that trade.
Contents
Prev
Next
Last
